Forum Discussion

poohty_t's avatar
poohty_t
5 years ago

No matter how good the next BF looks, you need to really nail anti-cheat

Look right now there is only speculation and no one knows if it will be crossplay with pc, so that part of the discussion I'm leaving out. Really people cheat on consoles just as much as PC. That sa...
discussion
cso7777's avatar
cso7777
Seasoned Ace
5 years ago

@Rev0verDriveThe problem is that people are willing to let cheat-software run at any possible privilege.

Unless MS can make the games memory and network-communication private to the game (hidden from the OS), cheat software will always be possible. This is not an easy task as making memory unreadable for other processes, brings a lot of possibilities for running really bad spyware/virus-products as well.

Whitelisting programs could be an option, but this would involve having MS to whitelist games/programs (there are a lot of legitimate software on windows, programs, drivers etc etc) and OS-whitelisting could probably get 'hacked' as well (cheaters will do anything possible).

The real solutions in using some kind of VM-technology, but this again brings a lot of issues (performance being one of them).

Rev0verDrive's avatar
Rev0verDrive
5 years ago
@cso7777 Only 100% way of preventing cheats is a Stadia type setup. The server does all processing and sends a rendered frame image to the client to display. Clients would only be a high framerate image flipbook with a UI.

For it to be a truly viable option for shooter games you'd need quantum internet... 0 ping/lag.

The next best thing is 100% server-side validation on all user input/actions. Zero client-side prediction, 100% lock-step. For it to be worth playing you'd want a sub 15ms ping and at very high server tick rate. Even then you're still vulnerable to ESP. But that's pretty much it.

About Battlefield Franchise Discussion

Discuss Battlefield games in this community forum.133,664 PostsLatest Activity: 2 hours ago