Give a choice: disable auto-updates

[relvarten]

MTA is the best GTA:SA network client, except for one thing — forced auto-updates with no way to disable them. In SA-MP, you can safely play any version, even the oldest, and the client does not require an update. Why are MTA users deprived of this choice? Why do you care so much about security, but at the same time force players to connect to multiple IP addresses that may not be yours one day?

My friends and I found a workaround: we blocked all MTA IPs — some of us did it via hosts, some via NetLimiter. "But you won't get important updates!" — so what? We are ready to play even on version 1.4, as long as they leave us alone. Many, like us, use MTA for local play. We do not need constant updates, and if we do, we will download the new version ourselves. What is the point of the <min_client_version> parameter in the server config if everyone is required to update sooner or later anyway?

If you are not ready to give users a choice, why not disable local play altogether? Do it like in GTA 5 - access only when connected to network!

Auto-updates are everywhere today, but in MTA - it is a blow to the heart.

[TMTMTL]

Hi. My first question is, why on earth are you playing on 1.4?
My second is, why do you have a problem with high security measures?

I really don't see what the issue is. If it's because your scripts are outdated, simply update them, there really isn't much to change in the way of removed/changed function names between 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6.

[DiSaMe]

I thought there was a setting for auto-updates, until I checked to find out it only allows choosing between stable and nightly. Too bad. But doesn't auto-update ask for confirmation? I can remember MTA asking if I want to update or not. Although it's probably just some old memories, and even then, having to reject every time would be inconvenient. I haven't used MTA in a connected environment for quite some time so I haven't been aware of how it works.

Auto-updates in MTA have never been a problem personally for me, but I agree with all your points. The reason I got so hooked on MTA is the freedom it gives. It was mostly about creative freedom, but that's just a part of it. I've seen MTA receive undeserved hate because of things it does right, like disabling glitches by default and allowing to enable them on a per-server basis. So it stands out when MTA, while otherwise being the best multiplayer at giving freedom, actively limits the freedom like that.

You're right about local play. While it's a great thing to be able to play with hundreds of other players over the Internet, I don't like the idea that multiplayer must revolve around online play. Playing locally is just as valuable, even solo - with MTA's scripting capabilities, playing alone can make as much sense as playing with others (funny because I probably spent most time in MTA alone, although I was scripting rather than merely playing, so it doesn't count).

I don't like living in the so-called "modern world" of "smart" devices and apps and some other crap where you're supposed to be part of a whole and blindly accept whatever they shove your way. If they want, they can make the software stop working the way it was working, and you will no longer be able to do what you used to do. I prefer being in control of what happens on my devices. With stuff like CrowdStrike incident happening not so long ago, I thought people would understand why someone would not want automatic updates.

Well noticed regarding the <min_client_version> parameter. It's contradictory to have a parameter that allows or disallows the players to do something that they're not allowed to do anyway.

But I can see a problem with making updates optional - even if the choice was added to the new versions, you still wouldn't be able to choose versions prior to that (because the earlier versions would still auto-update), unless those earlier versions were also updated to add the choice.

With MTA being open source, you can compile older versions yourself and otherwise suit it for your own needs, so ultimately it does leave it up to you to choose, but compiling just to disable auto-updates is an overkill.

10 hours ago, TMTMTL said:

Hi. My first question is, why on earth are you playing on 1.4?
My second is, why do you have a problem with high security measures?

I really don't see what the issue is. If it's because your scripts are outdated, simply update them, there really isn't much to change in the way of removed/changed function names between 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6.

Sorry, but you got it backwards. It doesn't make sense to require justification not for imposing limitations.