Not surprising of lack of support on STEAM version.

[spacecoasttoast]

I am not surprised that the STEAM version doesn't have the fixes that the GOG version has.
The blatant lack of support of Eidos is no shock at all.

Examples:
Games for windows live. They are letting there titles die such as Battlestations Pacific.
Any support request you open will be met with generic responses.
This game and lack of support on STEAM.
Final Fantasy ports on STEAM and really bad ports wtih zero support or patching.

Thank Eidos shame on me for doing this again.
I should have known better. It's my fault I should have looked at the publisher.

Ask me if I dare purchase Final Fantasy III or at least until I see positive support posts.
I hope Eidos is listening because if they are trying to beat out EA on being the worst company in the US they just jumped the line before the green light.

We can only hope they'll fix some of this.

[Leaf]

So you are saying go buy this at gog instead of Steam?
I, like many others, prefer to have most of my games on Steam, but having the game working is more important obviously. So gog is the way to go?

[Gila]

I don't think Steam is really the issue. They are just the middleman. I have heard that some GOG legacy games work better than Steam version, but that might be through the application of unofficial patches or workarounds. Steam delivers exactly how the publisher gives it to them.

Can you really expect to receive support on a game this old? I'm sure Eidos quit supporting Omikron years ago. They can't keep ALL of their games up to date.

That being said, Omikron has held up very well for it's age. It runs almost flawlessly for me (Sneak bug being the only exception) with top of the line hardware on Win7 Pro.

What kind of issues are you having? Maybe someone else has had them, and has found a patch.

Originally posted by Leaf:

So you are saying go buy this at gog instead of Steam?
I, like many others, prefer to have most of my games on Steam, but having the game working is more important obviously. So gog is the way to go?

I like Steam just for the ease of using the platform. I do have some GOG games that Steam doesn't offer, but whatever fixes GOG apply to their games; you can no doubt quickly find the equal through a search engine. I guess it just boils down to preference, really.

I have also read in places, that GOG sometimes has bonus content the Steam doesn't offer. (Artwork, and junk like that.)

[Baltasar]

This is odd. I have tried to get this game running for years on anything above Win98 and never succeeded until I got the GOG version. If this version does not feature those fixes, then I would refrain from buying it. If it's true, that is.

[Gila]

I have had trouble in the past getting disk copies of legacy games to run on newer versions of OS'.

However, after buying them on Steam; they usually seem to work fine. My own reasoning is that the Steam version would more than likely be up to date with the latest official patch. Disk copies are behind the curve, and won't have any kind of patching unless it is a re-release. (Even though patches were fairly uncommon back then.)

I don't think I ever had any trouble with my physical copy of Omikron running on newer systems, but Shadow Man would not run at all. I bought it on Steam, and it worked like a champ!

I can't speak for GOG, but Steam is just a distributor. Their games are going to be exactly how the publisher gives them to them. Meaning that there won't be any kind of unofficial patching applied. What you'll get is the latest version of the original game that was available.

If GOG does add additional patching, that may explain why some of their games work for people while Steam copies don't.

[Vi]

Aren't the Steam and GOG versions of this 99% identical? I own both and I can see traces of Timeslip's colour correction patch in both versions.