Disabling auto-updates in a single game

[Catnip-King]

I checked out the properties on Stardew Valley and even though there are auto-update options, there aren't any that disable them. Everytime the dev adds some minor thing to this finished game all my mods go out of date. Like is there a way to stop auto-updates on Steam's end? There aren't older versions on beta and I can't imagine any reason that this wouldn't be implemented, am I missing something?

[FFL2and3rocks]

You can't disable updates, only delay them until the next time you want to launch the game.

It's easier for the developers to provide support when everyone is using the current version.

[Lira, Chicken Chaser]

Set the game to only update when launched, set steam into offline mode, and then launch the game.

I wish steam would allow us to disable updates properly, but they apparently don't respect the user's wishes.

[999999999]

Originally posted by Buddicus:

I wish steam would allow us to disable updates properly, but they apparently don't respect the user's wishes.

That is up to the developers of each game to allow or not by letting users have a beta branch to use.

[Lira, Chicken Chaser]

Originally posted by 999999999:

Originally posted by Buddicus:

I wish steam would allow us to disable updates properly, but they apparently don't respect the user's wishes.

That is up to the developers of each game to allow or not by letting users have a beta branch to use.

According to the current model sure, however, that doesn't mean Steam can't give us the option to disable updates or even to select the patch we want to play on.

[999999999]

Originally posted by Buddicus:

Originally posted by 999999999:

That is up to the developers of each game to allow or not by letting users have a beta branch to use.

According to the current model sure, however, that doesn't mean Steam can't give us the option to disable updates or even to select the patch we want to play on.

Steam was built with auto updating in mind. To ease the stress on the devs.

Ask the game devs.

[Lira, Chicken Chaser]

Originally posted by 999999999:

Originally posted by Buddicus:

According to the current model sure, however, that doesn't mean Steam can't give us the option to disable updates or even to select the patch we want to play on.

Steam was built with auto updating in mind. To ease the stress on the devs.

Ask the game devs.

I don't mind the default state being auto-update, but to ignore the wishes of the customer when they decide they don't want to update is anti-consumer.

The devs do not take priority over the user when it comes to the user's machine and files.

[Kargor]

Originally posted by 999999999:

Steam was built with auto updating in mind. To ease the stress on the devs.

And the users. When I see the suggestions people often get on problems, having the option to not update the game, or even select an older version, would just create more havoc.

[999999999]

Originally posted by Kargor:

Originally posted by 999999999:

Steam was built with auto updating in mind. To ease the stress on the devs.

And the users. When I see the suggestions people often get on problems, having the option to not update the game, or even select an older version, would just create more havoc.

It did, for everyone. Just about every issue on the forums was easily resolved by updating the game... Before Steam.

[Silicon Vampire]

As stated, the devs can allow people to use other branches of the software.

Most choose not to implement this feature. That should tell you something.

[nullable]

Originally posted by Buddicus:

Originally posted by 999999999:

Steam was built with auto updating in mind. To ease the stress on the devs.

Ask the game devs.

I don't mind the default state being auto-update, but to ignore the wishes of the customer when they decide they don't want to update is anti-consumer.

The devs do not take priority over the user when it comes to the user's machine and files.

This is how Steam operates. And how most other distribution platforms operate as far as I know. If you don't want to use a platform like Steam, Blizzard, GoG, Origin or Epic, then you're free to vote with your dollars and buy stand alone games that don't require a platform and then you can manage arbitrary versions however you want.

Discovering a platform operates a certain way and you want it to operate differently as a matter of convenience is not anti-consumer. If this was a serious concern for you, you probably should have read the user agreement when you signed up.

The last thing developers want to do is deal with people running fifteen versions of the game, turning off auto-updates and forgetting that they did, then throwing a tantrum that their game is "broken", demanding refunds, and fixes that already exist or support for some old version, or fixes that don't involve updates. You want a silly thing as a matter of convenience, not because it's a good idea in general.

[DonJuanDoja]

Only good solution I've ever seen implemented was Nexus mod manager which updated your mods etc.

That's the whole problem with mods is they're not supported, even the mods devs usually end up walking away from projects unfinished... probs because they don't get paid.

Bethesda tried to fix that with paid mods and got crucified... so that's the end of that.

That's why I don't use mods. There just isn't a reliable solution yet and it takes too much time and effort to maintain a good modded game.

Maybe when I retire and have nothing but time...

[nullable]

Originally posted by DonJuanDoja:

Only good solution I've ever seen implemented was Nexus mod manager which updated your mods etc.

That's the whole problem with mods is they're not supported, even the mods devs usually end up walking away from projects unfinished... probs because they don't get paid.

Bethesda tried to fix that with paid mods and got crucified... so that's the end of that.

That's why I don't use mods. There just isn't a reliable solution yet and it takes too much time and effort to maintain a good modded game.

Maybe when I retire and have nothing but time...

Well it really depends on how frequently a game is updated, once upon a time developers would pretty much stop updating a game a few months after release so after that point mod compatibility was pretty stable. So it can be hit or miss. And modding is not not for everyone if you want magic one button compatibility and updates.

And paid mods aren't a guarantee of support. I am sure mod makers generally wouldn't be making enough to support their mods full time given the paltry cut of revenue Bethesda was offering. And mod makers can still quit and get bored and abandon their mods at any time and I promise that Bethesda wasn't going to support abandoned mods themselves. And once people are paying for mods they're going to have much different expectations from mod makers, and Bethesda. It was always going to implode like it did and it seems clear it was a bean counters idea of how to monetize the work of others when considering many of the variables.