Steam was made to keep games up to date. People have asked for it to be turned for for nearly the same amount of time.

You'll have to ask Game devs to release beta branches for a game.

Originally posted by Zefar:

Steam was made to keep games up to date. People have asked for it to be turned for for nearly the same amount of time.

You'll have to ask Game devs to release beta branches for a game.

I don't mind it for most products, I just want the option, not for it to be default or anything. Also, asking say, EA for beta branches, you'd be better off, say, asking a car to make your coffee, lol.

Game Devs have the option to make "branches" where you can stay on a version without anything happening, unless they update that. Secondly, the same game Devs, can make their code more mod-friendly by not changing dependency code lines. Else, they can make it like some older games where a file will override the parameters of the original, as long as the dependency names/lines match meaning they don't keep renaming things.

Steam is made to games keep up-to-date, and those usually having mods break are people playing games that are well-known to be in active development. Most of what you want starts with the Developers themselves.

Originally posted by Mad Scientist:

Game Devs have the option to make "branches" where you can stay on a version without anything happening, unless they update that. Secondly, the same game Devs, can make their code more mod-friendly by not changing dependency code lines. Else, they can make it like some older games where a file will override the parameters of the original, as long as the dependency names/lines match meaning they don't keep renaming things.

Steam is made to games keep up-to-date, and those usually having mods break are people playing games that are well-known to be in active development. Most of what you want starts with the Developers themselves.

While Beta branches are great and all(I use it for Rimworld), not every game dev can be bothered with them, it would be much easier for everyone if steam simply had the option to not update a title, toss a warning on the game's library window to remind people they've hit the tick box(like the beta branch does) I'm actually fairly sure there used to be such an option once upon a time.

Originally posted by uni790:

Originally posted by Mad Scientist:

Game Devs have the option to make "branches" where you can stay on a version without anything happening, unless they update that. Secondly, the same game Devs, can make their code more mod-friendly by not changing dependency code lines. Else, they can make it like some older games where a file will override the parameters of the original, as long as the dependency names/lines match meaning they don't keep renaming things.

Steam is made to games keep up-to-date, and those usually having mods break are people playing games that are well-known to be in active development. Most of what you want starts with the Developers themselves.

While Beta branches are great and all(I use it for Rimworld), not every game dev can be bothered with them, it would be much easier for everyone if steam simply had the option to not update a title, toss a warning on the game's library window to remind people they've hit the tick box(like the beta branch does) I'm actually fairly sure there used to be such an option once upon a time.

You don't know if you don't ask them. Some Devs even have their own launcher which can allow several versions to be installed at the same time. As for Steam, quite literally exists to keep things updated, which can include a Devs launcher capable of installing various versions.

See, I'm talking about an option to remove the burden from the individual devs, because some teams (EA's as my example) will never listen to consumers that want a stable functioning product, others just may not have the capability of doing so.

Also, steam was made as a launcher for the orange box primarily (before it was even called that), afterwards it evolved into a cash generating monster.

I hear you, loud and clear....

https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/discussions/forum/10/601908461606839831/

Again, i think folks are getting tired of these endless updates altering and even breaking our games.

That is what Early Access, Live Service and the Beta process are for. Not finished games.

Originally posted by uni790:

I'm actually fairly sure there used to be such an option once upon a time.

There wasn't, one of the download options was simply worded wrong/misleadingly. Valve's fix was to correct the text.

I would not hold my breath waiting for the feature. It has been asked thousand times since Steam was originally released and I doubt making one more thread about it will make any difference. Everything indicates Valve isn't interested.

Also do note that even if Valve were to entertain the idea of adding the feature, it will come out on Valve Time™ and first time we'll hear about is when it's introduced to Steam. There won't be any communication from Valve before that.

Edit: In addition the developers and publishers want to ensure everyone is on the latest version as it makes providing support for their games order of magnitude easier than having users being on what ever version they prefer.

If adding such option would even be considered, Valve would have to consult developers and publishers first and if they don't want to give the ability to users, then Valve would have to either give developers and publishers choice whether to allow it or not or give up on the idea. Developers and publishers are far more important client s to Valve than individual users are.

This would be great. I had to offline steam for a while so one of my games wouldn't update until I was finished with a particular part of the game. A no update option wouldve made that much easier.

Originally posted by uni790:

Originally posted by Mad Scientist:

Game Devs have the option to make "branches" where you can stay on a version without anything happening, unless they update that. Secondly, the same game Devs, can make their code more mod-friendly by not changing dependency code lines. Else, they can make it like some older games where a file will override the parameters of the original, as long as the dependency names/lines match meaning they don't keep renaming things.

Steam is made to games keep up-to-date, and those usually having mods break are people playing games that are well-known to be in active development. Most of what you want starts with the Developers themselves.

While Beta branches are great and all(I use it for Rimworld), not every game dev can be bothered with them, it would be much easier for everyone if steam simply had the option to not update a title, toss a warning on the game's library window to remind people they've hit the tick box(like the beta branch does) I'm actually fairly sure there used to be such an option once upon a time.

And again, that is a dev's decision. It's not Valve's job to enforce dev's to update or not update their games. There are some games that simply have to be updated (like MMOs) in order to continue to be functional for every one. You can't have beta branches for most live service games, so it's something that cannot be, and should not be enforced. If a dev cannot be bothered to keep a beta branch, then that's their rightful choice as the developer of their own game.

Originally posted by uni790:

As it stands right now, you have no options to not update a game,.

Exactly, as you agreed to that.

https://steamhost.cn/subscriber_agreement/

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.

For reasons that include, without limitation, system security, stability, and multiplayer interoperability, Valve may need to automatically update, pre-load, create new versions of or otherwise enhance the Content and Services and accordingly, the system requirements to use the Content and Services may change over time.

You consent to such automatic updating. You understand that this Agreement (including applicable Subscription Terms) does not entitle you to future updates (unless to the extent required by applicable law), new versions or other enhancements of the Content and Services associated with a particular Subscription, although Valve may choose to provide such updates, etc. in its sole discretion.

Hmmmm, no!

yeah thatd be nice. Being forced tp update is very annoying. Especially when the update will break mods and youd rather wait till the mod author updates their mod

Developers already have the option to enable version choice BUT it is not mandatory.

https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/groups/steamworks/announcements/detail/4547039255696769967

New: Steam APIs For Switching Game Versions & Beta Branches making it easier to manage game updates, and move audience in or out of beta branches

Recently released Steamworks APIs help solve some common challenges to switching game versions on Steam. With these new tools, developers can now offer players a choice in-game to join a beta branch for testing or to switch back to an older version of the game.

For released games that make frequent updates, these tools can give players more clear choices in how they want to engage with the game. Some players want to be part of your beta branch where you are testing out the latest updates, while others may want to play on an older stable build that they know works well with their save file.

New version support:

Many games on Steam already have multiple build branches available to players; different builds of the game, either historical versions or forward-facing test builds with the latest pending updates. Previously, accessing these alternative build branches has been fairly obscure, done by players through the Steam 'settings' panel for a game. However, new Steamworks APIs now allow developers to offer players this choice from within the game itself.

Originally posted by Nx Machina:

Developers already have the option to enable version choice BUT it is not mandatory.

https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/groups/steamworks/announcements/detail/4547039255696769967

New: Steam APIs For Switching Game Versions & Beta Branches making it easier to manage game updates, and move audience in or out of beta branches

Recently released Steamworks APIs help solve some common challenges to switching game versions on Steam. With these new tools, developers can now offer players a choice in-game to join a beta branch for testing or to switch back to an older version of the game.

For released games that make frequent updates, these tools can give players more clear choices in how they want to engage with the game. Some players want to be part of your beta branch where you are testing out the latest updates, while others may want to play on an older stable build that they know works well with their save file.

New version support:

Many games on Steam already have multiple build branches available to players; different builds of the game, either historical versions or forward-facing test builds with the latest pending updates. Previously, accessing these alternative build branches has been fairly obscure, done by players through the Steam 'settings' panel for a game. However, new Steamworks APIs now allow developers to offer players this choice from within the game itself.

I'm not asking for beta branches, these are nice, but they're not universal, a tick box in the game properties would be universal, and up to the user when they wanted to freeze things for a bit.

Originally posted by BJWyler:

Originally posted by uni790:

While Beta branches are great and all(I use it for Rimworld), not every game dev can be bothered with them, it would be much easier for everyone if steam simply had the option to not update a title, toss a warning on the game's library window to remind people they've hit the tick box(like the beta branch does) I'm actually fairly sure there used to be such an option once upon a time.

And again, that is a dev's decision. It's not Valve's job to enforce dev's to update or not update their games. There are some games that simply have to be updated (like MMOs) in order to continue to be functional for every one. You can't have beta branches for most live service games, so it's something that cannot be, and should not be enforced. If a dev cannot be bothered to keep a beta branch, then that's their rightful choice as the developer of their own game.

I'm not saying force the devs of a particular game to update or not, and of course a server based game would need to update(the game's own launcher in this case takes care of that though, not steam(or at least I've never seen an MMO use steam's update services instead of their own)). The larger companies updates are very often broken on release and need weeks at a time just to be playable again.



But I can see very few people actually care about options, more options never hurt anyone though, I'll just crawl back into my little hole, you can let the post die now.