Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
This topic has been locked 
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Adding more systems does not add relevance to this matter either. That goes directly back to know the systems vs the games, especially those you're interested in actually playing. Using the total library count is not accurate towards the total number of games played at any one time.
Not to mention, there's also Steam Link or other methods of streaming games to weak devices, while able to use controllers or other accessories utilizing the power of a PC, to such devices as Tablets.
So, even more solutions than you're likely aware of as well that can make things a non-issue or open different roads to solutions to still play the specific games you want on weaker equipment. If I can stream Doom 2016 to a phone and use a usb (OTG) cable to play it nearly flawlessly (connection dependent), then you have strong options available.
I'm talking about when I sit down to play a game out of my library, Instead of just picking a game and pressing play, you said I should install all my games in advance on my systems and write a note pad file. If I have 900 games you say I should test them all. So I have the ability to check the notepad file to have the choice to play something that works. Instead of picking up a device and looking through 900 games, 70% of which provably won't work on my current device. You said install them 900 games in advance across all 4 systems and write a notepad file. This will then give me the ability to sit down instantly pick a game that is guaranteed to work and just press play.
When you have a big library of unplayed games, sometimes you just want to pick up a device and try a new game.
But do you know what could whittle the library list down and give me a strong possibility that a game I choose to play would work? I dont know, say if they implemented a system where you could filter your library by current hardware.
Something like that would let you sit down, pick up any device and just press play on one of the items in the library list and there would be strong possibility it would work.
I dont know why someone hasn't mentioned it before.
You don't need to lie or mislead people with bad faith claims.
Nope, never said it.
Also wasn't aware of "4" systems, until you brought that up. So you have the double negative of
If you're going to make things up, you're clearly not here for a discussion, and thus you have zero credibility.
I did mention it read back through the post. I mentioned a Surface go ages ago. Your clearly not reading the thread properly.
Obviously I would need to install all 900 games, if I dont, when I sit down and game and want to just press play to get straight into a game, how am I going to know what game I want to play in a few months time on what device, obviously I would have to install them all.
When you have a big library of unplayed games, sometimes you just want to pick up a device and try a new game.
Having the ability to just pick up any device and pick a game that works on that device at random wouldn't be possible unless I test all 900 games on each system and have my notepad ready.
But do you know what could whittle the library list down and give me a strong possibility that a game I choose to play at random would work? I dont know, say if they implemented a system where you could filter your library by current hardware.
Something like that would let you sit down, pick up any device and just press play on one of the items in the library list and there would be a very strong possibility it would work.
I dont know why someone hasn't mentioned it before in this thread.
If 70% of the games in my library don't work on my current device. That means 7 games out of every 10 I try will not work. That's a 70% error rate, if the games could be filtered and had even a 10% error rate and 10% in the list didn't work. I would take a 10% download and install error rate to a 70% error rate any day of the week. A filter like that would potentionally remove 500 games that wont work on my current device out of the list. That's a lot of time saved downloading, installing, testing and writing notepad files.
1) Why have you purchased / accepted a gift of something that you haven't already checked if you'll even be able to use?
2) Liability, cannot / will not create a feature that implies a user would definitively be able to run soething
3) Every single "canirunit" type state also add a clarifying statement that the results given do not guarantee that a user will be able to effectively use whatever they checked on.
Yes, no one could memorize hundreds of games worth specs. But at the same time, why do you need to? How many dozens of games do you have installed or are running at any one time?
I mean I have hundreds of games on my Steam account, I only care about a small percentage of them at any one time though. Your argument that you need to accurate know if every one of those games will run on any one of your systems at all times doesn't strike me as rational.
It sounds like something you've exaggerated to try and make your request seem more necessary. So necessary that the problems with implementing it are trivial and can be ignored...
And the reality is Steam, all other online stores, and all game stores ever have worked just fine without this feature. Millions of gamers have managed to navigate the problem of, "can I run it?"
Until the industry changes and starts creating system requirements that provide meaningful data that you can do the kinda work you want done, accurately, the kinda of tool you want and the level of accuracy and reliability you'd want just ain't gonna happen.
Here I will admit it *WOULD* be nice if you could see the game specs on each game's Librtary page. Obvious Place would be under 'Show More Details' Or even in the right column where they put things like links to mabnuals and stuff.
Learn your specs. and make use of the 'Categories' Feature in the Library.
You can creat Categories like:
"Super Gaming RIg" (It runs everything)
"LIving ROom PC"
"Work Laptop"
"Old Laptop" (weakest System)
Then you assign the games accordingly. I'd recommend starting with filling out the Category for the Weakest system first. Because you know anything that will run on the Weakest will work on the strongest systems and YOu can simply appl multiple categories at once. From there you work your way up the chain.
Depending on the size of your library it will require a one time investment of some time but once you do that maintaining it becomes easier since you can categoprize new games as they come in.
Not impossible. Just requires a one time investment of an hour or two.
Of coursse you can categorize by anything you want. Whatever makes sense to you.
Yeah Valve is not going to do this. Neither on the store page, nor the library because it really doesn't know what your system can handle. At best it would be able to tell based a direct match of hardware, which is rather unhelpful. Say you have an Nviodia1030, but oh no! the dev/pub only listed Radeon 210 under there graphics. Guess you can't run it, because you clearly don't have the listed graphics card. What a shame. Even though your actual card smokes the Radeon 210.
And then there's the little fact that dev/pubs have a hait of high-balling minimum and recommended system specs. . Either due to the factt they did not have a weaker machine to actually test it on, or for best practice reasons. I.e you are advised to high ball to account for various quirks and performance issues on the user's system. Because you know you're never going to have just the game running on a system.
I have multiple devices that I use at different times, I have 900 games and 70% of them I have never played. I like to try and play through my un-played library. I have a Desktop that can run anything and lower end devices that can only run certain games due to the hardware. I buy games because I know my Desktop and Gaming laptop can handle them. But when I'm travelling, or staying away from home for long periods, I will take my Acer Aspire or Surface Go laptop, these aren't gaming laptops but they can play 30% of my Library. So when I want to install a game to play at random, I have to look through 900 games to find a game I want to play. But there is a good chance that it doesn't work as the minimum specifications are too high for the device.
The only way to find out if the current device plays the game, is to visit the store page and look for the minimum specs and match them with the laptop manually. Or alternatively, download, install, test and uninstall. I play games to have fun, not constantly download, research and test. If it doesn't work move into the next game. Especially when 7 in every 10 games dont work.
I understand it wouldn't be perfect. But anything is better than an ultimately flawed system.
If there was an ability to filter my library to get an estimated match to my Hardware, this would slim down the constant research or guessing game.
It limits my ability to just open Steam and click play on a game and just play. Most people probably don't play on a large library on multiple devices so probably haven't noticed how annoying and time consuming it is to scan through a library full of games you probably can't play on your current device, but no way to get any help to filter them without installing and testing every game in advance.
If they actually tried you'd have product names lookiong like 96 character serial numbers. Which would be more confusing to the sort of user who already has difficulty dealing with understanding systems.
Again. I've already given you a good way to do this. And thats about as good as it's gonna get.
If the game is small enough that downloading to test is the faster alternative to researching the system specs, chances are that answers your question right there.
You'd just have an equally if not moreso flawed system in its place because then people like yourself would oprobably complain about steam giving you the wrong answer and that you can't trust it.
ANd as said. That would at best be a flat search for matching strings.
And if the dev/pub didn't list the precise hardware you have.. well you're back to square one. You'd likely notice quickly enough that at least have the agmes in your library will show up as being unplayable on any of your systems. WHich would again basically render it useless. SInce even the times it matches wouldn't be totally accurate either.. YOu'd have to be suspect of the matches and have to manually check the non-matches...
How is that different from what you're doing now?
It's only time consuming the first time you set up a category system like I suggested. After that the system is pretty easy to maintain since you can categorize games as they come in.
Graphics cards do have a quantifiable speed, and memory size. and there is only 1200 on the market currently. It wouldn't take too much information to cross reference model numbers with speed and ram references to make a quantifiable list to match against. CPU speed and RAM are definitely quantifiable. This could get you an estimated match against minimum specs. We are not talking about features matching just average speed matching. With Artificial intelligence and advanced algorithms doing some amazing stuff these days, this sort of thing could easily be calculated.
You only make things better by working out how you can achieve things, not making excuses about why you can't achieve things.
Nothing is impossible.
There's pretty much an infinite number of PC part combinations. Plus requirements for what? 4k 30fps? 1080 120fps, 1080 60fps, 720, etc. And there's extra stuff to "can i run it?" than that, what Windows version, what drivers version, game optimization, etc.
It would be a waste of time AND money, that's why nobody has done it.
So basically you expect Valve to maintain an every expanding list of gfx cards based on speed, ram, cores, insttruction sets, shader models, rendering presets, and driver features....and again rthis wouldn't exactly tell you anything as to whether the game would 'run',
Since how dev/pubs quantify that is going to vary. I mean sure it will run...at 640x480, with everything set to off/minimum, at 25 fps, with a little choppiness, but it will run.
If you want to improve things, improve yourself first. Might I suggest since you seem to be so averse to learbning your specs...you just maybe switch to consoles and sidestep the problem entirely.
As said. this is not something that can be done. Microsoft tried this and failed miserably and Microsoft is by their very nature in a better position to actually pull that sort of thing off.
Then you can work on learning your sepcs and categorizing your library.
I understand that there is billions of different combinations but each part when combined and benchmarks creates a performance envelope that rises as the quality of the parts rise. Passmark benchmark collect justifiable results on graphics cards that shows you the performance envelope. It doesn't matter how many different combinations you have, performance always follows an envelope based on the model of graphics card. A GT710 doesn't perform the same as a RTX3090. Models and GPU's have a Quantifiable performance difference. That's why we have benchmarks. Because if you buy the same graphics card as the Benchmark company, you will see comparible results within a margin of error. To say it's not possible to create a performance algorithm to match against per machine is non-sense. If we couldn't do that, benchmarking would be pointless.
Yet it doesn't exist. What does that tell you? because i doubt nobody ever attempted it, so it tells me that it's a huge waste of resources.
What doesn't exist? Benchmarking?
Like I have mentioned, there probably isn't as many people using multiple systems on a regular basis with large libraries.
The majority of people probably have one machine that they buy games for, so dont come across this problem.
Funny how when Valve release the Steam Link, they provide the "Remote play Ready" Library filter to make it easier for customers to filter their games for Steam Link. When they release Hardware that isn't as powerful in the Steam Deck, they feel the need to add the "Works well on Deck" Library filter to help customers filter their games for the deck. So obviously they feel a need to filter the game library for specific devices. Valve are doing it already for their own devices.