Enigmatic Sage wrote: » EAC as in easy anti cheat? that's a controversial program all on its own with what it has access to lol Besides that I believe they're implementing their own cheat detection software imbedded into the game but I could be mistaken. They're going to have bot detection and all that obviously. Some MMORPG companies can even ID hardware and put it on the ban list. Should always be careful about buying used GPU's and what not.
Knevah wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » EAC as in easy anti cheat? that's a controversial program all on its own with what it has access to lol Besides that I believe they're implementing their own cheat detection software imbedded into the game but I could be mistaken. They're going to have bot detection and all that obviously. Some MMORPG companies can even ID hardware and put it on the ban list. Should always be careful about buying used GPU's and what not. I was going to make this point actually... you're likely to get more support calls about EAC if that's the route you go, I've not seen other MMO's feel the need to do that... Eve Online is a giant sandbox game, and Wow is... well, everyone knows what that is... it's just that using UE, the temptation will be there to use EAC, and therefore I feel the need to highlight that we, as an interested party are here.
Enigmatic Sage wrote: » Knevah wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » EAC as in easy anti cheat? that's a controversial program all on its own with what it has access to lol Besides that I believe they're implementing their own cheat detection software imbedded into the game but I could be mistaken. They're going to have bot detection and all that obviously. Some MMORPG companies can even ID hardware and put it on the ban list. Should always be careful about buying used GPU's and what not. I was going to make this point actually... you're likely to get more support calls about EAC if that's the route you go, I've not seen other MMO's feel the need to do that... Eve Online is a giant sandbox game, and Wow is... well, everyone knows what that is... it's just that using UE, the temptation will be there to use EAC, and therefore I feel the need to highlight that we, as an interested party are here. Relatively true but ironically considering how many dev's use Unity and publish on steam, they usually end up being the ones with the highest hack and cheat rate regardless of EAC. I don't know why people use Unity over UE other than the fact it was more affordable. Not that games in UE cant be hacked, it's just not as common.
Knevah wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » Knevah wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » EAC as in easy anti cheat? that's a controversial program all on its own with what it has access to lol Besides that I believe they're implementing their own cheat detection software imbedded into the game but I could be mistaken. They're going to have bot detection and all that obviously. Some MMORPG companies can even ID hardware and put it on the ban list. Should always be careful about buying used GPU's and what not. I was going to make this point actually... you're likely to get more support calls about EAC if that's the route you go, I've not seen other MMO's feel the need to do that... Eve Online is a giant sandbox game, and Wow is... well, everyone knows what that is... it's just that using UE, the temptation will be there to use EAC, and therefore I feel the need to highlight that we, as an interested party are here. Relatively true but ironically considering how many dev's use Unity and publish on steam, they usually end up being the ones with the highest hack and cheat rate regardless of EAC. I don't know why people use Unity over UE other than the fact it was more affordable. Not that games in UE cant be hacked, it's just not as common. Wow, did we come to a point were we can agree... I'll take it!.. /ducks
Knevah wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Knevah wrote: » Here's a screenshot I prepared earlier. Screenshots are fun. Indeed... 1.6% of steam users is 2 million people,... or, a potential market of $200 million a year with a subscription model.... Can you check a box for $200 million?
Noaani wrote: » Knevah wrote: » Here's a screenshot I prepared earlier. Screenshots are fun.
Knevah wrote: » Here's a screenshot I prepared earlier.
Noaani wrote: » That isn't how numbers work - but lets just follow the way you're using them here for fun.
Noaani wrote: » If there is literally any negative side effect at all to pushing that button (which there is), why would it get pushed?
Enigmatic Sage wrote: » windows holds that dominant market share for pc gaming.
Knevah wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » windows holds that dominant market share for pc gaming. Well, we can't hope to change that if we don't allow competition... Our companies web developers spent a lot of time arguing with me there was no point coding our company website to support anything other than IE6, because that was 95% of the market... and in that way IE6 held the web back for a decade.
Enigmatic Sage wrote: » Knevah wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » windows holds that dominant market share for pc gaming. Well, we can't hope to change that if we don't allow competition... Our companies web developers spent a lot of time arguing with me there was no point coding our company website to support anything other than IE6, because that was 95% of the market... and in that way IE6 held the web back for a decade. True but I'm fine with windows haha. Linux seems like a head ache for those who don't want to deal with it. Many computer enthusiasts still use it especially if you know what you're doing on it.
Rather not buy an apple/mac for gaming regardless if more gaming is going to cloud. Probably never will. Look at GPU's, Nvidia controls the market share yet AMD is making some great improvements and competitive pricing over the years and slowly raising their market share. Many buy Nvidia for the FOMO of DLSS and cash grab things like RTX where in most situations on a modern game you wouldn't be competitive gaming with DLSS and RTX can literally be achieved in UE5 via developer tools.
Knevah wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » Knevah wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » windows holds that dominant market share for pc gaming. Well, we can't hope to change that if we don't allow competition... Our companies web developers spent a lot of time arguing with me there was no point coding our company website to support anything other than IE6, because that was 95% of the market... and in that way IE6 held the web back for a decade. True but I'm fine with windows haha. Linux seems like a head ache for those who don't want to deal with it. Many computer enthusiasts still use it especially if you know what you're doing on it. Many Windows users like to throw that "still" in there just to imply that it's going away... I honestly don't think they realize the implication of that continual small growth, in spite of the fact that when this started installing Windows yourself was a normal thing, and now most people are too scared to touch the OS that came with their PC... Linux has taken over every area of computing in the world, except the desktop... where ultimately monopoly power keeps Windows hanging on... At this point, it's easier to install Linux than Windows... and the UI's are nicer than Windows... I'm not sure many Windows users realize this! Rather not buy an apple/mac for gaming regardless if more gaming is going to cloud. Probably never will. Look at GPU's, Nvidia controls the market share yet AMD is making some great improvements and competitive pricing over the years and slowly raising their market share. Many buy Nvidia for the FOMO of DLSS and cash grab things like RTX where in most situations on a modern game you wouldn't be competitive gaming with DLSS and RTX can literally be achieved in UE5 via developer tools. Mac won't be a gaming platform any time soon... at least not until they finally give up Metal for Vulkan... and even then, the move to ARM will hurt them in that regard... Linux is a much more viable gaming solution than Mac! As for Nvidia... they've been exploiting the market with excessive prices etc, over the last several years... I for one think it's important to have competition, so I think AMD's efforts are critical, and I welcome Intel into that market also.
Enigmatic Sage wrote: » I agree with the intel hitting the GPU market, it's smart, could take some time to get where they want though but considering their history with CPU's it shouldn't take them too long but wont be that soon. They've even been doing what AMD has been doing with their chip designs that they poked fun at AMD for past years. Imagine if Nvidia hit the CPU market.. a true trifecta competition. be ironic though considering their history.
Knevah wrote: » We wouldn't flood the team with reports of issues that are unique to proton, but I will say that I played Eve Online for many years using Wine, and I never did encounter an issue that couldn't be replicated on Windows. So to the Intrepid folks... I'd say, the Linux folks aren't gonna flood your support system with issues that are nothing to do with you...
Sail wrote: » Knevah wrote: » We wouldn't flood the team with reports of issues that are unique to proton, but I will say that I played Eve Online for many years using Wine, and I never did encounter an issue that couldn't be replicated on Windows. So to the Intrepid folks... I'd say, the Linux folks aren't gonna flood your support system with issues that are nothing to do with you... How can you promise that the majority of you guys aren't going to report issues? Maybe you yourself won't but what about the thousand or more of others?
Knevah wrote: » Noaani wrote: » If there is literally any negative side effect at all to pushing that button (which there is), why would it get pushed? And your negative impact is, what?... at best a few KB extra download on top of ~50GB game assets, for a library that's literally not loaded on Windows so cannot be causing you any issues.
Noaani wrote: » Knevah wrote: » Noaani wrote: » If there is literally any negative side effect at all to pushing that button (which there is), why would it get pushed? And your negative impact is, what?... at best a few KB extra download on top of ~50GB game assets, for a library that's literally not loaded on Windows so cannot be causing you any issues. At this point, I can't tell if you are debating from a position of ignorance, or if you are just not here in good faith. You seem to be focusing on the technical, without factoring in the social. If that button is pushed, the negative impact is that the game can then be run on Linux. This in itself opens the game up to a number of cheats that would then become both possible and undetectable.
This is why that button exists - so developers can prevent games running on Linux and thus prevent these cheats.
If there were no negative side effects, Valve would have paid EAC money to just have it always on. This is why the question isn't "how much money will Linux users bring the game", but rather "how much money will the additional cheating cost the game".
Knevah wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Knevah wrote: » Noaani wrote: » If there is literally any negative side effect at all to pushing that button (which there is), why would it get pushed? And your negative impact is, what?... at best a few KB extra download on top of ~50GB game assets, for a library that's literally not loaded on Windows so cannot be causing you any issues. At this point, I can't tell if you are debating from a position of ignorance, or if you are just not here in good faith. You seem to be focusing on the technical, without factoring in the social. If that button is pushed, the negative impact is that the game can then be run on Linux. This in itself opens the game up to a number of cheats that would then become both possible and undetectable. Yes, EAC is not quite as powerful on Linux as it is on Windows... as it likely can't rootkit the OS, as some anti-cheat software does on Windows... and obviously patching the Windows kernel to support some kind of cheat is less practical than doing that on Linux where the source code is available... BUT.... this is not e-sports... and while other MMO's have had issues with things like gold farming, etc... those are generally not issues that could be solved with this kind of anti-cheat... and those games don't feel the need to use it... So, yes... running on Linux makes /some/ of the EAC protections theoretically easier to circumvent... but in practice history has shown that those are not the issues that MMO's generally have to deal with anyway. This is why that button exists - so developers can prevent games running on Linux and thus prevent these cheats. If this was an e-sport title, I might agree that it's increasing the attack surface, and so vendors will want the option to consider that, but the fact remains that the majority of cheats I've seen are run on Windows anyway... If there were no negative side effects, Valve would have paid EAC money to just have it always on. This is why the question isn't "how much money will Linux users bring the game", but rather "how much money will the additional cheating cost the game". Personally, I think the kind of issues that occur in an MMO, compared to what might be the case in e-sports are such that what you can control this way is down in the noise compared to simpler issues such as item farmers, gold sellers and bots, which can really only be addressed by actively monitoring players for unusual activity and having good GM's.
Depraved wrote: » what are the issues then?
Knevah wrote: » BUT.... this is not e-sports...
