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
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
As well as set each game to more then one category?
Yes of coarse but, that isn't the topic at hand. The customization options or lack thereof in the beta is the problem. The issue is that there are no editing tools available to Steam users that would create a more seamless ability to make changes. As it stands now as you just stated, these simple beta tools made currently available to the end user seem unfinished and are to say the least dismal.
Implementing the features as stated in the original post would enable Steam users the ability to alter the customized categories, instead of only what is available now.
With the current tools available a this Steam user in the example would then have to individually make these changes which, would in it's current state take hours upon hours of their time. This would most definitely be a monotonous and teeth grinding affair.
If even one of the tools I mentioned in the original post were made available, this same user would then have the ability to return their library categorization to the default configuration (A-Z) within a matter of seconds. This is just one example of how these tools would assist a Steam user in customizing their libraries without the current disorganization and headaches that in it's current state are creating within the community.
Thank you for taking an interest and I hope this clarifies the issue at hand. Have a nice day Black Blade
Yes, this really bugs me too. After using the favourites setting, when I go back, everything is expanded and it takes ages to close them all. Why not have simple expand all/close all buttons?
Most useful IMO would be sub-categories and tags.
I have way too many categories, it would be so much simpler to have a small number of top level categories, like strategy, RPG, etc, then sub-categories for different kinds of strategy game, different kinds of RPGs. I've got at least half a dozen different strategy categories, same for RPG.
Tags would be really useful too. Some games don't fit neatly into one category. For example, Pacific Storm is a mix of strategy and flight sim. Being able to apply multiple tags to games (based on the tags that they already use, edited to suit your preferences) and then filter games by tag would make it SO MUCH EASIER to find specific types of games.
For example, I'd like a tag for turn-based and another for hex-based games, which would filter out RTS games yet include many RPG games as well as the traditional hex based wargames.
I agree and have now added this into the original post along with credit to jlebel for his assistance.
Thanks for support and taking the time to assist me with this threads creation.
This is an excellent proposition.
Also, in the beta, you can now give games multiple tags (categories). Yes, we don't have tree like hierarchy for said tags, but I think that would only complicate things. Now, you could add the "startegy" and "flight sim" categories to Pacific Storm. This way, if you look through these categories you will find Pacific Storm in either of them.
What I feel this system lacks is a multiple categories filter (something similar to the latest market filter system), where you check/uncheck different categories and you get a list of games that have those attributes.
EDIT: Regarding the original post, I think the best feature would be a drag and drop way of moving games from one category to another. Renaming, as I've said earlier is kinda available, moving a large number of games would be much more intuitive than having to select them, right click "set category", search the right category and click ok. Drag and dropping them would be extreamly intuitive.
The only things that remain are a way to backup the categorization in a file, that could later be restored if we make too many changes that we don't like. With this feature, there could be a default state that you could restore anytime.
Some good ideas! I certainly agree it is an area that needs some love in the Steam interface and is more relevant the larger your collection gets. Along with custom categories & support for quick filtering with tags I would also like to see sorting/filtering on:
- Latest games first (the ability to sort so I can see my newest purchases on top of my list).
- Latest played first (based on your play history)
- Latest games updated (see which games may have had a patch/content update first)
- Sort by achievements earned (for the achievement hunters)
- Sort by publisher
- Sort by year
- Sort by hours played
- Sort by most being played (current online count)
- Ability to toggle categories on and off, so I can change between my custom categories and an aphabetical list of all games.
- Ability to mark a game as 'complete' as another tag you can associate to a game and search for. Could work similar to the 'hide' tag that has just been introduced, so I can see what I can cross off my 'to-play' list :)
- Controller supported games filter present in the Big Picture mode should also be available in the desktop client.
Also like the idea of having sub-categories under main ones previously raised too and to have the option of client opening with the categories minimised, but being able to quickly filter or change what you are looking for is more important to me.
I also encountered today loosing all my custom categories for the 400+ games I had done. All gone! If it is not already implemented custom categories should be saved in the cloud so they cannot be lost in any circumstances and ensure it always syncs with all clients you are running. I'm too demoralised right now to spend the time to sort them all out again after spending so long on it the first time around. This sort of thing shouldn't happen.
Thanks for the discussion!
-steam cloud,
-status (not installed, ready to play, update required, updating etc.)
-metascore
-developer
-last played date
-size on disk
To use this sorting while ignoring all the categories (thus showing all games in one sorted list) you would need to choose from the library filter "My Games". This will show you only one list, which then you can sort by clicking the attribuite in the top of the list.
I've explained this a few rows above.
This could be achieved simply by doing the before mentioned multiple filter system (like in the market) and adding the ability to add negative filters. That means to NOT show games with a particular tag/category (eg: "finished").
Right now, in the beta, you can right click any category and click "expand all" or "collapse all". Though it would be cool if steam would remember your last state when it starts.
In the last couple of days, my categories show up very late after I start steam and a few times they didn't show up at all. A simple steam restart/relogin has fixed it.
I disagree about a tree heirarchy complicating things, I think it would have the opposite effect. The tree heirarchy is a tried and tested system that has been used in computing since, well, forever. It's basically folders within folders and it's an extremely good way to organise files when you take the trouble to do it. I am not a fan of the modern "one big list with tags" concept (like with emails on Gmail). Tags are great for filtering, not so much for categorising. They're each good at different things.
As you say, I can now include Pacific Storm in two different categories, but the problem there is that I'll end up with longer lists of games in each category. The new "multiple category" thing is effectively the same as tags but without filtering. It's a big improvement, but it creates longer lists rather than shorter ones. We need to be able to select multiple tags and only show games that have ALL of those tags.
Exactly.
I've been using Steam on two computers for a while now and category changes don't transfer properly between them, so every time I switch I copy the "7" folder (which contains the category data) to the new computer. The "7" folder is in the "Steam\userdata\37765826" folder.
It may be worth making a backup copy of the "7" folder before you make a lot of category changes. If you mess up, you can overwrite it with your backup.
Negative filters are not necessary, all you need is a simple AND/OR switch. With AND, games with all selected tags are shown, with OR, games with any selected tags are shown. This feature is common in most photo library software. Combined with categories and sub-categories, this can be very powerful.
Selecting a high level category can either be set to show all files within sub-categories, or none. Multiple categories can be selected, and then tags can be applied to filter the results using AND or OR.
I said that a tree heirarchy would complicate things because, you would have the same sub-category in multiple categories. As you've said, about "hex grid" games, there are RTS and RPG games that use that system, so you would have to put a "hex grid" sub-category into RTS and RPG too. By using only tags, you would only need to check a few boxes and have exactly the list you want, the only problem is, that those boxes do no still exist. But I assume that is only a matter of time, since they allowed us to put multiple tags on games or else, this multiple tag system only makes longer lists.
I honeslty do not like this tree system, because you would have the same sub-category in multiple places and because it would fragment your game list too much. You would have sub-categories with only a few games (true, depends on the library). Also, I hate to have to open up folder after folder to get what I want. I already dislike that I have to exapand those categories to find the games I want, but also collapse to keep the list compact.
I have an example:
categories: adventure, sandbox, horror, 1st person camera, 3rd person camera, isometric/top-down, multiplayer, co-op
games: Resident Evil, Doorways, Damned, Darkwood, Outlast, The Forest, Afterfal Insanity, Call of Cthulhu, Clive Barker's Jericho, Condemned Criminal Origins, Amnesia: The Dark Descent, How to survive.
With tags, it's quite simple, attach each game the tag it fits it:
Horror
-all of them
Adventure:
-Call of Cthulhu,
-Amnesia: The Dark Descent
-Outlast
Sandbox:
-The Forest
1st person camera
-Damned
-Outlast
-The Forest
-Call of Cthulhu
-Clive Barker's Jericho
-Condemned Criminal Origins
-Amnesia
3rd person camera
-Resident Evil
-Afterfal insanity
isometric/top-down
-Darkwood
-How to survive
Multiplayer
-Resident Evil
-Damned
Co-op
-Resident Evil
-How to survive
Now, if I want something horror with co-op, I would check 2 boxes and have a nice list.
I can't even imagine how I would put this into a tree hierarchy. On this particular set, Horror would be the root, but on a more general list, it would probably be genres (FPS, Adventure, Sandbox). Now, in which sub-category would I put Resident Evil? Multiplayer or Co-op? Let's say, we could merge these down for simplicity's sake. But I think you got my point already.
EDIT:
So you would also need a tags system on top of a tree to be able to easily search through all those sub-categories. I think it's overcomplicating it.
Yeah, I get your point. I think the issue is that we think about categories and tags differently.
Going back to my photo library example, the key difference between categories and tags is that you use categories to organise your photos on the hard drive. Categories represent physical locations (folders) and each file/photo only exists in one place. Tags on the other hand, can be applied to any photos wherever they are.
So in game terms, the categories would be the type of game, e.g. platform, racing, strategy, RPG, adventure and so on, and characteristics like 1st person, isometric, hexes, turn based, multiplayer etc. would be tags. So there'd be no multiple instances of a hex category.
Another good use of tags would be for genre (if that's the right word), like fantasy, sci-fi, WW2 and so on, because those genres exist across many different game types, for example fantasy strategy games, sci-fi RPG, WW2 adventure games.
So categories and sub-categories are only used for one instance (each game can only be in one category), but every game can have multiple tags.
As for fragmenting the game list too much, that's already happened. I've already got 30 or 40 categories and they practically fill the height of the screen. Having sub-categories would enable me to have a short list of main categories (maybe 10) which I can then drill down into with sub-categories for categories in which I have a LOT of games (so I don't have sub-categories with only a few games).
If you don't like sub-categories, there's nothing forcing you to create them. It's all about organising your games the way that suits you best.
Anyway, much as I'd like categories and sub-categories, I guess that a tag only system would still work, albeit less efficiently. What were once called categories have effectively become tags (since we can now put games into multiple categories), and it's already a big improvement on what we had before, so I'm quite happy about that.
No, it's making your search and categorisation options more powerful. This is a well-established system that's been used by library software for many, many years. I think the issue here is that by doing away with categories you're over-simplifying it, and in the process limiting your options.
Compare using Gmail with tags only to using Outlook Express with folders. In spite of its simplicity, I can still find old emaiils from maybe 10 years ago in OE very easily, but finding emails from a year ago in Gmail is a real pain!
Maybe I'm more used to organising things by folders rather than tags, and maybe you're more used to using tags, but the most powerful option is to use both! There are certain things that folders/categories are better for (overall organisation), and certain things that tags are better for (searching/filtering). Having both gives you the best of both worlds. I guess I'm just used to using powerful organising/sorting software so I really miss these options when they aren't present.
The bottom line is that if you don't like folders/categories, you don't have to use them. Same for people who don't like tags. Having both options doesn't force anyone to use both, you can use one or the other, or both. You can create a system that suits you. If you don't like sub-categories, don't make any, but it would be nice to have them for people that do want to do that.
I like fixed categories and sub-categories. Often I feel like playing say, an adventure game, so I'll just open the adventure category and look through the games in that category. No need for any searching or filtering.
Where tags come in handy is when you want to search and filter, like when you're in the mood for playing a multi-player turn based strategy game in the sci-fi genre.