Somehow, I think inflicting a rootkit on consumers that don't understand how intrusive it is, especially when a significant number of them are children, is not going to end well. This is malicious and a massive overreach.
Every Korean game already does this and most people really don't care. For example: League of Legends, Valorant, Black Desert Online, all have very intrusive anti-cheat already and is the norm.
You always see huge backlash on the internet, but you never see low player counts.
While I don't particularly like this sort of anti-cheat, I think we should all be more worried about cloud gaming than anything else. It's been obvious for a while that the big gaming companies have it in mind, and the only reason it isn't as big as it could be, is due to tech limitations FOR NOW. When (not if) cloud gaming truly takes off, and it will, we'll lose any and all control over our games. So long to moddin…
AFAIK cloud gaming hasn't shown any signs of "taking off" so far, despite many desperate attempts. I think we're safe for a while. And even if, there will be new game companies discovering that now free niche of "cloud free gaming". Some of the other problems you describe already exist for locally installed games though (e.g. most multiplayer games are useless when their matchmaking servers are switched off).
I fear with install sizes getting g bigger and bigger with no signs of slowing down, game streaming will become more attractive to more people in the coming years
While I don't particularly like this sort of anti-cheat, I think we should all be more worried about cloud gaming than anything else. It's been obvious for a while that the big gaming companies have it in mind, and the only reason it isn't as big as it could be, is due to tech limitations FOR NOW. When (not if) cloud gaming truly takes off, and it will, we'll lose any and all control over our games. So long to moddin…
AFAIK cloud gaming hasn't shown any signs of "taking off" so far, despite many desperate attempts. I think we're safe for a while. And even if, there will be new game companies discovering that now free niche of "cloud free gaming". Some of the other problems you describe already exist for locally installed games though (e.g. most multiplayer games are useless when their matchmaking servers are switched off).
> AFAIK cloud gaming hasn't shown any signs of "taking off" so far, despite many desperate attempts. I think we're safe for a while.
Are you kidding? What's the most recent game you have that will let you set up a non-hotseat multiplayer game involving only computers you control?
These sorts of things always get circumvented, but I wish the CoD players fun during the 1-2 week gap where the cheaters are still figuring it out. I've actually figured out the permanent solution to cheaters. Oddly enough, I worked it out in Pokemon Unite, which doesn't have a cheating problem as far as I know, but does have items that you can buy to boost your character stats. The solution is easy: play a game with…
> The solution is easy: play a game with a good ranking system
A lot of games do this, and the cheater’s response is to deliberately lose a bunch of games so that they drop down to the lower leagues, where they can more effectively harass the noobs
I wonder if the scale of cheating in games like CoD Warzone tends to be inflated due to skill-based match-making which would tend to put cheaters (with high kill/death ratios) with content creators (who tend to be good), who go on to complain about it and get millions (/billions?) of views. My anecdata is that I'm a very average player and I haven't noticed any cheaters in lobbies for at least 24 hours of play time which seems at least an order of magnitude longer than the MTBC (mean time between cheaters -_-) for a content creator.
>It's been obvious for a while that the big gaming companies have it in mind, and the only reason it isn't as big as it could be, is due to tech limitations FOR NOW. I'll begin to worry when the speed of light increases, making gaming through streaming practical.
Indeed. Multiplayer network lag is one thing, but network lag between INPUT and SCREEN is preposterous.
There is sub 100ms input lag in good conditions with cloud gaming, and it goes as low as 60, and it will be better as more servers come online as everything from gets optimized for latency. Is it worse than PC with same games? Yes. Is it worse than game consoles? Not really. But it removes whole sets of "who shot first" problems, and if we are talking about actual latency for your decision to take effect(input lag+network lag) cloud might just be better in many scenarios.
AFAIK cloud gaming hasn't shown any signs of "taking off" so far, despite many desperate attempts. I think we're safe for a while. And even if, there will be new game companies discovering that now free niche of "cloud free gaming". Some of the other problems you describe already exist for locally installed games though (e.g. most multiplayer games are useless when their matchmaking servers are switched off).
> AFAIK cloud gaming hasn't shown any signs of "taking off" so far, despite many desperate attempts. I think we're safe for a while. Are you kidding? What's the most recent game you have that will let you set up a non-hotseat multiplayer game involving only computers you control?
I guess we're talking about different things then. I understand "cloud gaming" as Stadia, (or the older attempt Onlive), where the game is running on machines in datacenters and sends a video stream to the user.
AFAIK cloud gaming hasn't shown any signs of "taking off" so far, despite many desperate attempts. I think we're safe for a while. And even if, there will be new game companies discovering that now free niche of "cloud free gaming". Some of the other problems you describe already exist for locally installed games though (e.g. most multiplayer games are useless when their matchmaking servers are switched off).
I fear with install sizes getting g bigger and bigger with no signs of slowing down, game streaming will become more attractive to more people in the coming years
A middle way would be to stream assets from the internet as needed, but run the game locally (basically the internet becomes the hard disk, and the hard disk just an additional cache level). This may require designing games for this asset loading strategy from the ground up though (on the other hand, this was always the case that games had to designed around the limitations of their storage device, especially in the game console world).
It's a cat-and-mouse game, where the mice basically have infinite time to spend on anti-anti-cheat... and dare I say it, countless young people probably got their head start in learning about computers, programming, reverse-engineering, etc. by playing this "meta-game". I know some people who were otherwise completely uninterested in the typical STEM courses at school, but highly skilled at the sort of low-level know…
Self-taught but that's how I got started early on https://github.com/cheat-engine/cheat-engine
Same, started learning on Cheat Engine and flash games, and it made me interested in the whole memory editing thing.
Too bad now you have to learn how to decompile a kernel driver and how to bypass that just to try and make a basic trainer.
If this happens enough, then a Windows gaming PC becomes a very expensive console. If all I do on my PC is game, then it doesn't really matter if it's got a rootkit (or kernel-level anti-cheat driver) or not. But, that's an expensive console. $600 - $2,000, depending on how nicely you want to game. A lot of the big popular online game culture really isn't fun anyway, so I'm not sure it's much of a loss.
Online gaming doesn't necessarily mean competitive PvP. Co-op tends to be a lot less toxic.
Indeed, but then there is less need for anti-cheat in co-op.