6 ms·

The last missing piece for full Linux gaming is anticheat. Last I looked into it, the major vendors don’t want to support it due to lack of kernel security and

The last missing piece for full Linux gaming is anticheat. Last I looked into it, the major vendors don’t want to support it due to lack of kernel security and the ones that do, game devs refuse to allow it (destiny for example) One we can play AAA games I am literally ditching windows forever. Steamos is the best thing that has happened to gaming

fooqux 1y ago
Anti-cheat today is a stop-gap measure at best. For various reasons such as improved OS security and security concerns with this software, ring zero anti-cheat won't be around forever. Besides, it's a cat and mouse game where the vendor is the mouse. We already have the technology now to do it better. A combination of only sending what info a client should have, and server-side checks. As soon as something like UT ships with that built in we can hopefully forget about this horrible hack we currently have to check for cheats.
- hypeatei 1y ago
  As long as games are running on user hardware/OS, you'll always deal with cheating. Server-side checks and computation can only go so far. For example: in competitive shooters (where cheaters are most prevalent) you can't have things appearing out of thin air. The client needs to know about things ahead of time to play sounds and to give other environmental hints.
  - armada651 1y ago
    Exactly, nothing short of streaming the entire game fully rendered from the server will stop cheats. And even then you can probably still do aimbotting with modern day computer vision.
    - rowanG077 1y ago
      How exactly will it stop cheats? Any skill based game can still be cheated. Just analyze the video stream, or go even lower tech, point a camera at your screen. Many games can be effectively cheated like this. For eaxmple Aimbots in counter strike and peak human reflexes in dota/lol.
    - userbinator 1y ago
      This reminds me of a discussion around 2 decades ago, where someone showed a picture of his "undetectable aimbot" for a turn-based artillery game: a ruler, a page of charts, and a handheld calculator; followed by a copious amount of discussion of whether that was considered cheating.
      - ghthor 1y ago
        I hope this was for gunbound, lovers that turn based artillery game.
  - jay_kyburz 1y ago
    I've always thought the line about whats cheating, and what's not is unfair and arbitrary. How is it ok that some players can play 4k 200fps and others 1080p at 30fps. The only way to be really fair is for everybody to Stream the game at the same res, frame rate and latency.
    - armada651 1y ago
      This isn't exclusive to video games. Much of the improvements to world records in sports are due to improvements in gear, yet we don't consider those records to have been unfairly achieved. Some games do impose limits though, for example Overwatch doesn't allow you to use an aspect ratio larger than 16:9 and selecting a wider aspect ratio actually cuts down on your vertical field-of-view rather than granting you more horizontal field-of-view. This lessens the potential advantage of ultra-wide monitors.
    - ashikns 1y ago
      Yeah and in real world people from different countries with vastly different economic backgrounds compete on the same stage, I think video games are fine.
    - zrobotics 1y ago
      In certain competitive environments framerate is definitely limited. Here [0] are the rules for Fallout 4 any% speed runs, framerate must be capped at 60FPS. AFAIK that rule applies to all games in this engine due to physics behavior. I don't follow tournament FPS games, but it wouldn't shock me if there are rules for competitive play there as well. If you are asking why games like counterstrike don't have limits on online play, that's mostly a commercial question. Would those games be as popular if they limited performance to what was achievable for minimum specs? I certainly wouldn't want to play at 1920x1080 on my nice widescreen monitor, but setting the minimum to a $1500 monitor and the hardware to drive it would guarantee very few players. [0] https://www.speedrun.com/fallout_4?h=Any-Full-game&rules=game&x=z27g5642-e8mz7qn6.z19x4401 https://www.speedrun.com/fallout_4?h=Any-Full-game&rules=gam... Edit:typo
  - bloqs 1y ago
    so consoles are better
    - armada651 1y ago
      They are often more convenient and secure. If you don't mind a single-purpose device that severely limits your ability to modify your experience. Better is subjective after all.
    - zrobotics 1y ago
      How would consoles be any more immune to computer vision based cheating? Instead of feeding the output to a spoofed keyboard & mouse, you'd just be feeding it to a controller input. I'm not really seeing any difference in technical challenge here, and you wouldn't even need esoteric hardware since console controllers are USB devices anyways.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - literalAardvark 1y ago
        Since the hardware is better controlled and secured, and hardware attestation is a solved problem these days, it's not particularly difficult to enforce security to the point where you'd need to hardware hack a controller and connect it to a physical camera to bot. That's still gonna be annoying for players, but it'll greatly decrease incidence, and if reporting a player for botting requires buying and hacking a new controller... It should be quite effective.
        p_ing 1y ago
        Controller-based cheats have been around for awhile, like Cronus which allows scripted actions; reduced recoil in CoD, for example.
        literalAardvark 1y ago
        Sure, but that's because they're not protected. They could easily be protected.
  - Sammi 1y ago
    Surely the server can tell the client what sounds to play and what other environmental hints to do, just as well as the server can choose to tell the client where the other players are when they are in sight.
    - hypeatei 1y ago
      Maybe, but I think that would've been done already if it was feasible.
    - vel0city 1y ago
      If the server says "there are footsteps from these coordinates" then it's telling the client there's a person at these coordinates.
    - jayd16 1y ago
      The storage read, memory bandwidth, load computation, and gamethred pause to add the object to the game world is far more expensive than sending a move.
    - LocalH 1y ago
      Due to latency, the client has to at least do a little prediction.
- armada651 1y ago
  > Besides, it's a cat and mouse game where the vendor is the mouse. The goal of anti-cheat isn't to stop the world's most advanced cheaters. Those are already unstoppable because they now use Direct Memory Access over the PCI-E bus, so the cheats don't even run on the same computer anymore. However since those cheaters are few and far in-between they can be handled through player reports. The goal is to stop the mediocre cheater who simply downloaded a known cheat from a cheating forum. If you don't stop those you'll get such a large wave of cheaters that you can't keep up with banning them quickly enough.
  - alex77456 1y ago
    DMA hardware and cheats are getting more and more accessible. It's not just chosen few anymore
  - jsolson 1y ago
    > Those are already unstoppable because they now use Direct Memory Access over the PCI-E bus, so the cheats don't even run on the same computer anymore. Working on mostly server platforms, I had forgotten that IOMMU enablement (and, where relevant, enforcement) was not the default. Consumer hardware and software is terrifying.
    - cwillu 1y ago
      Not sure how that's relevant, unless you find it terrifying that owners of hardware have control over their hardware.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - dwattttt 1y ago
        It's your IOMMU, you can do what you want with it. Maybe you need to write heaps of stuff to take advantage of it, but what's new there? The only thing you're getting by saying "no IOMMU" is "I want any devices in my machine to be able to do anything, not just what I want them restricted to".
- chithanh 1y ago
  > Anti-cheat today is a stop-gap measure at best. For various reasons such as improved OS security and security concerns with this software, ring zero anti-cheat won't be around forever. I think that traditional kernel-level anticheat is going away. But the reason is more that when CrowdStrike caused mass outage, Microsoft stated that they want to provide standard interfaces for security sensors, and forbid kernel-level access otherwise (and anticheat can be considered a kind of security sensor too). If these interfaces become standardized then Valve/Linux could in principle implement them too.
- jekwoooooe 1y ago
  The goal isn’t to stop 100% of cheats but the majority of them and that’s fine. Either way, it’s the only thing stopping me from playing the rest of my games on steamos.
- NoPicklez 1y ago
  It might be a cat and mouse game, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying. Any anti-malware software ends up ultimately being a cat and mouse game, but that doesn't mean we stop updating our signature updates.
Cloudef 1y ago
Multiplayer games without dedicated servers is dead end anyways. I dont need a "anti-cheat" daemon hooking into kernel scanning files and other memory while playing a game. Communities in dedicated servers are much more efficient at moderating the player base than centralized match making ever will be.
- kgwxd 1y ago
  Yeah, but it's very time consuming/impossible to find similarly skilled players for a fun lobby. The only competitive game I care to play on Linux is Rocket League, which is nearly impossible to cheat at, so it doesn't currently have anti-cheat, but I wouldn't be surprised if Epic decides to put their beloved EAC in it at some point anyway, maybe even just because they hate Linux so much.
  - Moomoomoo309 1y ago
    EAC has a Proton-compatible version, actually. Even if they enable it, if they use that version, it'll work fine via wine/Proton.
- SchemaLoad 1y ago
  This is where I'm at with gaming. Even outside of cheating, it's not fun to me to be dumped in a game with screaming children/manchildren. If I'm playing a game I want it to be with my actual friends. And then I don't have to worry about them running cheats because I trust them. Once you get to match making, global ranks, etc it's just getting too sweaty and ruined by cheating/low trust/etc.
  - kjkjadksj 1y ago
    At least in TF2 the sweats are all on the community servers. I can get like 3 kills a round on skial servers. I’m trash there. When I use the valve matchmaking servers I dominate the lobby about half the time.
- ThatPlayer 1y ago
  Communities with dedicated servers include anti-cheat though. Most people aren't interested in spending time moderating a player base: they'd rather just play the game. So server admins use anti-cheat. You can see this in existing games with current games with community servers. GTA V's modded FiveM and CS2 Face-IT include more anti-cheats, not less.
0x38B 1y ago
This is problem for me and my brother right now. He's up at a remote job site and we want to play Siege or Apex together¹, but both require anti-cheat and don't support Linux. And I'm loathe to devote space on my SSD to Windows. ¹: Rainbow Six: Siege and Apex Legends, respectively.
boston_clone 1y ago
interestingly, I have no issues with the anti-cheat within Marvel Rivals; however, games that embedded an anti-cheat prior to the steam deck popularity don’t work as you described (PUBG, apex legends).
alex77456 1y ago
There are rumours of next xbox generation supporting steam platform and 386 architecture. I know it's a bit off topic, but it could be an elegant solution to the cheating problem, gradually move to standardised consoles. This could solve the dma problem too
ryukoposting 1y ago
Don't forget the ancillary applications that gamers want. If you follow Discord's website, you're gonna end up installing a DEB file manually. Then, every couple weeks, Discord won't launch until you go download another DEB file and install that. Oh, and good luck getting Discord screen sharing working on Wayland. I tried for hours, gave up, and switched to X11. So, just in Discord, we've already run into two hideous workflows that no Windows native is going to take in stride.
- The_SamminAter 1y ago
  Discord is shipped in a number of package managers (I don’t know the status for mainline apt repos). I know that this isn’t an easy solution/doesn’t go against your argument, because it isn’t download-and-run simple, but discord’s version can be modified with no consequences in a build_info.json file. I used to do it manually, back when they updated it every once-in-a-while, but due to their current tendency to push updates every few days or so, I’ve made a few-line bash script to fetch the latest version (thank you httptap) and patch the file for me. For screen sharing, I use whatever current discord client on GitHub supports it for Wayland, which usually has the added benefit of not limiting quality and framerate options. But yes, you do have a point, it’s not just ‘as simple’ as it is under Windows - when Windows works properly.
- danielbarla 1y ago
  And certain types of games have a _ton_ of ancillary applications. For flight simulation, I rely on 2-3 additional contollers, some of which I am fairly certain either won't have driver support, or at the very least will have some major issues with the GUI and configuration. Then, there are things like head tracking which are either another dedicated peripheral which may or may not get drivers, or a set of apps which feed from a webcam and output the signal to a standard driver that games know to check for. Finally, most 3rd party add-ons have custom installers, and I'm guessing most of them won't have a working Linux version. So, while I'm sure it's possible to run, say, a vanilla X-Plane on a non-Windows installation with no peripherals/apps/add-ons, I just see a mountain of work to get a normal, heavily custom installation working.
- Ferret7446 1y ago
preisschild 1y ago
AFAIK most anti cheats such as BattlEye actually work under Proton, but the Game Developers have to write to the Anticheat vendor that they want to opt-in into allowing Proton.
akimbostrawman 1y ago
>the major vendors don’t want to support it The two most popular ACs by far are Easy anti cheat and Battle eye which have natively supported Linux for years, but it is entirely up to the game devs to enable it. About 40% of all games with AC are working areweanticheatyet.com
JeremyNT 1y ago
Don't discount peripheral support. I've got some pieces of hardware that are only kinda-sorta supported in Linux. Not a big issue if you're just using kb/mouse/controller but you can get into the weeds with VR, flight sticks, wheels, etc.
bsimpson 1y ago
It's also an anticompetitive red herring, at least for Epic. They say they don't support Linux because it's too complicated to be worth the ROI. Really, it's that they don't want to boost a platform where Steam is far and away the default store.
- WorldMaker 1y ago
  This is especially relevant to note because Epic bought and owns Easy Anti-Cheat (EAC) one of the currently most popular anti-cheats in AAA. ETA: EAC still supports Linux gaming today, but the rumors remain that Epic could remove that at their whim.
- happymellon 1y ago
  Epic are a hostile company. Just avoid it.
mystified5016 1y ago
Missing anti-cheat is a feature, not a bug. Linux not allowing games to install kernel malware is a good thing.
- ladyanita22 1y ago
  Linux definitely allows it.
WorldMaker 1y ago
It's funny because one of the OG draws to Steam back in the day was because Counter-Strike (et al) had the superior Valve Anti-Cheat (VAC) in Steam copies than the myriad of raw CD installs of HL1 plus the mods to run Counter-Strike. This missing piece is sort of a fun "whatever happened to VAC and why hasn't it kept up with the times?" It seems like Linux would be a good excuse to reinvest in VAC and make it a bigger competitor to the current favorites like Easy Anti-Cheat (EAC).

fooqux 1y ago

Anti-cheat today is a stop-gap measure at best. For various reasons such as improved OS security and security concerns with this software, ring zero anti-cheat won't be around forever. Besides, it's a cat and mouse game where the vendor is the mouse. We already have the technology now to do it better. A combination of only sending what info a client should have, and server-side checks. As soon as something like UT ships with that built in we can hopefully forget about this horrible hack we currently have to check for cheats.

hypeatei 1y ago
As long as games are running on user hardware/OS, you'll always deal with cheating. Server-side checks and computation can only go so far. For example: in competitive shooters (where cheaters are most prevalent) you can't have things appearing out of thin air. The client needs to know about things ahead of time to play sounds and to give other environmental hints.
- armada651 1y ago
  Exactly, nothing short of streaming the entire game fully rendered from the server will stop cheats. And even then you can probably still do aimbotting with modern day computer vision.
  - rowanG077 1y ago
    How exactly will it stop cheats? Any skill based game can still be cheated. Just analyze the video stream, or go even lower tech, point a camera at your screen. Many games can be effectively cheated like this. For eaxmple Aimbots in counter strike and peak human reflexes in dota/lol.
  - userbinator 1y ago
    This reminds me of a discussion around 2 decades ago, where someone showed a picture of his "undetectable aimbot" for a turn-based artillery game: a ruler, a page of charts, and a handheld calculator; followed by a copious amount of discussion of whether that was considered cheating.
    - ghthor 1y ago
      I hope this was for gunbound, lovers that turn based artillery game.
- jay_kyburz 1y ago
  I've always thought the line about whats cheating, and what's not is unfair and arbitrary. How is it ok that some players can play 4k 200fps and others 1080p at 30fps. The only way to be really fair is for everybody to Stream the game at the same res, frame rate and latency.
  - armada651 1y ago
    This isn't exclusive to video games. Much of the improvements to world records in sports are due to improvements in gear, yet we don't consider those records to have been unfairly achieved. Some games do impose limits though, for example Overwatch doesn't allow you to use an aspect ratio larger than 16:9 and selecting a wider aspect ratio actually cuts down on your vertical field-of-view rather than granting you more horizontal field-of-view. This lessens the potential advantage of ultra-wide monitors.
  - ashikns 1y ago
    Yeah and in real world people from different countries with vastly different economic backgrounds compete on the same stage, I think video games are fine.
  - zrobotics 1y ago
    In certain competitive environments framerate is definitely limited. Here [0] are the rules for Fallout 4 any% speed runs, framerate must be capped at 60FPS. AFAIK that rule applies to all games in this engine due to physics behavior. I don't follow tournament FPS games, but it wouldn't shock me if there are rules for competitive play there as well. If you are asking why games like counterstrike don't have limits on online play, that's mostly a commercial question. Would those games be as popular if they limited performance to what was achievable for minimum specs? I certainly wouldn't want to play at 1920x1080 on my nice widescreen monitor, but setting the minimum to a $1500 monitor and the hardware to drive it would guarantee very few players. [0] https://www.speedrun.com/fallout_4?h=Any-Full-game&rules=game&x=z27g5642-e8mz7qn6.z19x4401 https://www.speedrun.com/fallout_4?h=Any-Full-game&rules=gam... Edit:typo
- bloqs 1y ago
  so consoles are better
  - armada651 1y ago
    They are often more convenient and secure. If you don't mind a single-purpose device that severely limits your ability to modify your experience. Better is subjective after all.
  - zrobotics 1y ago
    How would consoles be any more immune to computer vision based cheating? Instead of feeding the output to a spoofed keyboard & mouse, you'd just be feeding it to a controller input. I'm not really seeing any difference in technical challenge here, and you wouldn't even need esoteric hardware since console controllers are USB devices anyways.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - literalAardvark 1y ago
      Since the hardware is better controlled and secured, and hardware attestation is a solved problem these days, it's not particularly difficult to enforce security to the point where you'd need to hardware hack a controller and connect it to a physical camera to bot. That's still gonna be annoying for players, but it'll greatly decrease incidence, and if reporting a player for botting requires buying and hacking a new controller... It should be quite effective.
      - p_ing 1y ago
        Controller-based cheats have been around for awhile, like Cronus which allows scripted actions; reduced recoil in CoD, for example.
        literalAardvark 1y ago
        Sure, but that's because they're not protected. They could easily be protected.
- Sammi 1y ago
  Surely the server can tell the client what sounds to play and what other environmental hints to do, just as well as the server can choose to tell the client where the other players are when they are in sight.
  - hypeatei 1y ago
    Maybe, but I think that would've been done already if it was feasible.
  - vel0city 1y ago
    If the server says "there are footsteps from these coordinates" then it's telling the client there's a person at these coordinates.
  - jayd16 1y ago
    The storage read, memory bandwidth, load computation, and gamethred pause to add the object to the game world is far more expensive than sending a move.
  - LocalH 1y ago
    Due to latency, the client has to at least do a little prediction.
armada651 1y ago
> Besides, it's a cat and mouse game where the vendor is the mouse. The goal of anti-cheat isn't to stop the world's most advanced cheaters. Those are already unstoppable because they now use Direct Memory Access over the PCI-E bus, so the cheats don't even run on the same computer anymore. However since those cheaters are few and far in-between they can be handled through player reports. The goal is to stop the mediocre cheater who simply downloaded a known cheat from a cheating forum. If you don't stop those you'll get such a large wave of cheaters that you can't keep up with banning them quickly enough.
- alex77456 1y ago
  DMA hardware and cheats are getting more and more accessible. It's not just chosen few anymore
- jsolson 1y ago
  > Those are already unstoppable because they now use Direct Memory Access over the PCI-E bus, so the cheats don't even run on the same computer anymore. Working on mostly server platforms, I had forgotten that IOMMU enablement (and, where relevant, enforcement) was not the default. Consumer hardware and software is terrifying.
  - cwillu 1y ago
    Not sure how that's relevant, unless you find it terrifying that owners of hardware have control over their hardware.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - dwattttt 1y ago
      It's your IOMMU, you can do what you want with it. Maybe you need to write heaps of stuff to take advantage of it, but what's new there? The only thing you're getting by saying "no IOMMU" is "I want any devices in my machine to be able to do anything, not just what I want them restricted to".
chithanh 1y ago
> Anti-cheat today is a stop-gap measure at best. For various reasons such as improved OS security and security concerns with this software, ring zero anti-cheat won't be around forever. I think that traditional kernel-level anticheat is going away. But the reason is more that when CrowdStrike caused mass outage, Microsoft stated that they want to provide standard interfaces for security sensors, and forbid kernel-level access otherwise (and anticheat can be considered a kind of security sensor too). If these interfaces become standardized then Valve/Linux could in principle implement them too.
jekwoooooe 1y ago
The goal isn’t to stop 100% of cheats but the majority of them and that’s fine. Either way, it’s the only thing stopping me from playing the rest of my games on steamos.
NoPicklez 1y ago
It might be a cat and mouse game, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying. Any anti-malware software ends up ultimately being a cat and mouse game, but that doesn't mean we stop updating our signature updates.

Cloudef 1y ago

Multiplayer games without dedicated servers is dead end anyways. I dont need a "anti-cheat" daemon hooking into kernel scanning files and other memory while playing a game. Communities in dedicated servers are much more efficient at moderating the player base than centralized match making ever will be.

kgwxd 1y ago
Yeah, but it's very time consuming/impossible to find similarly skilled players for a fun lobby. The only competitive game I care to play on Linux is Rocket League, which is nearly impossible to cheat at, so it doesn't currently have anti-cheat, but I wouldn't be surprised if Epic decides to put their beloved EAC in it at some point anyway, maybe even just because they hate Linux so much.
- Moomoomoo309 1y ago
  EAC has a Proton-compatible version, actually. Even if they enable it, if they use that version, it'll work fine via wine/Proton.
SchemaLoad 1y ago
This is where I'm at with gaming. Even outside of cheating, it's not fun to me to be dumped in a game with screaming children/manchildren. If I'm playing a game I want it to be with my actual friends. And then I don't have to worry about them running cheats because I trust them. Once you get to match making, global ranks, etc it's just getting too sweaty and ruined by cheating/low trust/etc.
- kjkjadksj 1y ago
  At least in TF2 the sweats are all on the community servers. I can get like 3 kills a round on skial servers. I’m trash there. When I use the valve matchmaking servers I dominate the lobby about half the time.
ThatPlayer 1y ago
Communities with dedicated servers include anti-cheat though. Most people aren't interested in spending time moderating a player base: they'd rather just play the game. So server admins use anti-cheat. You can see this in existing games with current games with community servers. GTA V's modded FiveM and CS2 Face-IT include more anti-cheats, not less.

0x38B 1y ago

This is problem for me and my brother right now. He's up at a remote job site and we want to play Siege or Apex together¹, but both require anti-cheat and don't support Linux. And I'm loathe to devote space on my SSD to Windows. ¹: Rainbow Six: Siege and Apex Legends, respectively.

boston_clone 1y ago

interestingly, I have no issues with the anti-cheat within Marvel Rivals; however, games that embedded an anti-cheat prior to the steam deck popularity don’t work as you described (PUBG, apex legends).

alex77456 1y ago

There are rumours of next xbox generation supporting steam platform and 386 architecture. I know it's a bit off topic, but it could be an elegant solution to the cheating problem, gradually move to standardised consoles. This could solve the dma problem too

ryukoposting 1y ago

Don't forget the ancillary applications that gamers want. If you follow Discord's website, you're gonna end up installing a DEB file manually. Then, every couple weeks, Discord won't launch until you go download another DEB file and install that. Oh, and good luck getting Discord screen sharing working on Wayland. I tried for hours, gave up, and switched to X11. So, just in Discord, we've already run into two hideous workflows that no Windows native is going to take in stride.

The_SamminAter 1y ago
Discord is shipped in a number of package managers (I don’t know the status for mainline apt repos). I know that this isn’t an easy solution/doesn’t go against your argument, because it isn’t download-and-run simple, but discord’s version can be modified with no consequences in a build_info.json file. I used to do it manually, back when they updated it every once-in-a-while, but due to their current tendency to push updates every few days or so, I’ve made a few-line bash script to fetch the latest version (thank you httptap) and patch the file for me. For screen sharing, I use whatever current discord client on GitHub supports it for Wayland, which usually has the added benefit of not limiting quality and framerate options. But yes, you do have a point, it’s not just ‘as simple’ as it is under Windows - when Windows works properly.
danielbarla 1y ago
And certain types of games have a _ton_ of ancillary applications. For flight simulation, I rely on 2-3 additional contollers, some of which I am fairly certain either won't have driver support, or at the very least will have some major issues with the GUI and configuration. Then, there are things like head tracking which are either another dedicated peripheral which may or may not get drivers, or a set of apps which feed from a webcam and output the signal to a standard driver that games know to check for. Finally, most 3rd party add-ons have custom installers, and I'm guessing most of them won't have a working Linux version. So, while I'm sure it's possible to run, say, a vanilla X-Plane on a non-Windows installation with no peripherals/apps/add-ons, I just see a mountain of work to get a normal, heavily custom installation working.
Ferret7446 1y ago

preisschild 1y ago

AFAIK most anti cheats such as BattlEye actually work under Proton, but the Game Developers have to write to the Anticheat vendor that they want to opt-in into allowing Proton.

akimbostrawman 1y ago

>the major vendors don’t want to support it The two most popular ACs by far are Easy anti cheat and Battle eye which have natively supported Linux for years, but it is entirely up to the game devs to enable it. About 40% of all games with AC are working areweanticheatyet.com

JeremyNT 1y ago

Don't discount peripheral support. I've got some pieces of hardware that are only kinda-sorta supported in Linux. Not a big issue if you're just using kb/mouse/controller but you can get into the weeds with VR, flight sticks, wheels, etc.

bsimpson 1y ago

It's also an anticompetitive red herring, at least for Epic. They say they don't support Linux because it's too complicated to be worth the ROI. Really, it's that they don't want to boost a platform where Steam is far and away the default store.

WorldMaker 1y ago
This is especially relevant to note because Epic bought and owns Easy Anti-Cheat (EAC) one of the currently most popular anti-cheats in AAA. ETA: EAC still supports Linux gaming today, but the rumors remain that Epic could remove that at their whim.
happymellon 1y ago
Epic are a hostile company. Just avoid it.

mystified5016 1y ago

Missing anti-cheat is a feature, not a bug. Linux not allowing games to install kernel malware is a good thing.

ladyanita22 1y ago
Linux definitely allows it.

WorldMaker 1y ago

It's funny because one of the OG draws to Steam back in the day was because Counter-Strike (et al) had the superior Valve Anti-Cheat (VAC) in Steam copies than the myriad of raw CD installs of HL1 plus the mods to run Counter-Strike. This missing piece is sort of a fun "whatever happened to VAC and why hasn't it kept up with the times?" It seems like Linux would be a good excuse to reinvest in VAC and make it a bigger competitor to the current favorites like Easy Anti-Cheat (EAC).