Valve seems to have quietly rolled out a major upgrade to their Anti-Cheat system and it’s apparently wrecking havoc on cheat providers
-
Why do you sound like a 12th grader who just discovered Reddit? "You've passed the idiot test!"
Cringiest comment I've ever seen in my life. Goodbye cunt.
Lol, I can't even play around with a satirical condescending tone because you're too dense to pick up on it.
I guess there are people with lead skulls! (/s)
Bye-bye shitstain!
-
Lol, I can't even play around with a satirical condescending tone because you're too dense to pick up on it.
I guess there are people with lead skulls! (/s)
Bye-bye shitstain!
"I was only pretending to act like an idiot"
And you double down. Redditor sounding like an AI chatbot. Get fucked.
-
I assume Steam makes it easier to make multiplayer games then GOG?
Much more so - I think largely because of Steam's game server networking and update infrastructure.
Also anti-cheats (of any sort) and DRM-free games are kind of oil and water.
-
I asked you to provide evidence of the rampant cheating problem in valorant as compared to games without kernel level anti cheat. The theory being, if valorant has less cheaters than let's say, CS, that means a kernel level anti cheat is more effective than VAC at deterring cheating.
Of course that's just a theory. No one has evidence for anything
So you have no evidence?
-
So you have no evidence?
wrote last edited by [email protected] -
Got anything with up to date data?
-
Got anything with up to date data?
This is literally from a few months ago.
-
Does anyone have proof that this is less/more effective than kernel level anti cheat?
Please provide factual evidence, not hearsay. That's % cheaters detected vs % cheaters not detected scaled by the overall player base.
Please provide factual evidence, not hearsay. That's % cheaters detected vs % cheaters not detected scaled by the overall player base.
Yeah good luck providing such evidence for any kind of game or anti-cheat.
Personally, I hate kernel level ac and it made me actually stop playing few games and avoid similar ones. Had enough of mere games screwing up with my PC through EAC and EAC ignoring my reports for years.
-
This is literally from a few months ago.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Right after an update, so you think the cheat providers just gave up? So you don't have recent data?
-
That source is biased. However looking at their ban types, behavior type is less than 5% probably. I'd imagine it should've been majority for an anti-cheat that works well.
-
Hypothesis: people who cheat in video games are scum bags in other aspects of life. I wonder if anyone's done a study on that. I feel like the kind of person who has to cheat in video games is a broken sad sack.
Counter (simplier) hypothesis: people who don't care about how they negatively impact other people's experience are overall scumbags.
-
That source is biased. However looking at their ban types, behavior type is less than 5% probably. I'd imagine it should've been majority for an anti-cheat that works well.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Do you have an example of an anti cheat that works better than Vanguard? Please provide sources. Just like I did. You can cry about bias all you want. I provided two sources comparing similar games. One was reports from players and one was reports from the Devs. Riot reports 1/100 games have detected cheaters. CS2 player base is reporting much higher, just by looking at the thread.
If VAC was so good surely Valve would release some numbers right?
-
Do you have an example of an anti cheat that works better than Vanguard? Please provide sources. Just like I did. You can cry about bias all you want. I provided two sources comparing similar games. One was reports from players and one was reports from the Devs. Riot reports 1/100 games have detected cheaters. CS2 player base is reporting much higher, just by looking at the thread.
If VAC was so good surely Valve would release some numbers right?
Any server-side anti-cheat really. You might argue they don't exist but that's the whole point. They will become effective once they start to develop, and maybe we are actually seeing that now.
Didn't read past first sentence. Don't want to waste my time with a kernel level anti-cheat fan.
-
Any server-side anti-cheat really. You might argue they don't exist but that's the whole point. They will become effective once they start to develop, and maybe we are actually seeing that now.
Didn't read past first sentence. Don't want to waste my time with a kernel level anti-cheat fan.
wrote last edited by [email protected]You seem to be wasting time talking anyway so don't be shy lol. I just asked for evidence and you're acting all snooty. You need help.
Where is this magical server side anti cheat? You do realise that kernel level anti cheats have a server side component to them? Vanguard doesn't run entirely on the client side. It's server side too, that's why every Valorant pro tournament has to be run online with private servers. So even if a pro were to use Word.exe on a tournament machine it would be detected via Vanguard. Which itself is a combination of server side heuristics and local machine based code.
I am not a "kernel level anti cheat fan." Unlike you I actually work with software. I have a degree and I do actual software engineering. I've developed games too. So I understand a lot about this stuff. And I've played enough games full of cheaters to be sick of them. I hate riot vanguard as much as you do. But I live with it because I want to enjoy a game without wondering whether the other person is cheating or not. I've yet to see any negative effects of Vanguard. None of my data has been stolen, and I don't even store any data on my computer. It's just for games.
-
You seem to be wasting time talking anyway so don't be shy lol. I just asked for evidence and you're acting all snooty. You need help.
Where is this magical server side anti cheat? You do realise that kernel level anti cheats have a server side component to them? Vanguard doesn't run entirely on the client side. It's server side too, that's why every Valorant pro tournament has to be run online with private servers. So even if a pro were to use Word.exe on a tournament machine it would be detected via Vanguard. Which itself is a combination of server side heuristics and local machine based code.
I am not a "kernel level anti cheat fan." Unlike you I actually work with software. I have a degree and I do actual software engineering. I've developed games too. So I understand a lot about this stuff. And I've played enough games full of cheaters to be sick of them. I hate riot vanguard as much as you do. But I live with it because I want to enjoy a game without wondering whether the other person is cheating or not. I've yet to see any negative effects of Vanguard. None of my data has been stolen, and I don't even store any data on my computer. It's just for games.
That's a neat way to miss the good point about server side solutions. Which would be the absence of intrusive client side code.
You developed software and games? Well I cracked them haha. Have fun detecting puny exploits like 3rd party processes. Moving data our of PC because it could be stolen by cheaters or kernel level something? That's where your acceptance of all of this have led you.
-
Much more so - I think largely because of Steam's game server networking and update infrastructure.
Also anti-cheats (of any sort) and DRM-free games are kind of oil and water.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yep, and i know this Cause one of my friends has that steamworks sdk and he finds steams api easier to work with (for multiplayer)
-
Cheaters aren't only aimbots. In fact, most of the time they're not even using aimbot because that's one of the easiest one to tell that someone is cheating. Most of the time they can just see everyone through walls. But if it's cheater vs cheater and they don't care about being caught then it's not fun or interesting because you just use aim + speed + noclip (I assume that's possible) and just kill everyone the second the round starts.
Yeah....that's why I said "aimbots".
-
I used to “cheat” in Mass Effect 3 CooP, using cheat engine to buy those weapon/character crates en masse.
Screw that grind. It was such a sublime MP game EA bolted the absolute stupidest loot box system to. Everyone in the platinum tiers did it; it didn’t hurt anyone’s experience. That game was so good everyone played for the sake of the game anyway, not the trickle of unlocks.
As a side “cheat”, I used to host modded public lobbies with crazy mixes of enemies, like all banshees one wave or “ranger” swarms of scions+ravagers another and such. A few players left, but the most common reaction was “holy shit, this is mad” and players stayed for the fun.
…I guess what I’m saying is, screw malicious cheaters.
But I also don’t like the idea of locking out modding either, or enforcing particularly asinine P2P schemes. I suppose the kind of MP games even conducive to modding don’t really exist anymore though
wrote last edited by [email protected]I mean they do try to lock down the client, but the thing is the majority of anger comes at cheaters in games that are designed to have players compete against another, like CounterStrike, The Finals, RUST, COD, Battlefield, etc...
Community servers and co-op games that don't have the same structure usually have less problems with that sort of thing. I haven't played Mass Effect 3, but if it's a co-op game I'd imagine players would be more okay with it (especially if you explained what you're doing) compared to something like a CS2 competitive match.
(Also some games like RUST make a clear distinction between official, community, and Modded Servers, and allow the host to pick their own rules. You could find a modded or community server that allows that sort of behavior, for instance.)
Edit: also, there are games with intentional modding implementations for co-op and server multiplayer play, like Project Zomboid.