Comment by gjsman-1000

Comment by gjsman-1000 a day ago

5 replies

When it comes to cheating, perfect is the enemy of good. This is one of those rare cases where the phrase doesn’t hold.

The problem is that server-side occlusion is only a small piece of the puzzle. A naïve implementation means hundreds of thousands of raycasts per second, which doesn’t scale. Real engines rely on precomputed visibility sets, spatial partitioning, and still have to leak some data client-side for responsiveness.

Basically - the kernel level check is not laziness, but for unsolvable problems without huge compute costs or latency.

dvdkon a day ago

Fine, then let's not bother with anti-cheat at all, since an aimbot can work by just filming the screen and sending HID events over USB. Anti-cheat is like DRM: You have to make do with a compromise.

Hundreds of thousands of raycasts per second sounds doable to me, but couldn't you just use a GPU and some simplified level geometry? That ought to scale well enough. It's not free or perfect (knowing the position of a hand a cheat will be able to estimate where the head is anyway), but that's not the goal, right?

  • whatevaa 21 hours ago

    There is a video of DYI aimbot of using a camera and sending electrical impulses into his arm to make him do certain adjustments. It's a bit hit and miss but seems refineable.

    It's cat and mouse game.

    • pxc 20 hours ago

      Is cyborg doping even cheating? At least at this stage it's still high effort and DIY. That almost makes it legitimate to me

      • internetter 19 hours ago

        many sport communities call doping cheating

        • pxc 18 hours ago

          and that's reasonable! but it's not a given. It's different from other kinds of cheating and some of its motivations are unusual when it comes to cheating restrictions (e.g., long-term health of players)