Installa Steam
Accedi
|
Lingua
简体中文 (cinese semplificato)
繁體中文 (cinese tradizionale)
日本語 (giapponese)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandese)
Български (bulgaro)
Čeština (ceco)
Dansk (danese)
Deutsch (tedesco)
English (inglese)
Español - España (spagnolo - Spagna)
Español - Latinoamérica (spagnolo dell'America Latina)
Ελληνικά (greco)
Français (francese)
Indonesiano
Magyar (ungherese)
Nederlands (olandese)
Norsk (norvegese)
Polski (polacco)
Português (portoghese - Portogallo)
Português - Brasil (portoghese brasiliano)
Română (rumeno)
Русский (russo)
Suomi (finlandese)
Svenska (svedese)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraino)
Segnala un problema nella traduzione
Regole e linee guida per le discussioni
Segnala questo messaggio
So there will be a new OS and a new client again and all your games are obsolete and unuseable over night. You may be warned before this happens, but what is it worth if there is no solution, cause running the old OS on an old machine further isn't possible cause of the missing functional client and running the games on a new machine with the new OS needs tons of buggy mods/patches and many, many hours of research and test. For some games (especially simulations which aren't so popular) there will even never be any solution.
And no one is interested in helping you or giving you a solution for this problem, but they were very interested in taking your money before! And believe me this will happen again for the games that are state of art today, the same it did for the games from the past.
If you have a lot of games in your library, lets say about 400, and only half of them isn't useable anymore and we say you bought all of them on sale for arround only 10 bucks (what isn't the truth), than we already speak about arround 2000€.
It could be much, much more, depending on how heavy the changes in a new future OS are and in realation to this also have to be in the new client, which will then effect the compatibility of the games from now, and how much of them are still useable. And it simply deppends also on what price you bought some games. Maybe that most of them still runable, but it could also be the case that none are runable anymore.
And the point is, if things go on like they do at the moment, even if many games aren't playable anymore, it will not interest any one and there won't also still be no solutions or workarrounds, or a still useable client anymore.
You have to search on your own for solutions, or to learn programming, reengineering and source code hacking to be able to play your legally bought games again. The other "solution" is to forget about the games and the money you spent on them and buy new ones, which will be obsolete and unuseable again in a few years.
This may be ok for many of the younger gamers, but not for the ones that are collecting games or simulations since years. And those are also mostly the ones that have large libraries with a lot of games and even do also still buy older games if they are missing in their collection.
As things stand at the moment, I personally rethink about my hobby and I'm really at the point to end it. It just doesn't make any sense anymore, if you will be locked out of your legally bought games in the not so far future. And it WILL HAPPEN!
Also. Thank you for admitting there are no games that evidence your claims.
You mean like I did when I needed to figure how to change the keybinding on DoW2?
Being averse to tweaking as a PC gaming hobbyist is like a model builder being averse to teh smell of glue.
That, my friends, is called special pleading.
Let me return these words to you:
You do realize that I, too, can use that line of reasoning to dismiss your argument out of hand, right?
Yeah, nice that those game worked on older systems for you. But they didn't work for everyone, so that doesn't count.
Uh-oh, I think you broke your own argument this time around
Which of the Steam games listed in this thread natively run on any other plattform than Windows? Steam has canned support for legacy Windows versions ~3 years ago. If the games don't work on modern systems, why do they have recent positive reviews (or people stating they run fine on mondern OSes in the forums, for that matter)?
If the games can be run on legacy system because they have no DRM or can be run fine on Linux via emulation your argument is invalid to begin with, because nothing is stopping you from doing exactely that.
So DRM-free games that don't require Steam and can be run on legacy systems still require various workarounds - just like games that require Steam.
Ergo they are crappily programmed and being able to run them on legacy systems doesn't solve inherent problems. Thanks for confirming that - again.
So far neither you nor OP have been able to show any, so there's that. This is the point we're confirming that this isn't about "games not working", but about you wanting a lightweight Steam client and highjacking OPs thread to push that idea. This is illustrated by your absolute inability to actually follow up on your claims regarding games needing a legacy Steam client to run.
My dear, that's called "paraphrasing". Here's what you said on page 2 for example:
You've (unsuccessfully I might add) tried to argue that games don't run correctly (or at all) on modern systems and that we need a backported version of steam to fix that. This has been going on for ~9 pages by now.
Yeah, it's this totally novel concept called paraphrasing. You just confirmed - again - that being able to run games on legacy systems doesn't solve your problem as they still need various workarounds.
So let me get this straight - games that are DRM free now require "luck" to get working on legacy systems - where they are supposed to run best?
"Luck"?
So nothing anybody actually has any influence over and which is not down to software or hardware either. Meaning a legacy Steam client isn't going to fix your problem.
Thanks for proving my point. Might I suggest praying as an alternative? Maybe a rabbit's foot next to your monitor?
You've just managed to prove - again - that your proposal doesn't make any sense, runs directly counter to established security practices and isn't going to actually benefit anybody because you now apparently need luck to get old software running on legacy hardware.
And even if someone will make something similar, threre will still be the problem that you couldn't use Steam's client within this emulation, cause it's based on the OS that is not supported by the client anymore.
So to get your old games running you have to be able to start them which isn't possible with an old OS cause of a missing client, and this is totally independent of the fact if it's running in a virtual environment like a WinBox or a VM or even on a physical old machine.
And that there will be fixes for every game or simulation in future, that aren't playable anymore will never happen. It didn't happen in the past so why should things change in the future?
And things go even worse the last time. Even Virtualbox has dropped the 3D acceleration for Windows XP in there last release, so why should things get better?
DOsbox works fine with Steam. Sopooo why woudl you think a thirdparty launcher/emulator would be any different?
\And again the existence of DOsbox based games kinda shoots you in the kneecap m8.
I mean the Gap between DOs and and Modern systems is even greater.
Of course there will be fixes. Devs will happily update and repackage their installers to keep making money off their games in the future.
See I can constryuct hypothetical future scenarios too. Except mine actually has some precedent. See th e packaging of games with preconfigged dosbox and/or SCUMM.emulators.
Sio basically you're admitting that games won't be able to run on an old client anyway because the devs have updated towards modern clients?
My dude. At this point you're essentially making up wild future scenarios to make your point ...a clear admission of a lack of any current evidence.
There are some fixes that work for popular games from the past but not for a lot of older simulations which weren't as near as popular back those days.
But I've bought them and I want to be able to still use them as long as I have the hardware to do it. There isn't a problem running those games, but there is a problem to run the client which prevents me from still using them fully functional and without any flaws.
And even if those older titles here on Steam aren't so many and most of the gamers aren't affected by it, cause most of them aren't collectors, this could easy change in the near future with other OS and clients also for the titles we still can play.
And if there isn't an interest to fix the problems we still have, there will also be no interest to do so in future when many more titles are concerned about it.
For me this is more than enough to rethink my purchase behavior about computer games and also a reason to rethink the whole hobby and if it's still worth it.
* the games that run better than they did: have tweaks of various sorts to make them run
* the games that run the same as well: some games that are as-is in their original form, and some games with tweaks
* the games that don't run better: other games that are as-is in their original form
They'll only "run better than they ever did" if someone builds some other tweaks -- patches, emulators, etc. -- to make them run better. They don't magically run better on their own.
Look at your own post; you have to mention VMs and DOSBox and ScummVM:Those things don't come into existence on their own.
Oh, and this is not even getting into the difference between emulation and real hardware. I thought you would have known about this since you brag about being an experienced retro gamer, but...that's just one more piece of evidence that you aren't.
Assuming they're still around and are willing to do so. Neither of which is a guarantee.
See above.
Only when updates actually make things inaccessible. If the original software and the original hardware don't change, they'll continue running fine. The only time they stop running fine is when someone changes something.
But, just as someone can break something with a change, someone can make something work with a change -- such as having a Steam client edition geared to work on older operating systems.
Look yourself in the mirror with that statement.
Because my own experience has been that they generally run better than they did. Especially if they weren't too overly optimized.
Name a few. The thing is its the less popular games that paradoxically have some ofn the most dedicated fanbases.
And so far you've yet to give an example of a game that doesn't run on the modern hardware.
So there's nothing about the modern client.
You're making lots of assumptions m8. I mean I'm a rather avid collector and I have yet tocome across any game that I couldn't get running.
That's the problems of that person alone. iT's like a pickle jar. AIf you can't be bothered to use a little elbogrease to open it...well then you don't really get to complain about not having pickes to gnosh.
That's your call youngster.
Those of us who can still remember how to manually allocate memory blocks to drivers in our autoexec and config files have a slightly different perspective.
Let me paraphrase what you're saying:
That, my friends, is what we call special pleading.
Uh-oh, looks like you also broke your own argument.
None of the Steam games you or OP brought up natively run on other OSes but windows. Steam removed support for Windows XP ~3 years ago. Where do all the recent postive reviews come from then? For that matter, where do all the posts on the forums come from stating that the games run fine?
If the games can run without problems on legacy systems or via emulation your argument is invalid to begin with.
So even being able to run the game on legacy systems doesn't solve the problem then, because the games programming is crappy. Thanks for confirming that.
And this is point where your confirm that this isn't about needing a legacy client, but you highjacking OPs thread to push your "we need a lightweight client" idea. Thanks for further illustrating that by not being able to list a single game that actually requires one and confirming that even running the games on old systems doesn't solve the problem.
That's called paraphrasing. Here's what you said on page two for example:
We are now on page nine and you still haven't managed to show this to be accurate.
It's called paraphrasing, remember? And you just stated that being able to run DRM-free games on legacy systems doesn't solve your problem because they still need workarounds.
Okay, let me get that straight. Running games on legacy systems is down to luck.
"Luck"?
Being able to run those games "on systems where they run best" isn't actually dependent on hardware configuration or software - like that legacy Steam client - but something that you can't actually influence? Yeah, I guess that's one way to surrender the argument.
Have you tried praying? Or hanging a rabbit foot next to your monitor?
You've just managed to prove - again - that your proposal doesn't make any sense, runs directly counter to established security practices and isn't going to actually benefit anybody because running games on the systems where they run best requires luck.
And we've gone over this multiple times earlier in the thread already.
If your standard is "is it possible to get it running", there's never any need for any accommodations, because it's theoretically possible to get literally any old software running on newer computers. (Even more so when you ignore any and all imperfections in how the game runs.) But that assumption is extremely unrealistic and impractical, as has already been amply covered in this thread.
But looks like you're not interested in practicalities. You're just interested in trying to come off as better-than-thou than the "youngster".
That's the thing that doesn't add up. Having multiple "retro" machines to run those games, only to then buy them on Steam and complain about the client preventing them from running. First off, which games games are actually affected by this? Secondly, you don't "collect" games on Steam to then run them on retro hardware. Why would you purposely lock yourself out of ownership when your goal is tol collect games? This doesn't makes sense.
Let me point out that you're not quoting me but just misrepresenting me.
This entire thread has been about whether games work on various different computer systems.
But all you can do is to "paraphrase" (read: actually just flat-out misrepresent to make someone look bad) in some silly way and then make an unfounded claim about it.
Uh-oh, looks like you just broke your own counter-argument.
One can review a game long after one's played it. And just because a game runs for one player doesn't mean it runs for everyone else.
So needing to run on an emulator is fine but having a Steam client that runs on an old system is not fine?
"being able to run the game on legacy systems" can vary from person to person (especially if they have different ideas of what it means to "run", considering that you notably don't even care about things like the game running at the wrong speed). But you'd just dismiss all that with "the games [sic] programming is crappy".
Your rejecting information already posted doesn't make the information invalid; it just makes you willfully ignorant.
And a lightweight client that has fewer dependencies (especially on more modern components) would indeed be more likely to work on an older system. It can "kill two birds with one stone".
"Steam needs to create a client so that one can run one's Steam games". Seriously, there is nothing wrong with this statement. This has always been the case on Steam.
Do you seriously think the world runs like some sort of videogame with a luck stat?
It's based on "luck" because everyone has a different computer, with a different combination of hardware and software on it, and the exact circumstances defined by these parameters are very difficult to predict with absolute certainty. So it's definitely not certain that a given game can run, and it's up to "luck", because everyone's system is at least a little bit different.
If you can't even understand normal use of language, I don't know what you're doing.
Since you can copypaste, so can I.
You keep denying that it'll benefit anybody when there are clearly people whom it'll benefit. Old computers, old games, and old operating systems still exist, y'know.
Now I'm not gonna hold my breath expecting this to become a thing anytime soon. But it doesn't hurt to ask.
You are literally saying that games running alright on modern systems is irrelevant, as is being able to run DRM-free games on legacy systems. You have so far not managed to name a single game that can't be run because you don't have a magical "fixes all the things I am complaining about" Steam client.
Uh-oh, looks like your argument is still inherently broken
I am quite sure that threads do, in fact, work on different computer systems.
Which is way I can quote you pretty much word for word on what you're saying. Yeah, checks out.
And Steam handily lists total playtime and playtime when the review was written. Also, nice to see that you haven't forgotten your old friend special pleading. Unfortunately that still means that your argument is invalid.
How else would you run Windows games on the Linux Steam client? That's literally what Proton is for.
You're claiming that you can't run your Steam games unless Valve creates this magical Steam client.
If the games can be run via emulation or natively without Steam your argument is indeed invalid as it possible to run said games without needing a new client.
So how is that magical steam client that's supposed to run on those very same systems going to fix that? You are literally contradicting yourself. Yes, "games running at the wrong speed" on systems where they are suppsoed to run best is indeed a sign of crappy programming.
You keep mentioning "games running at the wrong speed", but can't even list a single one where Steam is preventing you form running it at the "correct" speed. Why is that?
I can't reject information you're willfully misholding or are unable to provide in the first place. I can point to every single game you've mentioned and state as a fact that Steam does not prevent you from running these in the correct way. They are either DRM-free an can be run on prior verions of windows or are designed to run on a OS that is compatible with Steam.
So Steam hasn't managed to do that and prevents you from running your games? Which ones?
That has nothing to do with luck, and the steam client isn't going to change any of that. The steam client isn't preventing you from running those games "correctly" on legacy hardware - the games are, because they are crappily programmed. Neither do you have any basis on which to complain about having to use workarounds on modern systems.
Meaning you have yet again resorted to invalid arguments.
You know what's next, right?
You have yet again shown that your proposal doesn't make any sense, runs directly counter to established security practices and isn't going to actually benefit anybody because running games on modern systems apparently requires just as much "luck" as running them on older systems.
Isn't that a bit like calling yourself a movie collector and using netflix or amazon prime video? Even more so if we're talking about old/retro games? Buying games on GoG I could understand because of lack of DRM. Archiving Steam games is kind of pointless, unless you believe Gabe's statement (has he even actually said that?) about removing Steam DRM when/if Steam shuts down.
But true, definitions might vary.