安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
此主題已被鎖定 
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
Sometimes an Update will introduce new issues but 80% of all issues people have with updates stem from Mods, or other user-generated alterations.
10% Can be said to stem from people simply griping about content being removed (usually due to licensing issues). Things like Music and voice samples. In which case the publishers are legally required to remove such and they always have been .. The only issue is in the past there was no feasible way to do it. So we once again have a case of technology finally catching up with the laws.
It is true that GoG doesn't force the updates but they do leave whether or not old installers are made available up rto the individual developers. So even if you don't isntall the update, unless you saved tyhe installer and never uninstall the game then you're basically gonna get that new version...
Fun story is that one of the issue GoG has is devs not bothering to make updates available through GoG at all, basically leaving GoG users with bugged broken versions while other platforms get fixed versions.
For the record, I am in grim solidarity with your assessments.
"I don't have this issue, so therefore the problem doesn't exist."
There's no interference. There's just the user declining an update.
You have a weirdly mangled sentence here which doesn't make sense. But it remains true that for every game on my GOG account that Galaxy manages, I can choose whether to allow it to update or not allow it to update. And the same goes with your GOG games, but I guess you have fewer of them.
You might not decline it, but you are not everybody.
Just because you have confidence that updates will only ever do you good, does not mean that everyone shares your sense of priorities as well as being okay with the downloader client forcing their game version to change.
While it is true that most patches don't do anything deleterious to the player's experience, a few do. Doubly so when mods are involved. And you're arguing that devs should get to mess up people's gameplay experience anytime. With no recourse. Not even a way to avoid an update that is known to cause problems.
What don't you understand? Giving the option to not update doesn't remove the ability to automatically update. And no - devs choose Steam because it's the biggest platform.
I guess you're taking the stance of "consumers not getting to choose is better".
In that case, I would strongly question your values.
Well, there was never the expectation for Valve or 'Steam' to be under the obligation of a user to take any specific forum posted recommendations seriously, so I am not sure why anyone would say suggest that they are.
But now that you've brought it up, I admit it'd be nice if someone that actually worked for them commented now and then on these things, since it seems plenty of people have opinions about how they think the place should be run and what features people should get.
I generally try to control my PC as I see fit; I accept that I lost some of that control when I traded some of it away for convenience. I lament the exchange sometimes, and would like to see a time when I can get some of that control back--even at the loss of convenience. Call it buyer's remorse, and comments about updates and control are... often enough... intended to be positive feedback, which is strangely often met with animosity from others.
We are asking for Valve to make the changes. But as per the usual ultra Steam fans come in to defend a bad practice of Valve for no valid reason at all.
You guys noticed you guys have not given a single valid reason as to why we should not be asking for a objectively good option for players? You guys are fighting against players having an option, you are fighting against player choice about software that is installed on their PC.
You know what, I really wish you people would stay the heck out of these threads, because you guys do nothing but muddy up the issues with complete bunk, fighting against an objectively good option for players, and you guys do this for no valid reason at all other than what appears to be ultra fanaticism of Valve.
Seriously, you people need to stop being a part of these discussions.
So, like I said, better to just take one's patronage elsewhere. Maybe Steam will get better in the future? Probably not worth holding one's breath waiting though.
First of all the EULA is written for the end consumer. They have completely different contracts and agreements with Valve. Secondly - giving the option to not update a game doesn't take away the functionality for allowing you as a user to - at any given time - update the game should you want to. Steam would still have the latest available update ready for you to install if and when it comes to that. You also seem to live in a fantasy world where updates never have negative outcomes even if they are intended to improve for example performance. The purpose of Steam isn't to always keep the clients library on the latest version - it's to allow the clients libraries to always be on the latest version with ease should they choose to. If it was the way you describe it we would not have any options when it comes to automatic updates at all and you wouldn't be able to use Steam in offline mode.
Also, you may be mistaking me for someone else, because I've been pointing out Steam's flaws and providing suggestions to it for quite a while now. Including in this thread.
Automatic updates provide convenience. They are not the problem here.
Forced updates remove user choice. They are the problem here.
I have already explained how forced updates need not be automatic, and automatic updates need not be forced.
Yes. And so do a wide variety of other people, some of whom have posted in this very thread.
Oh, I know that, and I'm saying that ought to change to become a possibility.
And so those 14 games are not even relevant to this discussion. But if and when they do get updates, you will get the choice to choose whether or not to accept those updates.
Oh, so now you get to decide how everyone interacts with their games.
I never said to get rid of auto-updating. I said to offer an option to the user to decline updates.
An option is a choice. You can choose not to exercise that option. So if you like updates (which it certainly seems you do), then you can still enjoy your auto-updating just fine. I even specified upthread that auto-updating should be the default, for your convenience.
His disingenuous arguments are this:
He is dismissing other people had various problems with updates just because he didn't. Nobody else is dismissing that people never had any problems.
he is trying to pretend auto-updating and forced updating are the same things. They are not. Nobody is asking for auto-updates to go away. IN fact what is being asked for is the option to not update a game at all. Those who want to continue to have auto-updates are free to continue to have auto-updates if Valve were to create an ADDITIONAL OPTION that players can choose that would prevent updating of games and still be able to play it without updating.
Just because Solid would not decline an update, does not mean other's would not. Again, he is ignoring that fact that nobody is asking to taking anything away from him, because an additional option would not take away the option that allows him to do auto-updates.
I suggest ignoring Solid until he can do the right thing and actually debate in good faith instead of using his disingenuous arguments.
There would be a non-default option which allows those people who want to decline updates to do so.
Nor is it yours, but since you can state your opinion on what is, so can anyone else.
No thank you.
You're going in a strange direction yourself, since you've completely changed your line of argument at this point.
The automatic uopdates were a core component of Steam before there was even a store, and thats really not likely to change from Valve's end. Thus as I said. Start convincing the devs that it makes more sense.
Encourage devs to make use of any of the already available methods of making updates optional.