How to skip this new idiotic launcher ?

[amud]

When I click divnity 2 icon - it launches this new launcher which ask me what game i want to play and if i want to sign up for some stupid third party service. How do i get rid of all this crap so when I click the icon it just plays the game ?

[Wolfsun]

launch from the .exe file for the Game you want to play. Used to work. YMMV.

[Zeet]

tfck dude, their launcher don't take 5 seconds to use..

[EolSunder]

really like Zeet said.. launcher comes up, button on bottom right says "SKIP " and presto your playing the game. It isn't rocket science.

[OMG!]

you can also add the line
--skip-launcher
to launch options under properties. i agree their launcher is very bad and kind of annoying. I'd be okay signing up for an account if it was like this when i bough the game but they also added it like years after the fact so thankfully at least it's not a requirement.

[Calico-Jack]

Originally posted by OMG!:

you can also add the line
--skip-launcher
to launch options under properties. i agree their launcher is very bad and kind of annoying. I'd be okay signing up for an account if it was like this when i bough the game but they also added it like years after the fact so thankfully at least it's not a requirement.

When Larian released Baldur's gate with the $70 price tag, it gave me pause for thought. Here was a developer releasing an early access title at the same price as an EA or AtciBlizz main release. Even now mega corp titles costing $70 is a contentious issue, but at the time of release it was particularly spicy.

So now this launcher. Like the $70 early access price tag, It certainly points in a direction Larian appears to want to take.

[EolSunder]

in these current internet gaming days, buyers are wary of buying any newly released game with a hefty 70 dollar price tag, because we know from experience that usually they aren't complete functional games due to the way gaming companies work now. They throw out their 70 dollar game at release date weather its finished or not, and patch it up later. Gamers don't mind paying 70 dollars for a FINISHED game, but we know that many companies and the current trend mean your paying 70 dollars for a unfinished game.

Been proven lots of times and gamers know the deal. If fallout 76 was thrown out for 70 bucks as it functions today, sure, after months/years of patches and fixes. But to throw out 70 dollar games as "finished" when they are far from it. Buyers know. I NEVER buy a game at full price on release, not for decades. You always wait a while, let other sheep throw out money and watch to see how long it takes to patch it, fix it, get it functional, then hopefully by then the price has went down a little. THEN you buy it.

Old days sure, when finished games were released, you didn't have internet patching to fix them later. You either had a functional game, or it wasn't and you returned it because it didn't work. Not so in the current internet days.

[Calico-Jack]

Originally posted by EolSunder:

we know from experience that usually they aren't complete functional games due to the way gaming companies work now.

Working practices changed - it has become the norm to use agile or agile like development cycles where prototypes are quickly released then refined over multiple cycles. On the upside it's faster and more responsive to user input on what direction the app should take. The issue is where the developers take the model and then try to see what the minimum they can get away with and still have people people give them money.

The first time I saw this level of cynicism was Peter Monlineux with Godus where 22 Cans used kick starter and Steam early access to develop a mobile game while promising something else entirely in its Kick Starter phase and all through the early access period for desktops.

I think it's worth mentioning that Hello Games with No Mans Sky appeared to do exactly the same, and was close enough to Godus in release times that it really looked like they'd set out to follow 22 Cans lead, but followed through with the process of continual release cycles until they had a good product. They are however rare.

But the real issue with the $70 dollar tag is the most common arguments in support of it are all something along the lines of games are expensive to make from an industry that rarely, if ever, actually shares the gains with the producers - the coders, modellers and artists.

I'm not saying Larian is doing any of this but a proprietary launcher that nags you to set up some kind of sanctioned game account sounds just so UnisoftEAAvitvisionBlizzard. Same with the $70 tag - when I saw it my first reaction was "Nooooo - I thought you were one of the good guys!!"

[EolSunder]

well i do agree, prices always go up and a 70 dollar price tag for a FINISHED game is fine, long ago new games were 40 bucks, then 50, then 60, etc. So yes it will go up over time as wages/work/etc costs more. Don't have a problem with that. Again, the problem is your often paying full price for an unfinished game that may, or may not be patched/fixed down the line. No mans sky exactly, thats another game that was released not functional and of course everyone was mad. At least they over time fixed and added stuff to the game, but like the norm, they threw out a unfinished bad game in order to get money which they needed to continue working on the game, and if all the buyers had any idea how bad the game was at release, just like FO76 and others, they wouldn't have spent a dime.

Just like me, i don't spend a dime, expecting them to put out an unfinished game. I wait, see what happens, laugh at everyone tearing their hair out at a bad release, laugh, and go "i'll see how it pans out next year, if they fix it".

[NicoloHs]

si

[Calico-Jack]

Originally posted by EolSunder:

well i do agree, prices always go up

There used to be a connection between rarity and price for physical products (though that hs also fallen by the wayside in recent years). However when talking about the Games Industry, we're talking about a product that can be reproduced without limits. The $70 price tag has everything to do with convincing investors they will get a return on investing rather than actual costs. The staff making the games will still be subjected to obligatory unpaid overtime, lack of job security and layoffs used as tools to pad profit margins.
I'm not saying this is what Larian does but with the timing of the launch they do seem to be trying on a look.

[abaoabao2010]

You guys have no idea what you're talking about lol. Games are more expensive to make nowadays because releasing a game with the quality of a 90s game isn't going to sell.

And since it costs more to produce, it sells for more money.

As for early access costing $70, that's a totally different problem. You're not buying an unfinished game for $70, you're pre-ordering a finished game for $70, in addition to getting to play it even before it's released on the side.

[Calico-Jack]

Originally posted by abaoabao2010:

You guys have no idea what you're talking about lol.

Answer two simple questions:
how much have non management salaries risen over the past 20 years in comparison to upper management in major games companies?
why are so many games companies against employees having the means of discussing or renegotiating the terms of their employment?

When you have the answers to those I'll listen to the rest of what you have to say.

[Jawaka]

Working practices changed - it has become the norm to use agile or agile like development cycles where prototypes are quickly released then refined over multiple cycles. On the upside it's faster and more responsive to user input on what direction the app should take. The issue is where the developers take the model and then try to see what the minimum they can get away with and still have people people give them money.

Developers can change and do whatever they want but consumers don't have to support any of it.

[Calico-Jack]

Originally posted by Jawaka:

Working practices changed - it has become the norm to use agile or agile like development cycles where prototypes are quickly released then refined over multiple cycles. On the upside it's faster and more responsive to user input on what direction the app should take. The issue is where the developers take the model and then try to see what the minimum they can get away with and still have people people give them money.

Developers can change and do whatever they want but consumers don't have to support any of it.

I agree, having said that most big budget titles contain micro tansactions, season passes (gated content), pay to skip grind features, predatory data harvesting, launching with vague roadmaps promising future content which a tiny part of will actually arrive. Beats me why people fall for this stuff but the AcitEaBizzThedas still shift units.

[amud]

Personally I think the days of Larian being a customer oriented company is over. One could say it is the natural tansition of a small company to large company. Oh well...