5 ms·

> They don't want you to cheat Why do you think that is? I’m sure they wouldn’t bother with it if most gamers were fine playing against cheaters.

matheusmoreira 2y ago
It's my computer. I am the god of this machine. If something happens, it's because I will it. I get to read and write arbitrary memory if I want to. It's offensive to me that they even think I shouldn't have this power. Couldn't care less what their reasons are. Cheating? I don't care enough about most games to even consider it. I absolutely do consider it to be my prerogative, however. If they don't like it, they better run their "anticheat" nonsense on their computers, where it belongs. If they try to usurp control of my computer, I will do everything in my power to stop it. This is gonna turn into yet another example of illegitimate customers enjoying a superior product while paying customers get treated like dishonest criminals. Legitimate customers get DRM and anticheat rootkits, pirates and cheaters get none of that. Guess which side I want to be on?
- w0m 2y ago
  The issue w/ competitive gaming (League of Legends, Deadlock, Overwatch) is if you take advantage of your prerogative and cheat, you make the experience worse for everyone else; and it hurts the game itself. The sad state of existence is that if you want to run a multiplayer game, you need to do shitty/controlling things or the game will turn unplayable as soon as it starts to become popular. Games like BG3 however - Who cares if someone is cheating? Just stick to those (great) games if you want more control
  - matheusmoreira 2y ago
    It's unfortunate but at the end of the day they're just video games. They aren't worth sacrificing computer freedom over. We shouldn't end up becoming serfs in the digital fiefdoms of corporations just because people want to play online video games. These companies need to give up and let us play these things on our terms. I'd sooner see multiplayer games disappear than accept this sad state of affairs where our computers come pwned straight off the factory in order to please the so called stakeholders by denying us the freedom to do things that hurt their interests. That's a far more damaging outcome than silly video games becoming unplayable. Cheaters are a small price to pay for freedom and I pay it gladly. Besides, some games should be hurt. Plenty of "free" games out there employing literal gambling and drug dealer tactics to get people addicted to their product. Cheaters are doing us all a huge favor by speeding up their demise.
    - skeaker 2y ago
      I saw your point in your original post of being wary of what games you install since some come with crapware, but you've completely lost me here. For many people, perhaps even most people, the whole point of practicing their digital freedom and even owning a computer is to enjoy a game. The use of games in society and the use of anticheats to games is very obvious by every measure. Yes, don't install crap; no, multiplayer games shouldn't and aren't going anywhere.
      - matheusmoreira 2y ago
        Cheating at video games is actually an exercise in computer freedom. The game is running on my computer. As the owner of the machine, I can change its memory. I can change whatever I want. I should be able to do this. If you don't have the power to cheat at video games, it's because you do not actually control the machine. There's something above you preventing you from doing what you want. It's not your computer, it belongs to the game company. The computer does their bidding, not yours. So people are not "practicing their digital freedom", they are practicing only what the game company allows them to do. They don't "own a computer" either, the corporations own their computers, they're just letting people use them. In the end it's up to them to decide if games are worth their sacrifices. Personally I think that's an indignity. It means your PC is no different than a game console. I for one want to play games but don't want to make those sacrifices. I look for ways to make the game run on my terms instead of accepting the corporation's take it or leave it offer. It's pretty sad that people will just give up all their power just to play games but it can't be helped. I can only post these comments and try to convince others.
        skeaker 2y ago
        And murder is an exercise in bodily freedom. If my hands are tied so I can't murder people, I am not bodily free. Yes, you're correct, we shouldn't bind the hands of people. No, we shouldn't be arguing in favor of murder. That's where you lost me. Instead of arguing for cheating in games or for the death of all multiplayer games, argue for something like server side anti-cheat and rally against games that include crapware instead of saying things like (paraphrasing) "all multiplayer games should die for my sake." Seek nuance or find a middle ground instead of grandstanding on absolutism like this, it hurts your (fundamentally very good!) point.
- wqaatwt 2y ago
  > I don't care enough about most games to even consider it Well yes, but millions of people feel otherwise. Why do you think that game developers have some nefarious reasons for this and want to usurp your computer? To what ends? I mean sure the current approach is flawed in many ways however without it many multiplayer games couldn’t really exist in their current form i.e. public servers, matchmaking etc. would become near impossible since the experience for most users would become extremely unenjoyable. > pirates and cheaters get none of that True in regards to single player games but I’m not sure how do you think this would work for multiplayer games? How can cheaters bypass the anticheat root kits and still play onlie?
  - matheusmoreira 2y ago
    > Why do you think that game developers have some nefarious reasons for this and want to usurp your computer? Because that is what they do. They think we are all potential cheaters who need to be preemptively stopped and controlled lest we crack their games open. They feel absolutely justified in doing whatever it takes to "ensure" their precious games aren't "tampered with". There are no limits they wouldn't cross. It's just what I've come to expect from the copyright industry as a whole. Our computers already come pwned straight off the factory just to appease "content creators". We really don't need game companies making the situation even worse. > To what ends? It doesn't matter. The result is we have to install their rootkits to play games we paid for. There are no excuses for that. > many multiplayer games couldn’t really exist in their current form Not a big deal. Maintaining control over our machines is more important. If that's the price I'll pay it gladly. > How can cheaters bypass the anticheat root kits and still play onlie? You'd have to ask them. I'm far from an expert on the subject. I just know that whatever it is that they do no doubt leads to their customers having to put up with a lot less game company malware than they would have needed to otherwise.
    - ryandrake 2y ago
      Unfortunately, you're not going to change any minds here. I've tried and failed to take this principled stand here, too. People (especially gamers) are willing to excuse anything game companies do as long as they at least say it's in service of "preventing cheating." These rootkits are now considered the cost of admission to playing games, because gamers won't fight the practice, and they hate cheaters so much they are willing to accept anything. Also consider: HN is full of software developers. If it's a choice between "What Software Developers Want To Do To Your Computer" and "What Users Want To Stop Them From Doing," HN commenters tend to be strongly on the side of the developers.
- zzo38computer 2y ago
  I agree with you. However, if you want to run a tournament then you can go in the tournament room where they should have the computer without cheating software, so that can be the "anticheat", instead of installing unwanted software in your own computer.

matheusmoreira 2y ago

It's my computer. I am the god of this machine. If something happens, it's because I will it. I get to read and write arbitrary memory if I want to. It's offensive to me that they even think I shouldn't have this power. Couldn't care less what their reasons are. Cheating? I don't care enough about most games to even consider it. I absolutely do consider it to be my prerogative, however. If they don't like it, they better run their "anticheat" nonsense on their computers, where it belongs. If they try to usurp control of my computer, I will do everything in my power to stop it. This is gonna turn into yet another example of illegitimate customers enjoying a superior product while paying customers get treated like dishonest criminals. Legitimate customers get DRM and anticheat rootkits, pirates and cheaters get none of that. Guess which side I want to be on?

w0m 2y ago
The issue w/ competitive gaming (League of Legends, Deadlock, Overwatch) is if you take advantage of your prerogative and cheat, you make the experience worse for everyone else; and it hurts the game itself. The sad state of existence is that if you want to run a multiplayer game, you need to do shitty/controlling things or the game will turn unplayable as soon as it starts to become popular. Games like BG3 however - Who cares if someone is cheating? Just stick to those (great) games if you want more control
- matheusmoreira 2y ago
  It's unfortunate but at the end of the day they're just video games. They aren't worth sacrificing computer freedom over. We shouldn't end up becoming serfs in the digital fiefdoms of corporations just because people want to play online video games. These companies need to give up and let us play these things on our terms. I'd sooner see multiplayer games disappear than accept this sad state of affairs where our computers come pwned straight off the factory in order to please the so called stakeholders by denying us the freedom to do things that hurt their interests. That's a far more damaging outcome than silly video games becoming unplayable. Cheaters are a small price to pay for freedom and I pay it gladly. Besides, some games should be hurt. Plenty of "free" games out there employing literal gambling and drug dealer tactics to get people addicted to their product. Cheaters are doing us all a huge favor by speeding up their demise.
  - skeaker 2y ago
    I saw your point in your original post of being wary of what games you install since some come with crapware, but you've completely lost me here. For many people, perhaps even most people, the whole point of practicing their digital freedom and even owning a computer is to enjoy a game. The use of games in society and the use of anticheats to games is very obvious by every measure. Yes, don't install crap; no, multiplayer games shouldn't and aren't going anywhere.
    - matheusmoreira 2y ago
      Cheating at video games is actually an exercise in computer freedom. The game is running on my computer. As the owner of the machine, I can change its memory. I can change whatever I want. I should be able to do this. If you don't have the power to cheat at video games, it's because you do not actually control the machine. There's something above you preventing you from doing what you want. It's not your computer, it belongs to the game company. The computer does their bidding, not yours. So people are not "practicing their digital freedom", they are practicing only what the game company allows them to do. They don't "own a computer" either, the corporations own their computers, they're just letting people use them. In the end it's up to them to decide if games are worth their sacrifices. Personally I think that's an indignity. It means your PC is no different than a game console. I for one want to play games but don't want to make those sacrifices. I look for ways to make the game run on my terms instead of accepting the corporation's take it or leave it offer. It's pretty sad that people will just give up all their power just to play games but it can't be helped. I can only post these comments and try to convince others.
      - skeaker 2y ago
        And murder is an exercise in bodily freedom. If my hands are tied so I can't murder people, I am not bodily free. Yes, you're correct, we shouldn't bind the hands of people. No, we shouldn't be arguing in favor of murder. That's where you lost me. Instead of arguing for cheating in games or for the death of all multiplayer games, argue for something like server side anti-cheat and rally against games that include crapware instead of saying things like (paraphrasing) "all multiplayer games should die for my sake." Seek nuance or find a middle ground instead of grandstanding on absolutism like this, it hurts your (fundamentally very good!) point.
wqaatwt 2y ago
> I don't care enough about most games to even consider it Well yes, but millions of people feel otherwise. Why do you think that game developers have some nefarious reasons for this and want to usurp your computer? To what ends? I mean sure the current approach is flawed in many ways however without it many multiplayer games couldn’t really exist in their current form i.e. public servers, matchmaking etc. would become near impossible since the experience for most users would become extremely unenjoyable. > pirates and cheaters get none of that True in regards to single player games but I’m not sure how do you think this would work for multiplayer games? How can cheaters bypass the anticheat root kits and still play onlie?
- matheusmoreira 2y ago
  > Why do you think that game developers have some nefarious reasons for this and want to usurp your computer? Because that is what they do. They think we are all potential cheaters who need to be preemptively stopped and controlled lest we crack their games open. They feel absolutely justified in doing whatever it takes to "ensure" their precious games aren't "tampered with". There are no limits they wouldn't cross. It's just what I've come to expect from the copyright industry as a whole. Our computers already come pwned straight off the factory just to appease "content creators". We really don't need game companies making the situation even worse. > To what ends? It doesn't matter. The result is we have to install their rootkits to play games we paid for. There are no excuses for that. > many multiplayer games couldn’t really exist in their current form Not a big deal. Maintaining control over our machines is more important. If that's the price I'll pay it gladly. > How can cheaters bypass the anticheat root kits and still play onlie? You'd have to ask them. I'm far from an expert on the subject. I just know that whatever it is that they do no doubt leads to their customers having to put up with a lot less game company malware than they would have needed to otherwise.
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    Unfortunately, you're not going to change any minds here. I've tried and failed to take this principled stand here, too. People (especially gamers) are willing to excuse anything game companies do as long as they at least say it's in service of "preventing cheating." These rootkits are now considered the cost of admission to playing games, because gamers won't fight the practice, and they hate cheaters so much they are willing to accept anything. Also consider: HN is full of software developers. If it's a choice between "What Software Developers Want To Do To Your Computer" and "What Users Want To Stop Them From Doing," HN commenters tend to be strongly on the side of the developers.
zzo38computer 2y ago
I agree with you. However, if you want to run a tournament then you can go in the tournament room where they should have the computer without cheating software, so that can be the "anticheat", instead of installing unwanted software in your own computer.