Cethin

I don’t think it says that a company can’t put restrictions on you. It says The government can’t restrict how it’s used —notably supported by AI groups so they can’t regulate that. A company can still prevent you from doing whatever the hell they want if they have the power to.

Even better, don’t use detergent pods. They’re a scam. They don’t do anything better than the powder, except take money out of your pocket significantly faster.

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.

It’s burnt to hell. That’s why it’s like that. The cultivar doesn’t matter at that point. You could start with the best beans and it’d still be shit roasted like that.

The cultivar matters, but only when it’s roasted well. These huge coffee companies burn the coffee to ensure consistency. It doesn’t matter what they started with.

I feel like you might not actually know that much about coffee. You’ve heard two names and that one is supposed to be better (it isn’t, just different, and useful in different circumstances). You then stopped learning and think you know everything.

Yeah, I’m certain you’re right. It isn’t more popular. It’s more popular if you’re going out to a café, but most people are drinking drip coffee made at home. I would bet a lot of it still has that super sweet flavored “creamer” crap added though.

Most people think plain coffee tastes like the burnt shit sold at Starbucks. They’ve never tasted what coffee actually tastes like, so they buy cheap dark roast coffee and add a bunch of sugar to it because they bought the most bitter thing you can get.

I got Single Player Tarkov working, but it was a pain in the ass. I think vanilla multiplayer won’t, but it’s been quite a while since I tried.

I pretty sure I wouldn’t have enjoyed it as much as EfT or definitely not ARC Raiders, but I still wanted to see what they decided to do differently. Yeah, they probably saved me some time.

They stated the obvious, which didn’t add to the conversation, and also was wrong. There are a number of older games that just do not work on modern Windows. Frequently they work through WINE/Proton just fine though.

I was watching a video about extraction shooters and it mentioned a F2P Chinese one. I wasn’t that interested in it, but I wanted to give it a try to see what it was doing differently. It didn’t run though, because almost all Chinese games have kernel-level AC. I figure it’s not a big loss. I own EfT, and I’ve got other extraction shooters to play, especially ARC Raiders now.

That was the last time, and the only time in a very long time, that a game I tried to play didn’t just work.

100% of games worth playing work on Linux!

I would imagine there’s a kernel of truth to it. It’s probably correct, but for one rarely used operation, or something like that. It’s not a total revolution. It’s something that could be included to speed up a very particular task. Like GPUs are much better at matrix math than the CPU, so we often have that in addition to the CPU, which can handle all tasks, but isn’t as fast for those particular ones.

I doubt the idea this can be proven at all. It makes the assumption that a simulation would have to function in a particular way. Why would that have to be the case? Anything you find could just be a quirk of the simulation. Hell, the simulation could be made in a universe with entirely different rules and logic, so you can’t make assumptions about anything. It’s really not something that I think could be disproven or proven.

(Because it can’t be disproven or proven, and it doesn’t change anything either way, you should live as if it isn’t real probably. It’s a fun thought experiment, but you probably shouldn’t hold an active belief in it, because it seems like something that could mess with your mental health.)