this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
1139 points (98.4% liked)

Games

32320 readers
2095 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Now if only they could more clearly communicate when games are playable offline.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

That does not detect things like wall hack and aim-bots that don't modify the game state directly.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Don't tell the client what's going on outside its vision, I suppose? Add a small buffer to compensate for latency, so wall hack would be more of a "corner hack".

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I mean sure, that is how some (mostly strategy and tactical) games do it, but for an FPS, figuring out where the buffer should be would be a programmers nightmare. I guess you would have to try to calculate all possible lines of sights a player could have within some buffer time (100-1000ms) and then all players that could in theory enter them... Add physics and it is practically impossible.

Also, corner hack is useful enough and it does not address aimbot. IMO the answer is some combination of human moderation and ability to play with "friends" instead of randos. E.g. you could ask people to like or dislike a player at the end of a match and try to pair players that liked each other in the past.