Add the option to STOP games from updating!!!

[Cryogami]

It's not that hard of a concept honest, tired of modding a game only to have a update force me to go thru REmodding my game or even waiting for the mod authors to update their mods. You know we mod our games and that updates screw us from being able to play our modded versions until our mods are updated to the games new version, it would be nice to have the option to NOT update and have that extra time to play our games while we wait for the mod authors to update their mods. It's just a little option you could easily squeeze into the drop down tab, can't be any worse than all the other useless options and features you add to Steam.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

When updates were left up to the players, dev/pubs had to field far more support queries. This way is, by a utilitarian measure' better.

You know what's better?

Offering people the option to disable updates, but making updates enabled by default.

This way, the people who don't care will get the updates, and the people who do care will know that they've disabled the updates.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

And bugs really are like landmines. You don't know one is there until you trigger it and triggering one generally results in not good things and wishing that it hadn;'t been triggered and wasn't there. As for most bugs being graphical odities, those sorts of oddities don't cause issues with mods. If its a texture glitch that can be patchesd without affecting stuff. CLipping issues hopwever well. those aren't just mere graphical issues.

Most bugs are not landmines and you know it.

The fact that you try to isolate graphical "odities" shows that patch notes ought to be available to the customer so that the customer can choose whether the update is worth installing.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

ANd the dev is indeed obligated to provide the best, version to the buyer (within reason) that they are capable of. WHy do you think they even bother to update at all? Out of the kindness and goodness of their hearts? Lol.

The devs are not obligated, but they do it simply because games that get bugfixes tend to give the devs a better reputation, and they generally also prefer to have a coherent and intended artistic vision delivered to their fans. But it is not an obligation.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

As said. If the consumer can't keep their system up to snuuff. that their problem. If the cpnmsumer installs mods that get broken by updates, thats between the consumer and the modder. The Developers are doing their job and fulfilling their obligations.

When the "cpnmsumer"'s system is up to "snuuff" but then an update breaks the game, it's the update's fault.

There is no legal obligation on the part of devs, as indicated above.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

As for speed running. Well thats completely external to the developer. and ergo. not their problem. The speed run communities will either have to accept and adapt which is actually more interesting, or move on to something else.

And thus you have accepted that there is a legitimate reason to maintain an older version of the game.

[Start_Running]

Nguyên văn bởi Quint the Alligator Snapper:

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

When updates were left up to the players, dev/pubs had to field far more support queries. This way is, by a utilitarian measure' better.

You know what's better?

Offering people the option to disable updates, but making updates enabled by default.

Yeah that option was the default before... It was more of a headache for at least 2 of the 3 parties involved.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

And bugs really are like landmines. You don't know one is there until you trigger it and triggering one generally results in not good things and wishing that it hadn;'t been triggered and wasn't there. As for most bugs being graphical odities, those sorts of oddities don't cause issues with mods. If its a texture glitch that can be patchesd without affecting stuff. CLipping issues hopwever well. those aren't just mere graphical issues.

Most bugs are not landmines and you know it.

I know what I know And I said what i know. And what we also know is that you have a very clear shall we say bias. Any bug worth the cost of fixing is clearlyy something that needs to be fixed. Devs don't have vaults of cash to throw at stuuff that isn't important.

The fact that you try to isolate graphical "odities" shows that patch notes ought to be available to the customer so that the customer can choose whether the update is worth installing.

That was done originally. And from a utilitarian stand point the current scenario is better.

The devs are not obligated, but they do it simply because games that get bugfixes tend to give the devs a better reputation, and they generally also prefer to have a coherent and intended artistic vision delivered to their fans. But it is not an obligation.

Keep telling yourself that. Maybe talk to a dev and see what they say.

When the "cpnmsumer"'s system is up to "snuuff" but then an update breaks the game, it's the update's fault.

Nah thats just the march of profgress. You either move with it or get left. If you can't move with it then you can ask the devs pretty please to accomodate you.

There is no legal obligation on the part of devs, as indicated above.

Many COPnsumer Affairs groups would say otherwise ;-)

And thus you have accepted that there is a legitimate reason to maintain an older version of the game.

About as legitimate as the use of a Dremel as a sex-aid. It can be done but the maker isn't obligated to design for your edge case use.

[cinedine]

Nguyên văn bởi Quint the Alligator Snapper:

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

When updates were left up to the players, dev/pubs had to field far more support queries. This way is, by a utilitarian measure' better.

You know what's better?

Offering people the option to disable updates, but making updates enabled by default.

This way, the people who don't care will get the updates, and the people who do care will know that they've disabled the updates.

I very much doubt that this would solve anything.
One of the reasons people give is modding. Now image you use a version 1.4.5 that is the last supported one for your favourite mod and new one comes out you want to try that requires 1.5 or newer.

Whachyagonnado?

[Gus the Crocodile]

Nguyên văn bởi cinedine:

One of the reasons people give is modding. Now image you use a version 1.4.5 that is the last supported one for your favourite mod and new one comes out you want to try that requires 1.5 or newer.

Whachyagonnado?

Why do you care? Whichever option they take is a valid choice. The point is that it gets to be a choice at all.

[Crazy Tiger]

Nguyên văn bởi cinedine:

Nguyên văn bởi Quint the Alligator Snapper:

You know what's better?

Offering people the option to disable updates, but making updates enabled by default.

This way, the people who don't care will get the updates, and the people who do care will know that they've disabled the updates.

I very much doubt that this would solve anything.
One of the reasons people give is modding. Now image you use a version 1.4.5 that is the last supported one for your favourite mod and new one comes out you want to try that requires 1.5 or newer.

Whachyagonnado?

Yep, just like all the mods for Minecraft Flash version. Half the mods my daughter wants don't work on the version she's playing. But she has to be on that version because of other mods.

It's a crapshoot.

[Snapjak]

You can all argue the same ♥♥♥♥ over and over again, or just realize that Valve does not care to change it right now.

It's been suggested how many times?

[Crazy Tiger]

Nguyên văn bởi Snapjak:

It's been suggested how many times?

About the same amount of times that Quint and Start had their love dance.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

Nguyên văn bởi Quint the Alligator Snapper:

You know what's better?

Offering people the option to disable updates, but making updates enabled by default.

Yeah that option was the default before... It was more of a headache for at least 2 of the 3 parties involved.

Steam was created in 2003. And it was made to push updates, not to give people an option to refuse them.

When was this "before"?

If you're talking about "people had to go out of their way to download updates themselves", that does not count as the default being updates enabled.

Oh hey, look...

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

The fact that you try to isolate graphical "odities" shows that patch notes ought to be available to the customer so that the customer can choose whether the update is worth installing.

That was done originally. And from a utilitarian stand point the current scenario is better.

...yeah, that doesn't count.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

Most bugs are not landmines and you know it.

I know what I know And I said what i know. And what we also know is that you have a very clear shall we say bias. Any bug worth the cost of fixing is clearlyy something that needs to be fixed. Devs don't have vaults of cash to throw at stuuff that isn't important.

And sometimes bugs don't get fixed for years, or possibly ever, particularly if the dev goes out of business.

Yet somehow the world keeps on turning and people keep on playing the game anyway.

You hold a heavily idealized and unrealistic version of what devs do, while ignoring what consumers might need to do if devs don't live up to those ideals.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

The devs are not obligated, but they do it simply because games that get bugfixes tend to give the devs a better reputation, and they generally also prefer to have a coherent and intended artistic vision delivered to their fans. But it is not an obligation.

Keep telling yourself that. Maybe talk to a dev and see what they say.

I've talked to a number of devs. Some of them are even on my Steam friends list.

I know how long it takes for some bugs to get fixed. I also know what bugs get fixed and what bugs don't. And of course, that means knowing what bugs there are in the first place. And also knowing who complains about those bugs. And how.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

When the "cpnmsumer"'s system is up to "snuuff" but then an update breaks the game, it's the update's fault.

Nah thats just the march of profgress. You either move with it or get left.

Again, you indicate that you prefer forcing other people to enjoy their games only in ways you approve of.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

If you can't move with it then you can ask the devs pretty please to accomodate you.

So you confirm that the current situation involves the players being stuck with whatever raw deal they get, and you are just fine with it.

Nice to know where your priorities are.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

There is no legal obligation on the part of devs, as indicated above.

Many COPnsumer Affairs groups would say otherwise ;-)

Yeah, go tell those "COPnsumer Affairs groups" to help you sue developers over "this game has bugs".

The furthest you'll get is cases of false advertising. Not bugs.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

And thus you have accepted that there is a legitimate reason to maintain an older version of the game.

About as legitimate as the use of a Dremel as a sex-aid. It can be done but the maker isn't obligated to design for your edge case use.

The maker isn't obligated. But the maker doesn't swoop in and poop on your Dremel either.

Unlike a developer who can force an update through Steam.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

TL;DR

Players are well-served by having the option to refuse updates to a game. Steam should default to enabling updates, but allow people to turn off updates.

Everyone who wants to keep their games updated can keep their games updated.

Everyone who doesn't care will automatically have their games updated.

Everyone who doesn't want to keep their games updated will simply be using whatever version they last installed, warts and all.

Very simple.

No need to force people to enjoy games in only ways you like, Start_Running.

[Start_Running]

Nguyên văn bởi Quint the Alligator Snapper:

TL;DR

Players are well-served by having the option to refuse updates to a game. Steam should default to enabling updates, but allow people to turn off updates.

Er no. Because one of the core functions of steam was to pushuopdates automatically to deal with the annoying problem of players not updating their games.. A sentiment shared by most who actually have to deal with the support issues called by that.

Everyone who wants to keep their games updated can keep their games updated.

Everyone who doesn't care will automatically have their games updated.

And those that choose not to will still complain anmd ♥♥♥♥♥ when they trip the metaphorical landmine that wipes 50 hours of platythrough progress. At least with the auuto updating, devs know that any ciomplaints and moaning are about current issues, not issues they patched 3 versions ago.

The industry tried it that way before... tyhe results were sub-optimal, and as pointed out it really just kicks the can to another problem. What happens when one mod (maintained by a dilligent and respectable modder) needs the newer version and another mod (by a lazy modder) needs an older version.


At that point you gonna have to kick one of the mods to the curve. Same as one already has to do with the auto update.

No need to force people to enjoy games in only ways you like, Start_Running.

If it was only me it would never be a system. Safe to say this is something that can be seen as the better option and when you have an objectively better option (by utilitarian standards) why bother to have inferior sub-optimal problematic options?

CHouice isn't always a universal good especially when you have to deal with the fallout of other people's bad choices.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

Everyone who wants to keep their games updated can keep their games updated.

Everyone who doesn't care will automatically have their games updated.

And those that choose not to will still complain anmd ♥♥♥♥♥ when they trip the metaphorical landmine that wipes 50 hours of platythrough progress.

And the very very first thing that any competent support personnel as well as any competent fellow player should ask is what version the player is running.

You keep saying that this is a problem, except it's not really a problem. The solution -- a simple version check -- is obvious.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

The industry tried it that way before...

You haven't shown a period of time when updates on Steam were the default low-effort choice but also were optional.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

What happens when one mod (maintained by a dilligent and respectable modder) needs the newer version and another mod (by a lazy modder) needs an older version.

At that point you gonna have to kick one of the mods to the curve. Same as one already has to do with the auto update.

No, you simply use the old version because it can run both mods together.

That is, unless some pesky launcher client forces the game to be changed.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

No need to force people to enjoy games in only ways you like, Start_Running.

If it was only me it would never be a system.

It's only a system because this was the second-laziest implementation.

Nguyên văn bởi Start_Running:

Safe to say this is something that can be seen as the better option and when you have an objectively better option (by utilitarian standards) why bother to have inferior sub-optimal problematic options?

Go spout your utilitarian philosophizing at someone whose game an update just broke.

Oh wait, you do that all the time anyway, given how you post in threads on this topic. You don't actually care about people being able to enjoy their games. You're willing to espouse taking away people's access to games they properly paid for just because you think that other people would benefit from having an updated version.

[Tito Shivan]

Nguyên văn bởi Crazy Tiger:

Nguyên văn bởi Snapjak:

It's been suggested how many times?

About the same amount of times that Quint and Start had their love dance.

Now you made me chuckle...

Nguyên văn bởi Snapjak:

You can all argue the same ♥♥♥♥ over and over again, or just realize that Valve does not care to change it right now.

They have made some changes though. Nowadays games not frequently played will have their updates scheduled for later. Still this doesn't solve the problem for most people asking for this feature as it involves frequently played games.

Also the developers can choose to freeze versions through the beta tab if they wish so.

I always sum it up the same way in these threads. I won't say it'll plainly won't happen, but in a world where the software industry is moving towards taking the control of updates from the users,
and automatically applying updates, it comes as a unlikely thing to happen in Steam.

[cinedine]

Nguyên văn bởi Gus the Crocodile:

Nguyên văn bởi cinedine:

One of the reasons people give is modding. Now image you use a version 1.4.5 that is the last supported one for your favourite mod and new one comes out you want to try that requires 1.5 or newer.

Whachyagonnado?

Why do you care? Whichever option they take is a valid choice. The point is that it gets to be a choice at all.

Why offer a solution that doesn't fix anything?
With mandatory updates you at least have pressure for the modders to keep their mods up-to-date or the users to move on.
Or the developers to roll-back a broken update or fix it ASAP or risk having their games reviews dumped and losing all players.

[Gus the Crocodile]

Nguyên văn bởi cinedine:

Nguyên văn bởi Gus the Crocodile:

Why do you care? Whichever option they take is a valid choice. The point is that it gets to be a choice at all.

Why offer a solution that doesn't fix anything?
With mandatory updates you at least have pressure for the modders to keep their mods up-to-date or the users to move on.
Or the developers to roll-back a broken update or fix it ASAP or risk having their games reviews dumped and losing all players.

”Fix” is a false idol. It’s not every feature’a job to somehow “fix” the software industry. The point is that things can be made better for some individuals.

Users don’t need to be “pressured to move on” - that’s not a good thing - at least not in the eyes of people who would be using this feature, so it’s not exactly a useful bit of reasoning here.

The idea that with this option in place you’d remove the pressure for devs to update their games is absurd. This isn’t going to be used by anywhere near 100% of players - and if you’re saying otherwise, then you’re literally suggesting that a huge percentage of players find that a preferable solution, which would be an argument in favour of the option’s availability.

You can’t have it both ways. If it’s true that it doesn’t help, then people wouldn’t be using it and there is no reason to worry about it being added. If you’re worried about it being added, it must be because you expect lots of people will use it, which implies that they find Steam having the feature to be an improvement for them.

[cinedine]

Nguyên văn bởi Gus the Crocodile:

Nguyên văn bởi cinedine:

Why offer a solution that doesn't fix anything?
With mandatory updates you at least have pressure for the modders to keep their mods up-to-date or the users to move on.
Or the developers to roll-back a broken update or fix it ASAP or risk having their games reviews dumped and losing all players.

”Fix” is a false idol. It’s not every feature’a job to somehow “fix” the software industry. The point is that things can be made better for some individuals.

Users don’t need to be “pressured to move on” - that’s not a good thing - at least not in the eyes of people who would be using this feature, so it’s not exactly a useful bit of reasoning here.

The idea that with this option in place you’d remove the pressure for devs to update their games is absurd. This isn’t going to be used by anywhere near 100% of players - and if you’re saying otherwise, then you’re literally suggesting that a huge percentage of players find that a preferable solution, which would be an argument in favour of the option’s availability.

You can’t have it both ways. If it’s true that it doesn’t help, then people wouldn’t be using it and there is no reason to worry about it being added. If you’re worried about it being added, it must be because you expect lots of people will use it, which implies that they find Steam having the feature to be an improvement for them.

Every solution is meant to fix something. Every feature is a solution to some problem.
If the feature doesn't do anything but just shifting the matter, it's not worth developing.

And yes, sometimes pressure is a good thing. You don't want a developer who just says "just don't download the new update" once in a blog post and feels like their obligation is done and fanbois spamming valid negative reviews with "the developer said not to update". It prevents shifting the responsibility of the game working from the developers to the customers to properly maintain their old version.

I don't expect many people using it. But I expect those few who do to sooner or later be the vocal minority spamming every support avenue possible. Just like people already and still do in regards with the library update and complaining about new games or updates literally requiring it, making their little workaround pointless.

There is an ultimate truth in gaming: gamers are the worst. There is no single one group of customers who will constantly ♥♥♥♥♥ about the slightest perceived issue and resorting to literally sending death threads over rebalance patches.
Literally everything you do is aking to opening Pandorra's Box. So you better make sure that you get something out of it.

So what's in there for Steam offering this feature?