Part three of Steam debate - split and archived.

[DrATty]

When it comes to bandwidth, seen from Steamworks' point of view, I would imagine that game downloads would be more of a concern than patches. The way Steam works would seem to encourage users to remove games they are not currently playing with a view to downloading them again when they next want to play. I remove games I have on DVD because I don't have space for them all, and I don't have many. The default installation from DVD usually accesses many of a game's files from the DVD too. Steam might run into problems when it has millions of customers, each with hundreds of games effectively stored on their servers indefinitely, all needing to be ready for download.
If each of one hundred million users downloaded one 5Gb game a month, that would amount to 6 exabytes of data. The patches I downloaded for the SuperBox and one other game I have amounted to more than 5Gb. The SuperBox itself used more than 5Gb. The numbers are mind-boggling, and all this data is coming from just one company. Steam isn't Google, yet.

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

**Sigh** You obviously have no idea how this actually works. As I mentioned just above, and has been stated over and over by many Steam users in these threads, that only applies to games you're not currently playing. If you try to play a game with an outstanding update available, Steam WILL force that update on you if you attempt to play while online.

Just to confirm, this is entirely correct.

[Al Zheimer]

Thanks for clearing that up, now I realize Steam is the evillest thing ever!

Don't bother. Some people just like to rant about Steam because they think that by blaming the people who actually made the decision to force updates in certain games (i.e., the game's publisher) they'd be "betraying" their game. And this way they can justify still playing the game while pretending to make a stand.

The result, of course, is that they achieve nothing (because they're complaining about the wrong people - so the publisher can just ignore them - and because they're complaining in the wrong place).

As should be pretty obvious to anyone, if "[disabling updates] only applies to games you're not currently playing. If you try to play a game with an outstanding update available, [that] WILL force that update on you if you attempt to play while online" clearly indicates that is the the GAME that is calling the Steamworks update, because the game's publisher chose to. In fact, several non-steam games do exactly the same thing (they just use their built-in downloader, since they weren't coded to take advantage of Steamworks).

And it's trivial to disable that anyway. Either get a real firewall and disallow the connection or interrupt the update and switch Steam to offline mode, in which case it will ignore the game's request to check for or download updates, and only games with a built-in downloader will try to update (but the firewall will take care of those, too).

[Al Zheimer]

That just tells me that Bastion does not really use steam/steamworks, since you do not need the steam client to run the game, this just further proves the point that it is the steam client that forces the updates not the game itself.

Wait, so I bought a game through Steam, it's installed inside the Steam folder, it's in the Steam library, it can be run throush Steam, it has the option to download updates from Steam, but since it doesn't force me to download those updates... that proves that "it doesn't really use Steam"...?

So, by your definition, a game only "uses Steam" if the game's authors decided force you to download updates? Yeah, by that (nonsensical) definition you are 100% correct.

[Nanook]

....
As should be pretty obvious to anyone, if "[disabling updates] only applies to games you're not currently playing. If you try to play a game with an outstanding update available, [that] WILL force that update on you if you attempt to play while online" clearly indicates that is the the GAME that is calling the Steamworks update, because the game's publisher chose to.

No. It's the Steam wrapper on the executable that's forcing the update. All game executables under Steamworks are 'wrapped' in that fashion.

In fact, several non-steam games do exactly the same thing (they just use their built-in downloader, since they weren't coded to take advantage of Steamworks)....

Which is totally irrelevant. That's the game publisher's choice. Steam does not give the game publisher a choice.

[Slashman]

Which is totally irrelevant. That's the game publisher's choice. Steam does not give the game publisher a choice.

To be fair, I honestly don't think game publishers ever raise an objection to that. They want you running the latest game version. It probably really helps with support requests.

I honestly don't ever picture a publisher or developer saying to Valve that they want them to not force updates for games played online. As a publisher or developer, it doesn't hold any real advantage.

[Nanook]

For online games, I agree. But having players complain about not being able to play a game simply because they have to download a large update over a slow connection doesn't do the developers/publishers any good either. The choice should always be with the gamer, not the game company, IMO. And this is the primary reason I'm not playing a Steam-downloaded game. If Steam and the game companies gave us a choice of what and when to download, then I, and I suspect a lot of other gamers in my situation would be more likely to buy their games. That choice is all we're asking for.

[TTD]

For online games, I agree. But having players complain about not being able to play a game simply because they have to download a large update over a slow connection doesn't do the developers/publishers any good either. The choice should always be with the gamer, not the game company, IMO. And this is the primary reason I'm not playing a Steam-downloaded game. If Steam and the game companies gave us a choice of what and when to download, then I, and I suspect a lot of other gamers in my situation would be more likely to buy their games. That choice is all we're asking for.

And that choice is given you in Windows OSs ,which I mentioned long ago when I complained about being updated even when I used the no update option in Steam.

In windows it tells me there are updates available.
I can then look at the update info and decide for myself which updates ,if any,I wish to install,and when.

[Jumee]

For online games, I agree. But having players complain about not being able to play a game simply because they have to download a large update over a slow connection doesn't do the developers/publishers any good either. The choice should always be with the gamer, not the game company, IMO. And this is the primary reason I'm not playing a Steam-downloaded game. If Steam and the game companies gave us a choice of what and when to download, then I, and I suspect a lot of other gamers in my situation would be more likely to buy their games. That choice is all we're asking for.

And that choice is given you in Windows OSs ,which I mentioned long ago when I complained about being updated even when I used the no update option in Steam.

In windows it tells me there are updates available.
I can then look at the update info and decide for myself which updates ,if any,I wish to install,and when.

for all the hatred Microsoft gets they are not the worst company around

regarding steam I have to admit I also had problems with the forced updates (but tbh I do not know, if it is steam enforced or publishers decision as has been stated here)

[NUKLEAR-SLUG]

regarding steam I have to admit I also had problems with the forced updates (but tbh I do not know, if it is steam enforced or publishers decision as has been stated here)

Enforced is the wrong word, you aren't prevented from playing your games unless you're up to date. But Steam is there to provide and maintain your games and if a publisher releases a patch then the publishers intention is to fix problems for the benefit of their users not cause them.

Is there room to do things better with the update process? Of course. Nobodies saying there isn't. Steam is very good for not hogging your bandwidth when it's doing updates but a Microsoft style 'updates are available' option instead would be a simple improvement for instance.

[BigBANGtheory]

for all the hatred Microsoft gets they are not the worst company around

Ubisoft wins that one hands down

[TEKing66]

@TTD

Something else that I like about the Windows update, in addition to the features you mentioned, is the fact that you can download most all of the large updates in a stand-alone install package. This would also be a nice feature to build into Steam, and I really do think it would make people with slow connections a little more likely to accept it. This would allow people like my self to download the updates offsite, then drop on the pc at home and point Steam to the update file and Steam does the rest.

There are a lot of little improvements like this, and those mentioned by TTD, Nanook and others that could be made to Steam to allow it to be easier for people on slow internet connections.

Here is a list that I emailed to a tech support person at Valve regarding this very issue.

1. When installing from a DVD, have the user download JUST the EXE file when first autorizing the game. Prompt for updates, but make them optional at that time. Your already makeing a DVD, use two if you must!

2. Allow Steam client to accept update files downloaded from a seperate location and PC that does not requiring Steam to be installed.

3. Allow the user to login to a Steam account through a website to download updates. The website and Steam would/should be the same account so Steam could track the udates download/installed.

4. Allow the Steam Client to be forced into "offline" mode if necessary.
Or, have it send a message explaining why it needs to connect, basicly just give the user more feedback.

And, no, I have not heard back regarding these points either in a good or bad way. If I had to guess I would say that they were discarded nearly as soon as they were recieved. But, I still think these changes would make it more appealing to people in the similar position as myself and other are in. That being, stuck with a slow internet connection and trying to use Steam with it's multi-gigabyte downloads.

[AkrionXxarr]

For online games, I agree. But having players complain about not being able to play a game simply because they have to download a large update over a slow connection doesn't do the developers/publishers any good either.

Doesn't do them any good but also doesn't do them nearly as bad. Trying to troubleshoot an issue someone is having with their game only to find out later they're not running the latest patch wastes time where as someone complaining about forced updates doesn't.

[T.S.Zatoichi]

TEKing, send that e-mail to TotalBiscuit, he might include it in one of his "Mailboxes". Steam may actually pay attention (assuming he agrees with you) if the complaint comes from him.

<Mailbox link removed. I suspect you need the owner's explicit permission to post a private mailbox link on a public forum. You could PM TEKing if you wish to inform him of contact details. Alan Phipps>

Sorry, I just copy/pasted it from YouTube. It's right under the videos so fans can send him questions that he can respond to in the next mailbox vid.

<OK, just being cautious about owners' rights. Thanks, Alan>

[TTD]

Doesn't do them any good but also doesn't do them nearly as bad. Trying to troubleshoot an issue someone is having with their game only to find out later they're not running the latest patch wastes time where as someone complaining about forced updates doesn't.

That is why ,when posting queries regarding problems in-game etc, it is required ,in the tech forum , to give details of which game and version you are running.

But the same can be said in the main forum,as often the OP does not mention what mods they are using.And it turns out that a game-mod or script is in conflict with normal play

[Kaiser Kraft]

I haven't logged in here in an age. Today I received the egosoft news letter and was pleased to see the dvd version of Albion Prelude was released. Once I hit the part where the bomb shell was dropped informing me that it was a requirement to use the steam client, I realised that this was the end of the Xuniverse for me.

I have purchased and played every release from egosoft and to be honest it has been a great experience on the whole. Egosoft have in the past been extremely good at looking after their fan base, and I couldn't praise them enough in that department.

This form of protection is not something I can condone regardless of losing out on fun to be had. On the upside it will stop me from losing time unproductively in front of a computer screen.

It's about time consumers grew a spine and realised that they have the power to stop the abuse of corporations. All you need to do is say NO! Simple you may take a short term loss, but long term protection of this nature would be removed if they want to sell their product.

People subjecting themselves to this sort of treatment drags us all down the tubes with them. <Deletion. We can do without the insulting analogies thanks - Alan Phipps>

I hope the 30 plus percent of participants in this poll who said no way never, stick by their convictions. If Egosoft can sustain a 30% drop in sales we wont be missed. Personally I doubt they can take such a hit on their bottom line, as 30% is a significant number!

It was fun while it lasted...I guess there always comes a point where one needs to move on, or search the web for an alternative solution <Which would prove illegal no doubt, so be very careful about how this debate develops! Alan Phipps>.

A proud member of the 30 percent steam dessenters.

[TTD]

Don't forget that soon you will be able to remove the steam stuff and play AP without it.
You just won't get any more updates.

[Kaiser Kraft]

There comes a point when the line needs to be drawn. But I would never say never. To be quite honest it's just a game, but corporate policies extends in to real life. I don't agree with this policy and find the conditions attached disagreeable, it goes completely against my principles - believe it or not there still some people out here that have them.

A steaming pile is a steaming pile no matter how it's dressed up.

A proud member of the 30 percent steam dessenters.

[Cycrow]

Doesn't do them any good but also doesn't do them nearly as bad. Trying to troubleshoot an issue someone is having with their game only to find out later they're not running the latest patch wastes time where as someone complaining about forced updates doesn't.

That is why ,when posting queries regarding problems in-game etc, it is required ,in the tech forum , to give details of which game and version you are running.

But the same can be said in the main forum,as often the OP does not mention what mods they are using.And it turns out that a game-mod or script is in conflict with normal play

unfortuatlly that doesn't always work
some people will say they have the latest version, when infact, they dont

[Slashman]

There comes a point when the line needs to be drawn. But I would never say never. To be quite honest it's just a game, but corporate policies extends in to real life. I don't agree with this policy and find the conditions attached disagreeable, it goes completely against my principles - believe it or not there still some people out here that have them.

A steaming pile is a steaming pile no matter how it's dressed up.

A proud member of the 30 percent steam dessenters.

You may be a bit shocked to know that not everyone's principles align with your own.

You don't write the book on what everyone finds acceptable or desirable. Just because you believe that Steamworks integration violates your human rights or goes against your morals, doesn't mean that anyone is obligated to agree with you.

Neither does it automatically make you a paragon of virtue versus someone else that finds no problems with using Steam. People have different views...it's the way humans work.

This is why I think making this discussion into some moral platform to 'stick it to the man' is pointless. There are enough people with genuine problems using Steam that those points can stand on their own.

Having poor or limited internet connections. Genuine problems with offline mode functionality and no opt-out for updates are tangible problems that Egosoft and Deepsilver can consider and address.

Trying to turn this into some crusade to take back gaming is unlikely to make the people who make the decisions take you seriously, since I strongly suspect that this decision by Deepsilver has more to do with convenience and streamlining their product releases than 'owning your soul'.

This is all just my opinion though, so maybe there is some evil corporate demon behind all this and Egosoft are prying the gates of hell open a little more by giving into them.