4 ms·

> Let me tell you a secret: it's because the gamers are demanding that. Citation needed. Whose these gamers ? I surely didn't ask for this neither any of the

by choo-t 2y ago

> Let me tell you a secret: it's because the gamers are demanding that. Citation needed. Whose these gamers ? I surely didn't ask for this neither any of the gamers I know, nor seen any demand about that in gaming forums. > The game companies couldn't care less if there are cheaters in the game, but it's the players which put huge pressure on the game companies to detect and ban cheaters. The jump from this to "requiring TPM" is quite a long one.

eezurr 2y ago
Go on steam and look at the recent reviews for older but still popular fps games. Gamers complain about cheaters constantly and will negatively review games cause of it
- choo-t 2y ago
  They're demanding a way to handle or ban cheater, not requiring TPM, that's a non sequitur.
  - RHSeeger 2y ago
    You're being disingenuous here, or just missing the point. The point being made was the gamers are demanding game developers stop cheaters... and that secure boot (and related ways to lock down the computer) is one of the primary tools they know to use to do that.
    - choo-t 2y ago
      > The point being made was the gamers are demanding game developers stop cheaters... and that secure boot (and related ways to lock down the computer) is one of the primary tools they know to use to do that. That's akin to saying that, as people want security on the street, mandatory strip search as soon as your exit your home is fair game. Asking for a result doesn't give a blank-check for all the measures taken toward this result.
      - RHSeeger 2y ago
        I agree, but it doesn't change the fact that it's one of the primary reasons they're doing it. And "strip searches on the street" may not happen, but "Stop and Frisk" certainly is/was. And it was very much done because people were complaining about crime and safety. And it was done regardless of whether or not it was right, or effective, or even legal.
  - brookst 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - choo-t 2y ago
      You cannot "prevent" cheating, you can at best mitigate it, it's a balance. There plenty of way to mitigate cheating in game, but the game industry is focusing on the ones where they don't bear the cost and only the customer will (and this view is in part due to the model of F2P games, where banning cheater is useless as it doesn't cost them anything to create a new account). Letting game developer having complete control and spying on the device playing the game is fine in a physical tournament were they provide the device, but it's insanity when it's the user own device in its home.
    - user_7832 2y ago
      > There is no technical way to prevent cheating in advance without secure boot. I'm not really sure I buy this. I can't really give a way that can guarantee no cheating but I know for example games like Genshin Impact run almost all the code (dmg calculation etc) server-side. Perhaps something that's an extension of Geforce Now might be the best "anti-cheat" technically speaking.
      - jprete 2y ago
        To run anti-cheat in that way, you need all game mechanics to be run server-side, and you need to not let the client ever know about something the player should not know - e.g. in a first-person shooter you need to run visibility and occlusion on the server too! Otherwise the cheating will take the form of seeing through walls and the like. This is going to boost the cost of the servers and probably any game subscription, and might lead to bandwidth or latency problems for players - just to avoid running any calculation that is relevant to game balance on player hardware.
        choo-t 2y ago
        Well yeah, that's the correct way to run a server, don't send information you don't want the user to get. But as you are pointing out, forcing client-side intrusive anti-cheat is cheaper, thus this as nothing to do about preventing cheating, but about reducing cost.
dmonitor 2y ago
Cheating in online games (especially ones that are free) is so absurdly rampant and disruptive that you can sell gamers just about anything if it can meaningfully deter cheaters. Every now and then a Youtuber will say “kernel level anti-cheat is bad for [reasons]” and gamers will pretend to care about it until the video leaves the “For You” page.
- beeboobaa3 2y ago
  [flagged]
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  Because a root kit is the only way to do anti cheat? CS2 ban wave begs to differ.
  - wredue 2y ago
    I haven’t played valorant, so I don’t know about them, but what I can say is that definitely other anti-cheats are highly ineffective (VAC being one that is highly ineffective), with blatant cheaters going years without ever being caught. Hell, blatant cheaters literally stream themselves cheating and their own communities do not recognize the cheating till the stream makes a mistake and selects the wrong scene. This also means that VAC methods of sending footage to random players is ineffective, as some streamers who are very obviously actually cheating do so in front of tens of thousands of people, and those people do not recognize the obvious cheating happening. We also know game companies don’t care about cheating, as activision admitted in their lawsuit that they leave cheaters on a safe list so long as the cheaters have any semblance of an audience streaming.
    - throw10920 2y ago
      > activision admitted in their lawsuit that they leave cheaters on a safe list so long as the cheaters have any semblance of an audience streaming That is absolutely wild, and completely characteristic of Activision. Do you have a link that I can share with my CoD-playing friends?
HideousKojima 2y ago
The real solution is letting players host their own servers and build their own communities of players they trust, but corps don't like giving that kind of freedom to users

by choo-t 2y ago

eezurr 2y ago

Go on steam and look at the recent reviews for older but still popular fps games. Gamers complain about cheaters constantly and will negatively review games cause of it

choo-t 2y ago
They're demanding a way to handle or ban cheater, not requiring TPM, that's a non sequitur.
- RHSeeger 2y ago
  You're being disingenuous here, or just missing the point. The point being made was the gamers are demanding game developers stop cheaters... and that secure boot (and related ways to lock down the computer) is one of the primary tools they know to use to do that.
  - choo-t 2y ago
    > The point being made was the gamers are demanding game developers stop cheaters... and that secure boot (and related ways to lock down the computer) is one of the primary tools they know to use to do that. That's akin to saying that, as people want security on the street, mandatory strip search as soon as your exit your home is fair game. Asking for a result doesn't give a blank-check for all the measures taken toward this result.
    - RHSeeger 2y ago
      I agree, but it doesn't change the fact that it's one of the primary reasons they're doing it. And "strip searches on the street" may not happen, but "Stop and Frisk" certainly is/was. And it was very much done because people were complaining about crime and safety. And it was done regardless of whether or not it was right, or effective, or even legal.
- brookst 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - choo-t 2y ago
    You cannot "prevent" cheating, you can at best mitigate it, it's a balance. There plenty of way to mitigate cheating in game, but the game industry is focusing on the ones where they don't bear the cost and only the customer will (and this view is in part due to the model of F2P games, where banning cheater is useless as it doesn't cost them anything to create a new account). Letting game developer having complete control and spying on the device playing the game is fine in a physical tournament were they provide the device, but it's insanity when it's the user own device in its home.
  - user_7832 2y ago
    > There is no technical way to prevent cheating in advance without secure boot. I'm not really sure I buy this. I can't really give a way that can guarantee no cheating but I know for example games like Genshin Impact run almost all the code (dmg calculation etc) server-side. Perhaps something that's an extension of Geforce Now might be the best "anti-cheat" technically speaking.
    - jprete 2y ago
      To run anti-cheat in that way, you need all game mechanics to be run server-side, and you need to not let the client ever know about something the player should not know - e.g. in a first-person shooter you need to run visibility and occlusion on the server too! Otherwise the cheating will take the form of seeing through walls and the like. This is going to boost the cost of the servers and probably any game subscription, and might lead to bandwidth or latency problems for players - just to avoid running any calculation that is relevant to game balance on player hardware.
      - choo-t 2y ago
        Well yeah, that's the correct way to run a server, don't send information you don't want the user to get. But as you are pointing out, forcing client-side intrusive anti-cheat is cheaper, thus this as nothing to do about preventing cheating, but about reducing cost.

dmonitor 2y ago

Cheating in online games (especially ones that are free) is so absurdly rampant and disruptive that you can sell gamers just about anything if it can meaningfully deter cheaters. Every now and then a Youtuber will say “kernel level anti-cheat is bad for [reasons]” and gamers will pretend to care about it until the video leaves the “For You” page.

beeboobaa3 2y ago
[flagged]
throwaway48476 2y ago
Because a root kit is the only way to do anti cheat? CS2 ban wave begs to differ.
- wredue 2y ago
  I haven’t played valorant, so I don’t know about them, but what I can say is that definitely other anti-cheats are highly ineffective (VAC being one that is highly ineffective), with blatant cheaters going years without ever being caught. Hell, blatant cheaters literally stream themselves cheating and their own communities do not recognize the cheating till the stream makes a mistake and selects the wrong scene. This also means that VAC methods of sending footage to random players is ineffective, as some streamers who are very obviously actually cheating do so in front of tens of thousands of people, and those people do not recognize the obvious cheating happening. We also know game companies don’t care about cheating, as activision admitted in their lawsuit that they leave cheaters on a safe list so long as the cheaters have any semblance of an audience streaming.
  - throw10920 2y ago
    > activision admitted in their lawsuit that they leave cheaters on a safe list so long as the cheaters have any semblance of an audience streaming That is absolutely wild, and completely characteristic of Activision. Do you have a link that I can share with my CoD-playing friends?

HideousKojima 2y ago

The real solution is letting players host their own servers and build their own communities of players they trust, but corps don't like giving that kind of freedom to users