lol

or switch to Linux, or PS5 for games that use kernel anti-cheat on PC if you despise what Microsoft has done to Windows. Stop giving yourself more headache

should be a sticky. as many people are reinstalling windows right now, because of microsoft

microcrap and their crappy updates

Originally posted by Elllis:

or PS5 for games that use kernel anti-cheat on PC

A number of online players are switching to the PS5 because the cheating problem on PC is getting out of hand.
Kernel-level, aggressive, and resource heavy anti-cheat tools don't stop cheaters. Selling PC cheats became a business.

Originally posted by C1REX:

Originally posted by Elllis:

or PS5 for games that use kernel anti-cheat on PC

A number of online players are switching to the PS5 because the cheating problem on PC is getting out of hand.
Kernel-level, aggressive, and resource heavy anti-cheat tools don't stop cheaters. Selling PC cheats became a business.

People have said "I'm going to console, too many cheaters on PC" for 10-15+ years. Nothing new

I got news for you, you can cheat on console too and use KB + Mouse

Most people actually are bad at many of these online games and aren't being trolled by any cheater. So many will call out a really good shooter for example as a cheater cause they are good and the person complaining is a whining cry baby who doesn't take time to GET GUD.

Going to console might reduce it a bit but it does not eliminate it. That once cry baby might find console better because maybe because it's full of non skilled cry babies

Originally posted by C1REX:

Kernel-level, aggressive, and resource heavy anti-cheat tools don't stop cheaters. Selling PC cheats became a business.

Don't take what I'm saying as a defense of any of those things, but saying something doesn't work just because it's not 100% effective is a very questionable claim to make.

As with most things in IT, there's a Swiss cheese approach to it and no single method prevents everything. It's usually multiple layers that work together to bring things down well below what they otherwise would be.

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

Originally posted by C1REX:

Kernel-level, aggressive, and resource heavy anti-cheat tools don't stop cheaters. Selling PC cheats became a business.

Don't take what I'm saying as a defense of any of those things, but saying something doesn't work just because it's not 100% effective is a very questionable claim to make.

As with most things in IT, there's a Swiss cheese approach to it and no single method prevents everything. It's usually multiple layers that work together to bring things down well below what they otherwise would be.

How much cheating does it stop? The answer is important here.

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

Don't take what I'm saying as a defense of any of those things, but saying something doesn't work just because it's not 100% effective is a very questionable claim to make.

As with most things in IT, there's a Swiss cheese approach to it and no single method prevents everything. It's usually multiple layers that work together to bring things down well below what they otherwise would be.

How much cheating does it stop? The answer is important here.

Not much, as seen in GTA Online, where cheaters are still happily blowing up everyone in public lobbies despite kernel level anti cheat

Well we'll see. Too early to tell how well requiring SecureBoot for online games with anti cheat will actually help. It seems to be doing well for Battlefield 6, so far. And it's not the only game that's been requiring that. It could reach a point where this is much more common practice of being a requirement and if so then people wanting to play such games on PC will be forced to get newer hardware

Originally posted by 𝔇𝔬𝔬𝔪𝔤𝔲𝔶:

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

How much cheating does it stop? The answer is important here.

Not much, as seen in GTA Online, where cheaters are still happily blowing up everyone in public lobbies despite kernel level anti cheat

Well tbat uses BattlEye, and you can look at the track record for games such as Arma 2 and 3 as well as DayZ... how well tbat has worked over the years. But nothing is fool proof. Most of the cheating in GTA Online is from those still running GTA5 Legacy as opposed to the newer Enhanced Edition

Nah fam. Glorious Win 10 LTSC reporting. I still stick to the OS that's UI isn't a warcrime.

Originally posted by I Did It 4 Teh Lulz:

Nah fam. Glorious Win 10 LTSC reporting. I still stick to the OS that's UI isn't a warcrime.

Can games all work properly on LTSC though???

Originally posted by emoticorpse:

How much cheating does it stop? The answer is important here.

Important for what?

The extent to which it has an impact is going to vary from game to game, or more specifically it will be down to the exact implementation. That should be obvious, so it's not like anyone can give you a single number answer to this. On top of that, not all game developers will publish that information. When they do, the community will probably tend to say it's made up information anyway.

I only play one game that uses such methods, so I'll refer to that one.

League of Legends started requiring Vanguard a while ago, and Riot's made Dev Updates[www.leagueoflegends.com] since then claiming it has helped in some things. These claims are scattered across various posts, but here's one specific to the topic from a while ago[www.leagueoflegends.com] if you want to dig into it.

The short of it that cheating is down. And in newer posts since that one, there's been more information that botting and sold accounts has been diminishing too. It turns out when accounts can be easily botted and sold for, what, $2, players are more willing to intentionally play poorly to throw games so their teammates lost ("inting") or causing fights in chat, all of which leads to poorer games, so there's a nice benefit here beyond merely "cheating". It turns out that once their main account is at risk (and Vanguard can "connect the dots" to see what accounts are shared, so punishments can transfer), people tend to shape up a bit.

Now that's just one game but it's the only one I play that uses such methods so it's the only one I can really speak for. Other games that implement it may still have high cheating issues. But even then, I would imagine it would be far worse without those methods.

If you're looking for some some single number that applies to all games, you're not going to find that.

If you're looking for "it magically stops all cheating and all bad intentions", you won't find that either. Some humans are going to be nasty to others regardless of the methods in place to thwart them, but as those methods starts to require more effort (and in some cases, become financially costly) to work around, there will generally be less of it.

Locks aren't always super effective either., but a lot of people still use them. You may have head the phrase "locks keep honest people honest". It means sometimes the method can be bypassed but is still an effective deterrence.

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

Important for what?

Well, for me it's important because I weight in whether or not something's worth the trouble of running for the benefits it provides and so if you said it stopped 100% of cheating I'd stop arguing and accept it that quickly deleting everything in this post but if it only stops 1% then yikes. I'm talking about TPM/Secure Boot so if you aren't then we're already on different things.

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

The extent to which it has an impact is going to vary from game to game, or more specifically it will be down to the exact implementation. That should be obvious, so it's not like anyone can give you a single number answer to this. On top of that, not all game developers will publish that information. When they do, the community will probably tend to say it's made up information anyway.

Any implementation that DOES NOT include TPM/Secure Boot isn't on my mind and not what I was talking about, and the game I was thinking about if there was one specifically would be Battlefield 6 because that's the one I just keep hearing about. If the anti-cheat technology was the same for certain games than I wouldn't necessarily think that it's out of the question to think several games had the same amount of cheating stop since the same technology would do it's thing (again, I'm talking Secure Boot/TPM). I really wasn't talking about any other anti-cheat methods but I really don't think much about them either and think the technology's success would be able to speak for itself and have a way to be tracked.

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

I only play one game that uses such methods, so I'll refer to that one.

League of Legends started requiring Vanguard a while ago, and Riot's made Dev Updates[www.leagueoflegends.com] since then claiming it has helped in some things. These claims are scattered across various posts, but here's one specific to the topic from a while ago[www.leagueoflegends.com] if you want to dig into it.

The short of it that cheating is down. And in newer posts since that one, there's been more information that botting and sold accounts has been diminishing too. It turns out when accounts can be easily botted and sold for, what, $2, players are more willing to intentionally play poorly to throw games so their teammates lost ("inting") or causing fights in chat, all of which leads to poorer games, so there's a nice benefit here beyond merely "cheating". It turns out that once their main account is at risk (and Vanguard can "connect the dots" to see what accounts are shared, so punishments can transfer), people tend to shape up a bit.

Now that's just one game but it's the only one I play that uses such methods so it's the only one I can really speak for. Other games that implement it may still have high cheating issues. But even then, I would imagine it would be far worse without those methods.

Since I'm talking about TPM/Secure boot I can't really comment on that anti-cheat technology or the game because it might be the technology outside of Secure Boot//TPM doing the magic otherwise why don't they just require TPM/Secure Boot and call that the anti-cheat technology in itself?. I get where you would certainly point out TPM/Secure Boot being beneficial as a additional layer. I get that. I would only like to say that's again where I'm starting at trying to figure out if that layer in itself is stopping enough of the cheating to say it's worth adding to the collection of anti-cheat methods/technologies being implemented.

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

If you're looking for some some single number that applies to all games, you're not going to find that.

If we're talking about TPM/Secure boot (and it wouldn't surprise me if you were never focusing on TPM/Secure boot and so I'm just talking about it for no reason at all this entire time because that is what I'm focusing on), I'm not sure why we couldn't get a single number (not literally) but something of a numerical representation of how effective it is. They usually do that to just about anything else even if it's just an estimate.

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

If you're looking for "it magically stops all cheating and all bad intentions", you won't find that either. Some humans are going to be nasty to others regardless of the methods in place to thwart them, but as those methods starts to require more effort (and in some cases, become financially costly) to work around, there will generally be less of it.

I'm still not sure why you would (if you're serious) expect someone here to imply that something would stop all cheaters (100%?). There is a way technically which to shut the game down or don't develop it/sell it or disconnect everyone from the internet for online gaming (heh). People certainly couldn't cheat then, but even realistically if consoles have a much less cheating problem them something reasonable can be done. Use the same proprietary technology running on consoles run on pc somehow (I know this sounds ludacris but if you're already requiring TPM/Secure boot might as well go that route. Just sign me up for locked down mouse/keyboard and a custom OS made by EA Games).

Originally posted by Illusion of Progress:

Locks aren't always super effective either., but a lot of people still use them. You may have head the phrase "locks keep honest people honest". It means sometimes the method can be bypassed but is still an effective deterrence.

I've heard the phrase "locks only keep honest people out" but I guess you see it's similar enough.

My beef is with the TPM/Secure Boot and aspect of things. I guess I'm taking it personal because Windows 11 supposedly requiring it but the truth is Microsoft doesn't require TPM/Secure Boot because the workaround is still there and I personally don't think this is an accident on Microsoft's part. So some game developers have now surpassed Microsoft and their OS requirements and are even stricter to play a game. I understand anyone having issues with this, especially since I have issues with it on my OS.

I respect your take too though. If you don't mind it and appreciate it that's fine too.