There didn't even need to be an anti-cheat implemented into the game, all that needed to be done to fix the cheater issue was to add a method that made modded versions of the game not apply their modifications in multiplayer.
I thought that was what the anti cheat was meant to do , stop the modded versions being playable in muliti player.
@Draigcastell Yes, that's what the anti-cheat was meant to do, but it actually doesn't do anything beneficial. All it does is reduces performance, creates even more launching issues with the game, unnecessarily searches in the root of your computer for cheats or mods for the game (which you don't need to detect players cheating) which is a huge invasion of privacy, and makes launching the game with mods slightly more complicated.
I keep saying this but imagine the following scenario:
- A "player" communicates to the server that he is now playing as boss in multiplayer
- The server responds with a "no you don't"
or
- A "player" says "i now have 2 billion coins instead of 13000"
- The server responds with a "no you don't"
That would be a server-sided overseer or even anti-cheat.
But the entire games design and the new "anti-cheat" seem to be focused locally. To cut costs, obviously.
And yes, i can not understand how nobody during the design phase ever thought that in a modern world - where cheating becomes worse and worse every day and science already pointed out that 30% of players jump ship - that people will avoid additional purchases by simply breaking the rules with additional software. Or even worse - cause harm to other players accounts.
But i am sure that internally somebody with a finances background and zero care for gaming argued that the projected damages caused by circumvented store sales will be lower than the costs of counter measures to prevent such events.
meanwhile just now had to quit another lobby , pretty much every time i play this happens
