Steam is dropping support for Windows 7 and macOS Mohave (and older), which could break or prevent downloading purchased games

[RejZoR]

Main question is, are all the games on Steam compatible with Windows 10 and newer?

[Recharged]

4 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Main question is, are all the games on Steam compatible with Windows 10 and newer?

Nope.

[Kisai]

3 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Main question is, are all the games on Steam compatible with Windows 10 and newer?

Yes and no. If 32-bit WoW is enabled (we've been seeing warning signs that Microsoft will be removing or not installing by default since 2018,) then All games will at least "run", but not well. MacOS however, is another story, and it's very likely that Rosetta2 will be turned off in 2028 given patterns seen. If you had OSX 10.3/10.4/10.5 you had Rosetta 1, but only if you upgraded from 10.3 / 10.4 to 10.5. After that it kinda just disappeared. If you, as a game developer were smart enough, you'd have kept Universal binary support since it's introduction and always built the binary for PPC/x86-32/x86-64/ARMv6/Armv7/Armv7s/Armv7-arm64, even if the systems those CPU's were targeted for, have no hardware for them. The problem is the OS libraries, eg a binary built for x86-64 and ARM64 on 11 (Big Sur) won't run on an older version of the OS.

 

Windows does not have that kind of history. 64-bit versions of windows basically come with a second copy of windows called WoW (Windows on Windows) to support the 32-bit binaries, just as 32-bit versions of the OS came with WoW for 16-bit Windows applications. The only reason 16-bit windows applications work on 32-bit Windows 10 is because it's a 32-bit OS. The 64-bit OS will not run the 16-bit applications at all (eg old screen savers and stuff) and will only run 32-bit Windows applications that are built against libraries the OS has. Microsoft has removed software services like DirectMusic, DirectPlay and a few other things I know I'm forgetting when they decided to dive into making Xbox hardware and live services.

 

So yes, technically "all" 32-bit games can run, on 32-bit OS, and 64-bit OS that has the 32-bit WoW layer, and likewise MacOS if they are Universal binaries that have all the builds in them. The practical reality is that most developers have not been recompiling their games for every new DirectX version, so anything older than DX9 will likely break, as there was never 64-bit versions of pre-DX9 libraries, thus needing wrappers like DXVX to work. 

 

But I do feel that steam is just saying they won't support installing Steam on OS's older than Windows 10. Nothing that really says they won't support installing any game. Just those those games might not have continued support from their publisher.

 

https://help.steampowered.com/en/faqs/view/4784-4F2B-1321-800A

Quote

In order to ensure continued operation of Steam and any games or other products purchased through Steam, users should update to a more recent version of Windows. We expect the Steam client and games on these older operating systems to continue running for some time without updates after January 1st, 2024, but we are unable to guarantee continued functionality after that date.

This change is required as core features in Steam rely on an embedded version of Google Chrome, which no longer functions on older versions of Windows. In addition, future versions of Steam will require Windows feature and security updates only present in Windows 10 and above.

And I was exactly right about that.

 

This is only about CEF, and nothing else.

 

[Vishera]

8 hours ago, ReanimationXP said:

If it truly doesn't update on install then that would help with one part of the problem..

Yep, I got that solved.

8 hours ago, ReanimationXP said:

now we'd just be waiting to see if and when logging in with it breaks.

Just like with Windows XP -  patching "packageInfo.vdf" should fix issues like this.

[E-waste]

On 12/2/2023 at 1:12 PM, Kisai said:

At some point Steam is going to need to invoke the same linux wrappers used to run games on the Steam Deck for 32-bit games built before Windows Vista/7 because of Microsoft's own breaking backwards compatibility.

Yep!

 

I cannot get Delta Force 2 demo to work on Windows 10, software support (and some wireless hardware support and networking features, which Linux still doesn't have software support for) is why I keep Windows around.  I still have it on one machine just for the wifi direct or "mobile hotspot" which doesn't seem to be available to Linux wifi drivers.  So I keep windows on one machine to have a second wifi network to modify.

 

Other than that, I switched to Linux for the reason I had Windows installed, game support.  Try opening 1nsane on Windows 10.  It is available on GOG, and I contacted support who said they didn't have the issue of it not starting.  It caused my system to bluescreen, due to a software driver issue related to GPU.  I also as mentioned am unable to launch Delta Force 2, or any of the demos, on Windows.

 

On Linux using Valve's implementation of Wine called proton, I can launch DF 2 and 1nsane and I play both.  Windows no longer allows this program compatibility, and Wine keeps these dlls packaged as part of the program.  So now Linux has better backward-compatibility for Windows software, and it will hopefully help push more Linux use.  I have stopped using Windows for my desktop system as I am not tied to non-game programs that only work on Windows, which I hope in the near future, more programs will be cross-platform and also that there will be more programming options designed with this idea in mind.

 

Who wants a program which only works on one system, if its functions are not related the system itself?  Only a greedy corporation.  Not all businesses are inherently bad or malicious, only the ones that try to reduce human freedom or choice.

[Eaglerino]

On 12/21/2023 at 2:16 PM, E-waste said:

Windows no longer allows this program compatibility, and Wine keeps these dlls packaged as part of the program.  So now Linux has better backward-compatibility for Windows software, and it will hopefully help push more Linux use.  I have stopped using Windows for my desktop system as I am not tied to non-game programs that only work on Windows, which I hope in the near future, more programs will be cross-platform and also that there will be more programming options designed with this idea in mind.

I don't believe any of this for a second

[ravenshrike]

On 12/2/2023 at 6:55 AM, Sauron said:

I agree, they should also be legally required to ensure all games they sell work on officially supported platforms.

On 12/1/2023 at 10:19 PM, Eaglerino said:

Demanding that they make Steam work with Windows 95 is a bold move Cotton.

[atxcyclist]

It sucks that many MacOS games simply don't work anymore. Rosetta 2 doesn't have any compatibility for 32-bit programs, so that's out. Valve is refusing to update old software to 64-bit (which is silly since CS:GO had it so all Source-based games could be patched), and AFAIK they removed Apple Silicon compatibility with Counter Strike 2. Bethesda just decided that they wouldn't support Elder Scrolls Online on Apple Silicon even though older versions were. It's clear that 32-bit computing isn't coming back, so... why are companies actively removing compatibility, or refusing to update software with working 64-bit engines they've deployed previously; It's all nonsensical. It could be translation-layered to all hell and back and I could run TF2 or Half-Life 2 in macOS on a modern Apple Silicon machine, there's just no way to do it without buying Parallels and a Win 11 key, or using some fairly janky WINE-ish software under MacOS.

[HumdrumPenguin]

Just think of everything you buy not really yours, just a long term rent (or so would Nintendo have you thought). That's unfortunately the case, as keeping a team to support dead platforms is just not feasible from a financial point of view.

[jagdtigger]

9 hours ago, HumdrumPenguin said:

That's unfortunately the case, as keeping a team to support dead platforms is just not feasible from a financial point of view.

Then remove the DRM and let the community do it. You dont make money out of it anyway so no harm in doing so.......

[Sauron]

On 12/23/2023 at 6:31 AM, ravenshrike said:

Demanding that they make Steam work with Windows 95 is a bold move Cotton.

Good thing I never said that then

[E-waste]

On 12/22/2023 at 10:05 PM, Eaglerino said:

I don't believe any of this for a second

In reply of my comment, Linux having better backward compatibility with older software (specifically game software in my experience) compared to Windows 10.

 

To prove my point, install Delta Force 2 demo on steam, and make it work on Windows 10.  Another example 1nsane, from the year 2000, the axel suspension makes this still a very fun game, 23 years later.  I could not get it to work on Windows 10 but, I did have it running on Windows 7.  I got a blue screen related to the game itself, and something about directx.

 

No issues on Linux with Wine, or now I use the built-in Proton in steam, which makes it significantly easier to begin running a program in Wine, and has an easy way to swap to different proton versions.

 

I would like to see winetricks added into it for various missing bits, I still can't get Dirt 2 to work on Proton.  I have it installed, and it did the VC atd directx stuff, which I had to close manually as there is no gui, but it doesn't launch.

 

So not all games work, especially when they require specific additions that need separate installation before the game will work, but for higher-quality developed games, wine is impressive in its performance and compatibility.

[Middcore]

6 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Then remove the DRM and let the community do it. You dont make money out of it anyway so no harm in doing so.......

 

Steam cannot unilaterally remove DRM from other publishers' games that they sell. 

[jagdtigger]

1 hour ago, Middcore said:

 

Steam cannot unilaterally remove DRM from other publishers' games that they sell. 

Im not going down that rabbit hole, no manufacturer/developer/whatever has any right to basically render something inoperable you already paid for....... I dont really care how they do it.

[Sauron]

On 12/24/2023 at 7:05 PM, Middcore said:

Steam cannot unilaterally remove DRM from other publishers' games that they sell. 

They don't need to remove it, they just need a bare minimum client that allows the existing steam DRM to keep authenticating with their servers.

[ravenshrike]

On 12/24/2023 at 8:18 AM, Sauron said:

Good thing I never said that then

DOOM, DOOM II, Fallout, and Fallout 2 all are officially supported on Windows 95. Steam sells them, and if you transfer the files onto a Win95 PC you can get them working. 

[Sauron]

13 hours ago, ravenshrike said:

DOOM, DOOM II, Fallout, and Fallout 2 all are officially supported on Windows 95. Steam sells them, and if you transfer the files onto a Win95 PC you can get them working. 

Nobody is saying that steam should be available on those platforms. Only that the games you buy on steam should be able to be installed and run on platforms that make them work. In this case that standard is already met...

[starsmine]

On 12/24/2023 at 2:12 PM, jagdtigger said:

Im not going down that rabbit hole, no manufacturer/developer/whatever has any right to basically render something inoperable you already paid for....... I dont really care how they do it.

They dont generally. The fact that the copy of the game worked just fine on the PC you had in the day is not, and has never been a guarantee that that particular version of the game would work on a PC built 20 years from then. 

 

[Kisai]

On 12/26/2023 at 8:24 PM, starsmine said:

They dont generally. The fact that the copy of the game worked just fine on the PC you had in the day is not, and has never been a guarantee that that particular version of the game would work on a PC built 20 years from then. 

 

If Microsoft wanted to, they could release DOS 3.2, 6.22, Win3.1, Win95, Win98, and WinXP images that have been modified to just launch the game as the shell and that would solve the problem of compatibility.

 

See, for "DOS" games, DOSbox solves this because DOSBox emulates DOS. You can even tell it to not emulate DOS and just emulate the hardware, and thus you can get it to emulate a machine that can boot Win95 OSR2 or Win98. But that's it. That's all it was ever intended to emulate. You actually lose features by making it emulate Win9x because Win9x can't use the native DOS. Win3.x however can. One of the hardest things to get DOSBox to do is emulate a Windows 95 machine, hard drive, and a CD-ROM so you can play the redbook audio on games that have it.

 

It would be easier to do if Microsoft just released a HyperV image with these legacy OS's that sandbox the guest OS. That's the only advantage Microsoft could get over Steam. So if Microsoft did this with a 32-bit XP-DX9 (that they previously did with Vista/7) in a way that actually ran the OS in a way to play the game, rather than the RDP setup which didn't permit any game to work. Valve, Epic, and GOG aren't ever going to be in a position to license a copy of each of Microsoft's old OS's just to run old games. They'd have to buy one copy of every OS for every user. Nobody wants to do that. But Microsoft itself could.

[starsmine]

5 hours ago, Kisai said:

If Microsoft wanted to, they could release DOS 3.2, 6.22, Win3.1, Win95, Win98, and WinXP images that have been modified to just launch the game as the shell and that would solve the problem of compatibility.

 

See, for "DOS" games, DOSbox solves this because DOSBox emulates DOS. You can even tell it to not emulate DOS and just emulate the hardware, and thus you can get it to emulate a machine that can boot Win95 OSR2 or Win98. But that's it. That's all it was ever intended to emulate. You actually lose features by making it emulate Win9x because Win9x can't use the native DOS. Win3.x however can. One of the hardest things to get DOSBox to do is emulate a Windows 95 machine, hard drive, and a CD-ROM so you can play the redbook audio on games that have it.

 

It would be easier to do if Microsoft just released a HyperV image with these legacy OS's that sandbox the guest OS. That's the only advantage Microsoft could get over Steam. So if Microsoft did this with a 32-bit XP-DX9 (that they previously did with Vista/7) in a way that actually ran the OS in a way to play the game, rather than the RDP setup which didn't permit any game to work. Valve, Epic, and GOG aren't ever going to be in a position to license a copy of each of Microsoft's old OS's just to run old games. They'd have to buy one copy of every OS for every user. Nobody wants to do that. But Microsoft itself could.

They did this with Windows 7. It came with a VM of XP with Windows Virtual machine. (though not on disk you had to download it)
I kinda wish they would do that again, but honestly i have not needed it. The couple of programs I needed VM to run when I used 7... just ran on windows 10. I have never tried on 11.

[Kisai]

58 minutes ago, starsmine said:

They did this with Windows 7. It came with a VM of XP with Windows Virtual machine. (though not on disk you had to download it)
I kinda wish they would do that again, but honestly i have not needed it. The couple of programs I needed VM to run when I used 7... just ran on windows 10. I have never tried on 11.

That's what I said. Windows Vista/7 came with "XP mode" that used RDP to access a version of Windows XP you got directly from Microsoft.

 

If you were ambitious you could also use this same disk image on VMWare. It just needed some tweaking so that it wouldn't try to activate windows every single time it booted. The same problem that happens when you run Windows in Parallels/Native hardware on Intel Mac's. It'll try to activate once, but then refuse to activate saying it's already assigned to another device.... you know... this exact same device.

 

So Microsoft would need to fix that otherwise it would just be unusable.  Heck there is even ANOTHER solution. Strip it down like WinPE and have just paravirtualized drivers. It's not like a 32-bit game is new enough to actually suffer from the overhead of that translation.

 

 

[leadeater]

14 hours ago, Kisai said:

If Microsoft wanted to, they could release DOS 3.2, 6.22, Win3.1, Win95, Win98, and WinXP images that have been modified to just launch the game as the shell and that would solve the problem of compatibility.

 

See, for "DOS" games, DOSbox solves this because DOSBox emulates DOS. You can even tell it to not emulate DOS and just emulate the hardware, and thus you can get it to emulate a machine that can boot Win95 OSR2 or Win98. But that's it. That's all it was ever intended to emulate. You actually lose features by making it emulate Win9x because Win9x can't use the native DOS. Win3.x however can. One of the hardest things to get DOSBox to do is emulate a Windows 95 machine, hard drive, and a CD-ROM so you can play the redbook audio on games that have it.

 

It would be easier to do if Microsoft just released a HyperV image with these legacy OS's that sandbox the guest OS. That's the only advantage Microsoft could get over Steam. So if Microsoft did this with a 32-bit XP-DX9 (that they previously did with Vista/7) in a way that actually ran the OS in a way to play the game, rather than the RDP setup which didn't permit any game to work. Valve, Epic, and GOG aren't ever going to be in a position to license a copy of each of Microsoft's old OS's just to run old games. They'd have to buy one copy of every OS for every user. Nobody wants to do that. But Microsoft itself could.

I'm pretty sure Microsoft could get something like this going using the Hyper-V core and Hyper-V Container technology. All the hardware emulation technology is already there in Windows, some specific additions would need to be made for DOS and Win95/98 probably, like virtual CPU frequency for things tied to CPU frequency like DOSBox does.

 

I just don't think Microsoft has any desire to do it and nobody else can without their blessing sadly.

[jagdtigger]

16 hours ago, Kisai said:

Valve, Epic, and GOG aren't ever going to be in a position to license a copy of each of Microsoft's old OS's just to run old games.

Because its impossible to use the wine source code to create proton for old games.....

(/off HAvent forgottan the linux discussion, im a little busy.)

[Kisai]

8 hours ago, leadeater said:

I'm pretty sure Microsoft could get something like this going using the Hyper-V core and Hyper-V Container technology. All the hardware emulation technology is already there in Windows, some specific additions would need to be made for DOS and Win95/98 probably, like virtual CPU frequency for things tied to CPU frequency like DOSBox does.

 

I just don't think Microsoft has any desire to do it and nobody else can without their blessing sadly.

Honestly, "DOS" is pretty much covered by DosBox, and the thing Microsoft should be doing is contributing to DOSBOX all the undocumented DOS features needed to make it run Win95/Win98, then just release a blessed version of Win95/98 that runs off DosBox.

 

It would make sense for Microsoft to release a HyperV version of DOS/Windows up to XPSP3. That reminds me...

 

In order to get Ultima 9 to work, at all. I had to run the game in Virtualbox 6.0, nothing newer, because for some reason Virtualbox has disabled 3D DirectX support in 6.1 and 7. This game was so buggy and unstable, but I eventually managed to finish it.

 

If it was possible to just get a "XPSP3-DX9" on HyperV that had tunable settings to hide cores/RAM/Disk Size to get installers to not flip out, we would be in a pretty good position. Proton will only get you so far.

[Vishera]

On 12/29/2023 at 8:55 PM, Kisai said:

Honestly, "DOS" is pretty much covered by DosBox, and the thing Microsoft should be doing is contributing to DOSBOX all the undocumented DOS features needed to make it run Win95/Win98, then just release a blessed version of Win95/98 that runs off DosBox.

The current version of DOSBOX already runs Win9x just fine.

I used that to install Windows 98 SE on my phone to play Half-Life and Age of Empires II on my phone.