this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2024
288 points (99.7% liked)

Linux Gaming

15189 readers
710 users here now

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.

Resources

WWW:

Discord:

IRC:

Matrix:

Telegram:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.today 44 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

How do they know you haven't trained an AI to get headshots? The cheats often break the bounds of what is realistic in games, whether it is allowing you to see through walls (server shouldn't be sending enemy positions that aren't in view), going too fast (server should speed check pplayer positions), getting items they shouldn't have (server should do inventory sanity checks), etc. Other than that, look for signs of automated movement/things unrealistically precise for a human to do. Eventually the cheating will just be moved to a separate air gapped computer running AI on the video feed. Client side is an invasive, broken, and malicious concept.

[–] Drathro@dormi.zone 16 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Just tracking trended data in general would be sufficient to defeat a LARGE number of common cheats. One of the very few use cases "AI" might actually work for in a positive way. But that puts the burden on the developers and server hosters, and it's much easier to just burden the players directly instead.

[–] SilverCode@lemm.ee 6 points 13 hours ago

I'm fairly confident that developers already do this. When the "ban hammer" comes down it is probably after analysing data trends for players.

[–] granolabar@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 13 hours ago

do you expect them to use data to fix their problems?

[–] tehmics@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Servers often don't send player data that is outside of the immediate area of the player, but they have to for enemies that are nearby. If they walk around the corner and your client didn't know about it, then you'll be waiting for your ping time to even render the enemy. I.e. they walk around the corner and already shot you, then you see them suddenly appear a full players width away from the corner, and you die. Aka peekers advantage amplified.

Same deal with footstep sounds, bullet tracers, a player's shadow, etc. Your client needs to know where all this is coming from and it can't do that if it doesn't know the enemy exists and where. And that is a buffer zone for hackers to derive wall hacks from.

So basically, the overwhelming majority of servers do do all those things, since the late 90's. Hacks tend to work within those bounds. The most common, impactful and hard to detect cheats are based on providing perfect mechanical inputs. Aka aim hacks. Nothing about limiting info from the server can prevent that unless you also want the legitimate player to be unable to see their enemies.

[–] joyjoy@lemm.ee 1 points 8 hours ago

The obvious solution is to make wall hacks an intended game mechanic.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

Eventually the cheating will just be moved to a separate air gapped computer running AI on the video feed.

At that point it isn't cheating anymore; the AI would be legitimately playing the game!

[–] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 13 hours ago

God I was pissed when riot did it for league. They didn't even have a terrible cheating issue, it was rare and they suuslly caught it and parched it quickly. If blizzard can do it so can they.

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world -2 points 10 hours ago

Well thank god this computer genius is on the scene. Don’t worry, EA can solve everything as soon as they hear about these great and very original ideas.