this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
93 points (95.1% liked)

Games

16651 readers
625 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Heavybell@lemmy.world 46 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Client-side anti-cheat is effectively pointless in the long run. The software is running on a machine the devs do not control, and ultimately that means it cannot be trusted. They should be working harder on server-side detection, but that requires work not just buying a product and dusting your hands off…

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Server authoritative multiplayer system (server only takes player inputs and spits out results, making editing data impossible), with a lag prediction system clientside, works wonders. Aimbotting will always exist, but detection should be server side.

[–] xan1242@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

Anti cheat is like DRM. It's a waiting game more than it is about actual direct protection.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

The best "server-side" anti cheat mechanisms online is streaming the game, and I am sure that eventually some talented developers are able to even write some aim bot (or more) for that.

Competitive games need a fully controlled environment. Doing it online with random unknown people should not be taken as serious as they currently do.

Alot about video games is not standardized. To be competitive all players should have the same hardware, internet connection, etc. So that it is actually individual skill that is measured, not just the size of players wallet.

But even then, developing skill takes alot of practice and time, which also, in our current system, can be converted into money. There just is no fair competition here anyway. Still many people believe in meritocracies...

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

about the time games move to stream only is when I stop buying games. I do not need that network saturation and latency.

[–] Heavybell@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Streaming the game is never gonna be viable for me because of where I live, even if I wanted it, and I very much don't. But then I don't care for the kind of competitive games where what hardware you run on makes that much difference, anyway.

I don't think we need "the best". Just to be able to detect and ban the egregious offenders would be enough.

I will say we agree on one thing; competitive games should not be taken as seriously as they are. But then I'm of the controversial opinion that esports made gaming worse.