Cheating software running on Linux is more challenging to detect than Windows-based kernel-level tools, and they require an increasingly higher level of attention from the Apex Legends team.
So, for starters, this is not a direct quote (of the interviewed Apex dev), so this is basically just the author’s opinion.
More to the point: Purchasable cheats that currently defeat AC on Apex are far, far more easy to find for Windows machines.
… and they defeat Kernel level AC on Windows all the time.
Also, Apex uses EAC which uh… supports linux, has for 3 years.
EDIT 2: The article states Apex uses BattlEye, not EAC for AC… but all the info I can find on Apex says they use EAC? Maybe there was a recent change?
Either way, BattlEye supports linux/SteamDeck as well, also for 3 years now.
https://store.steampowered.com/news/group/4145017/view/3104663180636096966
https://www.pcgamesn.com/steam-deck/proton-battleye-anti-cheat-support
I mean maybe there is some truth to cheat developers preferring to develop their cheats on linux…many programmers prefer to develop things on linux… but they develop them for Windows users.
Like… I obviously do not support cheating, so I won’t post the links… but a quick web search very, very easily reveals that all the cheats one can purchase… well they work on Win 10/11… no support for linux is indicated.
Granted I am no uberl33th4x0r, but I don’t see any Apex cheats which are easily acquirable which support linux.
…
EDIT: Oh right, it is probably also worth mentioning that after CrowdStrike Y2K’d half of the world’s enterprise Windows machines… through pushing a malformed update… that interfaces directly with the Windows kernel…
… MSFT is now re-evaluating giving kernel level access to 3rd parties, and is looking to create higher level APIs (above the Kernel) that are less likely to expose Windows to massive system stability errors from 3rd parties, and looks to want to at the very least have much more involvement with reviewing any 3rd party code that accesses the kernel:
Maybe these Kernel level AC proponents are a bit worried about their Kernel access on Windows being either much more stringently reviewed, or limited, and are making a fuss about it by scapegoating linux, you know, as a misdirect?
Just a thought.
EDIT 3:
A quote from the article I linked pertaining to BattlEye
BattlEye’s Steam Deck compatibility is great news, but its arrival on the handheld comes with small print. According to the anti-cheat solution’s clarification, developers will have to “opt-in”, suggesting that specific games could forgo compatibility. While it’s hard to think of a compelling reason why a company would want to do this, Valve’s PC competitors could, in theory, use the option to their advantage.
Pff, what an outlandish notion, that giant AAA studios (who all have massive business ties to MSFT) would exert pressure to limit linux marketshare/adoption, what a baseless and silly worry.
=P
Translation: We don’t feel like taking the effort to support Linux, so we need a scapegoat.
Client-side anti-cheat is effectively pointless in the long run. The software is running on a machine the devs do not control, and ultimately that means it cannot be trusted. They should be working harder on server-side detection, but that requires work not just buying a product and dusting your hands off…
The best “server-side” anti cheat mechanisms online is streaming the game, and I am sure that eventually some talented developers are able to even write some aim bot (or more) for that.
Competitive games need a fully controlled environment. Doing it online with random unknown people should not be taken as serious as they currently do.
Alot about video games is not standardized. To be competitive all players should have the same hardware, internet connection, etc. So that it is actually individual skill that is measured, not just the size of players wallet.
But even then, developing skill takes alot of practice and time, which also, in our current system, can be converted into money. There just is no fair competition here anyway. Still many people believe in meritocracies…
Streaming the game is never gonna be viable for me because of where I live, even if I wanted it, and I very much don’t. But then I don’t care for the kind of competitive games where what hardware you run on makes that much difference, anyway.
I don’t think we need “the best”. Just to be able to detect and ban the egregious offenders would be enough.
I will say we agree on one thing; competitive games should not be taken as seriously as they are. But then I’m of the controversial opinion that esports made gaming worse.
about the time games move to stream only is when I stop buying games. I do not need that network saturation and latency.
Server authoritative multiplayer system (server only takes player inputs and spits out results, making editing data impossible), with a lag prediction system clientside, works wonders. Aimbotting will always exist, but detection should be server side.
Anti cheat is like DRM. It’s a waiting game more than it is about actual direct protection.
Linux is just a source of exploits and cheats and nothing more, the developer said
Sure, and so is Windows. Is the difference then who will accept draconian anti-cheat?
Assuming that there really is significant cheating on Linux clients, this can just be the company saying that there are not enough users to make development of more robust anti-cheat cost effective.
This is basically the same argument that software and hardware vendors have used for decades for why they won’t support Linux
Even though EAC and BattlEye have both supported linux for 3 years now, and the devs don’t actually have to do anything as Proton functionally ports the game from Windows to Linux automatically at no cost to them.
… They’re lying.
Maybe for a smaller game studio, I could actually believe they don’t know these things.
But massive AAA studios that have direct business ties to MSFT?
They’re lying.
They’re saying anything they can to slow down linux adoption, because MSFT wants to dominate as a PC gaming OS.
They used to just ignore, play dumb, feign ignorance or perhaps just actually be incompetent… now they’re just lying to our faces.
Sure Apex. Show us your stats for how many cheaters you caught who were running on Windows vs running on Linux, and show us how at least a smidgen of methodology you used to determine the bare metal OS of someone running on a VM.
They may well be lying about their reasons/justifications, I don’t have any way to know one way or the other.
This just isn’t a new thing. Companies fave been blaming the high cost of supporting the relatively small number of users on an “alternative” OS for a very long time. Unfortunately, I think that as long as desktop Linux is in the single or low double digits of percentage of users, this is something we’re going to keep hearing.
A company is unlikely to do a thing if it’s cheaper to not do the thing.
My favourite from the old days was “we stopped/don’t support/only support Ubuntu Linux because customer support is too tough across different systems”.
Yeah. I’m not sure that this has changed much.
I suspect that was a large part of what drove the excitement for something like Valve’s Proton. It was supposed to make it easier for studios to make games available across platforms, because they would. “just work” without having to put special effort in.
This sounds like the same sort of “We found out that the cost is not actually 0, and we want out. We can’t say that though, so it’s your fault”
bullshit. there will be zero decrease in cheating. I highly doubt any paid cheat devs offer linux support either.
True, there will not be a significant decrease in cheating. The main savings will be in cost to the company by dropping support for a release pipeline.
