…and with proton, I haven’t heard my son complain in a long time now. (The old [heavy sigh] “I wish I had a windows gaming machine…” has been replaced with “Dad, can you move some more money over to my Steam account…”) He can play his Warhammer games… and he just started running Skyrim. (We have it on PS4 but he loves to run mods and there are not as many on the PS4.)
Offtopic Note: Most games fail to run on linux because they come with their kernel driver spyware, err anticheat. For this and similar reasons they fail on wine and can’t even legitimately be ported to linux either. At least not BattlEye games, because they disallow running with unsigned drivers, which could mean you cannot run on linux when using a driver unknown to THEM. Also they probably don’t have a Linux Anti Cheat handy.
AntiCheat 101: The Client Always Cheats. Perform all cheat-sensitive operations and anti-cheat checks serverside.
Oh, I think “anticheat” in this case is really “anti-piracy”. Where you spend more on the problem than you gain with the solution because of a broken equation. (Broken equation: illegal copies = lost sales)
That won’t help against Aim Botting, Anti Recoil Macros whatsoever though. BattlEye goes really deep: It is a kernel driver which hooks certain syscalls and thus even knows when you use SendInput(). It can and will scan everything which is open and upload it for further analysis, you are not allowed to run without driver signing etc. That kind of “spyware” wouldn’t be possible server side, however Rust e.g. detects Anti Recoil Macros because you always send the same “aim pattern” to the server. But it’s harder than verifying checksums of known cheats.
And yeah, piracy might also factor in, Denuvo Games aren’t portable either, but also most games I am talking about are multiplayer only anyway.
Sure, there are client-side solutions you walk away from - but on the flip side things like aim bots are still easily detected serverside. It’s a tradeoff where one possible solution is fairly straightforward and gives, say, 90% of the desired effect and the other solution is very difficult might get you a little bit farther in some cases. I’d always choose the first unless hard pressed to choose the second.
aim bots are still easily detected serverside
Not really. And aimbots are not the only type of cheat, there are plenty that are more subtle than that.
Yaya, I thought someone would bring up aimbots… I bet those could be detected serverside frequently, if someone tried. With more subtle stuff… bleh, anticheat will never be perfect anyway.
Anticheat also sometimes bans innocent people who just have uncommon software installed, from what I’ve read. Not to mention they’re “borderline” spyware. So these aren’t universally popular. I avoid games that do this stuff.
It’s a small issue holding back some Linux adoption maybe. I hope the industry decides it’s a “niche” use-case and moves forward with better cross OS support anyway. Let the first person shooter geeks switch to consoles if they’re worried about cheaters. (Yeah we’re about to start a flame war here aren’t we?)
isnt this Vulkan topic?
anyway noone like auto-bans, there always need to be human to verify.
in CS:GO they have easy system, players verify players, they get something from it if i good remember.
Continuing the cheat thread… CSGO has terrible anti cheat. Not only did they add a built in outline “x-ray” effect that has made cheats ridiculously easy to make (short source code really easy to find since you don’t have to do any graphics stuff so loads of people compile their own), but their system for players reviewing players is very low tick and so it makes good players look like they aimbot - several pros have been banned and god knows how many normal players.
They also decided to give you a matchmaking trust factor to help split up cheaters from legit players. The more reports you get the lower your trust factor. Everyone I play with started reporting every player they could every game.
Can we please stay on topic. If everyone wants to talk about anti-cheat, it would be appropriate for it to have its own thread.