• @MomoTimeToDie
    cake
    link
    English
    34 months ago

    I always find it interesting how many people are welcoming kernel-level anti-cheat software

    Imo it really depends on the game, and how much cheating can actually effect things, and as time goes on and technology develops, it will only become more relevant. I remember a headline a while back about a monitor that used machine learning to track the enemy team in league of legends by “watching” the map, and marking whenever an enemy is crossing a ward.

    • @[email protected]
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      174 months ago

      If the code used to cheat runs outside of the machine the game is running on - as in your example - kernel level anti-cheat won’t even do anything. What’s next then? Allowing the game (we are talking about games, I want to make that very clear) to whitelist/blacklist attached peripherals? “Ah, sorry, you can only play this game with Razer or Corsair mice, because your noname mouse might be injecting inputs from cheat software.”

      Client-side anti-cheat is like validating payloads on the client side in web apps. It won’t stop people who really want to break your game. Stop running shitty software on my computer. Anti-cheat needs to be server side, with (probably “AI” based) pattern recognition. If a cheater is found with some degree of certainty, let a human review the footage. Yes, these human employees cost money, but this is just the cost of running a (competitive) multiplayer game.

      Instead, game developers/publishers add a crappy anti-cheat software. It’s cheaper, but it’s also worse in terms of actually stopping cheating and in terms of security for the computer running the game.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        64 months ago

        Sorry to say but there are already peripherals that are blocked by anti cheat. Back when I bought Rust, i learned the hard way that their anti cheat blocks Input from the steam controller.

      • @MomoTimeToDie
        cake
        link
        English
        -14 months ago

        The problem is that most cheating is subtle. Sure, theres the idiots who just throw every cheat in the book, but especially at higher levels where people care most about the integrity of the competition, cheating is a lot more subtle and within human limits, such that “I’m just that good” or “I got lucky” would be an entirely valid defense.

        If you don’t like anti-cheat, don’t play games with it.

    • @LdyMeow
      link
      English
      74 months ago

      I’m not certain how what you said debates the other comment at all. Like I get that Chester will get more advanced or whatever, but allowing kernel level garbage is not ok to me. No matter the circumstances.

      • @MomoTimeToDie
        cake
        link
        English
        -24 months ago

        I mean there’s no point in debating in the first place if you’ve just drawn your line in the sand and don’t give a fuck about anything else

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          44 months ago

          “I don’t want to hand over compete kernel and administrative control of my PC just to play a game” seems like a pretty reasonable line to draw.

          • @MomoTimeToDie
            cake
            link
            English
            04 months ago

            If you like it, feel free. But it still isn’t particularly conducive to debate if it’s just your own line in the sand and you don’t particularly care what anyone else thinks.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              14 months ago

              The purpose of debate isn’t necessarily to convince the person your debating against. It also helps sway others who might be party to the discussion. Just because I have a line in the sand re: turning over control of my computer doesn’t mean I can’t debate that point and offer my own reasons for taking that position, while someone contrary to that can explain theirs. Neither participant in the debate needs to budge in their position, but by both offering their reasoning it may be useful in persuading others to one of their sides.

    • idunnololz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      34 months ago

      Yeah cheating is a lot worse for competitive games than for casual games. For example, it doesn’t matter how well you make a fps game, if every game has one cheater in it, no one will play your game. Cheating affects more casual games as well though, although it usually only affects the economy (eg. If someone gets infinite resources with cheats then the price of that resource will plummet).

      • @MomoTimeToDie
        cake
        link
        English
        -24 months ago

        if every game has one cheater in it, no one will play your game

        Exactly this. Any game that even hopes to have a remotely decent competitive community needs to have a solid way of not just targeting cheaters after the fact, but in keeping them out of games. Because even if it’s just something like 1 in 5 games being decided by cheats, if people become aware of it, any value people placed on a competitive ladder are going to evaporate overnight.

        And for what it’s worth, I fully support the ability to do things like local matches or private servers where anti cheat is partially or entirely disabled. I love modding and letting people play their own game their own way. But when it starts impacting other people’s experiences, there need to be rules in place and enforced.

        Oh, and for those people saying that no anti cheat should exist, go hop in an online match of splatoon 1 on Wii u, and honestly tell me if that’s what you want out of a competitive game. Because that’s what not targeting cheaters gets you