Valve Working to Make Steam's Offline Mode Not Suck as Much

[Vigormortis]

This is really weird, I've used steam offline for weeks at a time before and never even realized there was a 'problem' with the mode. I guess it's good they fixed it though, and it's nice to know that steam is designed to work "indefinitely" offline. It really sucks the wind out of any XBone defenders' arguments.

The problem was a temporary bug. One that wasn't around "forever", but rather one that had cropped up some time late last year.

It was a fairly isolated issue for a time, with only a small handful having problems. But over time the issues became more widespread, so Valve stepped up it's efforts to do away with the clientregistry.blob system.

They eventually fixed the issues around the middle of summer.

So why we're talking about it now is confusing.

 

[SmugFrog]

I've had issues with it in the past, being out to sea on a ship without internet access. I looked up a few guides on how to ensure it stays in offline mode, and haven't had a problem since. I <3 Steam and the ability to pick my games and take them with me - it's a DRM I feel is fair.

 

[Magmarock]

Sorry, but you're too late Valve at least for me you are. I have GOG, Deura and DotEmu. There's nothing on Steaming that really tantalizes me to sacrifice my consumer rights to play.

The first reason Steam was used, was because people stole HL2's source code adn with no sign of HL3, I can't even sympathize with you any more.

Is GOG really THAT good? I've browsed the library and nothing really stands out. Then again, I didn't play many classics that the site has, and it does have some cool stuff...

Site note: Your profile pic is FUCKING adorable o.o

Sorry, but you're too late Valve at least for me you are. I have GOG, Deura and DotEmu. There's nothing on Steaming that really tantalizes me to sacrifice my consumer rights to play.

The first reason Steam was used, was because people stole HL2's source code and with no sign of HL3, I can't even sympathize with you any more.

Is GOG really THAT good? I've browsed the library and nothing really stands out. Then again, I didn't play many classics that the site has, and it does have some cool stuff...

Site note: Your profile pic is FUCKING adorable o.o

Thanks you very much it was drawn for me by an artist

AS for GOG in my honest opinion.... yeah GOG can have my sole if they want it. Living in Australia gaming is a pain enough with steam games being close to 99 USD that's USD not AUD so currency doesn't even enter into it.

Not only that but while my internet is pretty good I can't always guarantee it. weather my modem conks out or my ISP it really sucks not being able to play games when there is no internet. I've had this happen to me and it served as a harsh reminder of how important it is to be in control of your own products.

Sorry, I know I rambling I get a lot of excuses like "oh who doesn't have the internet these days" but that's not the point. I bought it, there for I own it. With Steam I don't get that.


As for GOG I'm not sure where to start. Fort for all almost all games on their service work 100% of the time I've had my first encounter with a game that doesn't work 100% and that is Blood 2. It works it's just a pain to get it to work properly, and really isn't GOG's fault.

They have some of the best games ever made there, I particularly like their range of FPS and PC plat-formers.

On top of that their games often come with free extras and goodies.

They also have the best forum structure I've ever seen in on the internet. If you have an issue with one of their games and it's a common issues there will be a direct link to both the forum and the post that solves the problem. So after you click on the forum page there will be a "this issue has been solved click here to see the solution"

After I complained about a vsync issue with painkiller the staff listened and well this happened http://www.gog.com/forum/painkiller_black_edition/loadtimes_between_the_gog_and_dvd_version_of_this_game/page1

Ah, sorry for the long reply, once I start on GOG I can't stop, yeah me personally I'm never going back to Steam, they sell mostly multi player games anyway, and I'm more into good single player myself.

 

[saltyanon]

snip

I don't understand. What's the point of this news post? Is it intended to stir up genuine conversation about this admittedly old issue[footnote]Which would still serve little purpose as it's no longer an actual issue.[/footnote] or is it designed to start arguments?

One website with very high traffic linked to the article without checking it. Other sites started to link to that and it snowballed from there, basically.

 

[r0seyp0m]

Comparing Steam to Xbox One is a bit harsh, don't you think? Yes, they technically both require you to always be online, but the difference is that Steam is a free service and Xbox One is a 500 dollar box you buy.

 

[OldFogeyGamer]

That sheds light on quite a bit, I've always wondered why people complained about Steam's offline mode. I have Steam and a few games installed on a laptop off to the side (for those long trips), which has been on perpetual offline mode for... a little over four months now without any problems. No idea if this is true for my PC though, since it stays in online mode pretty much all the time.

 

[Kahani]

The difference between a console being online and a computer being online is that a computer has basically become synonymous with the Internet. However, consoles are known for being compatible with any TV anywhere (disregarding the current movement toward HDTVs), regardless of Internet connection or not.

My PC is compatible with any TV anywhere. Also any monitor anywhere. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's compatible with more displays than any console. Consoles do have their advantages, but this is certainly not what anyone thinks of as their main distinguishing feature.

Sure, the most popular games on them are Multiplayer experiences like CoD and Battlefield, but then you have your Mass Effects, your GTAs, your Saints Rows, games that thrive on Single-Player experiences that don't necessarily require Internet. Consoles are easy and often have these games that people really enjoy.

Wait, did you just list a bunch of games that are on PC as reasons people enjoy consoles?

Consoles have always been more convenient offline, and while the options was THERE, there's still quite a couple of people that buy consoles solely for those single-player experiences. I don't hear a lot about people wanting a computer for the offline experience, let me tell you.

Do you know anyone who actually owns a PC at all? Because you certainly don't seem to know much anything about them. PCs and consoles have always been in exactly the same boat. When the internet wasn't much of a thing, single player games were king, with local multiplayer coming in second place (generally split-screen for consoles and LAN for PCs). As the internet has become more and more prevalent, both PCs and consoles have had more and more focus on online activities. The current generation of consoles have at least as much focus on online stuff as PCs - XBLA/Steam, achievements, streaming video services, the huge focus on multiplayer games, and so on. The idea that the internet is some kind of distinguishing feature between PCs and consoles is as bizarre as the idea that display compatibility is one.

 

[Steve the Pocket]

I have to disagree there. I already have a browser, there's absolutely no need for Valve to waste time writing another one. Just remove the shit one from Steam entirely and make it use my PC's default browser the way every program is supposed to.

So you want it to force you to tab out of the game and pull up the link in your regular browser? Not having to do that is literally the entire point of the in-game browser existing. If they could make tabbing from a fullscreen game to another app faster and more reliable somehow, it wouldn't even be needed, but Windows' implementation of fullscreen hasn't been significantly updated since the DOS era (each version has to be backward compatible with the last, after all), so it's a necessary evil.

Devs use steam as a release platform for the simple reason that it is DRM (and it has awesome sales numbers), so I don't buy it that the online check in is a bug and not intended. That is extra coding, not accidental coding.

So why would one of their official representatives say that it's a bug and that they're working on fixing it? At the very least you'd think people would be suspicious when it never happens...

Oh, wait, that's right, this is Valve; they can promise anything and then never do it and people will assume that it's just taking a long time, because every now and then something Valve promised nine years ago actually will just show up out of nowhere.

 

[barbzilla]

I have to disagree there. I already have a browser, there's absolutely no need for Valve to waste time writing another one. Just remove the shit one from Steam entirely and make it use my PC's default browser the way every program is supposed to.

So you want it to force you to tab out of the game and pull up the link in your regular browser? Not having to do that is literally the entire point of the in-game browser existing. If they could make tabbing from a fullscreen game to another app faster and more reliable somehow, it wouldn't even be needed, but Windows' implementation of fullscreen hasn't been significantly updated since the DOS era (each version has to be backward compatible with the last, after all), so it's a necessary evil.

Devs use steam as a release platform for the simple reason that it is DRM (and it has awesome sales numbers), so I don't buy it that the online check in is a bug and not intended. That is extra coding, not accidental coding.

So why would one of their official representatives say that it's a bug and that they're working on fixing it? At the very least you'd think people would be suspicious when it never happens...

Oh, wait, that's right, this is Valve; they can promise anything and then never do it and people will assume that it's just taking a long time, because every now and then something Valve promised nine years ago actually will just show up out of nowhere.

I'm going to be bluntly honest here man, I have no idea where you are going with that rant. It sounds like you are upset about something, but there isn't a target to be found in your reply to me. Are you agreeing with me? If so why are you so upset about it? If not, what is the question or issue. I'm sorry if I just didn't get it, but I feel like there is a larger story behind the reply.