221–230 of 412 posts
The best way to prevent cheating is by streaming games. Game streaming services are the future of multiplayer games. Edit: I mean cloud gaming like OnLive, not Twitch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aren't there massive video latency issues with this? People spend tons of money to get the absolute best frame rates and monitor response times, I can't imagine hardcore gamers wanting to have tens of ms additional latency in their gaming.
It levels the playing field and allows players to play with others around the world if streaming servers have better latency to each other than p2p.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm merely saying that they could have avoided some of the issues if they designed a new game from scratch.
These problems are inherent to nature of being in the real-time PvP genre. And AFAIK LoL was designed from scratch, it's Dota that actually based on the code of the WoW mod. Not that it matters today, that code is long gone.
Btw, you are thinking of Aeon of Strife (Starcraft mod). World of Warcraft hasn't even been released back then.
Back when I worked in games we would detect cheaters and then shadow ban. Quarantine them by only matching them into games with other cheaters. You may still have to ban them from certain elements of your game, like player economies (auction house, etc). But the more legitimate their experience looks the better. The idea is that instead of fully banning them and triggering the next iteration of the arms race, you tra…
This is a great technical breakdown of some modern high level approaches to common cheats. I think this the most transparent approach (even though the author admits leaving some detail out) to modern anti-cheat for massive multiplayer games. Good on riot for having an open dialogue about this. I don't think you'd ever see someone like Valve going a transparent route with something like this. (Not making a judgement o…
Fair context: I make cheats/utilities this exact game being talked about in this article, so perhaps my opinion on the subject is biased or even invalid. I partially disagree about the transparency of this article, while they do explain most of their approach to anti-cheat (and that is pretty cool for them to do), they seem to leave out any mention of anything that could be controversial. It suppose that it does make…
If "deems as suspicious" means "whatever the server tells it to send" I would be very concerned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've always been curious about this, do you get paid, and if so how?
People love cheating so much they pay for the tools to do so. The fact is 99 out of 100 banned users were actually banned for good reason and are lying about not cheating. Half of those will also dmit to cheating but beg for forgiveness as if they aren't quite literally destroying the game and everyone's enjoyment of it. That less than 1 percent that is truly innocent is nearly impossible to service because of all th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'd probably need at least some so that you don't lag every time the fog changes.
Increasing the server tick rate would help with that. AFAIK Starcraft, Dota2 and LoL all use 30Hz. FPS games usually use higher tickrates. Some fighting games enforce a constant amount of (input and network) lag to make the connection quality unimportant (up to a point).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It levels the playing field and allows players to play with others around the world if streaming servers have better latency to each other than p2p.
The latency from the player to the server still exists though so I dont see how this is going to solve any problems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wouldn't that run afoul of GDPR?
Not necessarily. GDPR isn't a blanket ban on collecting/using this info without consent, it's a policy that consent is required for non-essential collection/usage. You could argue that anti-cheat is essential for an online multiplayer game like this. I think it's sketchy to collect this much info, but I don't think it's explicitly illegal.
I think the real question is whether or not the information in question is personally identifiable information. If it's not, then GDPR doesn't apply. I think you could make a pretty strong argument that it doesn't apply, as long as you take pains to ensure that you can't identify the person from the information.