Disable 'checking for updates' for manually chosen games

[Slaccoon]

As of right now, Steam only allows for 3 update options for specific games.
(right click a game -> properties -> Updates)

- Keep this game up to date
- Only update when you boot up the chosen game
- High priority: ALWAYS update the game first
(not word by word, but something along the lines)

A fourth option, to disable checking for updates entirely, would be very helpful for players like me who play most if not all of their games offline anyways and don't need fancy new multiplayer focused updates and could use the storage space that'd get taken much better.
For example, ARK and GTA 5 are games I own and owned that frequently get updates, however, none of them seem to have any impact on the offline singleplayer experience, and thus only waste my time downloading updates i dont need, waste storage space I could've used much better, and so on for players like me.

I, alongside (probably) many other, would welcome a feature like this, as it would not only save our precious storage space and time, but also not block players out of their games if they haven't updated it yet.

-----------

Alright, that's all for now. First time posting on the steam forums. And sorry in advance if someone else already made a suggestion like this and it got talked about there previously.

[Vlad 254]

I think many of us miss that option.

[Aachen]

It’s been discussed many, many times, yes.

Messaggio originale di Vlad 254:

I think many of us miss that option.

Which was never offered, fWiW.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

The Steam client forcing updates is a major problem with this platform, and a way to not be forced to update games would definitely be very welcome.

It shouldn't be set by default, of course, but it should exist as a built-in option, for the reason you mentioned, as well as a variety of other reasons -- preserving mods, system compatibility, poor internet connections, and more.

Now I'm gonna bet that some people are gonna come in here and...have less than nice things to say about this suggestion. Before they do, I'd like to repost my usual list of workarounds for how to avoid being forced to update your games on Steam:



0. Set the game to only update on launch. (Do this before other steps. This lets you get warning to prepare things before an update hits.)

1. Launch the game directly rather than through Steam, or somehow run the game without Steam running. (May require tweaking to get them to work wthout Steam.)

2. Launch the game in Steam's Offline Mode. (Reportedly, you may have more luck with this if you run the game executable or a shortcut directly.)

3. Modify appmanifest files (or their permissions, or permissions to the game files themselves) to prevent updates, such as by making Steam think that the updates were already applied. (Look up guides for how to do this. This guide might help, for example. There are other guides for doing this manually.)

4. Back up your game files elsewhere then delete the game files or just rename the install folder. Uninstall the game in Steam and then move/rename the folder back, then launch the game from the folder.

5. Back up your game files elsewhere, let the update apply, then put the old files back into the game's install directory. (Won't help to avoid wasting your internet connection, but will at least preserve your old files.)

6. If you're just interested in playing an older version, you might be able to get it via a Depot Downloader. (Reportedly this might not work anymore, but there's this guide which you can try.)

7. Get a version of the game on a platform that doesn't force updates. Any version of the game that's DRM-free -- or any store that sells their games DRM-free -- can definitely be made to not update. Some other versions/platforms, even ones with DRM, may still let you play without updating too.

[Slaccoon]

Messaggio originale di Quint the Alligator Snapper:

The Steam client forcing updates is a major problem with this platform, and a way to not be forced to update games would definitely be (...)

Very useful workarounds! Thanks for sharing them with us! Gave you a little award for it as a 'Thank You'. :)

[Count_Dandyman]

Messaggio originale di Eiswolfin:

Completely support this very popular suggestion, there is never a valid reason for Valve to force updates on non Multi-player only games.

Quint the Alligator Snapper, great comment.

Unfortunately Quint has once again left out the biggest qualifier in his comment Valve already have put systems in place that do allow an option not to update your games with the branch system the downside is that the system requires the devs/publishers to make the choice to allow it and very few do.

Valve have already decided devs/publishers are the ones to decide when and how their games are updated or not and are only acting as the inbetween delivery system for those updates. This isn't something that is likely to change no matter how many reasons you can think of for why you don't want to update so its better to try and encourage the individual devs/publishers to use the system that already exists.

[Nx Machina]

Developers force updates - Image: https://ibb.co/9cvN7FP

Messaggio originale di Nx Machina:

CDPR as all developers can update a game without recourse to anyone.

Messaggio originale di Quint the Alligator Snapper:

Yeah, they can update the game. That means they get to create and distribute updates.

That doesn't mean they get to force it onto people who don't want it.

@ Slacoon

Developers can enable version choice via branches for the products they own. It stops auto-updating yet as always those who use the narrative of "Steam forces updates" are aware of the option but deliberately and knowingly overlook that when posting.

[Nx Machina]

Messaggio originale di Count_Dandyman:

Unfortunately Quint has once again left out the biggest qualifier in his comment Valve already have put systems in place that do allow an option not to update your games with the branch system the downside is that the system requires the devs/publishers to make the choice to allow it and very few do.

Valve have already decided devs/publishers are the ones to decide when and how their games are updated or not and are only acting as the inbetween delivery system for those updates. This isn't something that is likely to change no matter how many reasons you can think of for why you don't want to update so its better to try and encourage the individual devs/publishers to use the system that already exists.

Exactly, after all it literally is their choice for products they own.

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/updates

Updating Your Game - Best Practices

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Messaggio originale di Count_Dandyman:

Messaggio originale di Eiswolfin:

Completely support this very popular suggestion, there is never a valid reason for Valve to force updates on non Multi-player only games.

Quint the Alligator Snapper, great comment.

Unfortunately Quint has once again left out the biggest qualifier in his comment Valve already have put systems in place that do allow an option not to update your games with the branch system the downside is that the system requires the devs/publishers to make the choice to allow it and very few do.

Valve have already decided devs/publishers are the ones to decide when and how their games are updated or not and are only acting as the inbetween delivery system for those updates. This isn't something that is likely to change no matter how many reasons you can think of for why you don't want to update so its better to try and encourage the individual devs/publishers to use the system that already exists.

You've left out the detail that even the branch system doesn't just let people play what's already sitting on their computer. If an update is pending and someone wants to use a branch to avoid it, that means the game files get switched to that branch, overwriting any mods.

Furthermore, even if one is already on a branch, any updates to the branch will still be forced onto the player.

And finally, the number of branches game devs can use is limited. Not to mention that, as Eiswolfin pointed out, branches are meant for betas, rather than a repository of old versions.


Frankly, it'd be far more efficient for Valve to fix Steam's design flaw once and for all, rather than for game devs to one-at-a-time implement enable workarounds to deal with this flaw.

But, if we're talking about what's most effective at dealing with this, then managing one's own game installs manually is the most likely to get results. Game devs might not care, or not have the time, or not even speak the same language; waiting for them to solve this problem still means leaving oneself at someone else's mercy to fix stuff.

Messaggio originale di Nx Machina:

Developers force updates - Image: https://ibb.co/9cvN7FP

It's funny how you keep reposting this (and the subsequent quotes which just repeat the same things) like it's some sort of crucifix against vampires, despite it actually saying the opposite of the point you keep trying to make.

Messaggio originale di Nx Machina:

@ Slacoon

Developers can enable version choice via branches for the products they own. It stops auto-updating yet as always those who use the narrative of "Steam forces updates" are aware of the option but deliberately and knowingly overlook that when posting.

The same update, for the same game, made by the same developer, uploaded to other platforms, can remain not forced on those other platforms.

When the only difference in agent is the platform, and the outcome is that it's forced on Steam, that makes it clear that the update is only forced by the Steam client, specifically locking out launching the game when an update is pending.

[Count_Dandyman]

Messaggio originale di Eiswolfin:

Messaggio originale di Count_Dandyman:

Unfortunately Quint has once again left out the biggest qualifier in his comment Valve already have put systems in place that do allow an option not to update your games with the branch system the downside is that the system requires the devs/publishers to make the choice to allow it and very few do.

Valve have already decided devs/publishers are the ones to decide when and how their games are updated or not and are only acting as the inbetween delivery system for those updates. This isn't something that is likely to change no matter how many reasons you can think of for why you don't want to update so its better to try and encourage the individual devs/publishers to use the system that already exists.

Which is why Valve needs to change their system so Valve is not forcing the updates onto their customers. They have no valid reason for doing this. Its obvisiously a system in place they started up when Steam client was for their online game, which makes sense for forced updating. This is nothing more than a bad decision on Valve's part of them to force updating.

So it is best for customer to keep on suggesting to Valve to improve their system, since Valve is the only one that can change the behavior or Steam, it is only Valve that has decided to force updates onto their customers.

The customer shouldn't be the one expected to talk to each and every single developer about using Beta branches for their unintended use. Especially since this really isn't anything developers are really going to care about because it doesn't actually directly affect them at all, for the most part they just see extra work to use a system in an unintended manner that really doesn't have any affect on them at all.

Again Valve aren't forcing the updates they are only delivering them the games devs/publishers are the ones forcing them and while you might not think the branch system is a good enough system the reality is that it is an even better system.

It not only allows users to opt out of updates it also allows them to rollback versions, set a fresh install to be an older version or choose to partially update to a set stage without going fully to the current build.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Messaggio originale di Count_Dandyman:

Again Valve aren't forcing the updates they are only delivering them the games devs/publishers are the ones forcing them and while you might not think the branch system is a good enough system the reality is that it is an even better system.

It not only allows users to opt out of updates it also allows them to rollback versions, set a fresh install to be an older version or choose to partially update to a set stage without going fully to the current build.

I'd like to refer you to my previous post wherein was explained:
* that it's Steam's design that's forcing updates, which is particularly noticeable when the same updates aren't forced on other platforms, and
* that the branch system isn't a thing that just lets people play whatever's already installed on their computers, and isn't a bottomless space for storing old versions anyway.

[Nx Machina]

Messaggio originale di Count_Dandyman:

Again Valve aren't forcing the updates they are only delivering them the games devs/publishers are the ones forcing them and while you might not think the branch system is a good enough system the reality is that it is an even better system.

It not only allows users to opt out of updates it also allows them to rollback versions, set a fresh install to be an older version or choose to partially update to a set stage without going fully to the current build.

Version choice via branches is Valve's version of CDPR's rollback feature but of course that has to be overlooked by the advocates of "Steam forces updates" because it breaks their narrative. Secondly version choice STOPS auto-updating. Dead Cells and Hearts of Iron IV are two examples of games on my PC which are still on older versions despite new patches been released by the developers.

Next - misinformation regarding GOG.

Messaggio originale di Eiswolfin:

- has the last 5 versions that released since 2015 of all games

False: not all games i have on GOG have rollback as a feature.

And finally "developers force updates" was confirmed in the image and wording on post #7.

[Count_Dandyman]

Messaggio originale di Eiswolfin:

Messaggio originale di Nx Machina:

False: not all games i have on GOG have rollback as a feature.

And finally "developers force updates" was confirmed in the image and wording on post #7.

Nope. All games on GOG, if they had any updates to it since after May 2015 have those versions available to roll back to, up to the last 5 versions.

You are not telling the truth about what that image says. You are twisting it to mean something else.

you boast about having the last five versions as a big example of things being done well then let me ask you this are you aware that Crusader kings 3 has over 20 versions available currently here on Steam right now?

Again the issue isn't that Valve have made it impossible for what you wan't to be done the issue is that it is neither ours or Valves choice over if it will be done and those making that choice have chosen not to do it.

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

Messaggio originale di Nx Machina:

Messaggio originale di Count_Dandyman:

Again Valve aren't forcing the updates they are only delivering them the games devs/publishers are the ones forcing them and while you might not think the branch system is a good enough system the reality is that it is an even better system.

It not only allows users to opt out of updates it also allows them to rollback versions, set a fresh install to be an older version or choose to partially update to a set stage without going fully to the current build.

Version choice via branches is Valve's version of CDPR's rollback feature but of course that has to be overlooked by the advocates of "Steam forces updates" because it breaks their narrative. Secondly version choice STOPS auto-updating. Dead Cells and Hearts of Iron IV are two examples of games on my PC which are still on older versions despite new patches been released by the developers.

"Version choice via branches" isn't "Valve's version of CDPR's rollback feature". That rollback feature isn't necessary for not forcing updates, and GOG was already not forcing updates even before they ever offered rollback.

Second, any updates to branches are still forced onto anyone on those branches. Also, when branches are removed, those users are then forced to update again. And that's not to mention that moving to a different branch just overwrites any mods.

Messaggio originale di Nx Machina:

And finally "developers force updates" was confirmed in the image and wording on post #7.

The image "confirmed" no such thing; heck it even shows the opposite of your point.

Edit: also, oh yeah, where is that quote of Eiswolfin that you posted, from anyway? I can't find it in this thread.

Messaggio originale di Count_Dandyman:

you boast about having the last five versions as a big example of things being done well then let me ask you this are you aware that Crusader kings 3 has over 20 versions available currently here on Steam right now?

And yet when an update is released on Steam it's still forced on anyone on the default branch -- even when the game has 20 branch versions on Steam.

[HEXEN]

So you want to disable one of the main reasons, Steam exists? No. Not gonna happen.

[Nx Machina]

Developers force updates.

Two examples from the Skyrim SE forum where end users blame the correct party, Bethesda.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/489830/discussions/0/3362524065551927223/

https://steamcommunity.com/app/489830/discussions/0/3371531159451148267/


As a sidenote if you use mods on Skyrim SE you disable achievements and are warned about breaking the ToS agreed with Bethesda if you re-enable achievements while using mods.

Translation - it is Bethesda game do with as they see fit.