6 ms·

What? The current PC gaming model where things run on a machine controlled by the user is fundamentally against solving the issue of cheats. You can't prevent e

What? The current PC gaming model where things run on a machine controlled by the user is fundamentally against solving the issue of cheats. You can't prevent everything server-side.

throwaway48476 2y ago
It's not about prevention, but detection.
- cobalt 2y ago
  and it is a cat and mouse game between cheat and game devs
- hypeatei 2y ago
  I'm not sure what point you're trying to make but in this context there is no difference. If you know someone is cheating, you prevent further cheating by banning them. Now I'll ask: how do you detect someone wall hacking automatically? No human review and no false flags. Go!
  - JoshTriplett 2y ago
    > how do you detect someone wall hacking automatically? You don't tell the client the location of anything they can't see.
    - babypuncher 2y ago
      This doesn't work well in real time games. The client needs to know another player is on the other side of that wall so it can * Play sounds from their actions * Actually be able to render them when either player comes around the corner without them obviously materializing out of thin air.
    - daedrdev 2y ago
      Far easier said than done
  - throwaway48476 2y ago
    A prevention model would be like the xbox where technical measures are used to prevent user code. A detection model is server side and detects anomalies for bans.
  - JoshTriplett 2y ago
    > If you know someone is cheating, you prevent further cheating by banning them. If you think it's statistically likely that someone might be cheating, but you're not sure, you can matchmake them with other people who might be cheating.
    - hypeatei 2y ago
      That seems flawed as you would punish people who are playing well. Statistics are great, but you'd inevitably match legitimate players with misfits, ruining their experience.
Brian_K_White 2y ago
Not our problem. The problem of cheating in games does not weigh more than the users ultimate ownership of and control over their own property. No one has a right to a business model. They can do plenty enough server-side. It's not a blocking problem at all, it's just easier to take over all control of the users pc for your own convenience. Everything, including all valid goals, is easier if you could just have the power to control whatever you want instead of having to cooperate and respect others and respect boundaries. It's no more valid than saying "Everything would be so much better if everyone would just do what I say.". Using that argument is invalid even if supposedly applied in service to some otherwise valid goal.
- babypuncher 2y ago
  If a game is overrun with cheaters, people will not play it. You're basically arguing that whole genres of games should cease to exist.
  - Brian_K_White 2y ago
    I'm saying no such thing. I'm saying that that wrong is no excuse for the other wrong. There are infinite ways to attack any problem, and it's not a requirement but a choice to persue only certain ideas vs others. For instance, these approaches are based on removing agency from all users for the supposed goal of dealing with the bad users. But there is no law of physics that says that is the only way to do that. You could go the opposite direction and empower all users to deal with bad actors themselves just like in real life where anbasshole simply gets avoided or punched in the nose, which works by the simple math that the bad actors are outnumbered by everyone else. They still always exist but they are relegated to operating in the corners and shadows. But their low level presence is a fact of life no matter what. Oppressive regimes don't get rid of them either. The sales pitch is we'll protect you but in fact they don't any better than you could have yoirself. A company that has an easier option and has no other value meter than money divorced from any consideration of how it is attained, simply has no incentive to bother doing anything but the easiest thing. That's the only reason they want the keys to your house, because you stupidly give them, not because they need them or have the tiniest right to demand them to protect their entertainment business.

What? The current PC gaming model where things run on a machine controlled by the user is fundamentally against solving the issue of cheats. You can't prevent everything server-side.

throwaway48476 2y ago

It's not about prevention, but detection.

cobalt 2y ago
and it is a cat and mouse game between cheat and game devs
hypeatei 2y ago
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make but in this context there is no difference. If you know someone is cheating, you prevent further cheating by banning them. Now I'll ask: how do you detect someone wall hacking automatically? No human review and no false flags. Go!
- JoshTriplett 2y ago
  > how do you detect someone wall hacking automatically? You don't tell the client the location of anything they can't see.
  - babypuncher 2y ago
    This doesn't work well in real time games. The client needs to know another player is on the other side of that wall so it can * Play sounds from their actions * Actually be able to render them when either player comes around the corner without them obviously materializing out of thin air.
  - daedrdev 2y ago
    Far easier said than done
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  A prevention model would be like the xbox where technical measures are used to prevent user code. A detection model is server side and detects anomalies for bans.
- JoshTriplett 2y ago
  > If you know someone is cheating, you prevent further cheating by banning them. If you think it's statistically likely that someone might be cheating, but you're not sure, you can matchmake them with other people who might be cheating.
  - hypeatei 2y ago
    That seems flawed as you would punish people who are playing well. Statistics are great, but you'd inevitably match legitimate players with misfits, ruining their experience.

Brian_K_White 2y ago

Not our problem. The problem of cheating in games does not weigh more than the users ultimate ownership of and control over their own property. No one has a right to a business model. They can do plenty enough server-side. It's not a blocking problem at all, it's just easier to take over all control of the users pc for your own convenience. Everything, including all valid goals, is easier if you could just have the power to control whatever you want instead of having to cooperate and respect others and respect boundaries. It's no more valid than saying "Everything would be so much better if everyone would just do what I say.". Using that argument is invalid even if supposedly applied in service to some otherwise valid goal.

babypuncher 2y ago
If a game is overrun with cheaters, people will not play it. You're basically arguing that whole genres of games should cease to exist.
- Brian_K_White 2y ago
  I'm saying no such thing. I'm saying that that wrong is no excuse for the other wrong. There are infinite ways to attack any problem, and it's not a requirement but a choice to persue only certain ideas vs others. For instance, these approaches are based on removing agency from all users for the supposed goal of dealing with the bad users. But there is no law of physics that says that is the only way to do that. You could go the opposite direction and empower all users to deal with bad actors themselves just like in real life where anbasshole simply gets avoided or punched in the nose, which works by the simple math that the bad actors are outnumbered by everyone else. They still always exist but they are relegated to operating in the corners and shadows. But their low level presence is a fact of life no matter what. Oppressive regimes don't get rid of them either. The sales pitch is we'll protect you but in fact they don't any better than you could have yoirself. A company that has an easier option and has no other value meter than money divorced from any consideration of how it is attained, simply has no incentive to bother doing anything but the easiest thing. That's the only reason they want the keys to your house, because you stupidly give them, not because they need them or have the tiniest right to demand them to protect their entertainment business.