5 ms·

I run these games via GeForce NOW. There's no way I'm installing kernel-level proprietary monitoring software.

matheusmoreira 5y ago
> There's no way I'm installing kernel-level proprietary monitoring software. Yeah, me neither. It's gonna suck if they start requiring it on Linux though. I hope smarter people than me will find workarounds that allow us to pretend their shitty modules are running. Just in case anyone is wondering why this is a big deal: https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/23/capcom_street_fighter_v/ https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/23/capcom_street_fighter...
baby 5y ago
Unfortunately cheaters ruin everything
- tl 5y ago
  You misspelt corporations.
  - baby 5y ago
    I think it's hard to understand my comment if you've never been seriously involved in a competitive game that has a cheating problem.
    - tl 5y ago
      I have previously. I'm currently not seriously involved in a competitive game. Actual serious gaming competitions (the kind with prize money) take place under circumstances where cheating is immediately obvious and gets you disqualified in a public setting. I believe the "understanding" gap is on your end; ranking the integrity of systems above the integrity of gaming is a common sense stance before you realize you don't need to compromise one for the other.
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  Cheaters aren't a strong enough reason to ship malware to users to monitor them. This sort of thing ought to be unacceptable. This is 100% on the games industry. They engaged in an arms race with cheaters and now their ineffective solutions are worse than the problem they're attempting to solve.
  - episteme 5y ago
    Who decides that though? I would bet the vast majority of players would be very happy to be monitored if it meant less cheaters. Look at Valorant, that anti cheat is way beyond what HN would deem acceptable and the game is very popular.
    - matheusmoreira 5y ago
      > Who decides that though? We do. We used to have choice. Online games back then had the option to search for servers with no requirements for any of this bullshit. Now we're lucky if we even get dedicated servers. > I would bet the vast majority of players would be very happy to be monitored if it meant less cheaters. Honest players letting themselves be monitored does nothing to help matters. Cheaters will work around the system and evade monitoring. > Valorant > they scan all of the software that has loaded up on the individual’s computer > Vanguard operates from system start-up, constantly operating on your PC unless you forcefully close it or uninstall it from your computer. > Vanguard also operates a Kernel level driver, which has access to the entire computer system And now it requires TPM and secure boot. It's disgusting really. It's like all that stuff RMS warned us about is becoming reality. All for what, a video game? No video game is worth this. From what I'm reading it's not just me either. People are concerned about the kernel module: > Can people trust a piece of software that has so much access? > it appeared as if they were just brushing off anyone’s concerns about it > The concerns people had weren’t exclusively from people scared of Riot Games or their parent company Tencent from performing “spying” operations on a computer and harvesting endless amounts of personal data. > A noted subsection was worried that if the Vanguard kernel component was compromised, it could be accessed by people with less pure intentions than Riot Games simply wishing to prevent cheating in their title. This has happened before with capcom.sys, it was literally a backdoor into the kernel that any user space program could use to execute functions in ring zero: https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/23/capcom_street_fighter_v/ https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/23/capcom_street_fighter... The games industry cannot be trusted to write kernel code! They need to stay in user space where they belong. If that means more cheaters so be it.

> There's no way I'm installing kernel-level proprietary monitoring software. Yeah, me neither. It's gonna suck if they start requiring it on Linux though. I hope smarter people than me will find workarounds that allow us to pretend their shitty modules are running. Just in case anyone is wondering why this is a big deal: https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/23/capcom_street_fighter_v/ https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/23/capcom_street_fighter...

baby 5y ago

Unfortunately cheaters ruin everything

tl 5y ago
You misspelt corporations.
- baby 5y ago
  I think it's hard to understand my comment if you've never been seriously involved in a competitive game that has a cheating problem.
  - tl 5y ago
    I have previously. I'm currently not seriously involved in a competitive game. Actual serious gaming competitions (the kind with prize money) take place under circumstances where cheating is immediately obvious and gets you disqualified in a public setting. I believe the "understanding" gap is on your end; ranking the integrity of systems above the integrity of gaming is a common sense stance before you realize you don't need to compromise one for the other.
matheusmoreira 5y ago
Cheaters aren't a strong enough reason to ship malware to users to monitor them. This sort of thing ought to be unacceptable. This is 100% on the games industry. They engaged in an arms race with cheaters and now their ineffective solutions are worse than the problem they're attempting to solve.
- episteme 5y ago
  Who decides that though? I would bet the vast majority of players would be very happy to be monitored if it meant less cheaters. Look at Valorant, that anti cheat is way beyond what HN would deem acceptable and the game is very popular.
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    > Who decides that though? We do. We used to have choice. Online games back then had the option to search for servers with no requirements for any of this bullshit. Now we're lucky if we even get dedicated servers. > I would bet the vast majority of players would be very happy to be monitored if it meant less cheaters. Honest players letting themselves be monitored does nothing to help matters. Cheaters will work around the system and evade monitoring. > Valorant > they scan all of the software that has loaded up on the individual’s computer > Vanguard operates from system start-up, constantly operating on your PC unless you forcefully close it or uninstall it from your computer. > Vanguard also operates a Kernel level driver, which has access to the entire computer system And now it requires TPM and secure boot. It's disgusting really. It's like all that stuff RMS warned us about is becoming reality. All for what, a video game? No video game is worth this. From what I'm reading it's not just me either. People are concerned about the kernel module: > Can people trust a piece of software that has so much access? > it appeared as if they were just brushing off anyone’s concerns about it > The concerns people had weren’t exclusively from people scared of Riot Games or their parent company Tencent from performing “spying” operations on a computer and harvesting endless amounts of personal data. > A noted subsection was worried that if the Vanguard kernel component was compromised, it could be accessed by people with less pure intentions than Riot Games simply wishing to prevent cheating in their title. This has happened before with capcom.sys, it was literally a backdoor into the kernel that any user space program could use to execute functions in ring zero: https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/23/capcom_street_fighter_v/ https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/23/capcom_street_fighter... The games industry cannot be trusted to write kernel code! They need to stay in user space where they belong. If that means more cheaters so be it.