this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2025
499 points (97.7% liked)

linuxmemes

28059 readers
1155 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack users for any reason. This includes using blanket terms, like "every user of thing".
  • Don't get baited into back-and-forth insults. We are not animals.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn, no politics, no trolling or ragebaiting.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, <loves/tolerates/hates> systemd, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  • 5. πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Language/язык/Sprache
  • This is primarily an English-speaking community. πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¦πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ
  • Comments written in other languages are allowed.
  • The substance of a post should be comprehensible for people who only speak English.
  • Titles and post bodies written in other languages will be allowed, but only as long as the above rule is observed.
  • 6. (NEW!) Regarding public figuresWe all have our opinions, and certain public figures can be divisive. Keep in mind that this is a community for memes and light-hearted fun, not for airing grievances or leveling accusations.
  • Keep discussions polite and free of disparagement.
  • We are never in possession of all of the facts. Defamatory comments will not be tolerated.
  • Discussions that get too heated will be locked and offending comments removed.
  • Β 

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.

    founded 2 years ago
    MODERATORS
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

    I don't know what the Helldivers devs did, but you don't think it's scummy that BF6 requires malware, like Windows and kerbel level anti-cheat?

    [–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

    Regardless of how you see those things or what they actually do, it's basically certain that the developers do not see them as malware. And I think it's reasonable to assume good intentions in making those choices, because it is a PvP game where cheating can negatively impact other players. I would give them the benefit of the doubt regarding their intentions.

    Many of the things that the Helldivers 2 devs have done could be excused with the benefit of the doubt as well, but they have stacked up a lot of broken promises, and recently there was a case of very blatant deception. It could be argued that it was not technically lying, but it was obviously intended to deceive. And there has been no apology for the deception since then, either.

    [–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

    I would give them the benefit of the doubt regarding their intentions.

    The developers are rarely the ones making the choice. I do give them the benefit of the doubt, but it's been shown it doesn't actually prevent cheating and you're refusing to let your customers choose how they play. They get the benefit of the doubt that they're honestly trying to prevent cheaters, but not that it's a purely benevolent decision towards customers. It's a trade off, and the option they're taking is bad for consumers and isn't effective anyway.

    [–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

    For what it's worth, cheating in BF6 seems pretty rare. So, it seems that something they're doing is having an effect at reducing cheating. There are probably other methods that they could use, though.

    I'm guessing that their decision ultimately comes down to money - they probably figure that other methods would be more expensive to achieve the same result, and that the lost revenue from people who are turned off by the anti cheat is less than that cost.

    [–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

    Cheating in ARC Raiders also seems very rare β€”and it's ahead of BF6 now in players.

    There's two issues. Cheating in general is pretty uncommon, though it has an enlarged impact on players in games with high skill, lower player count, high information. Counter Strike, for example, it's easy to tell when something feels off, so it's easier to detect cheating. The upset it causes people also has a re-enforcment factor that makes it feel more common.

    Meanwhile in BF, with tons of players all around, sprinting full speed, and low information, it's hard to know if someone is cheating. Was it luck or skill, or did they have ESP and saw you through the wall? The chaos hides cheats. However, I saw day 1 that cheats were active and working in game. They're there, but they're a lot more invisible.

    For example, I play Squad. In Squad you build FOBs where players respawn. There's a type of cheating (doesn't require hacks) called "ghosting" where you have a player on the other team who gives information about where FOBs are, for example, so you can destroy them. It's almost impossible to detect. Any ghosting that happens could just as easily be luck/skill, and more often than not is. You could assume there's no cheating happening. It is rare there, but it isn't zero. There's no Kernel level anti-cheat (for Linux at least).

    I'm guessing that their decision ultimately comes down to money - they probably figure that other methods would be more expensive to achieve the same result, and that the lost revenue from people who are turned off by the anti cheat is less than that cost.

    Yes, it's executuves making a short-term purely financial decision. It's also probably not even the wrong one with those factors in mind. However, it does long-term damage to your reputation. The devs who build for Linux get praised for supporting customer choice. The ones who push kernel level AC get roasted for it. Sure, it's doing fine now, but will they have lower revenue in 5-10 years because of it?

    Regardless, I personally think it's bad, and as such refuse to support them. I also choose to spend time and effort pointing out the issues to people so they can decide it's a bad choice in the future.

    [–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

    I'm not particularly interested in ARC Raiders because I don't like the chaos of FFA (or more than 2 teams in general).

    [–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    I get it, but you'd be surprised how friendly people can be there. Especially solo, it's like a 90+% chance people just work together.

    I didn't mention it to recommend it though, only to point out that it probably isn't their AC that is (creating the illusion of) preventing cheaters.