Forum Discussion

Re: Easy fix for Cheaters, this will solve everything.

It's... not easy at all to add something like a kill cam. There's a lot that goes into it. You basically need to track everything going on all the time in the game, constantly capture it, use storage (whether client side or server side) to store this data, and then make it playable both in the client for players to see and in the server so whatever game moderators they hire to overlook that system can review it later if someone gets reported.

Would it help? Yes. Would it solve everything? No. Is it as easy as 123? Definitely not.

18 Replies

  • @SDCoreTv cod implemented kill cams, and no it's not as much storage used as u might think, it can be treated as an external memory like twitch.tv has, (After a streaming session everything gets saved "online"), And also, your talking about the multi billionaire company EA. They can implement this if they would spare the programmers for it instead of re-using old content and bs like re-texturing the old kings canyon map etc.

    And it would most likely fix everything. Will it still be cheaters, Yes, but they would be far more at riskt, like the scripters in League of legends, or the scripters in wow, basically non-existent cuz of their security. EA can do this to. This deterrs cheaters.

    It's not as easy as 1,2,3, But they had 1 2 3 4 Seasons to do this.
  • @SDCoreTv also to add , if your not a programmer please don't comment on this, but do you know how Nvidia's 20 min shadow replay work ? There are easy technique out there, and keep in mind that shadowreplay uses 1 gpu from 1 system of any ordinary computer. Of course EA can pull this off.
  • @PRX_its3 


    Im sorry but you are obviously not a programmer either if you think that killcams in a BR could work like Shadowplay with the tech of this day and age. NO  kill cam can continuously record the last minute or so each and every player on each and every server. Thats just not how kill cam works, either in PuBG, Overwatch or COD. How it works is pretty much how the old Quake replay files did, i.e. it collect data so the game can reproduce the events locally. 

    And here is where my knowledge of programming ends, because for some reason that I cant explain, pretty much NO kill cams in previous BRs have been able to reconstruct 100% accurate replays. In fact, the introduction of kill cams in PUBG actually made the hack-suspicions even worse since people didnt understand this limitation with kill cams. The crosshair recoil for instance, would look much smoother and controlled in the replay than in reallity (trust me, I compared a reply with a recording and so much was just a little off).

    My point is; kill cams should only be used to get a general idea what happened in a fight; players position, general movement, weapons used etc, but when players start using kill cams as a 100% proof what happened, then we are in trouble.

  • PRX_its3's avatar
    PRX_its3
    6 years ago
    @Babbediboopi Thats because your streaming bits from your closest local servers compared to the person which the kill cam captured from, They dont have dedicated servers for kill cam mechanics. This is why in other games you experience an off/delay when watching. ALtho a dedicated server for this purpose would cost alot and alot of money, it's possible.
  • @PRX_its3 

    I might misunderstand you now, but what do you mean with "streaming bits from local servers" etc? My point was that the only way a kill cam can work in a BR is to collect data and then let the client of the viewer of the kill cam reconstructs the sequence locally based on that data. Its not possible from a technical standpoint to actually have a kill cam that records clips retroactively. So it should have nothing to do with streaming limitations etc, since its just a couple of mbs of data that reconstructs the sequence.

    And the problem is that it seems to be impossible for any replay or kill cam technologies to reconstruct 100% copies of what really happened, especially when it comes to crosshair position since that would require like 100-150 data points on exact x,y,z position every second. Less than this and the reconstruction would need to interpolate the position for the missing ones and suddenly, the replay isnt accurate anymore. So all Im saying is that a kill cam would probably just increase false cheater accusations.

  • PRX_its3's avatar
    PRX_its3
    6 years ago
    @Babbediboopi i mean there's a few different ongoing technologys out there. i'de imagane something as simple as overwolfs replay would do, that is a 100% accurate playback footage, and you can have algorithms that recognizes a death by a player to activate it and have all the data stram onto another dedicated server other then from your or another players local client recordings. Simply put, not use the game client, but create a complete new integrated server that issues only replay frames.

    Your thinking in the steps of the default kill camp setup that like old cod, or pubg has. Which by all means i agree suck. Im talking about building something completely new. Companies should try to perfect a working kill cam feature. All im saying, with all the in deph research i've been doing for years, is that it is in fact possible to create an instant and accurate flow. Don't have to tunnel vision onto an already existing technology that devs use, they do so cuz it's easy. Like people use same engines all over in games, easy.
  • @PRX_its3 Not to sound mean, but have you ever programmed a game before? I tried it a couple of times, helped with one or two little known games, and man is it flippin' hard!! Kudos to everyone who can do this (I know you guys do this for a living, but don't step on me now, I am on a roll) Now where was I...Oh yeah, Cheaters suck!! No, that's not where I was, Oh, right, I think the best way for them to deal with cheaters, is to not file lawsuits, just do like a, as Boopi (Love that) said 1 2 3 strike system. 1st strike is a week long ban. Strike 2 is a month long ban. and Strike 3 is a lifetime one, or maybe a year, or something like that. This will try to discourage cheaters from cheating. I have spoken
  • Why do you assume I'm not a programmer? I'm not a game developer by any means, but I do full stack web development and have friends who do game development.

    Regardless, this is still technology that would cost a lot for next to nothing in return. This isn't a "just capture my display" replay, this would have to be a full match replay.

    On top of that, you'd need some sort of middle ground between the client and the server. You've got to remember the server does a lot of trying to predict players movements, so when it comes to replays, a lot of it would probably be server movements instead of actual player movements; while identical, you'd never get the full picture.

    And again, storage space for something like that would outweigh the small benefits we'd get from that. Apex is a huge game with a lot going on at once, they're already pushing the limits of the engine as it is.

  • Facts, COD has had kill cams for so long now. This game has been out over a year and so many stupid problems still  extremely aggravating!

  • PRX_its3's avatar
    PRX_its3
    6 years ago
    @Cracjaw450 I don't really care about ones opinion. I care about the end game, also No offence taken, i am not here to discuss my area of expertise, i am well beyond programming games. Also, to comment on your way of thinking: 1 strike, 2 strikes, 3 strikes, would be an endless cycle of cheaters. Think about it, you strike one person, thats a past person, there will always be a new one, and a new one, and so on. The strikes don't deterr cheaters or newcoming cheaters enough to break a cycle like this. An instant permanent ban with exceptions for appeal, no second or third chances. Kill cam, (not gonna discuss this again, but it is possible.. it just is), and harsh rules. Would not only help this game, but set a rule of example for future games and thinking, and might in the future even eliminate cheaters, or minimize them to almost non existent.
  • @PRX_its3 I don't know if there is a way to quell human nature. Humanity has always been trying to figure out the easiest way around something, even if that way is immoral.
  • PRX_its3's avatar
    PRX_its3
    6 years ago
    @Cracjaw450 that is very very true, yet we can't fly with our own wings, correct ? We're restricted by a law of nature, but in the core it's still a law. No difference from technological form, doesn't have to be biological form 🙂

    What i'm saying is that we can do whatever rules we want and restrict in that manner. The question is not how to change a human. As "easy" as it is to transform and manipulate dna (Kappa) The question is how to build a wall. - D. Trump
  • SirRobL's avatar
    SirRobL
    5 years ago

    To record kill cam with perfect replay is very possible. We did that many years ago in CS in LAN party competitions. So why not online? Earlier the real limitation was that most gamers worldwide and most servers did not have the capacity (line and processing power). But todays internet speeds and the server power (and way they take advantage of Virtual servers), this is possible for sure. But they could improve the tehcnology and code further to capture longer replays than what we did back in the day.

  • SirRobL's avatar
    SirRobL
    5 years ago

    I pulled this of in CS LAN party game comps. So why cannot they?

    They would not need to keep it all. They would only need to keep the few records that get reported. And not any longer than is needed for a review.
    Think of it as a flag system. If a player get flagged many times during X number of games, they keep the recording for review. Just 1 or very few flags get ignore and data removed.

    "so when it comes to replays, a lot of it would probably be server movements instead of actual player movements; while identical, you'd never get the full picture."

    This has been a problem with any kind of kill cams used. But in the proven systems like in CS, people know this and the PRO's only care about the things that proove aimbot and wallhack, and other blatant cheats (speed hack etc).  

    "would outweigh the small benefits we'd get from that"

    NOT AT ALL. Let me remind you that this is a competitive games that wants to be a huge part of E-sports. Fairness and trust is EVERYTHING in that regard! 

  • To some of you saying it's possible to have a "perfect replay"... 

    Yes and no,    you can have 1:1 replays within reason by upping the tickrate of the servers.... or having a client side replay being recorded for the suspected player,  which is never EVER going to be secure.

    Someone else on here mentioned low tickrate (or specifically low amount of data points) and he is perfectly right about this..

    Running 20 tick servers means you are essentially recording 20tick demos/replays as a result, even if you do client side replays on your end you are seeing opponents being sent at 20tick (and you have interpolation/antilag delay on top of this).. interpolation is used (and would be used for demos as well) to smooth this out or everyone would be stuttering across the screen.

    Others have mentioned cs on here as well, which pretty much means they are talking about HLTV (or local demos as mentioned above)..  both are subject to the server tickrate as the clients are sending roughly 20tick anyway.

    And even if you were using something like HLTV  (which is basically a proxy server, simulating a client)  you are going to end up with the exact same problems, on top of being massive resource hogs (unless you are limiting the proxy tickrate to counter this as you are ignoring PVS i.e the players you can see and sending all positions at all times which is intensive as hell...  and in the end ultimately defeats the point).

    The only way you are going to effectively (or as effectively as you can) combat cheats is to go the way of valorant with a very invasive kernel level anticheat... which opens up a whole other discussion about trust and security.

  • Midnight9746's avatar
    Midnight9746
    Hero+
    5 years ago

    @pitchsomfanFun fact, I've seen a bunch of people report cheaters in Valorant. I only played the game once for about an hour. Most players seemed legit, a few.. eh not so much.

    Just because the anti-cheat is on a kernel level, doesn't mean a cheat can't act like an innocent app and get through it.

    I have to use a special browser for school, that's suppose to "lockdown" the system and forces applications closed. It only bothers to make me close Discord, Xbox Toolbar (where Windows has access to Xbox stuff), and sometimes my calendar and email app. It's suppose to force my browser to close as well, but I've been using Opera. Which, it doesn't ask me to close.

    The whole point of this browser is to prevent cheating in tests. If something like this can't detect a special kind of browser, what makes you think a kernel level anti-cheat won't make the same mistake?

  • pitchsomfan's avatar
    pitchsomfan
    5 years ago
    @Midnight9746 I never said it was fool proof, as in it will detect every cheat immediately.. but you will have a lot less cheating overall while using it.

    As for academic cheating.... not the same thing.
    In terms of games we are talking about application level injections and memory tampering (read/write).. which is far easier to detect on a kernel level basis.

    The problem is that cheats can get through this by being deployed on a kernel level basis as well.. which is why you see people get through.

    These cheats do however get detected in the long run when more samples come in (and when they get added in whatever database they are using, gotta attack cheating on several fronts after all).

    I think the problem is that people expect 100% instant results and that no cheating will ever be possible ever... this isn't the case and never will be.
    But a ring0/kernel level anticheat will make things a lot easier, and will filter out known cheats far easier than a regular mem/process pattern/statistic based one.

    If you want a "complete" death of cheating (for a while) we would need a completely closed source and separate OS from windows with no injection points (with encrypted memory tec) with separate proprietary compilers (and most likely a new closed programming language).

    The issue is in the end windows (and linux), as it's not a very secure operating system... especially not when cheaters are fully willing to give kernel level access just for the sake of cheating.

    I can say this much about vanguard, just a few weeks ago the number one ranked player in valorant got detected using hardware cheats.
    i.e a Direct Memory Access card (DMA)... this would be completely impossible to do without kernel access as cards can be spoofed etc.. their driver signature however cant be.

    As for your academic "anticheating" browser.. this is not kernel level and from what i can tell whoever coded that piece of software wasn't all too careful.
    Not trying to be mean, but if you are going to code that kind of software you should have a whitelist and not permit anything else to start.. this is security 101...
    This is what valorants anticheat does to an extent (outside of drivers etc).
    And why a lot of people have issues playing the game as it REFUSES to start when something that isn't whitelisted is running.


    Point is this, comparing the browser you speak of against a kernel level anticheat is fairly narrow as they are two completely different softwares.. it's like comparing a gpu driver to photoshop.. both are graphically oriented but are not the same thing... and should honestly not be compared.