3 ms·
No, the sad truth is that the current anticheat is FairFight. FairFight mainly operates by monitoring the behavior of a player and it takes a screenshot if they
by noname120 7y ago
No, the sad truth is that the current anticheat is FairFight. FairFight mainly operates by monitoring the behavior of a player and it takes a screenshot if they are suspicious. Cheating tools[1] are aware of this and disable any visual effects (ESP hack e.g. see through walls, etc.) when it takes a screenshot and reenables them right after[2].
[1] https://overlayhack.com/battlefield-5-v-hacks https://overlayhack.com/battlefield-5-v-hacks
[2] https://overlayhack.com/battlefield-5-v-hacks#509 https://overlayhack.com/battlefield-5-v-hacks#509
- Thaxll 7y agoDICE doesn't just use FairFight obviously. They have their own in-house solution, also used by some other EA games. And TBH you're complaining about 380 people which is a drop in a bucket compare to the number of players on that game, yes cheating sucks but I can assure you there are people actively working on that problem at DICE.
- noname120 7y agoIncorrect, FairFight is their in-house solution and this is the only tool that they use client-side for Battlefield V[1]. They've dropped the third-party PunkBuster anticheat tool since Battlefield 1. Other EA games use other anticheat tools for example Apex Legends uses Easy Anti-Cheat[2], which is much more efficient to track and ban cheaters. > And TBH you're complaining about 380 people which is a drop in a bucket compare to the number of players on that game The Firestorm mode has so few players now (I estimate 3-10 games running in parallel in the world depending on the time) that it has a huge negative impact on the game. You only need 1 cheater in a game to ruin it for everyone else. [1] https://www.ea.com/games/battlefield/battlefield-5/news/anti-cheat-in-battlefield-5 https://www.ea.com/games/battlefield/battlefield-5/news/anti... [2] https://www.easy.ac/en-us/ https://www.easy.ac/en-us/
- swivelmaster 7y agoYou're asking EA to devote hundreds of thousands of dollars of resources to maintaining a game mode that apparently only a few thousand people engage with now. I know it sucks for the people dealing with cheaters, but from a resource-allocation perspective it makes a lot more sense to focus on new games and (I assume) Battlefront 2.
- komali2 7y agoAh, the American politician strategy. > Sure we defunded it, but look how crappy it is! Nobody uses it! Guess we don't need it.
- reroute1 7y agoHow is this an american strategy?
- montjoy 7y agoI’m sure it’s not uniquely American. It’s just a standard strategy for the GOP. Defund, then complain regulation doesn’t work and deregulate or allow regulatory capture.
- zo1 7y agoMaybe, but the other side of the coin is "it's not working, so let's just blame lack of funding", irrespective of if there is actually enough funding to do something worthwhile or not. The goals are always nebulous and allows both sides to complain.
- montjoy 7y agoCan’t argue with that. Unfortunately there is no agile/“fail fast” in government.
- swivelmaster 7y agoThis isn't government we're talking about here, this is a company that has every incentive to do their best to make money from the games they release. I agree about the GOP though.
- Thaxll 7y agoYou don't know what you're talking about, FairFight is a third party solution that EA pays for but it's not the only anticheat technology used by DICE.
- noname120 7y agoYou're right my mistake. FairFight is a product of GameBlocks, which seems to be unaffiliated with DICE: https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_ca/201221610239 https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_ca/201221610239
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]