this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2026
211 points (96.9% liked)

PC Gaming

13064 readers
779 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
EXiLExJD@lemmy.ca
UncleBadTouch@lemmy.ca
KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
211
I'm brave enough to say it: Linux is good now, and if you want to feel like you actually own your PC, make 2026 the year of Linux on (your) desktop (www.pcgamer.com)
submitted 21 hours ago by inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Agent_Karyo@piefed.world 7 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

kernel anti-cheats do not want to develop for Linux due to the lack of a fully secure environment in the OS.

I don't think it will be possible to limit non-casual cheating (i.e. those who are willing to spend money) using the dynamic matchmaking approach.

The only way to beat cheating is to have "old style" community servers with regulars for cheaters to be kickbanned by someone with admin rights and/or server votes for kickbans. Not saying this will happen any time soon in the mainstream, but I don't see an automated approach working short of something like required real world IDs.

[–] SalamenceFury@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Automated could work using AI to check how someone is playing, since a lot of LLMs are specialized in analyzing if something has human behaviors on it or not, but even then that approach isn't 100% guaranteed. Ideally we'd use server-side anti-cheat instead of offloading it to client side, but that costs money and suits are allergic to spending money.

[–] definitemaybe@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

You mean machine learning algorithms (or just "AI"), not Large Language Models. LLMs are just advanced word prediction machines; they're categorically incapable of detecting cheating in a game.

But, yeah. It would totally make sense to have server-side detection for things like:

  • Consistency with performance (no changes over time within or sessions with reaction time, for example)
  • Behaviour changes depending whether there is vs. isn't someone around a corner, particularly in areas with long sight lines so footstep sounds wouldn't trigger
  • Inhumanly quick reaction times, with consistency (e.g. < 100ms reaction times — 101 ms is the world record)

etc.

Sure, people could still have cheats help tweak inputs, a bit, like "gentle" headshot aiming assistance, but it would catch egregious cheaters.