151–160 of 660 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suppose Valve, who trained a neural network to detect/ban cheaters exhibiting unnatural behavior.
It hasn't paid off very much, CS2 still has a rampant cheating problem. VAC has been a joke for years at this point.
Not a gamer - Is Steam basically a package manager like 'yum' or 'brew', but for games?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
l o l Fine, they'll gladly eat shit
How much shit, and how does it compare to the risk profile of, say, not wearing a five points seat belt and motorcycling helmet while driving, or a bulletproof vest when going to school, or an N95 mask literally everywhere? Security theorists are always ready to tell us about the horrifying risks of installing kernel-level code from a vendor, but can they actually quantify the likelihood times damage those billions o…
If you want to participate in a lot of these multiplayer games that place cheating far too highly, you can't use a hypervisor. You must have gaming device and computing device. They cannot be the same.
That's fine for most, but I consider it shit. VFIO makes it possible for a big computer to make a smaller gaming one. Ask me how I know.
My greater point is I don't care if I get cheated out of a finals match. I can actually speak from experience. I prefer autonomy over my devices. I kind of want to eat poop with them. A little.
I still hope someday the European Union forces Steam to allow transferring of games "owned", even if it's time-restricted (e.g. can't transfer the same game twice in a month)
If you want games that you can re-sell, you will have to keep buying them on physical media (or on appstores that don't have DRM like GOG)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Client Server architecture can still take you a long way. Culling what you send to the client and relying less on client-side "hiding" of state, server authoritative actions with client-side prediction, etc. At the end of the day someone could be using hardware "cheats" but you can get down to a pretty good spot to stop or disincentivize cheaters without running rootkits on their devices.
Latency significantly reduces the effectiveness of culling via the server. There will always be a place for client side anti-cheat if games are running on players' computers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suppose Valve, who trained a neural network to detect/ban cheaters exhibiting unnatural behavior.
It hasn't paid off very much, CS2 still has a rampant cheating problem. VAC has been a joke for years at this point.
VAC is a joke until they ban players and all start to cry on reddit/discord.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything says "wants to make changes to your device". I accidentally installed EAC that way.
It's worth noting that when you first install it, steam asks to install a service to assist with its duties, presumably for most install tasks. Steam has been around long enough and that service is now trouble free that it became part of the furniture most ignore as part of the background. That's aside from how users may be trained to hit 'yes' on any permission box that comes up to swat it away and play the game.
They do this because Steam was originally designed in the XP era when you could write whatever you want to Program Files without escalating to admin, and instead of refactoring where they put their files when Vista made the permissions more strict they started installing that backdoor service which lets them keep putting everything in Program Files without triggering UAC prompts all the time. It's a pretty gross and unnecessary hack, but I doubt they're ever going to fix it at this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Client Server architecture can still take you a long way. Culling what you send to the client and relying less on client-side "hiding" of state, server authoritative actions with client-side prediction, etc. At the end of the day someone could be using hardware "cheats" but you can get down to a pretty good spot to stop or disincentivize cheaters without running rootkits on their devices.
You don't need a "hardware cheat"; just a program that reads the memory representation of stuff. This is nothing new and already how many cheating tools work, and is exactly what all these anti-cheating things are designed to prevent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
l o l Fine, they'll gladly eat shit
How much shit, and how does it compare to the risk profile of, say, not wearing a five points seat belt and motorcycling helmet while driving, or a bulletproof vest when going to school, or an N95 mask literally everywhere? Security theorists are always ready to tell us about the horrifying risks of installing kernel-level code from a vendor, but can they actually quantify the likelihood times damage those billions o…
Good, the sooner devs realize they need to do server side properly, the better
It's impossible to prevent cheating from the server-side only. Something like an aimbot can operate purely on information you need to have as a client (to render the other players on the screen), and still be a huge advantage because it can respond faster than any human can.
They even claim to be able to fingerprint players according their playstyle, thwarting all methods of ban evasion. Skepticism should be abundant here, but this one of the oldest tricks in ML: categorization/clustering. I'm cautiously hopeful.
This would be server-side by nature.