Skip Navigation
193 comments
  • Not the case in my experience. Nobody is backing out from server-side checks and nobody is spending a ton of money either developing or purchasing anticheat to appease "non-technical stakeholders", such as they are. Technical directors and technical leads exist. You won't convince a random executive with a grumpy engineer in the room saying things are a waste of money. And that's assuming your decisionmakers are "non-technical" in the first place. Plenty of studio heads came from engineering.

    Game developers have metrics for cheating, they're not making it up, and as far as I can tell you get better results on PC by doing both than just one. Worse, when you don't have tight enough anticheat players can feel it, too, which is ultimately the only thing that matters.

    As I was telling someone below, the goal of anticheat isn't to fully secure the game. No game is fully secure. But it matters to make abuse onerous because it's a very different experience to go from multiple cheaters a game to a cheater every multiple games. Trivial cheating that average players can access is a dealbreaker.

193 comments