Effin Christ! Ya I can't do that because my flash isn't big enough to hold it. It'd take me ten days of coming back and forth to work just to get a few MB's worth of code. Wish I would not have opened the games because I would be taking them back. I have nothing but contempt for companies who FORCE their customers to these extremes when EVERY other program I have is as easy to update as transferring the patch via USB media device. This is way too cool of a game for me to want to take a piss on it right now. Damn it!

Nobody's forcing you to update, though.

How big is your flash drive? You can fit everything vital for GC2 and DA together on two CDRs or a 1gb flash drive (which can be found for about $12 now).

I agree, GalCiv II and Dark Avatar are the only game I own that I can't just download a patch for. I'm in the same boat as HossXL, I don't have internet access on my gaming computer and the computers I can get on the internet with I can't install Stardock on because I don't have Admin rights. They are great games, but a little support for those of us not blessed with personal internet is a definite must.

But the point the OP is making is that the customer should not have to be made to 'work around' and 'jump through hoops' to simply update the game.

I have had problems with SDC, as have many others.
So many times the downloads are incomplete or corrupted.

Stardock discontinued the stand-alone updates because it was 'too much trouble' to make the update into a single downloadable file - while its customers sometimes find it impossible to update through Stardock's more simple (for THEM) means of SDC.

I have always hated the SDC route, and have always waited for the stand-alone updates.
Now, that option is no longer available simply because it is inconvenient for Stardock.


It really looks like Stardock is going downhill in its commitment to its customers.

Up until version 1.4X of Dread Lords, Stardock was vigilant to provide a stand-alone update of every major update.
Now, though, even that update has been removed.

Why the removal, in the first place??????????????????


It was simpler and easier to just leave it on the server. But, they took it down entirely, for no other reason than they wanted to force people to use the glitchy and unreliable SDC.

The game itself need not be actually installed on the downloading machine, only SDC. You can download the game directly in its .sdc archive form without needing to install it. Small distinction, perhaps, since you still have to install something, but it may matter in some cases. But no, SDC is currently the only means of updating the game to the latest version.

I'm not sure if there is a plan any longer to release a standalone patch for DA when it's "done" as was mentioned might be done back around release, I'll have to look into that.

For what it's worth, it does appear that 1.4x is still available via the CE link in the footer of the downloads page, in place of the bonus pack patch, for those who can access the CE downloads.




It's believed that SDC is now mature enough to become the primary/only means of patching, which does reduce the workload involved in releasing a patch considerably versus doing a standalone installer. And it basically means that retail copies become identical to digital distribution copies, which simplifies things all around.

SDC should continue to improve especially since an entirely new and much more user-friendly version will be coming next year.


I would suggest that anyone opposed to SDC updates for non-philosophical reasons make their complaints in one place as calmly and politely as possible. Ranting may make one feel better, but it won't win any arguments.

Actually from the philosophical perspective this is entirely the opposite direction I would prefer to take. I would far prefer a friendly user in my face over a user friendly interface.

However all joking aside, forget for the moment about the standalone installer and simply consider the point in time that Stardock supplies a CD of the game. In this case it's not a matter of whether or not Stardock does something because it's clear that when a new expansion pack is available they have also allowed the purchase of it in CD form as well.

The issue is that this is precisely the least useful time to supply a CD. It's pretty much guaranteed that initial release is going to be the version in most need of change, why waste time and effort pressing a CD that's going to be useless within the 1st month? The reason is that someone has just bought something and often wants to see something tangible in return. A physical CD satisfies this need but it's a moot point because of the inevitable revisions.

Instead of giving someone a useless CD of the new expansion you could supply a CD of the final revision of the previous version. This is the point in time that it's worthwhile to press a CD because it will in all likelihood never be changed again. In this case I'm not really asking for anything that Stardock isn't doing anyway. I'm just asking them to do what they would otherwise do but at a different point in time and I would argue a far more appropriate point in time.

How about this idea?

I'm not quite sure it's the same. In the DL case the mature version of DL was v1.4x. AFAIK you can't have v1.5 without having DA. I'm not saying this is an issue but I don't know that it isn't for sure.

I do know that the initial v1.5 had significant problems assumedly all in DA but was it totally absent of issues on the DL side? If so then perhaps this does answer my need/question for supplying the latest version of the old when buying the new. I think the changes in DL beyond v1.4x were only for compatibility sake with DA. I guess the question comes down to could or did any of these changes in DL for DA compatibility sake cause issue in DL v1.5 versus DL v1.4x? If the answer is yes than they really aren't the same, instead of v1.4x that's been tried by many different people on many different configurations I get a v1.5 that hasn't had nearly the exposure. I do understand that the change from v1.4x to v1.5 was minimal and unlikely to cause problem but the end result is the same. I get something with virtually no field exposure instead of something with significant field exposure.

In the same vein if buying TA truly does get me the latest and greatest DA (and hence DL as well) then it would be worth it to me to buy it even if I never played a single game of TA. But I suspect that the same thing will happen with DA that happened to DL between v1.4x and v1.5, that there will be changes made to the latest DA for compatibilites sake to TA. Again the risk of introduced problems may be slight but still the same situation exists that I'm getting something with no field exposure instead of a tried and true product.


Actually I disagree. This is precisely the reason to *not* supply a CD. Giving a CD to someone that can't update when it's been shown from substanstial experience that the first version of anything will require multiple revisions before being realistically playable is basically giving someone a promise that's gauranteed to be broken. At least if you don't supply that initial CD then that will preclude those that don't have the ability to update from purchasing it in the first place. I think that is the preferable thing to do. It keeps you from making promises that you can't keep. In this case the implied promise of a CD is something that can be used independently for long term without the need for support or update. It's the final rev not the initial rev that comes the closest to delivering on this promise. That's the version I want to buy and have pressed into a CD.

So are you saying I can install DL v1.5 from the DA CD that I got last March and I can play DL v1.5 with no ill effect, even though the DA version on that CD has it's known issues?

Could I install the DL v1.5 from that CD without installing DA?


Don't forget that this is now the thread for only those with philosophical objections to SDC. Those with such mundane practical problems as lack of internet access have been relegated to other threads. Remember that you're talking to a guy that paid for DA with CD in August of last year (or was it September) and didn't install it once it became available on SDC because he wanted the initial rash of problems to be resolved before trying it and then eventually waited until receiving the CD in March at which point the CD was so far behind the times it was silly and to this very day has not installed a purchased item for close to a year now because it would require the afore mentioned dreaded SDC.

I have no problem with spending a few bucks on an item that I haven’t installed in close to a year. I look at it as supporting a company that is dear to my heart and well worth the few dollars I spent even if I’ve gotten no use out of the product. However, if you’re asking me, than I would have to say that yes I would far rather wait a year *or more* for something I could install without requiring SDC than get a CD that I knew would be unplayable as DA v1.5 was. If I remember correctly DA v1.5 generated an automatic MV cheat flag and was therefore far less than useless in my opinion.

Cool. I may give it a try. I'll be sure to have my drive image backed up to my invisible partition with Norton Ghost before attempting it first just in case.


OK, you're right. I really don't mean to impugn the quality of any particular rev it's just that it seems kind of pointless to go with DA v1.5 when there have been I don't know how many revs beyond it.

In any case the point of what I've been saying in this thread and the other is that I would like some kind of update ability that does not depend on SDC. I admit that I object to SDC on philosophical grounds and have no technical issue that would prohibit me from using it. However, my philosophical objections have been sufficient to cause me to not use software that's been purchased for almost a year.

If the point you make about DL in DA is true with respect to the final DA in TA then I probably will buy the TA expansion just for purposes of getting an installable final version of DA. However, it would probably require an installed DA. Perhaps installing DA/DL from my original DA disk followed by installation of TA/DA from the new expansion pack disk will get me to where I want to be which is the latest and greatest DA and DL without using SDC. Do you think this is a possibility?

Perhaps we can discuss this further once we get closer to the TA release and more is understood of the ramifications of what I would like to do.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not really complaining nor would I even have brought it up if it wasn't for these threads discussing this very issue. In any case all I wish to do is to register my request and leave it at that. I highly doubt that Stardock will change it's update strategy simply on my say so. But I do want to make sure that it's realized that there are a minority of folks that are left in the dark because of it. Finally, I hope that no one is deluded into believing that I'm anything other than a loyal Stardock customer regardless of my philosophical objections to SDC.

Hooray! Hooray!

Now to read the release schedule post to find out what and when this 2.0 update will be.

I did assume that Stardocks desire to limit these standalone releases was for reasonable cause. However, very infrequent releases at specific key points would be well appreciated. I'm in no rush, after all I haven't played with software that I bought close to a year ago without complaint (well hardly much of one).

I also think that I can get there before that by getting buying the TA expansion pack with CD and using the DA CD to get to DL v1.5 and base DA and then using the TA CD to get final DA and base TA. If the 2.0 of which you speak is merely the DA that will be incorporated with TA then this is probably the same thing.

However, I want to make one final point about why I haven't been in any great rush to be playing DA and that is because I still find DL to be fun and exciting and in the back of my mind I'm kind of holding DA in reserve for when I eventually tire of DL.

I hope that Stardock takes this for the compliment I think it is. However, if there's a TA beyond DA and perhaps a GalCiv III beyond both of those it may not be something I should worry about and there should be some form of GalCiv for me to play until the day I die. That would be cool.

Just a final question on this. I go to the downloads page and click on the Collectors Edition link at the bottom of the page (I assume that's what meant by CE). I then end up at https://www.galciv2.com/CollectorsEdition/ which has the following links.


Galactic Civilizations II Bonus Pack

Enable Collectors Edition Content only (Windows 9x/2000/XP)

Install Galactic Civilizations II Desktop Enable Collectors Edition (Windows XP or later)


It's not totally clear from the context which one of these get you to download v1.4x. Is it the "Galactic Civilizations II Bonus Pack" link?

Yes.