Discussions and news about gaming on the GNU/Linux family of operating systems (including the Steam Deck). Potentially a $HOME away from home for disgruntled /r/linux_gaming denizens of the redditarian demesne.
This page can be subscribed to via RSS.
Original /r/linux_gaming pengwing by uoou.
WWW:
Discord:
IRC:
Matrix:
Telegram:
Makes business sense. Why bother developing for 800 users when you have hundreds of thousands, if not millions, to worry about? The software company I work for has to make this kind of decision all the time.
But it was nice of them to include a viable strategy for cheaters via VMs.
800 feels like a number they cherry picked considering the overall community size.
Speaking personally: their vm detection is hot garbage and they know it. Detecting a VM is easy enough for anyone- detecting cheating via it is far more difficult. They flag a VM as such and wait for a report to roll in then blindly ban it.... only to reverse it when pressured. This isn't the behavior of an org with concrete evidence. It's a smokescreen.
Honestly, i don't get why people are bitching about it so much. A company, that makes a game with intention to make money off it, that never supported linux neither promised to support linux some time in the future, clarifies that it sees no purpose in supporting linux because of monetary reasons.
Okay, that may be your favorite game, you might have spend tons of money on in - but idea that it may never be supported on your favorite platform has never crossed your mind? It's like whining that PS exclusive game is not getting ported to Xbox.
So basically, “it’s too hard, and our engineers are not good at their jobs.”
Imagine this: you have a cheater problem. Your team of developers have only ever worked on gameplay-related stuff - graphics, game engine, etc. You can:
When money is involved, you make decision by counting them. You give somebody (tech lead, probably) task to evaluate your options - and give you approximate numbers. And i'm not surprised they chose 3rd option.
Stop stealing our CPU cycles for high risk rootkits and start mitigating and detecting cheating on the server. It’s that easy.
I'm currently working on bot detection for web resources - and trust me, it's extremely hard to distinguish them from people without some client-side analysis. Sure, you can use behavioral analysis, but you need lots of data and, again, expertise in that. Okay, they have the data - thousands of games played daily. Have you ever seen job listing for "game patterns analyst for LoL"? Again, you have to find someone capable - highly payed experts, who will spend some time testing their theories, with no guaranteed success.
"How do you separate good players from cheaters? This low ranked player who just got his second pentakill - is he cheating or smurfing? This weird behaviour - is it because of missing fog of war or are they just communicating over voice chat?"
It's just... really NOT that easy.
The “distributions” argument always smells like bullshit. Developers actually interested on supporting Linux usually stick to one or two distros of their choice. (Typically Ubuntu.)
There's your answer - they are not interested. And there is nothing wrong with that! It's just business! Remember the "a times b times c" scene from fight club? They've calculated their x - and it's not worth pursuing (for them).
Rootkits are bad, m'kay. Wanna avoid them? Don't install them. Just don't be surprised when company adds them - it's their product, they do whatever the fuck they want.
Kernel anticheat is just like gaming piracy, where developers are constantly fighting ghosts rather than tackling the social issues that encourage the behaviours they want to avoid.
there are no social issues you can ever fix to be found here. give a 11 year old an auto-win button for counter strike that he can press whenever he loses a single round and feels his pride hurt - he'll press it.
i think that anti cheats display a disrespect to the customer, because in an ideal world he should then run two computers instead of one. one for online banking, the other one for every company's favorite rootkit with questionable maintenance.
the only way out, in my view, is going to server side ai cheat detection.
and the difficulty in securing it is only compounded by all the frustrating differences between distributions.
You DO NOT get to bitch about dIfFeReNcEs while you're writing rootkits. Fuck off.
yesterday, there were just over 800 Linux users on League.
And how many of them were cheating? ರ_ರ
The number would be higher too, I doubt I was the only one who stopped playing months ago when Vanguard was supposedly going to be implemented imminently.
And Vanguard is already being bypassed by using external tools. IIRC I saw a video about it where the cheater had the hack running on a completely separate computer.
WINE
Is
Not
(an)
Emulator
What makes you think they are referring to Wine in that particular case, and not the emulation of the kernel level anticheat on userland? It's also arguably not an entirely correct use of the word there either, but it's fine.
What makes you think they are referring to Wine in that particular case.
Them talking about Lutris and Wine in that same paragraph and using the phrasing "even allowing" implying it's what they're currently doing. But looking again, you're right. They were referring to VMs.
their "hello fellow kids" energy works better for their goofy insignificant patch notes than it does for combating bad PR.
i was very on the fence about keeping it installed on a potato windows laptop i don't use for much else. this article absolutely convinced me fully not to. they could not have written a worse case for themselves if they had tried.
they have stated they even intend to try getting anticheat on macs as soon as possible. even if it is not possible, (which seems likely to me, considering the ecosystem?) their argument for axing linux could easily be used to just ditch macs. "we don't know how to secure it, and there were only 800 players [on a random, cherry picked day.]"
having a section in which they claim there are zero false positives is delusional. that's not how technology works. there will literally always be bugs, glitches, edge cases.
they claim they can currently read stuff in user mode, so it'll be essentially analogous in invasiveness, and it's straight bullshit.
this is several degrees of trust beyond "can read stuff in user mode when running"
this is "can read anything in user mode, in admin mode, on all other users on your computer, can restrict your bios and hardware, and has full potential to have permanent root access to any user or system you install in the future"
either they do not understand what they are implementing, which is a really bad sign for trusting them with it,
or they know exactly what they are doing and lying about it, which is another really bad sign for trusting them with it.
i'm gonna be honest, if they had taken the hardline "we know it's more invasive, but we need this" and kept it straight, i might have kept playing. it's the only multiplayer competitive game i have anymore.
but the ad hominem attacks in here, the calls to the "angry twitter mobs," the disingenuous and extremely loose way they play with the truth, ~~(it's not running all the time! well, it is, but we don't really think it should count)~~ that in just a few paragraphs has burned any goodwill i had towards them. they are weaponizing their own playerbase to cannibalize themselves and attack their friends for having legitimate concerns about degrees of personal invasion and that's unconscionable. that disgusts me more than the crappy implementation and the cavalier attitude ever could.
props to them, i guess, for making the only choice to be to quit a game i played happily for about a decade.
I've never actually noticed cheaters during the time I played the game. If they cheat and matchmaking puts me against them, it just means that me without cheats and them with cheats are equivalent in skill level, so it's a fair and fun game. So I don't see the point in preventing cheats in the first place unless you're at the very top of the ladder, and there's so few people up there that it should be easy to just manually ban the cheaters.
I think a part of it is the difference to losing to something "reasonable" vs "unreasonable."
If you're clearly really bad at the game when we are in a fight with line of sight but somehow you keep picking off my teammates through walls... That's the kind of thing where cheating really starts to get annoying.
You may still be on the same skill level overall, but for specific parts of the game they have super powers, and it just feels ridiculous.
Smurfing is also a real issue because cheaters seem to overlap with trolls that just want everyone else to have a bad time, so they'll spend a bunch of time down ranking, so they can spend a little time giving a lot of players a bad day.
I think a part of it is the difference to losing to something "reasonable" vs "unreasonable."
Yeah, that's understandable. I just don't think there's an equivalent in LoL that would feel particularly unfair. At worst, someone just knows where you are at all times. What do you do with that information? That requires good game knowledge. You can only influence a small portion of the map yourself and teammates tend to like acting independently even if you provide them with extra info.
Smurfing is a bigger problem, but I've found that Riot tends to be very good at gauging your skill level even if you intentionally sandbag. LoL is just one of those game where it's really hard to convincingly pretend to be bad at it.
I can't believe they made a shitty Dota clone based off the Arcane animation on Netflix.
