Thoughts on running an older version?
7 years ago
California, USA

I tried 1.0.0.8 for a little bit tonight, and it could just be rust or the fact that I'm bad at video games but the overall changes in this patch are really rough. The big glaring thing is that boss fights are going to be a lot rougher with the nerfs to Devouring Swarm, and then there's also minor stuff like the fact that blood wagons can't be hit by enemies anymore so that adds time as well.

So basically what I'm getting at is: is anyone going to yell at me if I keep running on 1.0.0.7?

I'm tired/been drinking or I'd make this more eloquent or funnier somehow.

Washington, USA

It's ultimately up to Zenavathar. I mentioned it to him on stream. I know games like Hyper Light Drifter have actually 2 boards due to the major changes in the game causing times to be varied. I don't think we will have that problem here and we don't have enough volume I think to justify it (at least yet).

I wouldn't give up on 1.0.0.8 yet, I think there could be some solid improvements in certain areas. Tonight I was breaking my record killing Cronley regularly. Though I also died in places like the gunners near Voldrak when I never do.

My concern is the possible slippery slope where going back to 1.0.0.6 would be valid due to the nerfs on devouring swarm there as well. Though on the flip side I am also concerned that if they keep nerfing the way they do the times will never be beatable again.

Then of course we have 2 new classes coming, undoubtedly a huge range of re-balances with the next expansion, maybe even possible rework on story lines like an act 5 which will make all this in vain anyways. At least causing us for sure to have a split with pre-expansion times vs post-expansion times.

For now I am going to rock out the 1.0.0.8 and see what's possible, but I am not opposed to your suggestion either. I will be curious what Gribboro and Zenavathar think on the matter.

California, USA

Ultimately it could end up being like a Dark Souls situation, where people play on one given patch until a DLC comes out and then they switch because the old patches don't support the DLC. Who knows though.

e: But yeah when the DLC comes out we're for sure going to have to make current any% an any% no DLC category, or make an any% with DLC category.

e again: I'm not giving up on 1.0.0.8 quite yet though, but definitely what I've seen of it doesn't look promising.

Edited by the author 7 years ago
Washington, USA

I had a thought when I woke up this morning as well. If playing older patches is approved at the very least we should have a new column under our submitted videos showing which version of the game the Speedrun is using. This would even be useful now so people can see which version of the game our videos are played on in general.

Just an idea, I just woke up so it sounds good right now, but might be total garbage I don't know lol.

I have nothing to say against anybody who decides to run older versions of gd. Don't see why they should not be approved for leaderboards either, especially if the version number is provided for each submission.

Personally I'm going to stick to running the most recent version though, at least for now. Maybe in time there'll be a version indorsed by the International Grim Dawn Speedrunning Community™, one suited best for speedrunning the game. Until then I'm totally fine with free-for-all.

California, USA

I have a zip of 1.0.0.8 -> 1.0.0.7 unpatch files put together - all zipped up the total size is about 13mb so it should fit on the page as a resource just fine.

If we do end up going this route maybe we can add something to the rules to the effect of "We recommend playing on the 1.0.0.7 version for speedruns - check the Resources page for files to unpatch from 1.0.0.8 to 1.0.0.7."

The files would also work to convert any future versions of the game to 1.0.0.7 as long as none of the resources (maps, models, conversations, sound files, etc.) change. None of that changed from 1.0.0.7 to 1.0.0.8 so this was a lot cleaner than I thought it'd be.

Edited by the author 7 years ago
Washington, USA

Yeah that's why I think adding a patch version box for submitting is the best route. That way people can easily identify which videos came from what as this game is going to be changing for a long time. Then I'd say, "Have at it!"

Edited by the author 7 years ago
California, USA

Here is the link to the aforementioned patch files: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0AgvOZ8ZbbOQVRRWjI3YmNrTzQ

After playing around some with 1.0.0.8 tonight I have more or less made up my mind that I'm not running on that version.

e: I'm having technical difficulties with this right now, I need to look more into what files actually need to be in this.

Edited by the author 7 years ago
California, USA

I updated the package in the Google Drive to include the Shaders.arc resource file - not having this in the package was causing weirdness with the AI (blocks not showing up on minimap, UI elements generally looking "off", etc.).

I'm going to play around with this a little more and see if there's anything else that needs to be in the package, but as far as I can tell it's good to go now. It's still under 15MB so that's good.

California, USA

FYI - I pulled the version that was up because I had updated it with Crucible files and then I realized that the Crucible files I updated it with were the wrong version. I'm going to fix it tonight and reupload.

Related, if anyone has a copy of mods/survivalmode/database/database.arz from a clean 1.0.0.7 install, that would be very helpful to me, since mine corrupted and I'm having to patch it back together by hand.

e: I'm seeing conflicting accounts of what was actually in the Crucible as of 1.0.0.7. Also apparently the Steam and GOG versions had different Crucibles at that point maybe? I'll... figure something out, I guess?

Edited by the author 7 years ago
California, USA

Okay, I re-uploaded the patch with Crucible files that are accurate to the 1.0.0.7 GOG version (i.e., the 1.0.0.6 Crucible files, because apparently it never got updated for GOG). Not ideal, but at least it's veriifiably accurate to at least one version of the game.

California, USA

So I see no reason why the patch files that are already up wouldn't be able to also convert 1.0.0.9 back to 1.0.0.7, but if people run into problems with that just let me know.

California, USA

Titan Quest has had a bit of an issue with versioning lately, and Kotti posted this link in a thread about it over there: https://www.reddit.com/r/Steam/comments/611h5e/guide_how_to_download_older_versions_of_a_game_on/

I haven't looked into this yet but it seems like we'd be able to use this to run essentially any version of the game we want.