8 ms·

This is a money grab with the polish of a pro-gamer cheat-cleanup. Why do I say that? Microsoft can fix most of the 'cheats' that a software controller can im

• RobotToaster 3y ago
  And someone in China will no doubt find a way to make their controllers be detected as official, if they haven't already.
  • fishtacos 3y ago
    No one in China was able to make a 360 controller bypass Microsoft's digital signature driver controls for their dongle for 18 years now. I think we're past the point of "someone will just hack it". Not going to hack it.
• baby 3y ago
  So should they just give up on cheating devices?
  • squigz 3y ago
    When it comes at the expense of legitimate user freedom, and is arguably useless? Probably.
    • endisneigh 3y ago
      Buy a gaming pc if you want freedom
      • solardev 3y ago
        What's the difference? An Xbox is essentially one already.
        • endisneigh 3y ago
          You don’t see the difference between an Xbox and a gaming pc running windows?
          • solardev 3y ago
            Not really? I bought an Xbox when I couldn't afford a gaming PC, but beyond that, they are very similar. Especially these days. Microsoft even sells a Xbox ultimate pass that works on PC and lets you play or stream many cross platform games. You can also play them on geforce now. Xbox to me is just a cheap gaming PC with a kiosk OS.
          • ToucanLoucan 3y ago
            Sure there's a difference, an XBox sucks. Besides that? Not particularly. The input devices are worse, the underlying hardware and software is worse, the fact it only supports a measly 60hz at 4K^1 blows. I used to love XBoxes and have many great memories of my original and 360, but ever since the XBox One it's just been a bloated, slow PC with a bad interface front for Windows. I own one because occasionally I like to play Halo 5. That's literally it. [1]: What Microsoft calls 4K which is like 2560x1440 upscaled slightly on the vast majority of games.*
            • JohnBooty 3y ago
              I'm not gonna disagree with your reasons for liking or disliking a gaming console. Gaming consoles are for fun, your preferences don't have to make logical sense. But... but ever since the XBox One it's just been a bloated, slow PC with a bad interface front for Windows. Huh? The original XBox and 360 were also slow (relative to higher-end PCs of their day) systems running Windows variants.
  • permo-w 3y ago
    in the hundreds of hours I've played of multiplayer console FPSs, which are what these controllers are marketed towards[1], I think I saw a player with a modded controller once. yes they got an advantage from it, but FPSs are mostly about how fast you can aim not how fast you can shoot, so it wasn't exactly game-breaking also in Call of Duty at least, often semi-auto fire rates are capped at a human level anyway even further, as far as I can see, you can't buy one of these controllers cheaply direct from china as you might expect to. from searching aliexpress and temu, I can only see a chipset for sale. it looks like your only option is to build one yourself or buy one custom built from a specialist site, but neither option is cheap and easy IANAL so I could be wrong about this, but I'm reasonably sure third party controller vendors operate in a somewhat legally grey area and could be exposing themselves to a nasty lawsuit if Microsoft or Sony took exception to them, which mitigates the problem basically it's barely a problem and this kind of action from microsoft is classic "product in decline" behaviour [1] - https://megamodz.com/instructions/ps4/mods https://megamodz.com/instructions/ps4/mods
    • mountainb 3y ago
      So, it is possible that the manufacturers are infringing in some way, shape, or form, but collecting a judgment on it or enforcing an injunction against a Chinese manufacturer or marketplace is not going to go anywhere. With software cheats, the lawsuits are usually over some kind of DMCA copyright protection circumvention, tortious interference, and the various generic unfair competition claims. For controller stuff and in certain software claims there might also be some patent issues there to raise in addition to those. Generally, the guys operating out of China etc. are not going to care that much because only their US-based accounts are going to be at the mercy of US courts. It is not even that straightforward to enforce US judgements in EU countries for various reasons (e.g. in Germany, to enforce the judgment, Germany must have close analogue of the underlying claim under its own law, and the German courts do not construe this liberally). I disagree that this is not a big problem. The cheat situation in online gaming probably worse now than it has ever been because the cheat providers have really succeeded in making them easy to use and access for the average user. IMO the companies brought it on themselves to some extent by breaking up the old decentralized server model, which was harder to use, but also was able to take advantage of massive numbers of volunteer moderators to regulate cheating and other bad behavior.
  • katbyte 3y ago
    Should have done this at the start of this generation before people invested in hardware which is now e waste
• jsiepkes 3y ago
  "Auto-fire is trivial to detect, as is a KBM setup where it doesn't belong" [..] "if they cared to disallow them after only a few minutes of profiling the player." Definitely not trivial and a gross over simplification. It will create a whole bunch of grey area's and endless tweaking. Which in turn will lead to people getting unfairly banned. Meaning Microsoft will then need to investigate these cases to unban them.
  • jasonjayr 3y ago
    Maybe don't ban them? Maybe mark them and force the player to explain the situation to their peers? Bans revoke products paid for, but marking suspects forces them to explain to their peers the situation and lets them make the decision.
    • rvba 3y ago
      > Maybe mark them and force the player to explain the situation to their peers? I imagined someone trying to explain to a bunch 12 year olds that they dont cheat, while the kids throw random insults. Or some random trolls who mark everything as a hack.
    • phone8675309 3y ago
      There have been several games that match suspected cheaters with other suspected cheaters, and I've always thought that was a pretty good solution.
      • karaterobot 3y ago
        That doesn't resolve the false positives, it just takes people who've been marked by an algorithm and puts them somewhere they're guaranteed not to have fun playing the game they bought.
• solardev 3y ago
  OK, maybe I'm biased here as a PC gamer who frequently uses a controller... but why not just allow both? Some games like Gears of War on Xbox already do this. Others, like Fortnite, offer crossplay and just show a symbol over each player's head. Do mouse and keyboard players have an advantage? Sure. So do players with bigger TVs or Series X graphics or less worn controllers or the Elite controller. Big deal? The PC ecosystem has had open control interfaces since forever, whether it's flight sticks or foot pedals or steering wheels or 3d controllers or all of the above. Both in coop and competitive games, people use whatever input devices they like (and can afford). Somehow the ecosystem hasn't collapsed. I love my Xbox controller, but it's simply an inferior input for shooters. It's superior in many other genres (action RPGs, driving and flight sims, arcade battles, side scrollers). It all evens out. I don't get the big deal here. Why purposefully handicap your player base instead of letting them use whatever they want? And autofire... eh, seems like a non issue. Why not just give the weapons a max semi auto fire rate?
  • butlike 3y ago
    The above-the-fold answer is "to not create an arms race" where one NEEDS to buy the keyboard and mouse in addition to the controller to be competitive. The below-the-fold answer, as others have said, is for profit.
  • narinxas 3y ago
    > Why purposefully handicap your player base instead of letting them use whatever they want? for the same reasons giant corps do anything: Profit! they think, and likely will, sell more "official" (i.e. premium price) controllers
    • HelloMcFly 3y ago
      Realistically though, how much financial upside can we possibly be talking about here? Many controllers the enable this "cheating" were also probably +1 buys as well, not lost sales of official accessories. I just have a hard time believing that controller hardware sales are the primary driver of this.
• erfgh 3y ago
  Anything is trivial to detect as long as the malicious party is not aware that you are detecting it.
• pandaman 3y ago
  First of all, it's definitely a "money grab". I am very surprised they allowed unlicensed controllers in the first place: other consoles used to make more from licensing accessories than from licensing software. I'd imagine they allowed it to sacrifice some profit to attract more customers with cheaper accessories and now they feel that they have enough customers already, very strange move at this point. However, the detection methods you described are very bad engineering. Any statistical method will have two types of errors: false positives and false negatives and you cannot eliminate either. Inevitable false positives will do much more damage to the consumer perception of the platform than any removal of third party controllers could possibly do.
• dangus 3y ago
  If this is really about cheating then the notice won’t appear for single player games.
• fra 3y ago
  I guarantee you that the total profit generated from selling XBOX controllers is immaterial to Microsoft. Anyone with an ounce of understanding of hardware business models will tell you that this has nothing to do with selling more controllers.
  • tennis_80 3y ago
    It looks pretty clear cut to me - and just because MS is massive doesn't mean that someone somewhere hasn't seen this as an opportunity to improve their personal / department KPIs. I'm not familiar with hardware business models though, so what do you think it is about instead? Reducing hardware cheating?
    • fennecfoxy 3y ago
      Potentially improving user experience but another big one is opening up consoles to the huge and still growing esports market. See super smash bros tournaments/other esports tournaments. Controllers are restricted to certain types. But tbf there's only so much that can be done with a controller, it's usually software based hacks that are the main problem.
  • doctorpangloss 3y ago
    Ah, I see you haven't ever stepped inside an Apple store, where DRMed dongles and cases are a multi-billion dollar business.
    • nemothekid 3y ago
      >Anyone with an ounce of understanding of hardware business models This line is important, as there is a clear difference between Apple's high margin, high markup hardware business, vs consoles which tend to be sold at cost, or even at a loss.
• crazygringo 3y ago
  I disagree completely -- there's no significant money to be made here. Microsoft wouldn't even bother if this were a financial play, it's so small. Not that many people use non-Xbox controllers to begin with, and whatever licensing fees Microsoft will charge manufacturers may very well be offset by the costs of running the licensing program itself. This seems very clearly to be anti-cheat. Advantages are not "trivial to detect" "after only a few minutes" -- there's tons of issues with false positives and false negatives. Any software detection, cheaters can learn how to go right up to the line but not cross it, and that still gives them big advantages, while genuinely really good players get unfairly banned. This is a single-purpose gaming console, not a general-computing device. One of the big benefits of console gaming is precisely protecting gamers against cheats, which makes it different from PC gaming. Microsoft wants a fair gaming experience for everyone, which makes it more fun for everyone who wants to play fair. If your idea of fun in gaming is cheating, then use a PC instead.
  • lxgr 3y ago
    > there's no significant money to be made here [...] Not that many people use non-Xbox controllers to begin with, and whatever licensing fees Microsoft will charge manufacturers may very well be offset by the costs of running the licensing program itself. Ah yes, original (or licensed) game console accessories, the well known non-profit operation... Yes, console prices are sometimes subsidized, but never accessories, quite the opposite. Or do you seriously believe that it costs MS or Sony $70 and more to manufacture a wireless gamepad?
    • com2kid 3y ago
      I actually used to work with the team who made Xbox 360 controllers. Things have probably changed in the decade since, but back then I was told that MS was only making $3 or $4 profit per controller sold. Money was made in volume, not on individual units. To explain this, imagine a consumer electronics device that costs $5 to make. The manufacturer then sells it to a distributor for $10. The distributor sells it to the store for $20. The store sells it to you for $40. The original company making the device only nets the $5, but that doesn't include other costs. For example any fancy in-stores displays stands are put there by the manufacturer and come out for their initial $5 cut.
• jasonladuke0311 3y ago
  > Auto-fire is trivial to detect How is this done? Input rate variability or something?
• 2close4comfort 3y ago
  WHQL - Gamer Edition! taxing hardware with cost increases passed on to the lucky consumers. Gee thanks Microsoft.
• Gibbon1 3y ago
  You could also just require that controllers be signed with a model type. Let the people organizing the game decide. Ya all want to play with cheats enabled on your Fuxsor Ceatboss 6000's. Go head.
• dumpsterdiver 3y ago
  I disagree with this take. If a small percentage of users still cheat / have an unfair advantage after this move, it’s still a win for Microsoft because they’ve significantly decreased that pool of people to the point that average players probably won’t encounter them often, and they’ve done it without incurring additional development costs. In my view this is clearly a move intended to solidify brand trust.
• clnq 3y ago
  > Auto-fire is trivial to detect Tell me you've never worked on an anti-cheat without saying you've never worked on an anti-cheat..... Why do you even say this if you really don't know it? In short - you don't want false positives with anti-cheat, you can tolerate some false negatives. Input timings and sequences are impossible to use for this, as button mashers (it's a pseudo-sport) can press buttons at up to 20 times a second - far faster than auto-fire would. Regularity of presses just takes care of the most obvious auto-fire, but once again - there isn't a clear human-robot threshold. And most auto-fire will be far on the human side. So you normally use a composite or layered approach. If there are enough signals of cheating on layer 1, you do more thorough checks on layer 2, 3, etc. The higher layers can be other players watching replays, ML, behavior-matching, and so on. Layer 1 can be "too lucky" checks, speed checks, ESP (extra-sensory perception/clairvoyance), altered memory, data packet manipulation, suspicious IPs, honey trap code paths/memory locations/impossible game states, skill inconsistencies, stupid values written into obfuscated memory, etc. All of those, by the way, have significant false positives on a large scale. But higher layers are almost always heuristics-based (human or machine), and with high false positives. So all together - not good, not easy. KM setup is easier to detect as there are certain expectations such a set-up must meet for the user, which are a different set of expectations from a controller. But it's still harder than one might think. Analog triggers can be simulated, noise can be introduced in smooth mouse movement, button presses that aren't feasible on a controller can be disabled on the keyboard, etc. Once again - the issue is with false positives. You don't want to ban a person because they play the game more "cheatey" naturally than the hardware that fakes it. Tamper-proof hardware with an auth mechanism is a really elegant solution for near 0% false positives. You can't mod a controller if you can't open it. And I suspect that players wouldn't mind buying such hardware if it put them in authenticated/cheat-free lobbies. What Microsoft might doing here is a slightly different topic. All I am saying is that anti-cheat is really not what you're saying it is.
• grepfru_it 3y ago
  >This is a money grab Found the person who hasn’t been tormented by a player with chronus DRM is bad though. The cognitive dissonance on this one shall be the tipping point