Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

iliana.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 258 posts

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#221

Post by pjmlp »

brnt wrote: post #217
pjmlp wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why GNU/Linux gaming is stuck on 2%, and needs to emulate Windows APIs. Valve only stresses the relevance of Windows.

The Steam user survey isnt a representative number. An API isn't emulated, it's implemented, it's no more or less native than Windows itself. In various benchmarks Proton is now outperforming Windows. There is no need for it anymore, outside some niche applications.

Statistics only matter when they make our case, yeah.

I know pretty well how Proton works.

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#222

Post by kaetemi »

yatac42 wrote: post #33
kaetemi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they could just not trust the clients, instead of throwing the problem over the wall. A lot of these games with fancy anti cheat protection the cheat tools basically just tell the server "spawn me a vehicle right here" and the server just does it. Garbage.

> A lot of these games with fancy anti cheat protection the cheat tools basically just tell the server "spawn me a vehicle right here" and the server just does it. Citation needed. I'd be quite surprised if it were common for servers of professional games to trust the client in that sense (i.e. allowing it to decide game logic like what gets spawned where). As far as I'm aware the most common types of multiplayer che…

Look up BF2. Cheat tools would just disable limits locally on ammo requests, vehicle requests, artillery strikes, and so on. Server didn't check anything. It had fancy anti-cheat tech. Which was bypassed by just writing and restoring executable memory changes faster than the anti cheat detected.

Things are certainly not always as professional as they appear to be.

Visibility test is definitely feasible against wallhacks, it's not that expensive.

Aimbot is an assist cheat, which technically does not violate the physical rules of the game, so you are right that it's more difficult to detect. One solution to detect this class of cheating is to record the player's movement, and rely on a combination of outlier scores and outlier movement behavior to detect abuse. It's not watertight, but neither are any of these client side anti-cheat detection schemes.

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#223

Post by kaetemi »

doublepg23 wrote: post #26
kaetemi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they could just not trust the clients, instead of throwing the problem over the wall. A lot of these games with fancy anti cheat protection the cheat tools basically just tell the server "spawn me a vehicle right here" and the server just does it. Garbage.

Wow, it’s awesome you’ve solved the entirety of multiplayer gaming. Here I was thinking anti-cheating measures was a complex topic but it’s great you’ve elucidated me.

Well, it's definitely not solved by throwing the problem over the wall and praying that anti-cheat tools aren't broken as easily as your game.

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#224

Post by kaetemi »

j1elo wrote: post #41
kaetemi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they could just not trust the clients, instead of throwing the problem over the wall. A lot of these games with fancy anti cheat protection the cheat tools basically just tell the server "spawn me a vehicle right here" and the server just does it. Garbage.

"just" is (tongue in cheek) a forbidden word in HN. Next thing you might find yourself claiming is that Dropbox is a worthless idea because it's "just" FTP. Btw tell me exactly how an aimbot that takes the visuals from the player's screen and tilts the player's cursor so (or not so) slightly towards identified moving targets, are to be avoided from the server. Modern cheating is already a hard-ass problem to solve, m…

Dropbox is a worthless idea (long term) because it's not running on my own server. :')

And exactly. You cannot detect that with client-side anti-cheat nonsense either. Record on the HDMI and output a fake USB mouse, why not? Botting doesn't break the physical rules of the game, so you're right that it's hard to detect. One "solution" is to record player movement on the server and detect outliers in behavior and scores. Not perfect (and also very difficult), but just as unreliable as client-side anti cheat nonsense.

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#225

Post by prmoustache »

jorvi wrote: post #42
COGlory wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI Valve is primarily deploying KDE, which does support VRR. They can't really control what dumb decisions the GNOME folks make. For Mirror's Edge, were you using Steam Input?

Yeah, except I prefer the cleanliness of Gnome over how scattershot and buggy KDE feels, so I’m SoL. I’ve even looked into launching games into their own little Gamescope instance, but if you don’t run Gamescope as your main window manager, you lose most of its benefits. > For Mirror's Edge, were you using Steam Input? Yes. The problem lies in the fact that only the Xone driver properly supports the Xbox wireless ada…

>Yeah, except I prefer the cleanliness of Gnome over how scattershot and buggy KDE feels, so I’m SoL.

You know that linux distros are multiusers/multiseats systems right? You can perfectly use Gnome as default desktop and live switch to a dedicated gaming user with kde plasma desktop that is only used to launch games.

Kde plasma shoudln't be buggy if only used as a game launcher and disable baloo file indexing if you want to limit kde memory usage to minimum.

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#226

Post by luma »

ho_schi wrote: post #155
luma wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using the phrase "MBA thinking" to mean "making decisions based on your personal use case and identifying solutions which match". I'm not sure how this is a bad thing. I don't run Linux to run games because Windows is a better supported platform for running games. I'm not "looking at past numbers", I'm looking at the situation in front of me as it exists, setting aside my personal feeling on what might have be…

„Today“…MBA-Thinking. I don’t want a huge problem tomorrow.

So you trade that for even larger problems today? You do you but I just want to play some games.

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#227

Post by rollcat »

slimsag wrote: post #202
rollcat wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NVidia on Linux is an unholy mess, and always has been (at the very least since 2004, which is my earliest memory of fighting it). It's true even on NVidia's own SoC (Jetson). It almost feels like they're trying hard to make the experience worse for everyone: users, OS developers, app developers, hardware developers... I don't know what to make of it, if you want NVidia you should pick an OS other than Linux (I've he…

I tried PopOS! recently and nvidia GPU worked 100% fine out of the box, without doing anything.

When projects like Sway only enable NVidia support behind a flag named --my-next-gpu-wont-be-nvidia, I have sincere doubts that a different gift wrapping will change anything.

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#228

Post by Brian_K_White »

Brian_K_White wrote: post #192
infecto wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry I am not going down this low brow path. We can agree to disagree. I just don’t think it helps an ecosystem to tell people the software they want to run is garbage.

I do. I think it helps the ecosystem more than any other reaction. I'm not sure we can agree to disagree. I don't think you are allowing it, and certainly I am not.

Actually I think "agree to disagree" was exactly right.

It doesn't mean we accept each others opinion as different yet valid, we still call each other wrong, but the point is it ends there with recognizing and accepting an impasse rather than progressing to pistolas at dawn, right?

Except wait, my whole problem was never that someone was ok with the deal (pay for a product or service that doesn't serve you), it was only with trying to say that everyone else also has to be ok with it.

Except wait again, that might have been your original point too. Not to put words in your mouth but would it be fair to say that you originally had no problem with someone declining to use some software, but only with telling someone else they should do the same?

Do we in the end have no real argument?

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#229

Post by ekianjo »

IshKebab wrote: post #85
arendtio wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not, but both are symptoms of a consumer-disrespecting mindset. - DRM does not serve the consumer, but the producer. - Anti-cheat only serves the consumer if it is well-designed. However, if someone is able to design a game (technically) well, anti-cheat is unnecessary. And if someone cannot design a game, their anti-cheat is often a disservice to the consumer. I don't like either DRM or anti-cheat solutions…

> However, if someone is able to design a game (technically) well, anti-cheat is unnecessary. Nonsense. It's completely impossible to stop cheaters these days, but anti-cheat technology definitely raises the bar. It's only "unnecessary" if you're willing to accept a large number of cheaters. Some anti-cheat stuff definitely goes to far but to dismiss the idea entirely is just naïve.

> Nonsense. It's completely impossible to stop cheaters these days

on the user side, it's perfectly possible if you only play online with your friends.

The whole idea that we should be able to play with random people if we all accept to have a kernel rootkit needs to die. Ultimately that's exactly what the NSA and other agencies want you to support.

Re: I forked SteamOS for my living room PC

#230

Post by kaetemi »

MrNeon wrote: post #81
kaetemi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they could just not trust the clients, instead of throwing the problem over the wall. A lot of these games with fancy anti cheat protection the cheat tools basically just tell the server "spawn me a vehicle right here" and the server just does it. Garbage.

If my cheat puts my crosshair on the opponent's head automatically what about that information is untrustworthy that would make you throw it out?

It's the same problem as detecting AI generated content from human made.

Automation and assist botting differs from outright cheating in that it still obeys the actual rules of the game.

Post reply on HN