this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2025
142 points (96.7% liked)

Linux Gaming

22166 readers
981 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.

No memes/shitposts/low-effort posts, please.

Resources

WWW:

Discord:

IRC:

Matrix:

Telegram:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
monolalia@lemmy.world
142
Rust developer has 'no plans' for Linux or Proton support, says games that support them are 'not serious about anti-cheat' (www.pcgamer.com)
submitted 20 hours ago by cm0002@no.lastname.nz to c/linux_gaming@lemmy.world
47 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The latest plea for official Proton support started on Reddit, where Scout339v2 shared their screenshot of Rust running "on a server with EAC disabled to show that the game already works perfectly on Linux." Disabling Easy Anti-Cheat (EAC) is the key factor here, and part of a broader conversation where Facepunch and its Linux/Proton userbase don't see eye-to-eye.

While it's true Rust runs on Proton, you can't join official servers, and most unofficial servers, with EAC disabled. Facepunch considered changing its stance in 2022 when the Steam Deck launched, but didn't end up introducing official Proton support. COO Alistair McFarlane said at the time that Linux is "safer for cheat developers," and that trying to support EAC on another platform could reduce the team's ability to support Windows.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 17 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Nah, cheating is just absurdly hard to stop. Even ring 0 anti cheat doesn't stop it entirely. At some point, I feel like the answer is similar to piracy, in that you must accept that there's going to be some amount of it, and then find a way to mitigate the damage. Because there are solutions to both of them that both go too far.

[–] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 15 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (2 children)

I think the way that CS does it is really the best one. Prevent the simple cheats, record games and let people handle the edge cases based on reports and suspicious activity.

[–] Attacker94@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

While I agree that this is usually enough, you end up with the issue that with volume the process becomes bogged down to the point of inefficiency. The best bet is to implement this system with a much more robust server side cheat detection, and ideally not send occult information or recieve bad information from the clients to minimize the damage that can be done with a cheat.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago

I didn't know CS did this, but yeah, at a high level, that's how I'd address it, too. It's probably not a solution that scales super well due to the manual review required, and I know that game has a reputation of people still being annoyed by cheaters, but it might be the best we can do without being very invasive, like the ring 0 stuff.