Downloads need 3rd option

[Krieger]

you give the 2 options of:

let steam download as it wishes

and

only update on game launch.


Where is my no updates/downloads option?

idc about the steam update but i am on limited data atm and i don't want to have to stop multiple games from downloading updates, why is this not an option?

[RiO]

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

More and more games are connected online, hence, to grant the optimal experience for everyone is to ensure everyone is on the same version: The most recent one.

If you're on limited data and are at your cap, then you aren't going to be playing multiplayer games either. You're planning on playing something that specifically isn't going to be network connected. So the need to patch to have every player on the same version for inter-connectivity is non-existent.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

The other reason for update enforcement is DRM. It's the publisher's right to dictate which versions are deemed compatible for distribution, to fix bugs, potential security issues, exploits or other negative consequences. Like it or not, they still do own the intellectual property of it and all you did was buying a LICENSE to play such titles.

Then as a corollary, all titles sold on Steam should state permanent network connection is
mandatory; because a publisher could issue an update at any time - totally unpredictable for consumers. You could be reaching for the 'go offline' button one second, and the very next before you actually hit it, your Steam client has received a message from Steam's backend that the publisher has queued a new update and now even if you would of offline, you still aren't allowed to start your game without network connectivity -- because the client already knows it's 'supposed' to get an update first.

I hope you understand the ridiculousness of this proposition, yes?

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

If you want to "own" your games as in dictate what to do with it or not, maybe search for a different storefront, such as GOG. Which in fact does offer offline installers.

Offline installers have nothing to do with forced updates.

And in fact, your earlier statement that forced updates as Steam does them is an industry standard is even flawed. Because even on consoles, updates aren't forced in that way.
If you're notified a game needs to be updated before it can be played, you can cancel the update, disconnect network, and play the old version offline.

Steam is afaik the only major distribution client on which that actually doesn't work; because 'it remembers' that there was an update pending from when it was online, and it's petty about it and won't let you play your game before you first go back online, and get that update installed.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

It is up to the publisher to offer access to past versions or not, and there are few that do. Paradox Entertainment, for example, grants access to past versions using the Beta participation option.

Beta branches are meant for short-lived beta versions. They are not meant to support past version access, are not in any official capacity supported to be used like this, and actually the amount of public branches any one title is allowed to concurrently have available is strictly limited.

Go look at Factorio by Wube.
They literally are up against the limit of allowed beta branches and have to start purging old version numbers. If you still want those, you're advised to sign-in to their website with Steam so they can see you own the game on Steam and you'll be allowed to download the standalone installer for any version the game ever had.

Of course, if you play a game that way - you have to play it without Steam integration. No cloud support. No achievements. etc.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

As internet access becomes more commonplace in media, it is fair to assume that a limited data plan is rather a hindrance to access of such entertainment and therefore it is fair to assume that an unlimited, unhindered and uninhibited access to the internet is a requirement for games to function, be it as part of their gameplay, their core functionality or their DRM.

Sure. Then make that an actual system requirement. If that's not an actual system requirement communicated as such in advance of sale as properly should be done, then it is not an argument you can bring to play.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

Even Microsoft went the route of forced updates in Windows since Windows 10, for good or for bad. If you don't like it, don't use it. Alternatives are out there.

And got so much backlash over it that they very quickly introduced an option to at least be able to defer updates to a later, more convenient time.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

Please be mindful that we gamers aren't the only customers on Steam. Publishers are also valued customers to Valve, therefore Valve has to find the perfect middle ground. If Valve starts dictating conditions to the publishers without any legal precedence and proper reason, leveraging their market share to shove it down the publishers' throats, even in us gamers' interests, they will be liable to antitrust lawsuits and that in turn is also bad for us gamers.

GoG puts publishers in charge of whether the option to install historical versions, or the option to skip updates are allowed. They don't enforce it. They just have both enabled by default. Very few publishers even bother to disable them and go to the strict "forcibly updated to latest update only" model that Steam uses. Which includes publishers and titles that have also been released on Steam.

Which indicates Valve introducing similar options would in all likelihood not harm their businesses relationships with publishers.

[Ettanin]

RiO の投稿を引用：

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

More and more games are connected online, hence, to grant the optimal experience for everyone is to ensure everyone is on the same version: The most recent one.

If you're on limited data and are at your cap, then you aren't going to be playing multiplayer games either. You're planning on playing something that specifically isn't going to be network connected. So the need to patch to have every player on the same version for inter-connectivity is non-existent.

It still exists for DLC compatibility, cloud saving or features that rely on online gameplay, but not necessarily multiplayer functionality, such as exploration data in Elite Dangerous or discovery attribution in No Man's Sky.

I had been on limited data from 2013 to 2018 (60 GB) myself and while I rationed my data well I was perfectly fine with playing multiplayer titles. Limited data plans back then were acceptable (not great, but usable to a degree), now they are not.

RiO の投稿を引用：

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

The other reason for update enforcement is DRM. It's the publisher's right to dictate which versions are deemed compatible for distribution, to fix bugs, potential security issues, exploits or other negative consequences. Like it or not, they still do own the intellectual property of it and all you did was buying a LICENSE to play such titles.

Then as a corollary, all titles sold on Steam should state permanent network connection is
mandatory; because a publisher could issue an update at any time - totally unpredictable for consumers. You could be reaching for the 'go offline' button one second, and the very next before you actually hit it, your Steam client has received a message from Steam's backend that the publisher has queued a new update and now even if you would of offline, you still aren't allowed to start your game without network connectivity -- because the client already knows it's 'supposed' to get an update first.

I hope you understand the ridiculousness of this proposition, yes?

Actually, have you read the Steam Subscriber Agreement? You need to be online to use a Steam account, and you need to be online to download and install games. You also need to be online to use these very forums, do you not?

Steam is an online service offered by Valve.

Online service. Online = requires internet access; Offline = doesn't require internet access. It is an ONLINE service. Therefore, an internet connection is MANDATORY.

RiO の投稿を引用：

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

If you want to "own" your games as in dictate what to do with it or not, maybe search for a different storefront, such as GOG. Which in fact does offer offline installers.

Offline installers have nothing to do with forced updates.
And in fact, even on consoles updates aren't forced.
If you're notified a game needs to be updated before it can be played, you can cancel the update, disconnect network, and play the old version offline.

Steam is afaik the only client on which that actually doesn't work; because 'it remembers' that there was an update pending from when it was online, and it's petty about it and won't let you play your game before you first go back online, and get that update installed.

Again: ridiculous!

Battle.net requires an online connection, Ubisoft Connect requires an online connection, EA App requires an online connection, Wargaming dot net requires an online connection, Frontier Store games require an online connection. Shall i list more?

RiO の投稿を引用：

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

It is up to the publisher to offer access to past versions or not, and there are few that do. Paradox Entertainment, for example, grants access to past versions using the Beta participation option.

Beta branches are meant for short-lived beta versions. They are not meant to support past version access, are not in any official capacity supported to be used like this, and actually the amount of public branches any one title is allowed to concurrently have available is strictly limited.

Go look at Factorio by Wube.
They literally are up against the limit of allowed beta branches and have to start purging old version numbers. If you still want those, you're advised to sign-in to their website with Steam so they can see you own the game on Steam and you'll be allowed to download the standalone installer for any version the game ever had.

Of course, if you play a game that way - you have to play it without Steam integration. No cloud support. No achievements. etc.

Nice that publishers actually find workarounds to offer their customers a better deal and find a way to be less dependent on Steam. Steam may amend these limits or turn it into a new feature. If the interest is there, from both publishers and customers.

RiO の投稿を引用：

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

As internet access becomes more commonplace in media, it is fair to assume that a limited data plan is rather a hindrance to access of such entertainment and therefore it is fair to assume that an unlimited, unhindered and uninhibited access to the internet is a requirement for games to function, be it as part of their gameplay, their core functionality or their DRM.

Sure. Then make that an actual system requirement. If that's not an actual system requirement communicated as such in advance of sale as properly should be done, then it is not an argument you can bring to play.

An internet connection IS a requirement to use Steam as intended.

RiO の投稿を引用：

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

Even Microsoft went the route of forced updates in Windows since Windows 10, for good or for bad. If you don't like it, don't use it. Alternatives are out there.

And got so much backlash over it that they very quickly introduced an option to at least be able to defer updates to a later, more convenient time.

Not for home editions. Only for Pro. Security issues are the reasons why it's forced.

RiO の投稿を引用：

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

Please be mindful that we gamers aren't the only customers on Steam. Publishers are also valued customers to Valve, therefore Valve has to find the perfect middle ground. If Valve starts dictating conditions to the publishers without any legal precedence and proper reason, leveraging their market share to shove it down the publishers' throats, even in us gamers' interests, they will be liable to antitrust lawsuits and that in turn is also bad for us gamers.

GoG puts publishers in charge of whether the option to install historical versions, or the option to skip updates are allowed. They don't enforce it. They just have both enabled by default. Very few publishers even bother to disable them and go to the strict "forcibly updated to latest update only" model that Steam uses. Which includes publishers and titles that have also been released on Steam.

Which indicates Valve introducing similar options would in all likelihood not harm their businesses relationships with publishers.

You can archive offline installers anytime. GOG does not check their validity or legitimacy. Furthermore, GOG Galaxy is not a requirement.
In fact, Valve offers the option to use old versions, through the Beta Access feature. It is up to the publishers to voice concern about the version limits. In fact, it is also perfectly possible for the publishers to publish old versions of their games as separate titles and to disseminate keys to give access to people who legitimately purchased them, or like Wube did, use Steam as an authentication method for access to old versions outside of Steam.

[Ben Lubar]

I don't know why people are posting misinformation about beta branches, but no developer is "running up against" the current limits, and they are not "only for short lived branches".

Valve explicitly tells developers to sort the beta branches from oldest to newest.

[William Shakesman]

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

RiO の投稿を引用：

Back in the old times bloodletting was a well-recognized and established medical practice as well. Still- I would not suggest poking a hole in yourself and draining a few quarts the next time you have a fever and the sudden urge to 'purge the demon-tainted blood' from your body.

Or to put that another way: your logical fallacy is called the bandwagon.
Everyone doing something, is not credible evidence of that something actually being the correct thing to do.

More and more games are connected online, hence, to grant the optimal experience for everyone is to ensure everyone is on the same version: The most recent one.

The other reason for update enforcement is DRM. It's the publisher's right to dictate which versions are deemed compatible for distribution, to fix bugs, potential security issues, exploits or other negative consequences. Like it or not, they still do own the intellectual property of it and all you did was buying a LICENSE to play such titles.

If you want to "own" your games as in dictate what to do with it or not, maybe search for a different storefront, such as GOG. Which in fact does offer offline installers.

It is up to the publisher to offer access to past versions or not, and there are few that do. Paradox Entertainment, for example, grants access to past versions using the Beta participation option.

As internet access becomes more commonplace in media, it is fair to assume that a limited data plan is rather a hindrance to access of such entertainment and therefore it is fair to assume that an unlimited, unhindered and uninhibited access to the internet is a requirement for games to function, be it as part of their gameplay, their core functionality or their DRM.

Even Microsoft went the route of forced updates in Windows since Windows 10, for good or for bad. If you don't like it, don't use it. Alternatives are out there.

Please be mindful that we gamers aren't the only customers on Steam. Publishers are also valued customers to Valve, therefore Valve has to find the perfect middle ground. If Valve starts dictating conditions to the publishers without any legal precedence and proper reason, leveraging their market share to shove it down the publishers' throats, even in us gamers' interests, they will be liable to antitrust lawsuits and that in turn is also bad for us gamers.

We bought a license, yes, but it does grant users access to any released version of the software, as the vast majority of software purchasing has been licensed. One does not transform from paying customer to pirate by simply running Steam in offline mode, skipping an update, or reverting back to a previous update that reduced the quality of the product. It is absurd to even suggest.

Of course that does not obligate the developer to provide the older versions, but I am not expecting the developer to cook dinner and buy my groceries too either.

Legalities are, again, irrelevant. It should not be hard to make compromises for limited data. I don't expect Valve to, they are perfectly fine with games that do not function without online yet have no multiplayer component to be sold without that in the requirements. But you cannot say OP is requesting something unreasonable

[Ettanin]

William Shakesman の投稿を引用：

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

More and more games are connected online, hence, to grant the optimal experience for everyone is to ensure everyone is on the same version: The most recent one.

The other reason for update enforcement is DRM. It's the publisher's right to dictate which versions are deemed compatible for distribution, to fix bugs, potential security issues, exploits or other negative consequences. Like it or not, they still do own the intellectual property of it and all you did was buying a LICENSE to play such titles.

If you want to "own" your games as in dictate what to do with it or not, maybe search for a different storefront, such as GOG. Which in fact does offer offline installers.

It is up to the publisher to offer access to past versions or not, and there are few that do. Paradox Entertainment, for example, grants access to past versions using the Beta participation option.

As internet access becomes more commonplace in media, it is fair to assume that a limited data plan is rather a hindrance to access of such entertainment and therefore it is fair to assume that an unlimited, unhindered and uninhibited access to the internet is a requirement for games to function, be it as part of their gameplay, their core functionality or their DRM.

Even Microsoft went the route of forced updates in Windows since Windows 10, for good or for bad. If you don't like it, don't use it. Alternatives are out there.

Please be mindful that we gamers aren't the only customers on Steam. Publishers are also valued customers to Valve, therefore Valve has to find the perfect middle ground. If Valve starts dictating conditions to the publishers without any legal precedence and proper reason, leveraging their market share to shove it down the publishers' throats, even in us gamers' interests, they will be liable to antitrust lawsuits and that in turn is also bad for us gamers.

We bought a license, yes, but it does grant users access to any released version of the software, as the vast majority of software purchasing has been licensed. One does not transform from paying customer to pirate by simply running Steam in offline mode, skipping an update, or reverting back to a previous update that reduced the quality of the product. It is absurd to even suggest.

Of course that does not obligate the developer to provide the older versions, but I am not expecting the developer to cook dinner and buy my groceries too either.

Legalities are, again, irrelevant. It should not be hard to make compromises for limited data. I don't expect Valve to, they are perfectly fine with games that do not function without online yet have no multiplayer component to be sold without that in the requirements. But you cannot say OP is requesting something unreasonable

the feature to provide old versions is there. It's up to the publisher to provide old version branches.

Valve will not force publishers to provide old versions without their consent.

Asking Valve to force publishers to allow access to old versions without their consent is unreasonable.

[William Shakesman]

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

William Shakesman の投稿を引用：

We bought a license, yes, but it does grant users access to any released version of the software, as the vast majority of software purchasing has been licensed. One does not transform from paying customer to pirate by simply running Steam in offline mode, skipping an update, or reverting back to a previous update that reduced the quality of the product. It is absurd to even suggest.

Of course that does not obligate the developer to provide the older versions, but I am not expecting the developer to cook dinner and buy my groceries too either.

Legalities are, again, irrelevant. It should not be hard to make compromises for limited data. I don't expect Valve to, they are perfectly fine with games that do not function without online yet have no multiplayer component to be sold without that in the requirements. But you cannot say OP is requesting something unreasonable

the feature to provide old versions is there. It's up to the publisher to provide old version branches.

Valve will not force publishers to provide old versions without their consent.

Asking Valve to force publishers to allow access to old versions without their consent is unreasonable.

Valve ALREADY allows that access through the console. Valve maintains all these previous versions and distributing them is fully in their control and their prerogative to make them available as they see fit. They absolutely can and it is not unreasonable to ask that.

But OP isn't even ASKING FOR THAT, nor would it actually do anything to solve HIS specific problem. There is no point in derailing the thread.

[RiO]

Ben Lubar の投稿を引用：

I don't know why people are posting misinformation about beta branches, but no developer is "running up against" the current limits, and they are not "only for short lived branches".

Valve explicitly tells developers to sort the beta branches from oldest to newest.

No misinformation there wrt running out of branches and them being in limited quantity:
https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?p=498922#p498922

You're right about one thing though; the Steamworks documentation no longer makes reference to beta branches being intended to serve for short-lived tests.

This may have been a change coinciding with Valve revising the available tooling around branches and enabling also API calls to switch branches while in-game. There's a news post dating back quite recently to Nov 2024 where they announced this new material, and it includes a reference to switching users back to an old version of the game:
https://store.steampowered.com/news/group/4145017/view/4547039255696769966

So it seems that late last year Valve have realigned formally with the ad-hoc reality of how beta branches were already being used by a substantial amount of publishers and self-published developers.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

It still exists for DLC compatibility, cloud saving or features that rely on online gameplay, but not necessarily multiplayer functionality, such as exploration data in Elite Dangerous or discovery attribution in No Man's Sky.

Already installed DLC at its installed version will be compatible with the already installed game at its installed version. You don't need to update the game to be compatible with the DLC you already have installed.

So there is no need to patch immediately, if you're just going to be playing offline. Mutual compatibility only becomes an issue with online components like multiplayer.

Cloud saves on Steam are also literally just files connected to a storage bucket with Google or Amazon. (No really - at some point you could even find references to those in the Steam client's log files.) They're opaque binary data as far as Steam is concerned and there is nothing that ties them to particular versions of a game for compatibility to be able to upload or download.
Also - if you'd be near your data cap and would put Steam in offline mode to save on data, cloud saves wouldn't synchronize.

Similarly, if you'd be putting Steam in offline mode, you'd not be using multiplayer.

You may have a point that these all might be valid in the context that you'd be wanting to still use online features that use limited bandwidth, but only want to defer updates - as those would take a lot out of a limited data plan.

But in that case, for games that aren't 100% reliant on online connectivity and that can play offline - you simply should still be able to play them offline, without first being forced to update them. There's literally no direct need to update them immediately if you're content with just taking Steam offline and playing them like that.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

Actually, have you read the Steam Subscriber Agreement? You need to be online to use a Steam account, and you need to be online to download and install games. You also need to be online to use these very forums, do you not?

Steam is an online service offered by Valve.

Online service. Online = requires internet access; Offline = doesn't require internet access. It is an ONLINE service. Therefore, an internet connection is MANDATORY.

Have you read the SSA though?

2. LICENSES

A. General Content and Services License

Steam and your Subscription(s) require the download and installation of Content and Services onto your computer. Valve hereby grants, and you accept, a non-exclusive license and right, to use the Content and Services for your personal, non-commercial use (except where commercial use is expressly allowed herein or in the applicable Subscription Terms). This license ends upon termination of (a) this Agreement or (b) a Subscription that includes the license. The Content and Services are licensed, not sold. Your license confers no title or ownership in the Content and Services. To make use of the Content and Services, you must have a Steam Account and you may be required to be running the Steam client and maintaining a connection to the Internet.

"To make use of the Content and Services, you must have a Steam Account and you MAY be required to be running the Steam client and maintaining a connection to the Internet."

May - as in: optional, for certain content and services - but not all of them.

As for the term "online service" that you are hung up on: that is just the broad classification of the type of service being offered. It doesn't mean it's a service that has always-online requirements. It just means it's a service that is offered through an online channel like the internet, rather than brick-and-mortar.

Also Steam itself has an offline mode; indicating the intent is there to not have it be an always-online service, clear as day.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

Battle.net requires an online connection, Ubisoft Connect requires an online connection, EA App requires an online connection, Wargaming dot net requires an online connection, Frontier Store games require an online connection. Shall i list more?

Battle.net and Ubisoft Connect require an online connection because of their DRM. As do others.
You're cherry-picking examples that fit your narrative though. There's a huge bulk of games that do not require online connectivity.

Most if not all of Paradox's games don't.
There's also Red Dead Redemption; Grand Theft Auto; and other Rockstar titles.
There's the Witcher games and Cyberpunk.
Bethesda games like Skyrim and Fallout? Offline capable.
etc. etc.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

An internet connection IS a requirement to use Steam as intended.

Except it literally isn't as per section 2A of the subscriber agreement cited earlier.

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

Not for home editions. Only for Pro. Security issues are the reasons why it's forced.

Pro users can use policies to explicitly defer feature updates by up to 6 months and not even be offered the notification to install them; and the ability to defer quality updates (aka security updates) by iirc up to 2 months.

But there's also a functionality to pause updates for a shorter period, and Home users do actually get access to that so they can pause updates until a more convenient time.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/pause-updates-in-windows-643e9ea7-3cf6-7da6-a25c-95d4f7f099fe#WindowsVersion=Windows_10

Lists explicitly Windows 10, Windows 10 Pro, and Windows 10 Enterprise.
Plain "Windows 10" is the 'Home' SKU. Formally, it's not called 'Home' - it's just called "Windows 10."

Ettanin の投稿を引用：

You can archive offline installers anytime. GOG does not check their validity or legitimacy. Furthermore, GOG Galaxy is not a requirement.
In fact, Valve offers the option to use old versions, through the Beta Access feature. It is up to the publishers to voice concern about the version limits. In fact, it is also perfectly possible for the publishers to publish old versions of their games as separate titles and to disseminate keys to give access to people who legitimately purchased them, or like Wube did, use Steam as an authentication method for access to old versions outside of Steam.

I want to point out here that while what you write is true, it also does nothing to dismiss the validity of the counter-argument to your earlier claim that Valve formally introducing an ability to allow access to historical versions directly, would harm their business relationship with publishers. That counter-argument being what you were replying to here.

I may conclude then, that you can't offer suitable rebuttal against it?
And thus that you admit your original argument didn't hold water?