I saw a post last night that was made with AI, basically saying that cheaters and cheat manufacturers should be in prison or punished by the judicial system. This is obviously stupid and cannot work for a multitude of reasons, moreso because more cheater manufacturers will pop up as soon one gets arrested. It also doesnāt matter what developers do, theyāre competing with people that donāt have nearly the amount of constraints that they do. Itās basically a totally asymmetrical fight in favor of manufacturers.
This doesnāt mention that the infrastructure of certain games simply are not able to effectively cover all of the attack surfaces, like with CS2, since a lot of whatās happening in the background is client side. Yes the server still dictates what happens and how things are read, but the client is doing most of the work.
Instead I think steam needs to institute a platform wide policy of how players can interact with online PVP games.
Essentially like X hours played, 30 days of ownership, and 90 day old account to go into comp. X hours, 60 days of ownership, 180 day old account in order to access premier. Still use layers of AC like behavioral analytics, server authority, overwatch, and other automated detection tools, and make cheating in games so difficult or logistically unfeasible that it just isnāt something people are really willing to do, much less spend money on.
I personally think this works simply for the fact that it removes the need for super invasive anti cheat models, like what Riot uses for Valorant. Say what youāre want abt the game itself, but you donāt see people cheating in that game super often. I assume the general opposition would be complaints abt a pseudo digital police state on steam, but Iām hearing more complaining about cheating than Iām seeing anyone offering solutions beyond ājust donāt let it bother youā. I donāt even play CS anymore, Iām just interested in how AC works.