51
submitted 9 months ago by alessandro@lemmy.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago

yeah but then it will only really work if the developers decide to implement it.

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 4 points 9 months ago

That's how it has to be.

Hijacking a game's execution willl get you banned from anything with any kind of anticheat every time.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago

I don't necessarily disagree but anticheat can be adjusted.

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

There's a lot of super invasive stuff companies are doing that I don't support, but hijacking execution to inject code is something they won't and shouldn't permit. (If they're detecting it by touching the kernel they should be in prison, but with any legitimate methods they have at their disposal, if they can detect anyone hijacking their execution, it should always be a ban. There is no legitimate source or way to do that in a competitive game.)

AMD working with the companies directly to patch in what they need is the only way it can work. Just shipping that code was insane.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

So you argue that video game anti-cheat should prevent good technology from existing. Cool cool cool.

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

There's a legitimate way to do it.

Hijacking code is not good technology.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

That's not hijacking code. That's working on a data flow.

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

No, users were banned because AMD took it upon themselves to intercept and change code execution.

It was a completely fucking bonkers decision that anyone remotely aware of game development in any context should have known was literally guaranteed to get anyone who used it banned. It was not, and fundamentally cannot be, acceptable in a competitive game.

The only possible valid way to do it is by working with developers to make the required changes.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

You have an authoritarian view on competitive gaming. And you're saying this should be a hard requirement for hardware development. That's an extreme point of view.

It's video games we're talking. If some asshat is cheating in a video game, that's irrelevant to hardware development.

I mean, do also endorse softwares that plague your kernel to prevent cheating? Why don't you use special hardware for your competitive gaming if that's so important?

The world doesn't live around competitive gaming.

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 0 points 9 months ago

It's a gaming only "feature" that is guaranteed to get 100% of people who use it banned.

Yes, intercepting code is bad.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago

I mostly agree. I'm assuming AMD working with the companies also means anticheat will be adjusted to allow it.

[-] null@slrpnk.net 1 points 9 months ago

yeah but then it will only really work if the developers decide to implement it.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Thats my point sorta.

It would be cool if it did.

this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2024
51 points (100.0% liked)

PC Gaming

8581 readers
705 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS