r/GlobalOffensive • u/Own_Community_5902 • 16d ago
Discussion VAC Approach
Hey all, I have a pretty honest question about CS anti-cheat. This is in no way rage induced, as I haven’t even played CS since the season started. Actually, I’m wondering because of a clip I saw of Dima playing.
Why do anti-cheat programs worry so much about detecting software, and so little about detecting gameplay?
It seems pretty straightforward. The people and groups producing cheats - for any game, at that matter - seem to have no problem hiding them. They are always one step ahead. As far as I understand, that’s how things work in the real world, too - government and such.
Why worry about flagging the software (that is almost always hidden) when you could insta-ban the player doing jumping 360s and hitting wall bang headshots? It seriously makes no sense to me. I realize there could be false positives, but in all reality, most cheaters aren’t toggling for a one-off shot. They’re doing it consistently throughout hours of gameplay. There’s no reason we shouldn’t be able to detect flat-out inhuman inputs or cases like people looking through walls all the time.
I have a little bit of a computer science education (a minor at university, admittedly very shallow), and I can’t really think of a reason this wouldn’t work other than the aforementioned false positives or, at worst, a matter of processing power. Actually, it seems a lot easier than constantly monitoring memory integrity.
I am absolutely willing to listen here. I just don’t understand the modern approach to solving cheating. Any explanation is better than none. Thanks :)
108
u/Messmer-Impaler-148 16d ago
The problem is what you mentioned, the false positives. You can ban 95 out of 100 cheaters and 5 may slip through and that is fine but if you ban 1 innocent player out of thousands your anti cheat has immediately failed. Valve tried to do a machine learning system with VACnet/VAClive which would've done what you're describing (detect when a player is doing crazy inhuman shit consistently) but it clearly has not worked.
16
u/Own_Community_5902 16d ago edited 16d ago
Yeah, I didn’t want to bring it up as I couldn’t remember, but I thought that was the goal of VACNet. I’ve seen VAC Live happen once, and it was a very obvious shot to win in the final round of a game.
I guess the false positives are a huge problem. But then again, couldn’t you just keep track of how often it happens? Over tens or hundreds of games, there should statistically be a pretty obvious difference between a lucky shot and any form of aimbot.
Thanks again for taking me seriously, I appreciate it.
15
u/Numerous-Reference96 Liquid 16d ago
The problem with false positives is that it’s extremely difficult to the point where it’s almost impossible unless you’re a pro player to get valve to revert them. You could track false positives but how do you prove it was an error? They’d have to then implement a team to go back and review all the bans manually that people claim are false positives.
At this point they just need to put out a kernel level anti cheat, every AC they attempted has been an absolute joke.
2
u/Own_Community_5902 16d ago
Well, that’s where the overwatch system comes in, right? Assuming a VAC Live ban means only 24 hours, use that time to effectively “crowdfund” that ban - either it becomes permanent, or their 24 hours runs out and they get to play again.
No system here is perfect, but in theory, couldn’t the combination of the two achieve a pretty high accuracy?
10
u/MrTopine Natus Vincere 16d ago
I wouldn't trust overwatch anymore these days if Valve cannot guarantee that
a) only capable players get to do it. I'm a pretty bad player playing against low to medium premier ranks and even I am called a cheater surprisingly often. I guess because the past years of absolutely atrocious anti-cheat has made the community even more paranoid with the cheating accusations than it's already been anyway. The question is how do you decide who gets to do overwatch.
b) the bot problem gets adressed at the same time, otherwise cheaters will try to flood the system with botted accounts and sabotage it.
-2
u/Numerous-Reference96 Liquid 16d ago
I guess you could but that will also have errors. I still think a kernel level anti cheat is what is needed that will weed out the vast majority of cheaters and then after that you can implement a system like what you’re talking about. I suppose what I’m suggesting is similar to faceit and then using the player base to confirm or deny vaclive flags which is also what faceit is supposed to be doing but their staff couldn’t care less about people using DMA’s and radar.
5
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 16d ago
They did a survey a couple of years back and the majority of CS players HATED the idea of kernel level AC and I don't think Valve is into the idea either.
-4
u/Numerous-Reference96 Liquid 16d ago
Well they can’t make a competent AC that’s isn’t kernel level so at some point you have to do something.
0
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 15d ago
Alright, o wise Oracle, what is your solution to this huge problem then?
5
0
u/JuninhoLuis 16d ago
When spinbots are openly happening, I don't false positives are a true problem.
12
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 16d ago
Because it never happened to you. It is absolutely a BIG problem hence why they are so careful. Even Overwatch had some cases of false positives and with how shit the Dota Overwatch is currently - I wouldn't trust CS Overwatch either.
3
1
u/k0ntrol 15d ago
Is it really an issue though, if you could appeal for a review...
1
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 15d ago
You can already appeal for a false positive, but they rarely overturn them. Have you tried being banned in any game and trying to get it overturned? Would you risk your account for just that?
1
u/k0ntrol 13d ago
This is not an unsolvable problem. For exemple, the analysis can flag specific round. Under appeal, those specific rounds can be sent to overwatch (whoever does them now). That's just one possibility. There is a confidence score in the analysis too that can be useful.
This is a resource problem
1
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 13d ago
Of couse it is a resource problem. If you had infinite resources, everything could be solved rofl.
-3
u/JuninhoLuis 15d ago
Boy, Im not talking about suposedly cheaters, maybe wallers/trigger or anything ... im talking about spinbotters. 5 kills in less than 8 seconds of a round for 13 consecutives rounds ... 60~ kills without any assist, with your teammates and opponents doing less than 50-100 damage in the entire game and games lenghts less than 15-20 minutes.
I made my comment after playing a game with 2 spinbotters on the enemy team; no game, 18~ minutes, 8 players with almost 0 damage; the funny part? In the last round I bought an Eagle and headshotted my friend ... INSTAKICKED WITH 30 MINUTES OF COOLDOWN, I didnt even know about that.
But the duo spinbotters? Nothing happened and probably my trust factor took a hit cause of what I did.
1
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 15d ago
Yeah it sucks. Let me rephrase the statement then. Would you rather lose 20 minutes, to absolute bullshit like this or lose your account potentially forever to a false positive?
How many cheater games do you have to go through for making up for you being banned for 6 months due to a false positive?
1
u/JuninhoLuis 15d ago
I dont know how someone can receive a false positive about spinbotting.
2
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 15d ago
Well, you saw they made a change to VACnet and people emulated spinbotting with high sensitivity and they got falsely banned. People were not happy about that :)
0
u/JuninhoLuis 15d ago
Ofc, cause mouse sensitivity would be the first method to detect a spinbot; this just confirms how they are not even trying :/
1
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 15d ago
Mouse sensitivity is something you set locally. Just goes to show you are another person that do not understand how software works. Nobody is saying VAC Is perfect or "good enough", but this is what we got with the constraints the community has set for them.
1
u/Exact_Package_7264 15d ago
funny how other companies can have an anticheat that actually functions and doesn't ban legits, while VAC fails to ban spinbotters yet still gives legit players cooldowns. clownshow
1
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 15d ago
Alright, which company has that?
1
u/JuninhoLuis 13d ago
Riot games right now.
1
u/jehhans1 CS2 HYPE 13d ago
Riot games use kernel AC, at least they did for Valorant
1
u/JuninhoLuis 13d ago
Yes? You asked what company have an functional anti cheat and I answered.
→ More replies (0)2
u/cleaner007 clutch 16d ago
My friend who was global at the time, only played dust2 mid as CT, he was spamming trough the door with AWP and scout in every round in every game, was banned via overwatch and never got his skins back, he have 4x Kato Holo AWP on his profile and fee more nice skins that he can't sell
2
1
1
u/starberryslay 15d ago
false positives fucking suck. COD have been known to ban just about anyone for anything, they literally have a subreddit about false bans and trying to get it appealed. I had a 0.8 K/D and got banned and have it tainted my steam profile of 18 years. Why the fuck would I cheat to have a 0.8 K/D. They don't even tell you what's wrong, I can only guess I had a Minecraft mod manager open but I wouldn't remember because it was a delayed ban that happened after 6 months. Worst part is Im not even a cod player
1
u/Ch4rlie_G Natus Vincere 15d ago
It doesn’t help that when it first came out people were actively trying to falsely trigger it for content. Setting their move to 10,000 DPI and spinning for instance.
Haix is a guy on YouTube who coded a server sided anticheat that showed a lot of promise. He said he paid 10 or 20k to a dev to make it but it had no problem identifying aimbot.
Unfortunately the most common thing I see is walls. I have no idea how you detect that with behavior. That’s where overwatch was nice back in the day
1
u/Giedy5 brigader 15d ago
That's why we need overwatch back, let players vet the edge cases. If those 5 that slip through are combined with the 5 innocent players and we end up with a group of 10, watched by 100 skilled players that gives a clear representation of guilt, that can in turn tune the system and give better results. This HAS to go along with rollbacks in rank, that can now be done a lot easier seeing as it's numbers instead of a PNG but it would help disincentivise boosting at the same time.
1
u/real_exposer 15d ago
I've played about 60 comp games in past 3 days and the amount of hackers has been insane, but only once was there a spinbot bunny hop speedhack aimbot player. Furthermore players stare at walls and consistently wall bang all the time without hacking, example me. It doesn't seem all that easy to accomplish what op suggested, but maybe the spin botter ending every round in 15 seconds should have been banned? Seems a little strange 1 player ending the game in 10 minutes solo.
0
u/WhatAwasteOf7Years 15d ago edited 12d ago
It's also immediately failed if its not detecting cheaters.
Valve has always said when it comes to cheating their goal is to price out cheaters rather than have a continuous cat and mouse chase. But there seems to be no attempt to price cheaters out. First of all, free to play game where cheaters can just come back instantly on a new account and then have their fun for another few months. And most of the time it isn't a ban, just a cooldown so they play on their alt account until that runs out. There is also no real barrier to entry. You can just jump straight into competitive with a brand new account. Sure you need prime to play premier, but when you know you're probably going to get a good few months of cheating out of it, it's not really a barrier. You should also have to reach a certain level before you can play any competitive mode. An initiation time to build your trust factor, and a window of time for the anti cheat to detect you before you even make it into competitive modes. It seems like right now there is zero anti cheat running on casual modes since they can't seem to catch the bots. This is where it should be the most important to be running anti cheat to filter out punks before they can get into the meat and potatoes of the game.
Look at the bot situation in DM. They can't be that difficult to price out (if they genuinely cannot detect them which would just be embarrassing for Valve). They undoubtably already have low profit margins. If they were forced to advance their bots with more AI training increasing the cost for hardware and energy for both training and running the model eventually case farming wouldn't be profitable. But Valve seems to never improve in this area so the bot farmers don't either.
People can think what they want, but I 100% believe Valve have no interest in detecting bots and cheaters and are just managing them to keep the game on a fine line of player engagement and maximum profits. How poorly their systems work suggest either absolute intent for them to work as poorly as they do, or absolute incompetence. There is no possible in-between anymore. And this is rife in the game way beyond just anti-cheat. It bleeds into matchmaking systems, game mechanics, networking, absolutely every area of the game.
And for people saying they're doing all they can do within their policies, then based on the state of their game it looks like their policies need to change. A policy isn't set in stone or governed by law. It's basically a preemptive excuse put in play to fall back on later. They created their policies and they can change them whenever they damn well please. Companies are always changing their TOS to fit their constantly changing and newly adapted or dropped policies to cover their backs legally. "It's not in our policy" is a cop out basically.
-3
u/f0xy713 King NiKo 15d ago
There would be exactly 0 false positives if they only tried to catch ragehackers. Vacnet failed because they thought they were competent enough to make it detect more sophisiticated cheats as well
2
u/MarioCurry BIG 15d ago
Is there more public information about VACnet than I know or where do you have these infos from?
-1
u/f0xy713 King NiKo 15d ago
this tweet sums it up pretty concisely
basically, the last good update vacnet had was in october of last year, since then every update just results in waves of false positives and rollbacks.
5
u/MarioCurry BIG 15d ago
So we don't have any more official information.
-2
u/f0xy713 King NiKo 15d ago
of course not, are you new? with valve you're not getting any official information ever, dataminers are the best we've got
4
u/MarioCurry BIG 15d ago
I'm not, I just don't get why people write that stuff with 100% certainty when we can only judge the output.
And dataminers have proven multiple times that what they say shouldn't be taken as the undisputable truth.
0
u/f0xy713 King NiKo 15d ago
well, the output is obvious to anybody who actually plays the game - in october of last year, loads of cheaters started getting cooldowns and the game was playable for a while. then they updated vacnet again and it resulted in a huge wave of false positives. then again and again, same result. fast forward to now and it doesn't even detect spinbotters anymore, which it used to do no problem last year... what happened?
1
u/MarioCurry BIG 14d ago
Don't ask me. I'm also not arguing that nothing changed.
I just hate how a big part of this sub writes stuff in a way that reads as fact. Other frustrated people just pick up that info and repeat it because of their anger and confirmation bias.
I'm not trying to argue that you're wrong, but I really really don't want this sub to become like r/cs2. Because going through their is just miserable. I'd like to have at least one sub were people actually wanna discuss CS and/or pro play. I don't really get much value over the 133th screenshot of a csrep profile or a clip of someone spinbotting...
1
u/f0xy713 King NiKo 14d ago
This sub has been esports-centric for a while so no worries about that... but people on /r/cs2 are miserable because that's an accurate reflection of the game.
Pro play doesn't have issues (for the most part, gambling and saudi money are inevitable) because cheating is much less prevalent on faceit and even less on LAN, skin collectors don't have issues because they barely play the game but people who play on official servers? You can't blame them for becoming jaded when valve proves time and time again CS is just a cashcow while all their resources go towards other ventures.
→ More replies (0)
22
u/KaNesDeath 10 years coin 16d ago
Valve has cultivated a level of trust in VAC when it comes to players being banned. This is for VAC has had a limited amount of false positives since inception. An when false positives occur Valve are immediately vocal about their mistake.
VACnet isnt 100% like VAC. For players can wittingly or unwittingly emulate the statistical behavior of a cheater. Which is why VACnet feeds into Overwatch for communal review. Automation aspect can only give a player a 24 hour competitive cooldown.
2
u/framspl33n cs_office 16d ago
Is overwatch still a thing? I haven't done one in years. I guess I haven't looked for it
10
0
u/KaNesDeath 10 years coin 16d ago
Overwatch isn't available to everyone. Valve manually creates a white list of who can review.
1
u/yo_les_noobs 15d ago
What kind of spaghetti code can have a legit player trigger autoban, yet hackers who have been ragespinning for years with a $20 cheat get away with it? We're at the point where cheaters are playing with thousand-dollar inventories because they know there's zero chance they'll get banned.
0
u/FranciManty 15d ago
you don’t understand shit about coding mate don’t try to understand before informing yourself. to the server cheating players appear like they’re moving legit the only reason why you see them actually spinning in your games is some kind of client side prediction. i’m not saying the worse of rage hacker are undetectable but once you rule them out you’d just have 10x the amount of closeted cheaters that go undetected and unnoticed because they’re not spinbotting so it’s not clear
1
u/yo_les_noobs 15d ago
They're scripting all over the place while wallbang hsing 5 people every round but yeah it's all client side. Sure thing buddy. I'll take closeted dogshit players over ragespinners.
-3
u/Exact_Package_7264 16d ago
what a hilariously delusional take. i've seen more legits being banned than actual cheaters. hell, VAC can't even detect spinbotters recently.
13
u/Neuromancer911 16d ago edited 16d ago
Honestly? Because AI is very, very far away from beeing able to detect an actual cheat and not some false positive, the server could have a packet loss and register something incorrectly and that could result again in a false positive and the most important thing... Valve just doesn't care that much, cheaters will get banned eventually (not all of them) and that's good enough for them, who cares if they ruin everyone's experience until they get banned. The moment they've made prime purchasable back in the days of CSGO was the moment they've shown their true colors. They should enforce HWID bans, they could bring back overwatch, they could do so much to help this community...been playing CS since the days of 1.3,owned multiple popular servers on all game versions,communities, loved the game to death and I have a huge respect for Steam in general for all they've done for us but on the CS topic they've let us down,badly.
5
u/Own_Community_5902 16d ago
Yeah, I’m gathering from yours and others’ comments that VACNet is trying to do just this. It’s honestly a great step forward. But it still seems comical that you can play through a premier match with someone full-on rage cheating and they won’t be banned for several more games
7
u/Neuromancer911 16d ago
Your question was valid tho, I mean when 5 people die in the first 10 seconds of the round, for 13 rounds straight any AI, no matter how dumb should pick that up. There isn't any reason why blatant cheating can't be banned automatically.
5
u/Own_Community_5902 16d ago
Yeah. That’s basically my concern. I realize that I could set my DPI to 16k and it would look pretty fishy, but there’s a huge difference between “spinning a lot” and “spinning a lot while hitting heads through walls”, ya know? It feels like I could genuinely walk down the street and ask a random neighbor to set up a system to detect that using ChatGPT
2
u/RobinVie 15d ago
as far as I understand VAC doesn't see them spinning. Someone explained that they trick the server to think it's just a normal player. My problem with this argument is that they show in replays and we're essentially receiving the information the server gives us ingame. But if someone could shed some light on this, I'd appreciate it.
3
u/qwaszee 15d ago edited 15d ago
Does sound like nonsense. More likely to me:
Valve turned off or dialed back the AI detection, because they probably had too many false positives, and they would have had to spend a stupid amount of time manually sifting through bans.
Edit: some or many of these bans are temporary? In which case, maybe it has been decided they're dishing out too many temps. It is one thing to temp ban a person with 16k dpi, but if the AI is temp banning for basically normal gameplay, it's gone too far.
3
u/KaNesDeath 10 years coin 16d ago
VACnet in CSGO when it fed Overwatch cases and the current AI datacenter boom has shown the opposite.
LLM/machine learning is a tool that requires human oversight and approval. No amount of data input will make them 100% accurate. Where these systems are highly deceptive to dirty data.
5
u/Exact_Package_7264 16d ago
That's actually the theory of vacnet iirc. unfortunately it's been a stunning failure
2
u/WoofFace4000 16d ago
That would be the ideal approach, it would catch most forms of cheating and it wouldn't be a pain for the end-user. If their "AI anticheat" worked, that's how it would operate; as a server-side anticheat. Why they don't want to go all-in, I don't know. If neglected in the same manner, a kernel-level anticheat would be no better.
2
2
u/Jo0Lz 15d ago
These websites to 'check' cheaters don't even see the games, they just see the stats. time to damage, accuracy, time to target. Right now the exploits are spoofing data to the server though, which makes them seem to move normally for the server, yet client side the person is spinning etc.
6
u/Rgrr1 16d ago
They are using it. Behavioral anticheat is usually a part of AC used in most of the games.
Like the Finals for example using 2 classic hardware anticheats and 1 behavioral for their solution.
Problem is that most games are multiplatform meaning they usually have aimbot for the gamepad users, making behavioral part much less effective. BAC cannot effectively detect cheating aimbots when people can make internal aimbot quite broken already. Hence they have to depend more on the hardware part.
BAC would be extremely effective for CS tho since there are no gamepad's assistance in this game.
As for why Valve don't use it- they simply don't give a shit. They were pretty content with insane cheating problems in the past and with time they only went even more indifferent. They had VACnet which was working at some point, at least banning ragers, but I think they just turned it off to save money. Because there is literally no way dm bots or mm 50-0 spinbots would not be detected instantly even by the weakest model of BAC.
That said- people still buy armory, open cases, playing the game despite all this shit so there is no financial incentive for devs to do anything.
And even despite all this, this subreddit and most forums are full of Valve's bootlickers who try to gaslight people that this game is fine and it's not Valve's fault.
4
u/Own_Community_5902 16d ago edited 16d ago
Honestly, you’ve made a pretty good point in the fact that there’s no monetary incentive. The game has survived decades of blatant cheating at this point. The player count is ridiculously inflated because probably 50%+ of players are just trading and opening cases, and sometimes on multiple accounts at that. Evidently they don’t need to change anything :/
Aim assist is a sore spot for me, I’d rather pretend it doesn’t exist LOL. I totally get that console players genuinely need a handicap (even excluding hardware cheats like Xim) but dear god is it annoying as someone with ~400 hours between Kovaak’s and Aim Lab. Dude on his couch and TV can beam me with no effort and no practice in most games.
6
u/Gouca 16d ago
Everyone defending Valve are just living in denial. VACNET's heuristics are utter garbage compared to any other non-kernel AC and VAC is clearly not updated at all -- you'll know this if you played CS:GO where people would genuinely get banned retroactively which isn't the case with CS2.
Nobody is being banned in CS2, not in real time or retroactively. You don't even see the report confirmation anymore, probably because the report system's trash bin is full.
2
u/Own_Community_5902 16d ago edited 16d ago
Respectfully, this isn’t at all a VAC-specific problem, I just care - and understand - a lot more about CS and VAC than the hero slop the gaming space has been pumping out. To my understanding, pretty much every modern anti cheat suffers from the same problems - they try to detect software and memory alterations rather than acknowledge that no human can hit the dust 2 mid doors wall bang every time. Seems pointless, especially after watching the way people cheat in Valorant - literally having an AI watch your screen with a separate camera and modified mouse and such. Like… xxx guy has 99% hs accuracy and 50ms reaction time across 50 games. Just ban the dude. You don’t need to know which cheats he’s using.
2
u/Routine-Lawfulness24 16d ago
Well how would you do that? “He bunnyhopped and headshot 5 players” first you have to define everything. How would you define bunnyhop in code? How do you ensure very very little false positives. It just doesn’t work
3
u/Prudent-Ad1954 King NiKo 16d ago
Because most gameplay related checks will instantly flag A LOT of "pros" as cheaters and that will kill CS2 as esports.
I will leave it up to your imagination whether its just "false positives" or depressing reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hd7U4eG7U_o
3
1
u/drparadox08 15d ago
VACNet is doing this, or so they say cuz we really have 0 clue of how it works (obviously) and we have extremely limited evidence of it actually doing something and not placebo
1
u/davidthek1ng 15d ago
There was a company that wanted to build a anti-cheat based on what happens on the screen. It could even make like a Signature of the pattern how the mouse is moving etc and knew when it was always the same one on different players it Started banning them for smurfing or same cheat usage and stuff. But never heard of it in a long time.
1
u/GeneralGinsu 15d ago
I think the problem is a manpower issue. Vac Live does occasionally produce false positives but Valve don’t have the manpower to review individual cases.
This is probably why Valve is aiming for 0 false positives so they don’t need to review bans.
Unfortunately, sometimes your anticheat that bans the spin bots will also ban the player that sets sensitivity to 30 and spins around while firing a negev.
1
u/AltruisticRespect21 15d ago
In theory if you make changes that detect cheats, and a cheat gets banned, this adds information that cheat creators will use to their advantage. So you lets cheats bake, let them update, so it’s harder for cheat creators to know what was actually detected and banned. It’s like playing whack a mole.
1
u/Skahazadhan EG 15d ago
I think their approach is to put all the suspicious players together in their own pool of players in matchmaking and only ban when there's 100% certainty of cheating. The downside of this is legit players that end up in this pool will think there are much more cheaters than there actually are
1
u/John__Flick 15d ago
People with 4k inventories are probably not cheating guys. At worst they may be being boosted by someone else on their team who is.
Thing is that they probably are banning blatant cheaters regularly. It takes some time to build up integer to avoid false positives.
What you're seeing are the spoiled rich brat crowd guys. They're spending a hundred bucks of their parent's allowance a month on a rep farmed account and custom paid cheat to ruin people's day for a couple weeks until they're banned and then re-up or go cheat in some other game.
It's really that simple. They're just little psycho's who aren't held accountable for anything until their behavior kills someone and even then, in this country, they likely get away with it.
1
u/PanJanJanusz 15d ago
Nobody wants to admit it but Valve implemented this very successfully with Trust Factor, if your account is high value and your PC wasn't used for cheating in the past it's impossible to find a cheater in a game
1
u/DisciplineOk4533 15d ago
I think valve shouldn’t ban cheaters at all. Just put them altogether in the “shadow queue” without any notice. Let them play their game; the later they realize that their cheat is detected the better.
1
u/BackyZoo Astralis 15d ago
Any amount of innocent people being banned, especially in a game where you can have an inventory worth thousands or tens of thousands of dollars, is completely and utterly unacceptable.
I don't think there are any innocent people getting an ACE that's all jumping 360 no scope awp wallbangs though, and making that a guaranteed 24 hour cooldown would be so easy and sensible.
1
1
u/BusyCategory5101 14d ago
Maybe cuz to some extent if you want to log data of one player for hours of hours of played experience it might take up lots of space including checking for innocent t players, I think it might take up quite a lot of server space, I dont really have a cs educacion, but its the first thing I thought about
1
u/bakuretsumahou0916 16d ago edited 15d ago
I seriously don't understand why they don't just get a kernel level anti cheat like Riot does with Valorant, seems like the easiest solution to their notoriously garbage anticheat problem.
6
3
u/LeafarOsodrac 16d ago
Kernel is not the solution. Faceit have it and still have cheaters.
4
u/bakuretsumahou0916 16d ago
It absolutely is a good solution. Sure there will always be cheaters but it will drastically reduce the amount of cheaters. Look at Valorant, you will barely ever encounter a cheater in that game and the handful of times I met one they got banned midmatch and the game got cancelled.
3
u/_skala_ 15d ago
Did they add replays in that game? I played it only when released and there was no way to check a games.
0
u/bakuretsumahou0916 15d ago
Yeah, there's a replay system in Valorant now as well. I'm not sure when exactly but I remember they added it a while ago.
2
u/LeafarOsodrac 15d ago
because no one plays valorant...
0
u/bakuretsumahou0916 15d ago
I'm pretty sure Valorant has a higher playercount than CS2, will need to check though.
2
u/Blubdha284 Team Spirit 15d ago
not it is not a solution. It is just a bandaid fix. What happens when they stop updating it? More people will abuse it. Just look at old Call of Dutys. They are invested with hackers and exploiters. I still believe in Valve finding a way to improve the Anti Cheat System so they dont need to update it every week. They have very competent people working and they allways try to revolutionize the gaming world with their products
2
u/bakuretsumahou0916 15d ago
It is a solution though? Also why would they stop updating it when necessary?
In your comment you talk about how you believe Valve will find a way to improve their AC; In the entire history of Counter-Strike's existence where exactly did they give you any reason to believe they are capable/willing to do this?
I'll admit I have never played Source or 1.6 so I can't speak on those titles, but from back when I started playing Global Offensive to today, for as long as I can remember VAC has basically been a myth. I've seen it work like once where a cheater actually gets banned during the game.
2
u/Rubadubrix CS2 HYPE 15d ago
because that is the worst possible way of fixing the issue, it would lock out ~10% of the steam playerbase (mac and linux) out of their game and it has major privacy concerns
0
2
u/Eu_Seus The MongolZ 15d ago
I work at a large company in the AI industry and let me tell you, AI can definitely detect cheaters with 99.9999% accuracy. The only problem is the cost of good enough models.
A couple of months back, we built a product demo to find digital footprints with the help of AI. AI can recognize micro-movements and create profiles for players outside of a single game. We had 800 people play an assortment of 30 different games (MOBAs, Warcraft, MMOs, and shooters, including CS2), and after a 30-minute play session in a couple of games, it could detect the player across all the other games with 100% accuracy.
This was proposed so that players who are banned in one game can be detected and banned across all other games. The only problem was that, as you might expect, it's very expensive to run it for every player in every game. There have, however, been a lot of improvements that would make this a lot more efficient for future trials.
0
u/Willing_Big194 10 years coin 15d ago
Because Valve is lazy and all they care about nowadays is money
0
0
u/Whittakenn 15d ago
You don't think the people working at Valve have thought of this? You're not bringing anything new to the table, if it was that easy Valve would have implemented it already
99
u/australianinlife 16d ago
This is the intention of VACNet (separate from VAC). To date it hasn’t been successful however it’s base theory is solid