安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
1) The setting they have is "do you support 64-bit, yes/no?" and the default is "no". What they should have done is have a setting with 4 values: unknown, 32-bit only, 64-bit only, 32-bit and 64-bit, with the default being 'unknown'.
That way, the UI could have more cleanly shown which games are actually incompatible with your system, and which the developer just never entered data for.
2) Crowdsourcing the data. Steam knows if the overlay is injected into a 64-bit process, or if a 64-bit process is using the Steamworks API. They could have had the client report back the bitness of games, to fill in the data where the developers didn't.
3) They could have scanned over the game files they have on their own servers to detect what CPU architectures are supported by the executable files in the install of a game. This information is available in the headers of the Mach-O file format used by Mac executables. If every executable in a game's files has 64-bit support, you can go ahead and mark that game as having 64-bit support without any worry.
But they didn't, so here we are.