zlacker

[return to "Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm"]
1. jchw+UO2[view] [source] 2025-12-03 17:27:25
>>evolve+(OP)
> and modern multiplayer games with anti-cheat simply do not work through a translation layer, something Valve hopes will change in the future.

Although this is true for most games it is worth noting that it isn't universally true. Usermode anti-cheat does sometimes work verbatim in Wine, and some anti-cheat software has Proton support, though not all developers elect to enable it.

◧◩
2. gianca+gQ2[view] [source] 2025-12-03 17:32:56
>>jchw+UO2
> though not all developers elect to enable it.

Looking at you Rust.

Edit:

And the rest of you. If even Microsoft's Masterchief Collection supports it, I Don't understand why everyone else does not.

https://areweanticheatyet.com/

◧◩◪
3. jshear+KS2[view] [source] 2025-12-03 17:45:17
>>gianca+gQ2
> I Don't understand why everyone else does not.

It's because the Linux versions of those anti-cheats are significantly weaker than their Windows counterparts.

◧◩◪◨
4. tapoxi+qU2[view] [source] 2025-12-03 17:52:52
>>jshear+KS2
It's telling that Valve uses a user space anti-cheat (VAC) for Counter-Strike 2, but the competitive community overwhelmingly rejects that and ops to use a third-party Windows-only kernel mode anti-cheat (FACEIT).
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. Draike+Mk3[view] [source] 2025-12-03 20:00:51
>>tapoxi+qU2
I mean, people are dumb.

Anti cheats are as much a marketing ploy as they're actual anti cheats. People believe everyone is cheating so it must be true. People believe nobody bypasses the FACEIT anti cheat so it must be true. Neither of those are correct.

Riot revels in this by marketing their anti cheat, but there are always going to be cheaters. And sooner or later we will have vulnerabilities in their kernel spyware. I much rather face a few cheaters here and there (which is not as common as people make it to be on high trust factor).

You think tournament organizers or pro players know the first thing about anti cheats? They buy the marketing just like everybody else.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. enneff+XA3[view] [source] 2025-12-03 21:17:53
>>Draike+Mk3
The marketing works because online games get destroyed by cheats. Losing in online games can be full of “feel bad” moments, even without cheaters (network issues, cheesy tactics, balance issues). To think that your opponent won because they outright cheated just makes you wanna quit.

I’ve seen so many players saying “look you can own my entire pc just please eliminate the cheating.”

It would be great to see more of a web of trust thing instead of invasive anti cheat. That would make it harder for people to get into the games in the first place though so I don’t know if developers would really want to go that way.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. Draike+EZ9[view] [source] 2025-12-05 18:02:33
>>enneff+XA3
The marketing works because of what I said: people are dumb.

Anyone that's not dumb will know (maybe after the heat of the moment) why they lost, but the vast majority of people will blame anything they can instead. Teammates, lag, the developers, etc. Cheating is merely one of these excuses.

> I’ve seen so many players saying “look you can own my entire pc just please eliminate the cheating.”

This entire idea is so dumb it makes my head hurt. You can't eliminate bad actors no matter how hard you try. It's impossible in the real world.

All these "if only we could prevent X with more surveillance/control" ideas go up in flames as soon as reality hits. Even if a single person bypasses it, we can question everything. Then all we're left with are these surveillance systems that are then converted into pure data exfiltration to sell it all to the highest bidder (assuming they weren't doing this already).

I applaud Valve for not going down the easy route of creating spyware and selling it as "protection".

[go to top]