Comment on Begun the kernel wars have
dogs0n@sh.itjust.works 1 day agoGood eye.
I would think there’s money to gain by keeping your players engaged longer by having less cheaters, but I guess theres also an incentive to keep just enough cheaters that you can steadily ban them for more game sales (not that I think that’s happening, i hope not).
Anyways they take our money, we expect whats best for us, within reason of course.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
I doubt the revenue from sales to cheaters is that significant compared to the risk of losing players. I think the simplest explanation is that catching cheaters is hard (read: expensive), so they’re happy with catching the most obvious cheaters with off the shelf solutions (i.e. the Pareto principle).
dogs0n@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Yeah as I mention I don’t really believe it either, just brought it up because it’s a thought.
And yup the simplest explanation is usually the right one.
I do wish they would stop invading our systems with their current anti-cheats (invasive ones) though, that’s the main thing I am worried about.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
I refuse to play them. If they want kernel level anticheat, they can submit the source under the GPL to the Linux kernel devs for consideration, because that’s the only way I’d consider using it. No game is worth compromising my system’s security.