Avoiding Patching EQ on multiple systems?

Quackanator

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2011
Messages
294
Reaction score
1
Points
16
Location
Australia
Greetings folks, had a question which might be a slightly dumb one but either I cant search properly or it's advanced stupidity kicking in.

Question: Is there a better way to update EQ across multiple systems other than sharing/copying the whole blasted EQ folder across? (To avoid doing a 750 MB update on four systems at home and two laptops in separate locations, or copying a 10 gig EQ folder each time which takes years to copy without USB3)

Usually I patch on one comp on the network and then progressively copy the whole EQ folder (or whatever other game) onto the other computers that I use. Takes ages and I was wondering if there was a better to do it.

Since EQ patches updates files across a number of folders, is there a simple way to just find just the updated files and copy them across to the corresponding folders on another system?

Amazingly enough looking at the recently updated files netted me 150 mb of updated files in easily identifiable files.. but the download was 750 mb. Searching by date nets a whole lots of more files updated in a variety of folders... but manually searching and copying files and then finding the right folder on another system to dump the in is about as slow as copying the whole folder. And I never can seem to find all the blasted updated files coz the updated files seems to always been a few 100 mb less than what I downloaded.

Was wondering if someone had a better way of updating EQ across different systems after patches?
Cheers in advance and sorry if the solution is very obvious.
 
Making the folders part of a network share and synching them. Im not familiar with something of the sort, but a quick google...

How to keep your information in sync

Synkron ? Folder synchronisation

It's free, so couldn't hurt trying :)


Personally, I can never get a decent speed from sony for patching. So i'll run the patched on the different devices at the same time and has no affect I can tell on download speeds from them.

Why do you spend the time copying the whole directory instead of patching normally? =\
 
hmm will try the folders in sync thing... Tried throwing game folder in dropbox but meah had horrible lag.

The changed files are easy enough to look up but gah at manually identify and copying the 569 file(s) to their corresponding locations.

So since I downloaded 770,529,891 bytes on a connection that horrifically slow and expensive on the data since the ISP is craptastic for data cap blowouts, so I don't want to rinse repeat the process on another five comps since I've already downloaded it once already.
 
hmm will try the folders in sync thing... Tried throwing game folder in dropbox but meah had horrible lag.

The changed files are easy enough to look up but gah at manually identify and copying the 569 file(s) to their corresponding locations.

So since I downloaded 770,529,891 bytes on a connection that horrifically slow and expensive on the data since the ISP is craptastic for data cap blowouts, so I don't want to rinse repeat the process on another five comps since I've already downloaded it once already.

why not just sort the folder by date and copy only the stuff that gets patched?
 
If had to do that these days, I would try and get some help writing a MS powershell script to put updated files into a zip file, or even use powershell to copy the files directly. If you go to sitepoint for help or some other sites you might actually be able to pull tha toff
 
I'd still personally just run the patcher on each system, what is a 700mb download these days? :S
 
Here are some alternatives:

#1. Patch on each client - but data cap and slow download sucks.
#2. Patch once and copy the entire folder - easy but copies take a while too.
#3. Patch once and copy using a utility that does it smarter:
- Synkron ? Folder synchronisation ( from above )
- XCopy from the command line with a few flags
- Do a local bittorrent!
#4. Patch once and share the folder on other machines. Anyone tried this? Maybe make it read only?