4 ms·
I agree with you. Good networking code is generally one of the best ways to reduce the visibility of cheating. But take a look at CS:GO. That has some of the
by invokestatic 6y ago
I agree with you. Good networking code is generally one of the best ways to reduce the visibility of cheating.
But take a look at CS:GO. That has some of the best designed networking code from a security perspective. Your keyboard and mouse input is sent to the server, and it figures out where you move or if you shot another player, not the client. And yet there is still widespread cheating on that game.
- crankylinuxuser 6y agoSigh. This garbage again. So is a expensive high dpi mouse a cheat? How about a keyboard that saves macros? How about a bigger high quality monitor? Or how about investigating network traffic? It is my network hardware, and NOT yours. How about investigating RAM? I paid for my ram. You certainly didn't. Same goes for CPU. These "anti-cheat" looks more and more indistinguishable to ransomware, coinscammers, viruses, and the like. Long and short of it - games like these are malware. And I'd argue that AV programs should target, quarantine, and disable. They are, by definition, anti-owner and anti-computer.
- invokestatic 6y agoI don't think anyone here is arguing that better equipment is cheating, or that you don't own your hardware.
- rkangel 6y agoGiven that, how do some of the worse CS:GO cheats work? I can understand wallhacks (at some point it does have to be up to the local graphics driver to calculate occlusion), but I thought CS:GO had a period of people being able to spawn in the enemies spawn, or snipe you at the spawn point. I'm not a CS:GO player so I#m sorry if I'm getting those accounts incorrect.