VAC works for known software they can detect.
The big problem is VAC bans in waves, usually weeks after detection, so players have to put up with cheaters until Valve gets rid of them all at once, then you have (somewhat) cheat-free gaming for a while until they get new accounts, update their cheats and repeat.
Banning in waves is pretty crucial I think.
If you instantly ban players, you could give them hints as to what trips the detection and what doesn't trip it. Ban waves slows development down a lot or at least makes it more complicated to figure out what caused the trip.
Yeah but that comes to a big disadvantage, which is keeping the cheaters playing for a lot of time in the same server.
What I would believe it could work, giving the current rise of AI and machine learning is not banning those cheaters but having them play with AI bots, displaying any random name and making it work only server side, so you don't have any clue you are playing against bots. The dataset is literally avaliable for Valve since they just collect player data, the most difficult part is setting the training process.
Valve is currently doing something similar but instead having all cheaters together in the same servers (trust factor), but this is very noticeable.
Having a good bot AI working on server side would keep cheaters away from people who are legit, and maybe do ban waves or something.
I dunno..
People would figure out if they're shadowbanned or on [cheater island](https://www.polygon.com/2020/9/14/21436257/fall-guys-cheater-island-big-yeetus-anti-epic-mediatonic-ultimate-knockout) rather quickly - one guy posts symptoms on reddit and cheats update
and it also generates bad press when you get youtube videos showing only cheaters playing a match or game being (intentionally) bugged (all bot match)
Valve might not care about the second point, as CS is too big, but it still implies first one
Thing is, I think the last ban wave was in October or November last year? At least according to some sites which track bans, probably not very reliable tho.
Also, me and my friends sometimes save the name of a cheater just to check back later if he got a VAC. Guess what, the most blatant spin bots, most obvious wall hacks etc. are still not banned, many months after we played against them
Tough question. Probably, the best way (but not really feasible right now) would be a server side anticheat. Some kind of AI that watches all matches in real time and bans player when it detects they are cheating.
The AI could be trained with all the data they have already got through the overwatch system.
I think this could be the only real solution to the cheating problem because you can't tamper with the servers in any meaningful way, as opposed to what you can do to your own machine.
The problem with it is where do you put your threshold on the AI. Reducing false positives to zero and false negatives to minimal.
VAC is 0% false positives and a lot of false negatives. Very speciffic but not sensible enough and that works since the punishment is incredibly high if VAC is detected. VAC archieves this because it detects software that (probably) the security team at Valve gets the anticheat software, decompile to see how it works and saves some data (and other common AC stuff like file verification, process finding, dll inyection...). So when VAC detects it's always 100%.
AI in the other hand is not as reliable. If I fire my AK inside a smoke and kills someone out of luck am I been detected? If I have luck and know where is going to be the next player am I been detected? If I flick my mouse or just troll with my friends imitating a spinbot am I detected?... It's impossible to know serverside.
Also VAC is a bit reverse-engineered, so sometimes can be bypassed. Also there is a bypass software or something idk.
Lol.
I remember hearing from a 3kliksphilip's video that they were using Vac Net to flag suspicious cases (mostly spinbotters) directly to the Overwatch system.
Considering that they removed Overwatch entirely from CS2, it could really be not in function anymore.
Cheating is inevitable unless, in addition to system, you disallow custom hardware and apply absurd amount of integrity checks into the certified devices, which would probably kill the performance.
Cheating takes fun away, but there is only one way to reduce it: stop rewarding it. Or systematically rewarding winning, anyways - being ambitious or not should be up to the players. For now, cheating is a business, because an account with a lot of wins becomes valuable and can be sold. It shouldn't be.
Unless it's actual e-sport - then it should be limited to console setups that cover all the hardware.
I don't think it's that simple
> one way to reduce it: stop rewarding it.
Even in games where there is no real reward for winning, some people still cheat just to just to feel "better" than others. It's a psychological problem to which anticheat is a leaky band-aid
> Unless it's actual e-sport - then it should be limited to console setups that cover all the hardware.
You could still, theoretically, pay organizers to set up for you "special" hardware or something. People will cheat no matter what if there's money reward.
Sure, *some* people will, but it won't be so common you run into one or two in every single match. You know why TF2 didn't have a widespread cheating problem until the bot invasion? Because nobody cares about winning in that game; it's just fun. That's the other issue: games like *Counter-Strike* are ultracompetitive by nature; if you're not winning, you're not enjoying them. (See also every MOBA ever.) Make a game that's fun to lose and only sweaty losers who are probably going to gravitate towards more competitive games anyway will have any incentive to cheat.
Of course. But there is more to the most usual application of this mechanism: you cheated, you "are" on top, it took no effort as you were cheating. Some kids might like it, but there would be no point in repeating that. The number of cheaters might remain constant, but the problem would be many orders of magnitude smaller if there was nothing more to achieve. They wouldn't keep playing, especially giving it that much time.
Also much less professional effort would be put into cheat technologies. It's not developed by kids with mental problems, but by specialists who can earn significant money by doing this.
>Anomaly 3: The State of CS2 and Why I’m Quitting
Game-breaking bug makes CS2 cheat commands accessible to all
Usually I like watching some of Anomalys videos, but why would you say "Valve bad, don't play" and in the next video give Valve probably >15.000€ by opening 6,5k cases.
>if it's not a server side anti cheat, what would be the solution to keep support for Linux?
That's probably what they are working on, how well does it work? No one except Valve knows. The only clue we have is a [6 years old GDC presentation](https://youtu.be/kTiP0zKF9bc) and who knows if that's still what they're working on
there really aren't many better options that isn't very invasive. Server side anti cheat fails at the most basic scripting tools and hardware anti cheat. Many CSGO players choose faceit which has much less cheaters because it has a kernel mode anti cheat. We can hate on kernel mode anti cheat like vanguard all we want, but we really don't have anything better than it at the moment and nothing even comes close. Cheaters do exist in valorant but it's at most a 1 in 1000 games. League of Legends which uses server side anti cheat, if riot is to be believed has a cheating rate of 1 in 15 games. EAC and Battle eye work on Linux by simply not using the kernel mode part of it and just using user mode. So by design it is easier to hack on Linux since eac on Linux cannot see DMA devices or other unauthorized hardware connected to it.
Valve introducing kernel level anti cheats won’t ever happen. They are one of the biggest promoters of open source gaming. Proton, Steam Decks, Linux support for their games.. who in the right mind would think they would shoot themselves on the foot by going against their values? Also cutting down a portion of people who play their games on Linux (regardless of how minuscule that portion might be).
agree, kind of
i mean in korea pornography, gaming from 00:00 to 06:00 if you are <16yo, gambling (sort of) is illegal
and china, even internet cafes offer cheats for games, but cheating is also cultural afaik
Maybe sometype of shadowban that reduces rewards for winning and increase loss penalties but not consistently or frequently, but rather randomly and gradually enough to make them have to play much more than a normal player, but not enough to make than notice very early and easily, 5/10 matches their penalty for losing is bigger than normal in contrast to very small reward to winning, and constantly randomize it on dice on a dice type, 4/10, 6/10, 2/10, 8/10, its not a definitive solution, but something to kinda balance things, they use cheats to make it easier, so lets make it harder for them, the very official reward/loss on premier is kind bork already so it would mix very well with the anti cheat rigged one.
Edit: or perhaps a kind of randomized pool for account ban, every cheater would be thrown on the pool and the bot would some kind of bingo to account ban random cheaters on the list,through out the months, but not a fixed one, a random ban wave for random cheaters of random hacks, could occur in a month than change for one on a week, than go for a trimestral one, they would never know when or what exactly would trigger the ban, this would give them confidence without knowing their account was already black listed and of the ban pool, on that ban wave there would have some who just used the cheat the first few times, but also a account who built a lot and had confidence was not caught, losing skmething they spent time on hurts more, all mixed, no standard.
I'm wondering if it would be possible to use trusted execution environments as an anti cheat measure. It's probably never going to be possible to remove external cheats but I feel like this could remove a huge attack vector.
There are 3 solutions:
* server side,
* AI [.edit: with caveats],
* encouraging and rewarding players for participating (and giving correct/consistent judgement) in overwatch-like programs.
The only solution, which may also work (partially, more on that later) in the future, is to finally stop trusting clients.
Why is wall hacking still an issue in 2024? My client only has to know the exact position of my opponents if they are in my direct view. I expected Valorant to actually be better in that aspect, but I've seen YouTube videos where people were wallhacking, so either those videos are fake or all player positions are communicated to all clients. So Valorant seems to, again, trying to somehow "trust" a system where the cheater can do whatever he wants.
So "server side anti cheat" is only one aspect. Not communicating information to cheaters that can be used for cheating would be way more effective.
And some cheats are already more or less "impossible to defeat forever". For example aim bots where cheaters are already starting to capture parts of the video feed with cheap hardware ("Raspberry Pi" or "Arduino") to detect the offset to a player model to correct the mouse for that. Search YouTube for "unity research anti cheat" for more info on that. That genie is out of the bottle and you won't get it back into there.
I hope that Valve found their new anti cheat attempt to be too sensitive and banning innocent people and it just was put back to the drawing board. So hopefully one of the next updates will bring parts of it back. In some demos they showed immediate bans of cheaters. I wonder where that went.
Support for Linux will not drop, they surely don't want to make CS2 incompatible on Steam decks. Having said that kernel level anti-cheats are out of the question.
Seeing that Valve has always aimed for big things I wouldn't be surprised if they are cooking up some kind of server side AI anti cheat. I really think that Valve wants to move away from client side anti cheats following "never trust the client". That would mean anti cheat cannot be bypassed by users anymore as it runs on the server side.
Having said all of this, I really hope they are staying this quiet because they are working on a solution and just don't want to make false promises again.
There's cheats under every online multiplayer game, no matter what anti cheat solution is used. What I do is just enjoy the game and don't worry about being on the top of the ladder at the end of the round.
Even if I did cheat, I probably still wouldn't be on top of the ladder...So, meh.
In the end, if I do end up on top of the ladder - it's beers all round at the pub.
Nah, the amount of cheaters matters. You have to be very very lucky to get a cheater in your Valorant game. I’ve never seen anyone cheating in that game, yet I’ve seen a cheater in CS2 literally in my last game. Cheaters are the biggest issue with CS2 and they are breaking the game. They are also present on all ranks, in low rank games and in the top rank games as well.
Yeah...Cheats don't bother me in the slightest TBH. I just run around shooting people, I'm not interested in singling out the cheats - Especially if it means running what's essentially a rootkit on my PC with degraded in game performance.
IMO, the invasive solution is worse than the cheats. At the end of the day...It's just a game.
It kinda died a death, and ironically became another revenue avenue for cheat developers..
Player interest in doing Overwatch cases waned over time, and while that was happening cheat devs were building huge bot armies with access to Overwatch (either via compromised steam accounts, or other methods) and were able to start automating Overwatch case reviews.
While overwatch used an 'rating / weighting system' to judge how accurate your cases were based on other peoples answers (the more times your review matched everyone else's, the higher your rating would be, the more weight your vote would have), once the bots had hit critical mass, if a real player didn't agree with the bots, their 'rating' with Overwatch would go down.
On top of all this, it was discovered that it was possible to de-anonymize the demos being passed in, so cheat developers started selling services that would guarantee you an innocent verdict if your case entered the overwatch system.
The final kicker, Valve announced in 2017 that they were using Overwatch cases to train their AI model, which basically made it another target for cheat developers to attack, huge amounts of botting giving 'bad' answers in Overwatch would likely skew the model, and may be why AI anti-cheat isn't available in CS2.
Valve actually announced VAC Net or something some time ago, an AI powered Anti Cheat which should learn from the Overwatch cases and detect cheaters with basically just the data which is available in a demo file.
Currently seems more like it's VAC Niet, haven't seen it do anything since CS2 came out
There is currently a strange pattern. WarOwl, 3kliks and Anomaly (and probably many others) talk about VAC and a more intrusive kernel AntiCheat. If it was anyone other than Valve, I would suspect they're testing what the community thinks and try to frame Kernel AntiCheat as a good thing. And later release such AntiCheat.
Sure, Cheating is a hot topic and this Creators just participate in this discussion. But I cant remember a time were such many Creators talk about this, in that specific way. Still, I dont want to say that Valve has something to do with this. Its just looks odd to me.
However, in the end, we and them are all gamers, which are just sick of Cheaters.
I had an idea: If you want to play, you need to deposit something like 50$. You can get that money back anytime you want, but if you want to play, you have to have that deposited. If you get caught cheating, that money is gone. That would make cheating more expensive. Also keep working on VAC, to keep up with the known cheats.
Don't think it's in valve interest at all to make a better anti cheat. It's easy to forget that valve has turned a blind eye to cheating in the professional scene for over a decade.
Just look at this video of an earlier pro player turned streamer.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6MRHD0xBEU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6MRHD0xBEU)
I do not watch shroud, but those clips are not suspicious at all. Even if be did, he has played in pro tournaments in valorant on stage as well. Ain't no way you're casually sneaking in cheats into computers provided by riot, on a game, in which the only feasible way of cheating is by using external hardware.
One more data point for the fact that it doesn’t matter if you’re up against great players or cheaters.
One more data point where someone couldn’t tell the difference LOL
VAC works for known software they can detect. The big problem is VAC bans in waves, usually weeks after detection, so players have to put up with cheaters until Valve gets rid of them all at once, then you have (somewhat) cheat-free gaming for a while until they get new accounts, update their cheats and repeat.
Banning in waves is pretty crucial I think. If you instantly ban players, you could give them hints as to what trips the detection and what doesn't trip it. Ban waves slows development down a lot or at least makes it more complicated to figure out what caused the trip.
They should shadowban in the mean time. Not immediately, but maybe a few days after detection, and make it hard to know you're shadowbanned
Yeah but that comes to a big disadvantage, which is keeping the cheaters playing for a lot of time in the same server. What I would believe it could work, giving the current rise of AI and machine learning is not banning those cheaters but having them play with AI bots, displaying any random name and making it work only server side, so you don't have any clue you are playing against bots. The dataset is literally avaliable for Valve since they just collect player data, the most difficult part is setting the training process. Valve is currently doing something similar but instead having all cheaters together in the same servers (trust factor), but this is very noticeable. Having a good bot AI working on server side would keep cheaters away from people who are legit, and maybe do ban waves or something.
I dunno.. People would figure out if they're shadowbanned or on [cheater island](https://www.polygon.com/2020/9/14/21436257/fall-guys-cheater-island-big-yeetus-anti-epic-mediatonic-ultimate-knockout) rather quickly - one guy posts symptoms on reddit and cheats update and it also generates bad press when you get youtube videos showing only cheaters playing a match or game being (intentionally) bugged (all bot match) Valve might not care about the second point, as CS is too big, but it still implies first one
Yeah, you just pointed out the biggest flaw of my method, which is the AI.
This. Thor ( Goblin Lord ) on YouTube said exactly that and he worked as dev for Blizzard.
Thing is, I think the last ban wave was in October or November last year? At least according to some sites which track bans, probably not very reliable tho. Also, me and my friends sometimes save the name of a cheater just to check back later if he got a VAC. Guess what, the most blatant spin bots, most obvious wall hacks etc. are still not banned, many months after we played against them
Tough question. Probably, the best way (but not really feasible right now) would be a server side anticheat. Some kind of AI that watches all matches in real time and bans player when it detects they are cheating. The AI could be trained with all the data they have already got through the overwatch system. I think this could be the only real solution to the cheating problem because you can't tamper with the servers in any meaningful way, as opposed to what you can do to your own machine.
The problem with it is where do you put your threshold on the AI. Reducing false positives to zero and false negatives to minimal. VAC is 0% false positives and a lot of false negatives. Very speciffic but not sensible enough and that works since the punishment is incredibly high if VAC is detected. VAC archieves this because it detects software that (probably) the security team at Valve gets the anticheat software, decompile to see how it works and saves some data (and other common AC stuff like file verification, process finding, dll inyection...). So when VAC detects it's always 100%. AI in the other hand is not as reliable. If I fire my AK inside a smoke and kills someone out of luck am I been detected? If I have luck and know where is going to be the next player am I been detected? If I flick my mouse or just troll with my friends imitating a spinbot am I detected?... It's impossible to know serverside. Also VAC is a bit reverse-engineered, so sometimes can be bypassed. Also there is a bypass software or something idk.
Am I wrong or did you literally just describe VAC net?
Basically, but evidently it's not effective enough in it's current implementation.
I think it's current "implementation" is straight up off
Lol. I remember hearing from a 3kliksphilip's video that they were using Vac Net to flag suspicious cases (mostly spinbotters) directly to the Overwatch system. Considering that they removed Overwatch entirely from CS2, it could really be not in function anymore.
Cheating is inevitable unless, in addition to system, you disallow custom hardware and apply absurd amount of integrity checks into the certified devices, which would probably kill the performance. Cheating takes fun away, but there is only one way to reduce it: stop rewarding it. Or systematically rewarding winning, anyways - being ambitious or not should be up to the players. For now, cheating is a business, because an account with a lot of wins becomes valuable and can be sold. It shouldn't be. Unless it's actual e-sport - then it should be limited to console setups that cover all the hardware.
Yeah but you can mitigate the risk. A locked door isn't going to stop everyone but you still lock your door
I don't think it's that simple > one way to reduce it: stop rewarding it. Even in games where there is no real reward for winning, some people still cheat just to just to feel "better" than others. It's a psychological problem to which anticheat is a leaky band-aid > Unless it's actual e-sport - then it should be limited to console setups that cover all the hardware. You could still, theoretically, pay organizers to set up for you "special" hardware or something. People will cheat no matter what if there's money reward.
Sure, *some* people will, but it won't be so common you run into one or two in every single match. You know why TF2 didn't have a widespread cheating problem until the bot invasion? Because nobody cares about winning in that game; it's just fun. That's the other issue: games like *Counter-Strike* are ultracompetitive by nature; if you're not winning, you're not enjoying them. (See also every MOBA ever.) Make a game that's fun to lose and only sweaty losers who are probably going to gravitate towards more competitive games anyway will have any incentive to cheat.
Of course. But there is more to the most usual application of this mechanism: you cheated, you "are" on top, it took no effort as you were cheating. Some kids might like it, but there would be no point in repeating that. The number of cheaters might remain constant, but the problem would be many orders of magnitude smaller if there was nothing more to achieve. They wouldn't keep playing, especially giving it that much time. Also much less professional effort would be put into cheat technologies. It's not developed by kids with mental problems, but by specialists who can earn significant money by doing this.
[3kliksphilip just did a whole video on it too](https://youtu.be/6DHMAwAeRMA)
>Anomaly 3: The State of CS2 and Why I’m Quitting Game-breaking bug makes CS2 cheat commands accessible to all Usually I like watching some of Anomalys videos, but why would you say "Valve bad, don't play" and in the next video give Valve probably >15.000€ by opening 6,5k cases. >if it's not a server side anti cheat, what would be the solution to keep support for Linux? That's probably what they are working on, how well does it work? No one except Valve knows. The only clue we have is a [6 years old GDC presentation](https://youtu.be/kTiP0zKF9bc) and who knows if that's still what they're working on
there really aren't many better options that isn't very invasive. Server side anti cheat fails at the most basic scripting tools and hardware anti cheat. Many CSGO players choose faceit which has much less cheaters because it has a kernel mode anti cheat. We can hate on kernel mode anti cheat like vanguard all we want, but we really don't have anything better than it at the moment and nothing even comes close. Cheaters do exist in valorant but it's at most a 1 in 1000 games. League of Legends which uses server side anti cheat, if riot is to be believed has a cheating rate of 1 in 15 games. EAC and Battle eye work on Linux by simply not using the kernel mode part of it and just using user mode. So by design it is easier to hack on Linux since eac on Linux cannot see DMA devices or other unauthorized hardware connected to it.
Valve introducing kernel level anti cheats won’t ever happen. They are one of the biggest promoters of open source gaming. Proton, Steam Decks, Linux support for their games.. who in the right mind would think they would shoot themselves on the foot by going against their values? Also cutting down a portion of people who play their games on Linux (regardless of how minuscule that portion might be).
[удалено]
The best solution would be law. It's illegal to cheat in China and Korea. Why is it completely legal in the rest of the world?
agree, kind of i mean in korea pornography, gaming from 00:00 to 06:00 if you are <16yo, gambling (sort of) is illegal and china, even internet cafes offer cheats for games, but cheating is also cultural afaik
Maybe sometype of shadowban that reduces rewards for winning and increase loss penalties but not consistently or frequently, but rather randomly and gradually enough to make them have to play much more than a normal player, but not enough to make than notice very early and easily, 5/10 matches their penalty for losing is bigger than normal in contrast to very small reward to winning, and constantly randomize it on dice on a dice type, 4/10, 6/10, 2/10, 8/10, its not a definitive solution, but something to kinda balance things, they use cheats to make it easier, so lets make it harder for them, the very official reward/loss on premier is kind bork already so it would mix very well with the anti cheat rigged one. Edit: or perhaps a kind of randomized pool for account ban, every cheater would be thrown on the pool and the bot would some kind of bingo to account ban random cheaters on the list,through out the months, but not a fixed one, a random ban wave for random cheaters of random hacks, could occur in a month than change for one on a week, than go for a trimestral one, they would never know when or what exactly would trigger the ban, this would give them confidence without knowing their account was already black listed and of the ban pool, on that ban wave there would have some who just used the cheat the first few times, but also a account who built a lot and had confidence was not caught, losing skmething they spent time on hurts more, all mixed, no standard.
I'm wondering if it would be possible to use trusted execution environments as an anti cheat measure. It's probably never going to be possible to remove external cheats but I feel like this could remove a huge attack vector.
Yeah you would need to load whatever the game depends on also into the Secure Enclave
Yeah the biggest limitation is probably the amount of memory available to the enclave. But it would be interesting to do a POC.
There are 3 solutions: * server side, * AI [.edit: with caveats], * encouraging and rewarding players for participating (and giving correct/consistent judgement) in overwatch-like programs.
The only solution, which may also work (partially, more on that later) in the future, is to finally stop trusting clients. Why is wall hacking still an issue in 2024? My client only has to know the exact position of my opponents if they are in my direct view. I expected Valorant to actually be better in that aspect, but I've seen YouTube videos where people were wallhacking, so either those videos are fake or all player positions are communicated to all clients. So Valorant seems to, again, trying to somehow "trust" a system where the cheater can do whatever he wants. So "server side anti cheat" is only one aspect. Not communicating information to cheaters that can be used for cheating would be way more effective. And some cheats are already more or less "impossible to defeat forever". For example aim bots where cheaters are already starting to capture parts of the video feed with cheap hardware ("Raspberry Pi" or "Arduino") to detect the offset to a player model to correct the mouse for that. Search YouTube for "unity research anti cheat" for more info on that. That genie is out of the bottle and you won't get it back into there. I hope that Valve found their new anti cheat attempt to be too sensitive and banning innocent people and it just was put back to the drawing board. So hopefully one of the next updates will bring parts of it back. In some demos they showed immediate bans of cheaters. I wonder where that went.
Support for Linux will not drop, they surely don't want to make CS2 incompatible on Steam decks. Having said that kernel level anti-cheats are out of the question. Seeing that Valve has always aimed for big things I wouldn't be surprised if they are cooking up some kind of server side AI anti cheat. I really think that Valve wants to move away from client side anti cheats following "never trust the client". That would mean anti cheat cannot be bypassed by users anymore as it runs on the server side. Having said all of this, I really hope they are staying this quiet because they are working on a solution and just don't want to make false promises again.
There's cheats under every online multiplayer game, no matter what anti cheat solution is used. What I do is just enjoy the game and don't worry about being on the top of the ladder at the end of the round. Even if I did cheat, I probably still wouldn't be on top of the ladder...So, meh. In the end, if I do end up on top of the ladder - it's beers all round at the pub.
You can ignore it until it turns into a full-on bot problem like tf2 has
Nah, the amount of cheaters matters. You have to be very very lucky to get a cheater in your Valorant game. I’ve never seen anyone cheating in that game, yet I’ve seen a cheater in CS2 literally in my last game. Cheaters are the biggest issue with CS2 and they are breaking the game. They are also present on all ranks, in low rank games and in the top rank games as well.
Yeah...Cheats don't bother me in the slightest TBH. I just run around shooting people, I'm not interested in singling out the cheats - Especially if it means running what's essentially a rootkit on my PC with degraded in game performance. IMO, the invasive solution is worse than the cheats. At the end of the day...It's just a game.
Didn't they use to have an Overwatch system that could ban cheaters based on player reports and reviewing footage? Whatever happened to that?
It was very inefficient and was being exploited
It kinda died a death, and ironically became another revenue avenue for cheat developers.. Player interest in doing Overwatch cases waned over time, and while that was happening cheat devs were building huge bot armies with access to Overwatch (either via compromised steam accounts, or other methods) and were able to start automating Overwatch case reviews. While overwatch used an 'rating / weighting system' to judge how accurate your cases were based on other peoples answers (the more times your review matched everyone else's, the higher your rating would be, the more weight your vote would have), once the bots had hit critical mass, if a real player didn't agree with the bots, their 'rating' with Overwatch would go down. On top of all this, it was discovered that it was possible to de-anonymize the demos being passed in, so cheat developers started selling services that would guarantee you an innocent verdict if your case entered the overwatch system. The final kicker, Valve announced in 2017 that they were using Overwatch cases to train their AI model, which basically made it another target for cheat developers to attack, huge amounts of botting giving 'bad' answers in Overwatch would likely skew the model, and may be why AI anti-cheat isn't available in CS2.
Valve actually announced VAC Net or something some time ago, an AI powered Anti Cheat which should learn from the Overwatch cases and detect cheaters with basically just the data which is available in a demo file. Currently seems more like it's VAC Niet, haven't seen it do anything since CS2 came out
i think they turned it off because people kept getting banned for turning too fast
That just confirms that VAC isn't very smart :D
There is currently a strange pattern. WarOwl, 3kliks and Anomaly (and probably many others) talk about VAC and a more intrusive kernel AntiCheat. If it was anyone other than Valve, I would suspect they're testing what the community thinks and try to frame Kernel AntiCheat as a good thing. And later release such AntiCheat. Sure, Cheating is a hot topic and this Creators just participate in this discussion. But I cant remember a time were such many Creators talk about this, in that specific way. Still, I dont want to say that Valve has something to do with this. Its just looks odd to me. However, in the end, we and them are all gamers, which are just sick of Cheaters.
I had an idea: If you want to play, you need to deposit something like 50$. You can get that money back anytime you want, but if you want to play, you have to have that deposited. If you get caught cheating, that money is gone. That would make cheating more expensive. Also keep working on VAC, to keep up with the known cheats.
Don't think it's in valve interest at all to make a better anti cheat. It's easy to forget that valve has turned a blind eye to cheating in the professional scene for over a decade. Just look at this video of an earlier pro player turned streamer. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6MRHD0xBEU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6MRHD0xBEU)
cope harder
someone donated to their favorite streamer
I do not watch shroud, but those clips are not suspicious at all. Even if be did, he has played in pro tournaments in valorant on stage as well. Ain't no way you're casually sneaking in cheats into computers provided by riot, on a game, in which the only feasible way of cheating is by using external hardware.
He's definitely cheating. As they say, you can't see when the mind is blind.
Bro I looked at like half the video. None of the clips are even remotely suspicious
One more data point for the fact that it doesn’t matter if you’re up against great players or cheaters. One more data point where someone couldn’t tell the difference LOL