Otz and problems with anti-cheat

EAC is famous for can't do **** in every game that use it for anti-cheat purpose.btw the vanguard for varlorant is actually something I'm looking for (the anti-cheat perspective)

Valorant's anticheat is not a good example, because it is very intrusive, basically as intrusive as a software can get. It only accepts to run if it is the very first thing that was loaded on your CPU, not just before Windows is even loaded, but even before your drivers, monitor. etc. There is barely any failsafe during this phase so if there is any bug in Vanguard software it will make your whole system instable, it is an extremely hardcore method of fighting cheats that comes with a lot of downsides (and likely this is the reason why Valorant isn't working on consoles).

With an anticheat like this, Vanguard dev team is probably spending more time debugging why countless innocent people have X or Y not working on their machine, rather than actually trying to detect cheaters. Of course Valorant can afford it because a large part of their marketing campaign is based on this anticheat, but I don't think other game studios are willing to make such sacrifices.

And I doubt even Vanguard anticheat is enough to fight motivated hackers like the PCIe device thing I mentioned.

cool, thanks for the correction, I do have many that level of computer science knowledge, it is just personal feelings, such as when I play a game with EAC like a battlefield, war thunder apex. tbh the chance that I met a cheater is not that low, and sometimes it is very hard to distinguish rather a player is a cheater or not. And looks like the only "official "way to do this is to report all of them when you feel like they are cheating. I'm very curious did anyone who reports a cheater get feedback from the dev to say that the cheater is banned or something?

For the cheaters that steam snipe, they leave the video evidence, (surely steamer will report that cheaters), and did the cheater get banned?

Yeah, I'm sure a lot of it is my own perception. If you're someone who has had multiple games hijacked, I'm sure it feels like a big problem. I play a lot of DBD, and I can count the times I was sure there was a cheater in one of my matches on my hands.

Now subtle cheaters? Hard to say. Impossible, really. Maybe a whole lot. But I don't feel like it is the biggest issue in the game.

What percentage of matches do you think are affected by cheaters? Balance issues affect every match. 100% of them.

I mean if every match had a cheater in it, you'd have a case for saying that addressing cheating should priority one. But I'd be surprised if even 5% of matches have cheaters.

Is there data on how prevalent cheating is? I mean not just reports, because people report all manner of nonsense.

You underestimate streamers' contribution to the game. They attract tons of new players and inspire old players to keep playing.

I'm not a streamer and I didn't see much cheaters or streamsnipers in my games so I can't share Otz' problem. But my real problem is that my favorite dbd content creator leaving the game. I like dbd and probably I will keep playing for a while. But who knows how long I will play without inspiration from good streamers and youtubers.

Its not about the anticheat though... Any anti-cheat can be bluffed as it works on client side.

The issue is how bad game is designed.

Why is there 2 hours time limit? It can be shortened easily to 20min... So even if streamer like Otz will be caught by cheater and held hostage it will be only 20minutes not 120.

Next is report system does not work in dbd. From what I heard they only have pre- and post- game statistics and does not know what happens during the match.

It would he so easy to catch cheater using speed hack or any other crap hack.

IP leak is the worst though. I assume DBD code is a very big spaghetti then.

But what impresses me the most is how little Behavior does on their behalf. They ban cheaters after few weeks , they let their own Fog Whisperers and other very committed streamers to get their game ruined and decide to don't see the obvious.

If they don't care about their dedicated group of players what do you think they do with the rest of us... or this forum?

Shame...

Well, an ingame action verification system might be a good start, dont you think?

You have to understand that a computer is basically a calculator where the computer works for you. All it does it flip the switches with 1s and 0s and that's basically it. What anti-cheat software does is calculate and see if at the end that the numbers aren't incorrect. This can be easily bypassed if you understand how it works, deceiving the software into thinking that you're legitimately playing a online video game. I can't explain you all of this here because it most likely will get me permabanned from the forums because I'm exchanging sensitive information.

All I can say it's very easy to cheat, even on console with a customized USB stick you could basically use that USB as a medium and turn it into an aimbot machine. (Cronus Zen for example)

I recall a distributor of cheats once claiming that, by their estimate, roughly 10% of DBD players run cheats. That's one in ten players. With 5 players in every match, that comes down to half of all matches being corrupted by cheats.

But outside of that, what do you think cheating does to considerations of balance?

If someone loses a match of DBD, is that a balance problem, or was someone cheating?

If all survivors were to take on subtle cheats and boost their movespeed to 105%, and the kill rate for killers plummets as a result, is that a balance issue?

You can make balance changes, but if the problem is cheaters, you make the game -less- balanced, AND you don't deal with the cheaters.

SpookyLoopz also put out a statement agreeing with Otz, all while being held hostage for over an hour by a cheater. I quit playing after cheaters and overall toxic messages I received after each match. Not worth the stress.

How was that distasteful? He acknowledge it needs looking at and objectively stated it's a big problem to a small percent of the total player base. This is factual, not opinion.

You even acknowledge you "Don't know why BUT..."

I hate to play devils advocate but there are several things which make what you posted incorrect.

Vanguard is signed not only by Riot's certification team (which ensures it works properly without bugs), its also further certified with Microsoft's kernel certification process. All of these processes with Microsoft specifically scan for malware, bugs, hardware compatibility tests, and multiple extended validation tests.

Any quick google search will tell you what vanguard does, as well as the processes behind that.

I don't know how Microsoft certifications work but I can tell you that they certainly don't guarantee that your software has no bug, because there is no process in the world to guarantee that. There have been exploits found in drivers that millions of people used, and at the time these drivers were definitely certified too, until someone publicly revealed the exploit...

Anyway, I don't see how that contradicts my post. Even if Riot were able to prove that Vanguard had no exploit still shipping an anti-cheat that is permanently loaded comes with so many constraints that likely no game will be willing to use it besides extremely competitive titles. The game studio will have to multiply their technical support team size by 2x because now users are wondering why since they installed the game X or Y does not work anymore on the machine only to find out that the anticheat blocked it even though the game was not launched. For example I just did a google search and there is a person whose touch screen stopped working after they installed Valorant. Bugs like that.

This would flag blatant cheaters, but the subtle ones are the real problem. All this would do is turn every blatant cheater into a subtle cheater to avoid being banned, making a bad situation worse.

The real problem is the lack of a streamlined report system. The current report system is just awful. It's time-consuming and requires a basic competency for video capture and editing to submit clips of the match.

At least the subtle ones don't hold you hostage for two hours.

Correct, they don't.

They make you question your own skill, slowly driving you crazy through the course of the match, which is substantially less pleasant.

i still have to find blatant cheaters that will keep you in a match from more than 2 hours, i still personally found a lot more irritating the subtle ones

I wonder if BHVR already tried to take the CHEAT SELLERS sites to court. I remember Destiny 2 and Valorant did this last year, not sure how it went. But yes, this would be the most logical thing to do. As long as ppl can just google for cheats, the barrier is low to do so. Make it harder and more complicated and you'll see way less cheaters aswell.

The game needs to move to full server authority, which is the fairest and most objective approach. We should also get console only cross play so console players can avoid all of the PC cheaters that are running rampant these days.

You make it sound so simple. It's almost as if it is that simple. :^)