As for computer games, I believe there are two ways to effectively combat any "cheating":
1. Restrict what clients see and do, server-side. Many cheats rely on the fact, client game software internally has much more information that it presents to the player (wallhacks, radars/ESPs, etc), and server trusts client-originating data more than it should (speedhacks, norecoils, spawners, etc).
I know, those're due to attempts to reduce network-induced lags and lowering server loads, but having a more powerful server-side (and have an occasional desync if network lags badly) doesn't sound like an unacceptable trade-off to not have players upset by cheaters.
2. Embrace cheats as features and raise everyone abilities to best cheater's ones. There's no need to, say, have an aimbot if you have an "official" in-game ability to have autoaim.
Maybe then we'll finally have scriptable/hackable games, where one could "legally" automate routine tasks and be on a "good" side. Oh, and that MMO grinding/farming phenomena would finally die for good.
One can still cheat even in an environment where data is restricted. The 'cheating' part comes from being able to use the CPU to help the player make better or faster decisions. It doesn't have to be perfect - only enough to help the player gain an edge.
I haven't tried it in probably 15 years (and, I'm sure technique has improved exponentially, since then) but as long as you can access and reverse-engineer the data protocol (which you almost always can), you can add code logic to gain an edge.
That's what second approach is about. If cheaters can use technology to improve their gameplay through an automation - why not enhance everyone's gameplay by making such automation an official built-in game feature?
Look at all the hype 0x10c got on here because the ship had a programmable computer.
Give the players some emulated low-spec hardware they can use and an API they can use it with.
Even if it doesn't appeal to everyone, it might keep the worst of the botters away from the games that don't want them.
Comments
As for computer games, I believe there are two ways to effectively combat any "cheating":
1. Restrict what clients see and do, server-side. Many cheats rely on the fact, client game software internally has much more information that it presents to the player (wallhacks, radars/ESPs, etc), and server trusts client-originating data more than it should (speedhacks, norecoils, spawners, etc).
I know, those're due to attempts to reduce network-induced lags and lowering server loads, but having a more powerful server-side (and have an occasional desync if network lags badly) doesn't sound like an unacceptable trade-off to not have players upset by cheaters.
2. Embrace cheats as features and raise everyone abilities to best cheater's ones. There's no need to, say, have an aimbot if you have an "official" in-game ability to have autoaim.
Maybe then we'll finally have scriptable/hackable games, where one could "legally" automate routine tasks and be on a "good" side. Oh, and that MMO grinding/farming phenomena would finally die for good.
One can still cheat even in an environment where data is restricted. The 'cheating' part comes from being able to use the CPU to help the player make better or faster decisions. It doesn't have to be perfect - only enough to help the player gain an edge.
I haven't tried it in probably 15 years (and, I'm sure technique has improved exponentially, since then) but as long as you can access and reverse-engineer the data protocol (which you almost always can), you can add code logic to gain an edge.
That's what second approach is about. If cheaters can use technology to improve their gameplay through an automation - why not enhance everyone's gameplay by making such automation an official built-in game feature?
Look at all the hype 0x10c got on here because the ship had a programmable computer. Give the players some emulated low-spec hardware they can use and an API they can use it with.
Even if it doesn't appeal to everyone, it might keep the worst of the botters away from the games that don't want them.