This really pisses me off. I understand that there are a lot of people who are really bothered by cheaters in GTA online. I'm not, at all. The free roam mode of that game has always been a grindy...
This really pisses me off. I understand that there are a lot of people who are really bothered by cheaters in GTA online. I'm not, at all. The free roam mode of that game has always been a grindy unfun mess to me absolutely full to the brim with whales murdering you over and over with whatever the latest new overpowered, tone breaking bullshit rockstar decided to add in the last update. At this point the game is goofier and more busted than saints row but without any of its charm.
I always enjoyed GTA online as a party game with friends. A lot of the custom game modes are fun, despite how broken the game still is. As such, I'm not affected by cheaters in even the slightest bit, so for me, I'm just losing the ability to play on my deck for no reason at all.
I understand playing games with cheaters is frustrating, but it always seemed to me that the most popular cheats in GTA were just free money to get around the ridiculous grind in that game.
This makes me think the primary motivation is the same as it's been with rockstar and this game for the past decade+ at this point: sell more shark cards.
I wonder if it's a test for the upcoming GTA6 (and subsequent GTA Online "2" release), to get people acclimatized to it. It doesn't even make sense to preserve selling Shark Cards as the money...
I wonder if it's a test for the upcoming GTA6 (and subsequent GTA Online "2" release), to get people acclimatized to it. It doesn't even make sense to preserve selling Shark Cards as the money hackers and people who use those services have all made (respective) bank and are long gone. There doesn't seem to be any influx of new GTA5 players to capitalize on by locking out cheaters.
All I can really think is that this is setting the stage for GTA6's online so that anti-cheat is baked in right from the jump. This GTA Online didn't start out as predatory, it really seems like Rockstar was surprised how big of a success it was after GTA4's Online barely made a splash. They probably also got a bit confused with why RDR Online didn't take off the same way but it's easy to see a few reasons why.
If we see GTA6 come out with a Fornite approach of customization and premium cosmetics, I think it will be very clear what the situation really is.
Nov 5, 2021 https://store.steampowered.com/news/group/4145017/view/3104663180636096966
BattlEye on Proton integration has reached a point where all a developer needs to do is reach out BattlEye to enable it for their title. No additional work is required by the developer besides that communication. Partners have started turning on BattlEye support for their titles, meaning these games are now working on Steam Deck.
I'm think it's opt-in because the linux version is less secure. Correct me if I'm wrong, but BattleEye is a kernel level anti-cheat. The proton compatibility shim might catch something running in...
I'm think it's opt-in because the linux version is less secure.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but BattleEye is a kernel level anti-cheat. The proton compatibility shim might catch something running in the same wine/proton prefix, but it would still be possible to write undetectable linux hacks.
Yeah you've got the gist of it, though I hesitate to agree that *kernel access means undetectable hacks. I intended to imply that this was a choice by Rockstar and not a technical limitation so...
Yeah you've got the gist of it, though I hesitate to agree that *kernel access means undetectable hacks. I intended to imply that this was a choice by Rockstar and not a technical limitation so one shouldn't hold their breath waiting for Linux support, thank you for the additional context.
This phrasing makes it sound like it’s easier to cheat on Linux. In reality I think developers just choose to force this because they are lazy and they want to normalize this type of invasive...
less secure.
This phrasing makes it sound like it’s easier to cheat on Linux. In reality I think developers just choose to force this because they are lazy and they want to normalize this type of invasive anticheat.
I mean, it definitely would be easier to cheat on Linux in the above scenario. Would it move the needle in most multiplayer games in terms of experience? Probably not unless the game rewards...
I mean, it definitely would be easier to cheat on Linux in the above scenario.
Would it move the needle in most multiplayer games in terms of experience? Probably not unless the game rewards botting in some fashion, which some games definitely do.
Can you elaborate? I’m not an expert on Linux kernel/user space interactions, but I do use Linux as my daily driver and for gaming, so I’m interested to learn if you have some additional...
I mean, it definitely would be easier to cheat on Linux in the above scenario.
Can you elaborate? I’m not an expert on Linux kernel/user space interactions, but I do use Linux as my daily driver and for gaming, so I’m interested to learn if you have some additional knowledge.
My understanding is that software that crosses the line between kernel and user space is pretty tightly constrained due to Linux access controls, so my thought was that it would be difficult to have a kernel process running that monitors and interacts with a user space UI application. Maybe a companion program running in user space would make it easier, but that would be detectable by more traditional anticheat
Well, once they are in kernel space they can hook any syscall they want, including whatever is used by the anticheat. So whether they have a loadable kernel module or just a patched kernel they...
Well, once they are in kernel space they can hook any syscall they want, including whatever is used by the anticheat.
So whether they have a loadable kernel module or just a patched kernel they can effectively disable anti-cheat and run whatever userspace hacks they want.
It's still possible to write undetectable Windows hacks, and to use macros, aimbots. Not that aimbots really matter, due to the leveling system and pay to win upgrades in the game they have...
It's still possible to write undetectable Windows hacks, and to use macros, aimbots. Not that aimbots really matter, due to the leveling system and pay to win upgrades in the game they have sanctioned aimbots already. This does next to nothing to combat cheaters over allowing Linux support with BattleEye.
Well, true but in order to get something in kernel space as a hack you would need to do a lot more on Linux. To the point that I highly doubt hackers on Linux are an issue at all.
Well, true but in order to get something in kernel space as a hack you would need to do a lot more on Linux. To the point that I highly doubt hackers on Linux are an issue at all.
There are so many good games out there to play and I have so little time to play them, that I've reached a point where rootkits and invasive DRM are now a disqualifying factor for me when choosing...
There are so many good games out there to play and I have so little time to play them, that I've reached a point where rootkits and invasive DRM are now a disqualifying factor for me when choosing what to buy.
If I can't run it on my Steam Deck because of garbage like this, I'll buy one of the many other games competing for my time instead.
I feel really mixed on this news. The online was of course an utter wasteland of cheaters and spammers. A full server (about 20 people) would be guaranteed to have at least 1-2 cheaters, generally...
I feel really mixed on this news. The online was of course an utter wasteland of cheaters and spammers. A full server (about 20 people) would be guaranteed to have at least 1-2 cheaters, generally causing havoc and trolling others. As a result I would play in solo lobbies almost exclusively. However I'm feeling really uncomfortable with the anti-cheat that Rockstar has bundled. Here's one of the terms they show during install:
BattlEye may scan Licensee's entire random access memory (RAM), and any game-related and system-related files and folders on Licensee's system using cheat-program-identifying algorithms, report results of such algorithms to other connected computers and/or to Licensor and store such information for the sole purpose of preventing and detecting the use of cheat programs. BattlEye only scans and/or reports data which absolutely needs to be scanned and/or reported to meet this purpose.
That's extremely invasive. If your password manager is open, they can scan that memory. If you're logged into your bank's website, they can sniff those cookies, or just view the account numbers directly. Your memory sees everything your computer is doing. Giving up that level of privacy just doesn't seem worth it to play a video game.
Of course it isn't. These systems are disastrously invasive, and no-one who cares about any of the data on their computer should be running them. Never thought I'd be saying that I'm pinning my...
Giving up that level of privacy just doesn't seem worth it to play a video game.
Of course it isn't. These systems are disastrously invasive, and no-one who cares about any of the data on their computer should be running them.
Never thought I'd be saying that I'm pinning my hopes on Microsoft, who seem to be making noises about protecting their systems from invasive kernel level software after crowdstrike, and I don't even run Windows, but if the industry moves away from kernel level malware, it could help the linux gaming landscape as well.
Remains to be seen if they do though. And what follows, if they do.
You sound like you might be more knowledgeable than I am about this stuff, so here is my question: Why is any program allowed to read another program’s memory space? Shouldn’t it be relatively...
You sound like you might be more knowledgeable than I am about this stuff, so here is my question:
Why is any program allowed to read another program’s memory space? Shouldn’t it be relatively trivial with virtual memory to just not map other programs memory spaces to a particular program?
I am sure it makes sense in some particular scenarios, like ghidra or antivirus, but they could make it difficult to enable for a given program. For example, macOS has SIP (system integrity protection). OS files cannot be modified except by updates. There are no exceptions to that rule (even for updates, I think they use a sort of dual partition scheme so there is a fallback in case of a failed update). In order to disable SIP, you have to reboot into recovery mode, make the changes you need, and reboot back into normal mode.
If windows (and Mac and Linux) had a function like this, it should solve the need for this sort of anticheat as well, since this anticheat is targeting memory modification, right?
Is this actually a much harder problem than I think it is?
This software is running as a kernel-mode driver. It's extremely low-level, and has greater access than most software running on your machine. It's the kind of thing usually reserved for antivirus...
Why is any program allowed to read another program’s memory space? Shouldn’t it be relatively trivial with virtual memory to just not map other programs memory spaces to a particular program?
This software is running as a kernel-mode driver. It's extremely low-level, and has greater access than most software running on your machine. It's the kind of thing usually reserved for antivirus or hardware drivers.
Anti-cheat software prefers to run at this level because it can see everything, including any cheat software you're running on your PC. Unfortunately, it poses a lot of concerns for end-users in doing so. Programming mistakes can result in much greater damage than usual (see the recent CrowdStrike incident), and malware can be extremely difficult to detect or remove. Even well-intentioned software may present privacy concerns, as this software is constantly scanning and sending off data to remote servers.
What about this: First, kernel mode drivers should be significantly harder to install, like SIP. Next, Microsoft could provide an API to show which programs have kernel drivers on the system....
What about this:
First, kernel mode drivers should be significantly harder to install, like SIP. Next, Microsoft could provide an API to show which programs have kernel drivers on the system. Likely this would require driver signing and integrity protection, but that should be doable. Now all anti-cheat has to do is validate that list against known programs. The actual anti-cheat software doesn’t need kernel drivers itself if it can verify what programs do have kernel drivers. Pair that with secure boot to verify everything down to the firmware, and that should do the trick right?
That doesn’t solve the Linux/proton/steam deck issue, but that would at least solve the privacy issues. These seem like features that any modern mature OS should provide. Windows is almost 40 years old at this point. Why are hacky software like these anti cheats with kernel drivers still required?
I am not an expert in Windows kernel drivers, but my understanding is Windows has APIs similar to what you're talking about. They just can't fully lock down the kernel due to a 2009 EU agreement...
I am not an expert in Windows kernel drivers, but my understanding is Windows has APIs similar to what you're talking about. They just can't fully lock down the kernel due to a 2009 EU agreement that prevents Microsoft from locking down their kernel.
That's beside the point though because the reason anti-cheat wants kernel-level access is because it can see and record absolutely everything happening on the system. Even if Microsoft locked down their kernel, anti-cheat would still want that level of visibility to monitor and prevent cheat programs.
I have GTA 5. I also use Linux exclusively. I also have Steam Deck. I don't care about this. Rockstar made some not-really-good things already - taking down original trilogy and making the...
I have GTA 5. I also use Linux exclusively. I also have Steam Deck. I don't care about this. Rockstar made some not-really-good things already - taking down original trilogy and making the "Definitive edition" that is worse in many aspects (see some comparison videos; it's clear it was.made for people to cough up money, not to.please gamers; have a look at Mafia Definitive edition to see how it should be made), GTA 5 can't be played offline (even just story mode) - so Rockstar is on my blacklist. I'd love to play RDR2, but I won't buy it out of principle and I won't pirate it because of the same reason.
It's sad they introduce something new after all the years that will eventually cut off some of the playerbase. Since it didn't matter up to this point why even bother now?
That’s so frustrating. I feel banning unnecessary network connectivity retirements would be a useful addition to the proposed law about retired games in the EU. https://www.stopkillinggames.com/
GTA 5 can't be played offline (even just story mode)
That’s so frustrating. I feel banning unnecessary network connectivity retirements would be a useful addition to the proposed law about retired games in the EU.
My guess is that it's a way for them to pre-empt the fact that they're gonna put it in GTA6. It really does suck though, I've heard that there's a way to enable BattlEye for Linux too on...
My guess is that it's a way for them to pre-empt the fact that they're gonna put it in GTA6. It really does suck though, I've heard that there's a way to enable BattlEye for Linux too on Rockstar's side, but who knows if they're actually gonna do it.
I'm not sure about anticheat on Linux, but I remember hearimg that there is some anticheat that works on Linux by itaelf but developers are just lazy or uncompetent to implement it for Linux (in...
I'm not sure about anticheat on Linux, but I remember hearimg that there is some anticheat that works on Linux by itaelf but developers are just lazy or uncompetent to implement it for Linux (in the game).
Yeah the fact that there's not even a way to play offline just makes me sick. I hate the future we're heading towards (or... that we're experiencing already) So now I need to enable an anti-cheat...
Yeah the fact that there's not even a way to play offline just makes me sick. I hate the future we're heading towards (or... that we're experiencing already)
So now I need to enable an anti-cheat to... play solo? Get f'd Rockstar
GTA5 can be played offline. There may be a periodic online check that is erroring out and preventing the game from being launched offline but adding -scOfflineOnly to the launch properties will...
GTA5 can be played offline. There may be a periodic online check that is erroring out and preventing the game from being launched offline but adding -scOfflineOnly to the launch properties will allow the game to be played offline.
This would have come in handy back in the day when I was till interested in playing the game. I got ao frustrated over the time that I don't even want to. Thanks for everyone who might find your...
This would have come in handy back in the day when I was till interested in playing the game. I got ao frustrated over the time that I don't even want to. Thanks for everyone who might find your commnt useful, though!
I worry about my PC Gaming future as a linux user, both on my desktop, and steam deck. I am giving one careful eye on the upcoming Monster Hunter Wilds, and fervently hoping that my all time...
I worry about my PC Gaming future as a linux user, both on my desktop, and steam deck. I am giving one careful eye on the upcoming Monster Hunter Wilds, and fervently hoping that my all time favourite game series doesn't pull crap like this or I'll be monumentally sad
These companies don't care, and the users don't care that they have invasive exploitable rootkits installed on their computer to "keep them safe", they'll just cheer it all on like a bunch of shambling zombies. It's bollocks, the whole lot is just bollocks and I'm tired of it.
Gaming On Linux says GTAV was one of the top played titles on Steam Deck I think blocking steam deck as a popular title is a bold gamble, and I wonder if other publishers will follow suit. This is...
I think blocking steam deck as a popular title is a bold gamble, and I wonder if other publishers will follow suit. This is probably a data-driven decision to raise the bottom line on in-game purchases, or a trial balloon for blocking steam deck with GTA6. Either way I hope it doesn’t pay off and we see Linux compatibility return.
A recent AAA title that made a similar decision to block steam deck was Concord. I don’t think Linux support was even slightly significant in Concord’s failure to launch, but as someone who didn’t purchase because of Linux support I want my abstinence to make a difference.
I remember hearing that GTA6 does not have a confirmed PC release date (and a quick Google seems to confirm that). Seems like Rockstar is just not prioritizing PC at all, so I doubt Linux would be...
I remember hearing that GTA6 does not have a confirmed PC release date (and a quick Google seems to confirm that). Seems like Rockstar is just not prioritizing PC at all, so I doubt Linux would be supported
That this problem still exists blows my mind. Anti-cheat seems to be the perfect fit for eBPF, which Windows and Linux now both support. Maybe this is coming and all it takes is more steam deck sales?
That this problem still exists blows my mind. Anti-cheat seems to be the perfect fit for eBPF, which Windows and Linux now both support. Maybe this is coming and all it takes is more steam deck sales?
In your experience, how rampant is cheating in GTA online? I imagine the number of steam deck and Linux users is insignificant compared to the amount of players who suffer from cheaters in-game.
In your experience, how rampant is cheating in GTA online? I imagine the number of steam deck and Linux users is insignificant compared to the amount of players who suffer from cheaters in-game.
It's omni-present, basically. And the worse part is that they can do things like give you hacked items or hacked money, which will then cause YOU to be banned in the next banwave. To remedy it,...
It's omni-present, basically. And the worse part is that they can do things like give you hacked items or hacked money, which will then cause YOU to be banned in the next banwave. To remedy it, you have to contact Rockstar support, who will remove it for you.
But that's a pretty big inconvenience to be forced on you.
Do you mean those items are gifted without the recipient intervening? As a non-player, that sounds awful - is there really no chance to just never accept cash/guns from anyone to avoid being...
Do you mean those items are gifted without the recipient intervening? As a non-player, that sounds awful - is there really no chance to just never accept cash/guns from anyone to avoid being caught up in this kind of thing?
Incredible. But what can a company like Rockstar do except use ridiculously invasive anti-cheat if the online experience is so broken by cheaters, I wonder? Hence the benefit of dedicated games...
Incredible. But what can a company like Rockstar do except use ridiculously invasive anti-cheat if the online experience is so broken by cheaters, I wonder? Hence the benefit of dedicated games consoles, I suppose, which can be ultra-locked down.
Valve’s Counter-Strike 2 is free to play but offers a paid matchmaking pool that should theoretically have less cheaters. I think Rockstar could do something similar, a multiplayer pool for those...
Valve’s Counter-Strike 2 is free to play but offers a paid matchmaking pool that should theoretically have less cheaters. I think Rockstar could do something similar, a multiplayer pool for those with BattlEye enabled and another pool for those without. That would be more work, and doesn’t address the real problem of cheaters generating money bypassing in-game purchases.
They can use a "ridiculously invasive" anti-cheat. Is what it is. But it does work. I'm always impressed at how few hackers are in Valorant - Riot's done a great job at that. It's equally...
But what can a company like Rockstar do except use ridiculously invasive anti-cheat if the online experience is so broken by cheaters,
They can use a "ridiculously invasive" anti-cheat. Is what it is. But it does work. I'm always impressed at how few hackers are in Valorant - Riot's done a great job at that. It's equally impressive because there's a direct comparison point: CS:GO 2 is INFESTED with hackers. It's a night and day difference, and really shows the power of a good anti-cheat.
IMO it's better for the player's who are OK with installing kernel level anti-cheats to have a good experience than for everyone to have an awful experience. Even if you were a linux user, I'd rather just not play than play in hacker cesspools.
This really pisses me off. I understand that there are a lot of people who are really bothered by cheaters in GTA online. I'm not, at all. The free roam mode of that game has always been a grindy unfun mess to me absolutely full to the brim with whales murdering you over and over with whatever the latest new overpowered, tone breaking bullshit rockstar decided to add in the last update. At this point the game is goofier and more busted than saints row but without any of its charm.
I always enjoyed GTA online as a party game with friends. A lot of the custom game modes are fun, despite how broken the game still is. As such, I'm not affected by cheaters in even the slightest bit, so for me, I'm just losing the ability to play on my deck for no reason at all.
I understand playing games with cheaters is frustrating, but it always seemed to me that the most popular cheats in GTA were just free money to get around the ridiculous grind in that game.
This makes me think the primary motivation is the same as it's been with rockstar and this game for the past decade+ at this point: sell more shark cards.
I wonder if it's a test for the upcoming GTA6 (and subsequent GTA Online "2" release), to get people acclimatized to it. It doesn't even make sense to preserve selling Shark Cards as the money hackers and people who use those services have all made (respective) bank and are long gone. There doesn't seem to be any influx of new GTA5 players to capitalize on by locking out cheaters.
All I can really think is that this is setting the stage for GTA6's online so that anti-cheat is baked in right from the jump. This GTA Online didn't start out as predatory, it really seems like Rockstar was surprised how big of a success it was after GTA4's Online barely made a splash. They probably also got a bit confused with why RDR Online didn't take off the same way but it's easy to see a few reasons why.
If we see GTA6 come out with a Fornite approach of customization and premium cosmetics, I think it will be very clear what the situation really is.
Nov 5, 2021
https://store.steampowered.com/news/group/4145017/view/3104663180636096966
I'm think it's opt-in because the linux version is less secure.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but BattleEye is a kernel level anti-cheat. The proton compatibility shim might catch something running in the same wine/proton prefix, but it would still be possible to write undetectable linux hacks.
Yeah you've got the gist of it, though I hesitate to agree that *kernel access means undetectable hacks. I intended to imply that this was a choice by Rockstar and not a technical limitation so one shouldn't hold their breath waiting for Linux support, thank you for the additional context.
*Edit: clarification, removed 'no'
This phrasing makes it sound like it’s easier to cheat on Linux. In reality I think developers just choose to force this because they are lazy and they want to normalize this type of invasive anticheat.
I mean, it definitely would be easier to cheat on Linux in the above scenario.
Would it move the needle in most multiplayer games in terms of experience? Probably not unless the game rewards botting in some fashion, which some games definitely do.
Can you elaborate? I’m not an expert on Linux kernel/user space interactions, but I do use Linux as my daily driver and for gaming, so I’m interested to learn if you have some additional knowledge.
My understanding is that software that crosses the line between kernel and user space is pretty tightly constrained due to Linux access controls, so my thought was that it would be difficult to have a kernel process running that monitors and interacts with a user space UI application. Maybe a companion program running in user space would make it easier, but that would be detectable by more traditional anticheat
Well, once they are in kernel space they can hook any syscall they want, including whatever is used by the anticheat.
So whether they have a loadable kernel module or just a patched kernel they can effectively disable anti-cheat and run whatever userspace hacks they want.
It's still possible to write undetectable Windows hacks, and to use macros, aimbots. Not that aimbots really matter, due to the leveling system and pay to win upgrades in the game they have sanctioned aimbots already. This does next to nothing to combat cheaters over allowing Linux support with BattleEye.
Well, true but in order to get something in kernel space as a hack you would need to do a lot more on Linux. To the point that I highly doubt hackers on Linux are an issue at all.
So to get the message clear - Rockstar doean't care...?
That's my impression at least.
It seems like that to me too.
There are so many good games out there to play and I have so little time to play them, that I've reached a point where rootkits and invasive DRM are now a disqualifying factor for me when choosing what to buy.
If I can't run it on my Steam Deck because of garbage like this, I'll buy one of the many other games competing for my time instead.
I'm the same. My game library is so big that I don't even have to buy a game in next 5-10 years and still have something to play.
I feel really mixed on this news. The online was of course an utter wasteland of cheaters and spammers. A full server (about 20 people) would be guaranteed to have at least 1-2 cheaters, generally causing havoc and trolling others. As a result I would play in solo lobbies almost exclusively. However I'm feeling really uncomfortable with the anti-cheat that Rockstar has bundled. Here's one of the terms they show during install:
That's extremely invasive. If your password manager is open, they can scan that memory. If you're logged into your bank's website, they can sniff those cookies, or just view the account numbers directly. Your memory sees everything your computer is doing. Giving up that level of privacy just doesn't seem worth it to play a video game.
Of course it isn't. These systems are disastrously invasive, and no-one who cares about any of the data on their computer should be running them.
Never thought I'd be saying that I'm pinning my hopes on Microsoft, who seem to be making noises about protecting their systems from invasive kernel level software after crowdstrike, and I don't even run Windows, but if the industry moves away from kernel level malware, it could help the linux gaming landscape as well.
Remains to be seen if they do though. And what follows, if they do.
You sound like you might be more knowledgeable than I am about this stuff, so here is my question:
Why is any program allowed to read another program’s memory space? Shouldn’t it be relatively trivial with virtual memory to just not map other programs memory spaces to a particular program?
I am sure it makes sense in some particular scenarios, like ghidra or antivirus, but they could make it difficult to enable for a given program. For example, macOS has SIP (system integrity protection). OS files cannot be modified except by updates. There are no exceptions to that rule (even for updates, I think they use a sort of dual partition scheme so there is a fallback in case of a failed update). In order to disable SIP, you have to reboot into recovery mode, make the changes you need, and reboot back into normal mode.
If windows (and Mac and Linux) had a function like this, it should solve the need for this sort of anticheat as well, since this anticheat is targeting memory modification, right?
Is this actually a much harder problem than I think it is?
This software is running as a kernel-mode driver. It's extremely low-level, and has greater access than most software running on your machine. It's the kind of thing usually reserved for antivirus or hardware drivers.
Anti-cheat software prefers to run at this level because it can see everything, including any cheat software you're running on your PC. Unfortunately, it poses a lot of concerns for end-users in doing so. Programming mistakes can result in much greater damage than usual (see the recent CrowdStrike incident), and malware can be extremely difficult to detect or remove. Even well-intentioned software may present privacy concerns, as this software is constantly scanning and sending off data to remote servers.
What about this:
First, kernel mode drivers should be significantly harder to install, like SIP. Next, Microsoft could provide an API to show which programs have kernel drivers on the system. Likely this would require driver signing and integrity protection, but that should be doable. Now all anti-cheat has to do is validate that list against known programs. The actual anti-cheat software doesn’t need kernel drivers itself if it can verify what programs do have kernel drivers. Pair that with secure boot to verify everything down to the firmware, and that should do the trick right?
That doesn’t solve the Linux/proton/steam deck issue, but that would at least solve the privacy issues. These seem like features that any modern mature OS should provide. Windows is almost 40 years old at this point. Why are hacky software like these anti cheats with kernel drivers still required?
I am not an expert in Windows kernel drivers, but my understanding is Windows has APIs similar to what you're talking about. They just can't fully lock down the kernel due to a 2009 EU agreement that prevents Microsoft from locking down their kernel.
That's beside the point though because the reason anti-cheat wants kernel-level access is because it can see and record absolutely everything happening on the system. Even if Microsoft locked down their kernel, anti-cheat would still want that level of visibility to monitor and prevent cheat programs.
I have GTA 5. I also use Linux exclusively. I also have Steam Deck. I don't care about this. Rockstar made some not-really-good things already - taking down original trilogy and making the "Definitive edition" that is worse in many aspects (see some comparison videos; it's clear it was.made for people to cough up money, not to.please gamers; have a look at Mafia Definitive edition to see how it should be made), GTA 5 can't be played offline (even just story mode) - so Rockstar is on my blacklist. I'd love to play RDR2, but I won't buy it out of principle and I won't pirate it because of the same reason.
It's sad they introduce something new after all the years that will eventually cut off some of the playerbase. Since it didn't matter up to this point why even bother now?
That’s so frustrating. I feel banning unnecessary network connectivity retirements would be a useful addition to the proposed law about retired games in the EU.
https://www.stopkillinggames.com/
We are hurtling towards a glorious future where we will all install company-sanctioned rootkits for the privilege of playing single-player content.
My guess is that it's a way for them to pre-empt the fact that they're gonna put it in GTA6. It really does suck though, I've heard that there's a way to enable BattlEye for Linux too on Rockstar's side, but who knows if they're actually gonna do it.
I'm not sure about anticheat on Linux, but I remember hearimg that there is some anticheat that works on Linux by itaelf but developers are just lazy or uncompetent to implement it for Linux (in the game).
Yeah the fact that there's not even a way to play offline just makes me sick. I hate the future we're heading towards (or... that we're experiencing already)
So now I need to enable an anti-cheat to... play solo? Get f'd Rockstar
GTA5 can be played offline. There may be a periodic online check that is erroring out and preventing the game from being launched offline but adding
-scOfflineOnlyto the launch properties will allow the game to be played offline.This would have come in handy back in the day when I was till interested in playing the game. I got ao frustrated over the time that I don't even want to. Thanks for everyone who might find your commnt useful, though!
Good to know, thanks
I worry about my PC Gaming future as a linux user, both on my desktop, and steam deck. I am giving one careful eye on the upcoming Monster Hunter Wilds, and fervently hoping that my all time favourite game series doesn't pull crap like this or I'll be monumentally sad
These companies don't care, and the users don't care that they have invasive exploitable rootkits installed on their computer to "keep them safe", they'll just cheer it all on like a bunch of shambling zombies. It's bollocks, the whole lot is just bollocks and I'm tired of it.
Gaming On Linux says GTAV was one of the top played titles on Steam Deck
I think blocking steam deck as a popular title is a bold gamble, and I wonder if other publishers will follow suit. This is probably a data-driven decision to raise the bottom line on in-game purchases, or a trial balloon for blocking steam deck with GTA6. Either way I hope it doesn’t pay off and we see Linux compatibility return.
A recent AAA title that made a similar decision to block steam deck was Concord. I don’t think Linux support was even slightly significant in Concord’s failure to launch, but as someone who didn’t purchase because of Linux support I want my abstinence to make a difference.
I remember hearing that GTA6 does not have a confirmed PC release date (and a quick Google seems to confirm that). Seems like Rockstar is just not prioritizing PC at all, so I doubt Linux would be supported
That this problem still exists blows my mind. Anti-cheat seems to be the perfect fit for eBPF, which Windows and Linux now both support. Maybe this is coming and all it takes is more steam deck sales?
Good, it’s really needed it. Better late than never. Hopefully GTA6 online ships with an anti cheat.
In your experience, how rampant is cheating in GTA online? I imagine the number of steam deck and Linux users is insignificant compared to the amount of players who suffer from cheaters in-game.
It's omni-present, basically. And the worse part is that they can do things like give you hacked items or hacked money, which will then cause YOU to be banned in the next banwave. To remedy it, you have to contact Rockstar support, who will remove it for you.
But that's a pretty big inconvenience to be forced on you.
Do you mean those items are gifted without the recipient intervening? As a non-player, that sounds awful - is there really no chance to just never accept cash/guns from anyone to avoid being caught up in this kind of thing?
Nope, nothing you can do other than hope you don’t encounter one.
Incredible. But what can a company like Rockstar do except use ridiculously invasive anti-cheat if the online experience is so broken by cheaters, I wonder? Hence the benefit of dedicated games consoles, I suppose, which can be ultra-locked down.
Valve’s Counter-Strike 2 is free to play but offers a paid matchmaking pool that should theoretically have less cheaters. I think Rockstar could do something similar, a multiplayer pool for those with BattlEye enabled and another pool for those without. That would be more work, and doesn’t address the real problem of cheaters generating money bypassing in-game purchases.
They can use a "ridiculously invasive" anti-cheat. Is what it is. But it does work. I'm always impressed at how few hackers are in Valorant - Riot's done a great job at that. It's equally impressive because there's a direct comparison point: CS:GO 2 is INFESTED with hackers. It's a night and day difference, and really shows the power of a good anti-cheat.
IMO it's better for the player's who are OK with installing kernel level anti-cheats to have a good experience than for everyone to have an awful experience. Even if you were a linux user, I'd rather just not play than play in hacker cesspools.