this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2025
633 points (99.2% liked)
Linux
10709 readers
314 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How about this:
There may be some places where a protocol-level solution is not feasible. In that case yeah, require your anti-cheat, but only for competitive game modes. I wouldn't even be pissed if they didn't allow it to run on Linux, Linux makes it easy to do whatever the fuck you want with your computer and so a determined cheater will find a way to cheat. It sucks, but I feel like a lot of people don't really care that much about sweaty competitive game modes anyway. Just give me a way to fool around with friends, it's not that serious FFS.
Casuals stop playing games when cheaters prevent them having fun, and it's the casuals they need to keep happy to keep their game alive.
IMO the answer is to internally maintain a "fun to play with" metric. It would be specific to the game, but each player's actions and interactions with other players would be evaluated to determine how "fun" they are to play with (might need to be multidimensional, since different players like having different types of interactions). It doesn't matter if they're cheating, or if they're just really good, or if they use cheesy strategies, etc, if the person isn't fun to play with, then match them with other people who are similarly unfun to play with.
This would cover your point that, if there's a cheater in the lobby, and their behavior somehow makes everyone have more fun, then who cares?