Yeah, logical volumes has a teeny bit of overhead, same with RAID. both together means you can run older things but things that have a lot of textures loading you will see some drop.
I love that you mentioned that abomination they call a client. Something so bad a developer solo wrote a better one only to have them hire that person and quietly kill the project.
I suspect it’s intended to be “ground-up rewrite in a better engine with more content” sort of like Isaac’s transition from Flash to its own bespoke C++ engine.
Yeah, a lot of expectations people have around Linux are about a decade old. I think Linux has really improved a lot in the area of gaming over the last few years even.
And as long as Linux keeps being worth supporting I think we’ll see more and more games targeted toward linux.
Unless it was one of those netbook desktop things, holy hell those were bad. I managed to get AntiX running pretty well on one, and tuxracer lagged a LOT. Was pretty useful as a cheap thin client though.
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.
Fuck Riot. Never playing their games again. If you’re going to have a shitty anticheat at least give people the option to play in anticheat disabled lobbies. Besides, they should be doing anticheat at the server level not spying on the boot sequence of client PCs. That shit is unnecessary for a fucking banking app let alone a goddamn game. It’s just a game, let us enjoy it rather than making such a ridiculously over the top response to cheating.
If you’re going to have a shitty anticheat at least give people the option to play in anticheat disabled lobbies.
This, a thousand times. I can understand requiring anti-cheat for Ranked matches, but some of us just wanna screw around. If there's no progression tied to the match why should they care?
Yup, at the very minimum let me continue to play TFT. You can’t really cheat there, and if you could, that’s more likely due to an underlying gamplay/UX problem.
It’s Harder to solve than you think. I came upon a documentary a while ago where they go a bit more in depth on the subject and what cheaters can do nowadays.
No company has solved the problem tbh. Even games like counter strike are riddled with cheaters and even on faceit there’s plenty of people that are dodgy AF and likely cheat.
It’s not an easy problem to solve and it is, AFAIK, still an unsolved problem in shooters. So your comment is a bit salty. Might as well claim every game engineer worldwide isnt good at their job because nobody has solved this yet. Not that I’m defending riot.
The rootkit “solution” is complete bullshit. It is completely disproportionate and a massive security/privacy risk. And to top it off it’s not even a solution that’s good enough.
The rootkit isn’t a solution. It’s a bandaid - and a bad one at that. Moba and FPS hacks have already moved outside the hardware of the PC or into the virtual space. It’s a beware of dog sign on the fence meant to scare users… while ultimately doing very little (besides providing a vector real hackers and tools can exploit to gain access to your system.)
Seriously anyone willing to install a rootkit on their system that that company is behind deserves whatever comes their way next.
Given the user always has a deeper access to the client (i.e. hardware access) than the anticheat dev does, eliminating cheating is probably unsolvable.
Best bet is probably always going to be a decently funded team dedicated to find and ban cheaters, rather than attempting to prevent them all with a rootkit.
First of all, you can’t solve a problem you’re not willing to work on.
Second, no one is expecting a solution that bans 100% of cheaters and has zero false positives. We all know that’s unrealistic. So saying no one has solved it yet is kind of misleading. There are existing solutions that work well enough for most people.
Third, there are solutions that can run entirely on the server side that would work for every system. Riot just isn’t willing to use them.
My comment stands. Bad engineers that can’t solve a problem other people have already come up with solutions for.
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.
The issue with this entire statement is that despite the amount of system access they want, and the complexity of the software they’ve made, cheating is as rampant as it was before. The fact that they continue treating Linux as an issue, just as Ubisoft do with Siege, or Bungie with Destiny, just shows that there is a much larger issue at hand
Even worse, it proves that they themselves don’t understand the entire psycho-social scope and workings of cheating. Cheating is not an entirely technical problem. It’s multidimensional.
linux_gaming
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.