They haven’t enabled it because they don’t get the same level of protection on Linux as they do on Windows, so Valve is trying to address that.
Comment on Valve Addresses Steam Machine Anti-Cheat Concerns, Says It's Working Towards Support
Baggie@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
It kind of bothers me that people are putting the responsibility on valve for this, when the companies themselves have purposefully not enabled compatibility in most cases.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
In case this is serious, kernel-level AC has been shown to not be particularly effective. There were people with hacks for BF6 before it released, for example. Them blocking an operating system doesn’t prevent cheaters. It only prevents consumers from having options.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Of course I’m serious. “Not 100% effective” is not the same as “not effective”. And to be clear, I hate it and do not endorse it. I will not buy any game that goes as far as to use that kind of anti-cheat. But developers use it because it’s more effective at catching cheaters than not using it. All downvoting me does is cover your ears to what’s actually going on. There are a number of big live service games that once enabled Proton and have now disabled it after cheaters took advantage of the more lax security. They would not cut off a portion of their customer base if they didn’t have to because user space in Linux was somehow just as effective as the Windows variant that lives at ring 0 in the OS kernel.
Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
In this instance not effective is 100% not effective.
Both kernel and non kernel anti cheat are equally effective in actual practice. In both cases your preventing kids, lazy and low knowledge users from cheating. But anyone who is willing to spend any amount of money to cheat can easily find someone who will provide them with a bypass.
In both cases the anti cheat is only as good as the on going support from the devs of both the anti cheat and the game.
You can’t control what a client does end of the day
Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
The reason they do it usually is because some executives hear the Linux is less secure and that it’s only a small segment of users. It isn’t because it’s effective. The games that blocked Linux are almost all some of the games with the worst hackers. Guess what happened when they blocked Linux? Nothing. The number of hackers that were on Linux were near zero.
The issue is they cant be bothered to put the actual money/work to create a solution that’s effective. Instead they signal to their audience that they’re doing something by removing Linux, which doesn’t cost them anything and makes a show that they’re actually trying. It doesn’t fix the problems, but they get to make a show out of it.
blinfabian@feddit.nl 1 month ago
guys this comment is clearly satire, why did yall downvote?
demonsword@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Poe’s law, maybe
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I’m not sure what there is to gain by pretending that downvoting me changes anything.
REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 month ago
30% cut from developers. Steam machine.