Support us on Patreon
PayPalIrdeto, the company behind Denuvo and the newer Denuvo Anti-Cheat have announced that developers on Steam can now get direct anti-cheat integration through Steamworks. Denuvo is one of the most popular DRM solutions, with it often appearing in Windows releases of popular AAA games. Now with this Anti-Cheat easily available direct through Steam no doubt many developers will look to use it.
The question is: how will this affect Linux compatibility of games both native Linux builds and Windows games run through the Steam Play Proton compatibility layer? Back in May, we reported that the Denuvo team did mention they were aiming for support of Proton.
After shooting a message over to Irdeto here's what Reinhard Blaukovitsch, Managing Director of Denuvo by Irdeto, said in reply:
We can confirm that future deployments of Denuvo Anti-Cheat will not prohibit Linux users from accessing single-player and non-competitive multiplayer features of their games. For example, campaigns or custom multiplayer game matches. Linux users will not be required to install a kernel-mode driver, and the lack of anti-cheat software will not prevent their game from starting.
Even though there is no kernel-mode driver on Linux, the userspace game process performs significant cheat detection. Linux users accessing multiplayer will be reported to online services as running at lower integrity. Some game developers may choose to prevent Linux users from accessing ranked or competitive game modes. We'll do our best to convince developers and publishers to allow Linux users to participate in competitive modes. Still, we must be honest with them and disclose our reduced detection capability on Linux.
We'll communicate concrete plans for growing Linux detection capability and how the community can contribute as our userbase grows.
In a further clarification to us, we asked if this was only for Windows games in the Proton compatibility layer or if it will have the same kind of support for native Linux builds to which they replied "This is for Windows games in Proton".
When asked for their plans (if any) to support native Linux builds of games, here's what they said:
We have not yet been engaged by an organization expressing interest in native anti-cheat support for Linux. Once there is demand, we’d have no hesitation to take on that task. It’s worth noting that we’ve had anti-cheat technology on consoles for many years now. Our experience with Linux-like environments on the Nintendo Switch and Sony PlayStation 4 & 5 indicates that effective native Linux anti-cheat would require a from-the-ground-up effort and not just a port. Denuvo Anti-Cheat is heavily dependent on hardware security features which makes it fairly kernel-agnostic, so it’s just a matter of ‘when’ not ‘if’. Our best bang-for-the-buck in the short term is Proton.
So there you have it. If demand comes, they will do it too and it's only a matter of time. Nice to see them being so open about it and happy to chat with us on it so clearly.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Quoting: GustyGhostQuoting: BielFPsIt's sad how anti cheat solutions are more effective to block legit Linux players instead of actual cheaters. And for anti-piracy protection, I haven't see any successfully case with Denuvo since the Chinese had their first success of crack them.
This last year has me of the mind that Beijing Sandingmeng may have been supported by particular interests seeking to better understand systems of digital control.
Quoting: elmapuland not all games can run server side only, what about those button mash mini games where the player who presses the button faster wins? its impossible to secure the input against hacking.
Alright, my snarky replies aside, the differences in perspective here are just from assigning completely different value to certain things things.
nice image joke, but that is beyond the point.
the example that i gave was just the example that i could think of at the time, that dont means this is the only case where this might be an issue, different types of games present different challenges that we might not be aware of.
and second, as an game developer, i have to solve problems related to game making, not judge then.
i cant tell the player "this game that you are playing is not fun, its stupid to code, go play something else", what i have to do is solve the problems.
the question is: how?
Yeah this times a thousand remember Total biscuit used to say i used to be able to put a cheat code in now i need to enter my credit card info
slaapliedje Jan 30, 2021
Quoting: Whitewolfe80It's funny looking back, back in the 90s "cheats" used to be a "feature" you literally paid extra money for a players guide or game shark or whatever to get special new capabilities.
Yeah this times a thousand remember Total biscuit used to say i used to be able to put a cheat code in now i need to enter my credit card info[/quote]This is why it's almost a breath of fresh air for me to just play games on an Amiga or Atari ST. That and to be able to just double click on an icon or put in a (sometimes virtual) floppy disk and have it load up the game. No DLC, no pay to win, Just the game to play!
Quoting: slaapliedjeThis is why it's almost a breath of fresh air for me to just play games on an Amiga or Atari ST. That and to be able to just double click on an icon or put in a (sometimes virtual) floppy disk and have it load up the game. No DLC, no pay to win, Just the game to play!
I'm now playing Blood Bowl 2 and it could be played without creating an online account, but the game is just missing some of the functionality. But I can't agree with the DLC part, we had them in the 90's there were just called datadiscs and added plenty of new functionalities. What is shame, that the DLC often lets you pay for only cosmetic things or something that should have been in the original game from beginning.
And the worst DLCs are those that are just dividing the online community, like DLC with multiplayer maps, which are not playable for others.
As you said the games should be just fun to play and not only for making money. I have some favorites developers in this case, which are creating games that are fun to play and you don't need to pay additional money to enjoy them. Some of them are even updating the games years after release. :-) You just don't see them creating any AAA titles.
slaapliedje Feb 1, 2021
Quoting: ZlopezYeah, I separate DLC with full blown expansions. Like Crusader Kings II is a good example, they had shit loads of DLC, with a few expansions. Sure they are called DLC, but they really are expansion packs for the game. Like a new civilizarion or sound tracks are DLC. When you are adding continents and new rules, etc it is an expansion.Quoting: slaapliedjeThis is why it's almost a breath of fresh air for me to just play games on an Amiga or Atari ST. That and to be able to just double click on an icon or put in a (sometimes virtual) floppy disk and have it load up the game. No DLC, no pay to win, Just the game to play!
I'm now playing Blood Bowl 2 and it could be played without creating an online account, but the game is just missing some of the functionality. But I can't agree with the DLC part, we had them in the 90's there were just called datadiscs and added plenty of new functionalities. What is shame, that the DLC often lets you pay for only cosmetic things or something that should have been in the original game from beginning.
And the worst DLCs are those that are just dividing the online community, like DLC with multiplayer maps, which are not playable for others.
As you said the games should be just fun to play and not only for making money. I have some favorites developers in this case, which are creating games that are fun to play and you don't need to pay additional money to enjoy them. Some of them are even updating the games years after release. :-) You just don't see them creating any AAA titles.
The worse offense is when they sell you the data on the physical disk but you have to pay extra to unlock it...
Quoting: slaapliedjeYeah, I separate DLC with full blown expansions. Like Crusader Kings II is a good example, they had shit loads of DLC, with a few expansions. Sure they are called DLC, but they really are expansion packs for the game. Like a new civilizarion or sound tracks are DLC. When you are adding continents and new rules, etc it is an expansion.
The worse offense is when they sell you the data on the physical disk but you have to pay extra to unlock it...
I must say I really like the DLC for Total War: Warhammer, most of them are adding new playable races with new mechanics.
As you said the worst are the ones that are just unlocking the content you already have. EA could be probably a good example of this, you pay full price for the game and most of the things are still behind paywall, when you start playing.
slaapliedje Feb 2, 2021
Quoting: GuestSpeaking of trickery, has anyone seen the mess of eBay and RTX 30 cards? People are selling 500+ dollar PICTURES of graphics cards. Some at least claim it is to mess with bots. But still, wtf?Quoting: slaapliedjeQuoting: ZlopezYeah, I separate DLC with full blown expansions. Like Crusader Kings II is a good example, they had shit loads of DLC, with a few expansions. Sure they are called DLC, but they really are expansion packs for the game. Like a new civilizarion or sound tracks are DLC. When you are adding continents and new rules, etc it is an expansion.Quoting: slaapliedjeThis is why it's almost a breath of fresh air for me to just play games on an Amiga or Atari ST. That and to be able to just double click on an icon or put in a (sometimes virtual) floppy disk and have it load up the game. No DLC, no pay to win, Just the game to play!
I'm now playing Blood Bowl 2 and it could be played without creating an online account, but the game is just missing some of the functionality. But I can't agree with the DLC part, we had them in the 90's there were just called datadiscs and added plenty of new functionalities. What is shame, that the DLC often lets you pay for only cosmetic things or something that should have been in the original game from beginning.
And the worst DLCs are those that are just dividing the online community, like DLC with multiplayer maps, which are not playable for others.
As you said the games should be just fun to play and not only for making money. I have some favorites developers in this case, which are creating games that are fun to play and you don't need to pay additional money to enjoy them. Some of them are even updating the games years after release. :-) You just don't see them creating any AAA titles.
The worse offense is when they sell you the data on the physical disk but you have to pay extra to unlock it...
Reminding me of the one of the first crapple touchpod things (basically an iphone without the phone component). The hardware itself came with Bluetooth, but you had to pay extra about 6 months after release for an OS update to actually use it.
But anyway yes I agree with you in separating DLC from expansions. Quite often DLC is already part of a basic game, and just gets carved out before release so they can try make more money for no extra effort. I lament how (big budget) games used to be about gaming, and now so much of it is about trying to squeeze every last drop from the customer through trickery rather than actually making something decent in the first place. And I'd best stop there before I descend into the madness of a wall-of-text rant on the matter.
This video carx and CPU shortage from AMD/Nvidia is really pissing me off.
See more from me