I think people can vote to kick people but that’s it really
Comment on Microsoft is moving antivirus providers out of the Windows kernel. Hopefully anti-cheat will be next
Winter_Oven@piefed.social 3 weeks ago...wait, games don't have even a single person checking for cheaters, even casually? Like, they wholly rely on anticheat?
(PS, has been a decently long time since I played a game that needed anti cheat)
NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
seralth@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
FF14 and BDO for example still have GMs but they are woefully understaffed. This is the more common reality.
Few to no mmos have zero GMs. They just frequently only work for like an hour a day doing spot checks are under staffed and mostly just are email support.
The old days of gms frequently being actively in-game to reach out to 24/7 isn’t a thing anymore.
dormedas@lemmy.dormedas.com 3 weeks ago
Depends on the game, really, but “relying” on anti-cheat is pretty common. Larger games tend to have teams who review cases that get flagged by the systems and players and do manual removal but these teams also tend to be quite small and unable to adequately handle the amount of cheating that occurs.
If gamers want to see cheaters less often, they need to pressure the companies to do human moderation in addition.
vulgarcynic@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
I’d argue the most effective anticheat is dedicated servers. Admin’ed a lot of CS, TFC, and Q3 servers growing up and olit was easy enough to kick/ban any one hacking or being an unrepentant dick. Downside for the corps is, you can’t gate all that dlc as easy when users have control.
dormedas@lemmy.dormedas.com 3 weeks ago
I’d argue the same, actually. It takes people to moderate people and dedicated servers make it easiest. Modern match made games could still have admins, the company needs to pay for them.