PC Always Online Single Player Game

D

Digital Toxin

New member
Hi Folks,
Does anyone know what build/change version was when single player games were converted over to be an always on sever setup? I think it was sometime in 2023. Thanks for anyone who can help.

Thank You

*Context* I'm looking to reach out to Fun Pimps and ask them to roll back this change, as having an always online Single Player game is an unwanted feature for me personally.

 
Could you state specifically what it is you mean by "always online"?

It has been several years since they had separate builds in the client for single player and multiplayer, so it is more curious as to what the exact issue is you are trying to remedy.

 
Digital Toxin said:
Hi Folks,
Does anyone know what build/change version was when single player games were converted over to be an always on sever setup? I think it was sometime in 2023. Thanks for anyone who can help.

Thank You

*Context* I'm looking to reach out to Fun Pimps and ask them to roll back this change, as having an always online Single Player game is an unwanted feature for me personally.
Click to expand...




You could just select Not Listed for Server Visibility if you don't want anyone joining your game. I do that and I also add a password for good measure.

image.png

 
There's no requirement for always online for single player, IIRC you have to make one connection to Steam/EOS servers initially and then you can go offline/online all you'd like. I've taken a live game on the Steam deck offline in the car/airplanes and it's worked just fine. Just select Play Offline when you get to that point. 

If you mean in SP the game always is listening online, you're right there, there's no "single player" so to speak, you're hosting and joining a server when you do that, but like Gamida said there, just choose Not Listed.

 
You can also set number of players to one and no one can join, though making the game unlisted is better.

 
BFT2020 said:
7D2D has confidence issues?  😆
Click to expand...
I find a lot of people completely ignore most of the important settings when they are setting up their save game to play it. As a result, they end up leaving it open, and any bad agent could get in and cause them trouble. You hear about them every now and again and get to explain to them how to change the settings that are literally right there when they are starting up their save.

Truly though, the responsibility lies on the end user. The game is likely played by the majority in a co-op setting with people who pay attention to the settings they are configuring. As such, the default settings are just fine for most people. Which is very likely why they are the defaults.

 
SylenThunder said:
Truly though, the responsibility lies on the end user. The game is likely played by the majority in a co-op setting with people who pay attention to the settings they are configuring. As such, the default settings are just fine for most people. Which is very likely why they are the defaults.
Click to expand...


Are there any stats on that? Most people I know play mostly SP, which is admittedly a small sample.

Edit: mostly or exclusively

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SylenThunder said:
I find a lot of people completely ignore most of the important settings when they are setting up their save game to play it. As a result, they end up leaving it open, and any bad agent could get in and cause them trouble. You hear about them every now and again and get to explain to them how to change the settings that are literally right there when they are starting up their save.

Truly though, the responsibility lies on the end user. The game is likely played by the majority in a co-op setting with people who pay attention to the settings they are configuring. As such, the default settings are just fine for most people. Which is very likely why they are the defaults.
Click to expand...
Although I agree about this, I would say that even if most people play multiplayer and pay attention to the settings, it would make sense to have default settings set to not show online.  After all, if you forget to turn that off and someone joins and messes stuff up on purpose, that isn't good.  Yet if you forget to turn it on when you want multiplayer, the worst you have to deal with is exiting the game and turning it on.  Given the difference in results if you forget, I think it is better to hide the online status by default.  I also think it would be good to be able to change that setting while playing the game and not only when starting it.  I don't see any reason you should have to exit the game just to change if it shows online.  Some other settings for the save could also be allowed to be changed within the game as well, imo.

 
Riamus said:
Given the difference in results if you forget, I think it is better to hide the online status by default.
Click to expand...
Was thinking of posting something similar, thanks. The default-on is great - for a utopia where people looking for random games to join aren't largely just looking for people to troll.. sadly we don't live in that reality.

 
SylenThunder said:
I find a lot of people completely ignore most of the important settings when they are setting up their save game to play it. As a result, they end up leaving it open, and any bad agent could get in and cause them trouble. You hear about them every now and again and get to explain to them how to change the settings that are literally right there when they are starting up their save.

Truly though, the responsibility lies on the end user. The game is likely played by the majority in a co-op setting with people who pay attention to the settings they are configuring. As such, the default settings are just fine for most people. Which is very likely why they are the defaults.
Click to expand...
 'The responsibility lies on the end user.'

Well.. No. That's not how it works.

 
Lots of software developers including Microsoft needed to learn that lesson the hard way and I have the feeling the games industry is largely still in the pre-learning phase: The default setting has to be secure or you will hurt your customers badly and have to pay the price later with a bad reputation.

It is exactly the least knowledable users who need the most secure setup and are also the users least able to set up the correct options

 
Last edited by a moderator:
seven said:
It would be nice if the default settings weren't the most insecure.
Click to expand...


The "Secure" storage defaults to unlocked. Maybe they have stats to support that decision too?

SylenThunder said:
The game is likely played by the majority in a co-op setting with people who pay attention to the settings they are configuring.
Click to expand...


This a security feature. The default should protect those NOT paying attention. Those already paying attention won't be bothered nearly as much as the inattentive guy who just got robbed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
DaVegaNL said:
 'The responsibility lies on the end user.'

Well.. No. That's not how it works.
Click to expand...
Yes, actually it does. It is up to you to ensure that the settings for your save match up with what you expect to get. No one else can do that for you.

meganoth said:
Lots of software developers including Microsoft needed to learn that lesson the hard way and I have the feeling the games industry is largely still in the pre-learning phase: The default setting has to be secure or you will hurt your customers badly and have to pay the price later with a bad reputation.

It is exactly the least knowledable users who need the most secure setup and are also the users least able to set up the correct options
Click to expand...
I agree fully, however most tend to lean towards ease of access for the majority of the intended playstyle. Where I work, we are contantly fighting between making things easy to access and use for our end-users and meeting high level security standards to maintain regulations for HIPAA and HITECH. 

 
SylenThunder said:
I agree fully, however most tend to lean towards ease of access for the majority of the intended playstyle. Where I work, we are contantly fighting between making things easy to access and use for our end-users and meeting high level security standards to maintain regulations for HIPAA and HITECH. 
Click to expand...
Ease of access is one thing... when it matters.  Having to make one change in settings isn't difficult.  Better to be secure in this instance than save someone from making a change to settings one time per save.  As I said, the difference between users who forget to make this change is significant... potentially getting stuff messed up in one way or another (destroyed, stolen, etc.) versus having to exit the game to change the setting and then load the game back up.

In the end, yes, end users are responsible for making sure they do things, but that doesn't mean developers can't make security a priority.  Especially when it doesn't have any significant impact on users.

 
DaVegaNL said:
 'The responsibility lies on the end user.'

Well.. No. That's not how it works.
Click to expand...
That's exactly how it works. As a UX designer myself, you can try and account for every possible use case and scenario, but at some point, the end user has to be the one to make a decision. It's up to the designer and the devs to create an experience that allows the user to make informed decisions, but that's where it stops.

As a purely SP user myself, I also initially wished the default settings were geared toward my preferences, but after I learned how to cater the settings to what I wanted, it was no longer an issue. The only feedback I have regarding game settings is allowing me to save a custom set of, erm, settings so that it makes new game creation quicker. Other than that, current implementation is fine.

 
Syphon583 said:
That's exactly how it works. As a UX designer myself, you can try and account for every possible use case and scenario, but at some point, the end user has to be the one to make a decision. It's up to the designer and the devs to create an experience that allows the user to make informed decisions, but that's where it stops.
Click to expand...


Human nature. People often do not decide at all (aka decide to do nothing) when they have to make a decision. And therefore that should be the safe case.

They do nothing when they are overwhelmed by choices, do not understand, get distracted, don't care, are 9 years old or 99 years old, are in a hurry. In other words most of the time.

Do you really expect a typical kid with a steam account to already make the right informed decisions about its games when you practically know that most kids have just enough sense to klick on any button that says "start"? And even half of all grown ups operate the same way?

(Disclaimer: There are actually very old people who would understand, but they are in the minority)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top