Cethin

There are increasingly many guard rails, like a warning when you do “rm -rf .” in many systems, for example. It’s just that they are only guard rails, not walls. You can ignore them.

Basically, all the small blocks. They aren’t all critical, but some of them are, and they’re all over the place.

I get it, but you’d be surprised how friendly people can be there. Especially solo, it’s like a 90+% chance people just work together.

I didn’t mention it to recommend it though, only to point out that it probably isn’t their AC that is (creating the illusion of) preventing cheaters.

If you like it, I’d like to recommend Squad. It’s more based in reality (though not “realistic”). It’s much slower. You can’t sprint around and kill people. It’s also focused on team play. It’s the spawn of the Project Reality mod from Battlefield 2, so it’s got the same DNA.

They frequently have free weekends. That’s the worst time to play, as free players kill a lot of the team play. For the chance to try for free though, it’s good. Just know it’s the worst experience you’ll have while playing. It only goes up from there.

Cheating in ARC Raiders also seems very rare —and it’s ahead of BF6 now in players.

There’s two issues. Cheating in general is pretty uncommon, though it has an enlarged impact on players in games with high skill, lower player count, high information. Counter Strike, for example, it’s easy to tell when something feels off, so it’s easier to detect cheating. The upset it causes people also has a re-enforcment factor that makes it feel more common.

Meanwhile in BF, with tons of players all around, sprinting full speed, and low information, it’s hard to know if someone is cheating. Was it luck or skill, or did they have ESP and saw you through the wall? The chaos hides cheats. However, I saw day 1 that cheats were active and working in game. They’re there, but they’re a lot more invisible.

For example, I play Squad. In Squad you build FOBs where players respawn. There’s a type of cheating (doesn’t require hacks) called “ghosting” where you have a player on the other team who gives information about where FOBs are, for example, so you can destroy them. It’s almost impossible to detect. Any ghosting that happens could just as easily be luck/skill, and more often than not is. You could assume there’s no cheating happening. It is rare there, but it isn’t zero. There’s no Kernel level anti-cheat (for Linux at least).

I’m guessing that their decision ultimately comes down to money - they probably figure that other methods would be more expensive to achieve the same result, and that the lost revenue from people who are turned off by the anti cheat is less than that cost.

Yes, it’s executuves making a short-term purely financial decision. It’s also probably not even the wrong one with those factors in mind. However, it does long-term damage to your reputation. The devs who build for Linux get praised for supporting customer choice. The ones who push kernel level AC get roasted for it. Sure, it’s doing fine now, but will they have lower revenue in 5-10 years because of it?

Regardless, I personally think it’s bad, and as such refuse to support them. I also choose to spend time and effort pointing out the issues to people so they can decide it’s a bad choice in the future.

Yeah, I have a group of three who I have been playing with for years. It really hasn’t been an issue for us though. We’ve been doing The Finals for a while now, and we did Hunt for a while before that. We’ve hopped between several different games, and it’s not a problem. We just aren’t really drawn towards EA or Riot though, which are the only western games that don’t work, for the most part.

I’ve had enough Battlefield in my past that I don’t care for it anymore. I also play Squad, so that easily takes its place. Basically, the companies with executives forcing kernel level anti-cheat on them aren’t allowed to make interesting games anyway, so it doesn’t bother me.

I would give them the benefit of the doubt regarding their intentions.

The developers are rarely the ones making the choice. I do give them the benefit of the doubt, but it’s been shown it doesn’t actually prevent cheating and you’re refusing to let your customers choose how they play. They get the benefit of the doubt that they’re honestly trying to prevent cheaters, but not that it’s a purely benevolent decision towards customers. It’s a trade off, and the option they’re taking is bad for consumers and isn’t effective anyway.

I don’t know what the Helldivers devs did, but you don’t think it’s scummy that BF6 requires malware, like Windows and kerbel level anti-cheat?

The vast majority of games work fine on Linux. Try not switching sometime. You don’t even need to reinstall them. Linux can read your Windows partition fine, do you just need to point whatever launcher to the same spot.

What games? The vast majority work fine.

The companies that don’t let you choose your platform don’t respect you. They won’t support Linux until they’re forced to. As long as you let them bully you they’ll continue to not support user freedom. There are far too many games to play that I can’t play them all, so I don’t really care that a tiny handful of games aren’t playable. They aren’t worth playing until they learn to respect customers.

They won’t support Linux unless they have to. As long as people decide to play along with them then they’ll continue to not support it. If you give up this game then eventually Linux will be supported.

In my opinion, every game worth playing supports Linux. There are way too many games that I don’t have time to play them, so I’ll play the ones that respect their customer’s choices. I’ll ignore the ones that require us to install malware —whether that’s kernel level anti-cheat or Windows.

Yeah, I think you’re right. The one on the left is stretched and has fewer pixels vertically than the right one, so it isn’t showing quite the same thing.

I’m with you. This doesn’t seem right. I know CRTs have an anti-aliasing effect, but this seems to have increased detail. Look at his ascot, for example. It seems to have more detail than the image on the left.

Yeah, most food has been processed. That’s why we have the term ultra-processed for most American food.

Recursion is amazing for a small selection of problems. Most of the time you don’t need, or want, it. When it is useful though, it tends to be really useful.

I don’t understand people’s issue with it. I always found it easy. Maybe that’s why I feel this way. Maybe if you find it challenging you want to avoid it, even when it’s a good solution.

This isn’t smart. This is clever. It’s a way to solve a problem in a novel way. It isn’t the best, or even most obvious, way to solve the problem. It’s just interesting.

I’m one of those guys that struggles to orgasm. Even masturbating I will sometimes last a really long time. It’s more a mood thing than a sensation thing for me. I have to have my mind in the right state to orgasm. The good thing about it is I can have sex for as long as my partner wants often.

It’s odd, because usually men are the ones who leave their partners wanting. For me my partners pretty much always get more than they bargained for, but I’m frequently left without orgasming. It’s fine though. It’s still plenty enjoyable without it.

The way this should work is it’s set as either left-to-right or right-to-left. (C:)/1/2/3.ext or ext.3/2/1/(:C). It shouldn’t render part of it one direction and part of it the other direction logically. It’s probably impossible to fix at this point, but this makes a lot more sense.

I don’t know if there’s anything specific to read. It’s a basic mechanic of gears. They turn connected gears in the opposite direction. If the gear you’re spinning is attached to two other gears, they’ll both want to spin opposite the first gear, and the same as each other. If they’re both connected they’ll try to make each other spin opposite themselves too, which obviously can’t happen.

Yeah, I guess knowledge is also a bad term. I guess a better way to say it is “when an interaction happens, so the position is concrete.”