The problem is that games like LoL or Valorant are kinda made so that you “need” to have a dedicated LoL PC. You’re not supposed to install these games on your main PC. Because these games are so highly competitive with real cash prizes involved, the devs ask for more control over your PC than typical games. It’s not a Windows vs Linux thing, it’s about control.
I’m not condoning this practice but it helps to understand why the situation is like this.
What percentage of players even do those competitive things though? Surely you could have an option to turn the orwellian anticheats off for regular players and only enabled for the sweaty wankers competitive players.
idk but there’s probably dozens of those. I don’t know what Rito are thinking and I kinda don’t want to. Intrusive anti cheat doesn’t work but those companies don’t care. Unfortunately, in the rat race between cheaters and anti cheat devs, actually developing a game solidly such that cheating is basically impossible has not been thought of yet. I also suspect “”“”““micro””“”“” transactions are a major driving factor here.
What do you mean it doesn’t work? As much as I hate having to keep a windows partition for the occasional game of league, Vanguard has made a huge difference in Masters+ games.
Anti-cheats will always be bypassed, also, you can have the cheats on a totally different computer (which can be a single board one too btw) that act as periferials so the game can’t even notice it…
Anti cheat will always be bypassed. BF6, requiring secure boot, had cheats during the open beta. And this will always be true due to the nature of how computers work. You would need to have a dedicated computing device that does nothing but play a specific game in order to ensure cheating isn’t possible; think tamagochi but for league of legends.
That doesn’t change the fact that there used to be a cheater every ~10 games, now I don’t think I’ve seen a single one since Vanguard. It doesn’t have to catch 100% of cheaters, if it went from catching 10% to 99.99% that’s a massive win.
honestly idk how much of a diff it makes and I really don’t care. I wholeheartedly disagree that it’s a massive win if the system catches a few cheaters if the system is designed around “guilty until proven innocent”.
It’s absolutely possible to design a game in a way that makes cheating basically impossible or severely nerfs it without an anti-cheat. And even if you didn’t want to do that, the fact that dedicated servers have become a incredibly rare sight also contributes to this issue.
It’s all for the bottom line. Spend as little time in development as possible and extract as much money from players as possible, at all costs.
I just can’t sit here and say kernel level anti-cheat is good if it works.
The problem is that games like LoL or Valorant are kinda made so that you “need” to have a dedicated LoL PC. You’re not supposed to install these games on your main PC. Because these games are so highly competitive with real cash prizes involved, the devs ask for more control over your PC than typical games. It’s not a Windows vs Linux thing, it’s about control.
I’m not condoning this practice but it helps to understand why the situation is like this.
What percentage of players even do those competitive things though? Surely you could have an option to turn the orwellian anticheats off for regular players and only enabled for
the sweaty wankerscompetitive players.It’s deeper.
The profit isn’t there, so they’re not going to do it.
idk but there’s probably dozens of those. I don’t know what Rito are thinking and I kinda don’t want to. Intrusive anti cheat doesn’t work but those companies don’t care. Unfortunately, in the rat race between cheaters and anti cheat devs, actually developing a game solidly such that cheating is basically impossible has not been thought of yet. I also suspect “”“”““micro””“”“” transactions are a major driving factor here.
What do you mean it doesn’t work? As much as I hate having to keep a windows partition for the occasional game of league, Vanguard has made a huge difference in Masters+ games.
Anti-cheats will always be bypassed, also, you can have the cheats on a totally different computer (which can be a single board one too btw) that act as periferials so the game can’t even notice it…
Anti cheat will always be bypassed. BF6, requiring secure boot, had cheats during the open beta. And this will always be true due to the nature of how computers work. You would need to have a dedicated computing device that does nothing but play a specific game in order to ensure cheating isn’t possible; think tamagochi but for league of legends.
That doesn’t change the fact that there used to be a cheater every ~10 games, now I don’t think I’ve seen a single one since Vanguard. It doesn’t have to catch 100% of cheaters, if it went from catching 10% to 99.99% that’s a massive win.
honestly idk how much of a diff it makes and I really don’t care. I wholeheartedly disagree that it’s a massive win if the system catches a few cheaters if the system is designed around “guilty until proven innocent”.
It’s absolutely possible to design a game in a way that makes cheating basically impossible or severely nerfs it without an anti-cheat. And even if you didn’t want to do that, the fact that dedicated servers have become a incredibly rare sight also contributes to this issue.
It’s all for the bottom line. Spend as little time in development as possible and extract as much money from players as possible, at all costs.
I just can’t sit here and say kernel level anti-cheat is good if it works.