Easy Anti-Cheat gets much simpler for Proton and Steam Deck

PUBG needs to add support as the playerbase is HUGE: https://steamcharts.com/app/578080

Paladins
Rust
Warhammer: Vermintide 2

From this list, those are only ones I'm thinking are willing to try to port it, the I think either will wait for people to demand (based on the success of other developers) or aren't going to do anyway.

Specially Dead by Daylight, because that would involve Behavior doing something actually good to it's players for a change


Last edited by BielFPs on 22 January 2022 at 3:28 pm UTC

Exciting! I hope Paladins, Halo MCC and Apex Legends will follow, I miss playing those games.


Last edited by akselmo on 22 January 2022 at 3:42 pm UTC

Good job by Epic and Valve. I'm sure back porting everything wasn't super trivial.

Mmm, I was wondering.. Step 2 is just placing a certain file in a certain dir so, couldn't proton take care of that?

EAC being proprietary, I don't think Valve or anyone could distribute it without a license, even a free (as in beer) one...

Also, there are multiple versions, as mentioned in the instructions. A script in Proton works have to detect and download the correct version, and every future version.

I can see that as a potential support nightmare, since a customer would only see a broken game, and likely blame the developer, which would have been taken out of the process, and has no way of fixing it.

Mmm, I was wondering.. Step 2 is just placing a certain file in a certain dir so, couldn't proton take care of that? (And actually you could control which dir is it by changing the environment variable LD_LIBRARY_PATH) It would remove step 2 and 3 which are the most annoying I think.

Version of anticheat with game is compiled probably need match version of library. Don't know if there is way how proton can get version... and if some game stop updating anticheat, you need multiple libraries...

I have zero idea of the underlying infra of anti cheats, but I'd assume that while adding the "LD_LIBRARY_PATH" trick would indeed work, unless it's enabled on the back end (i.e: allow linux library to queries to even be considered) it would still return as "false"


Last edited by minkiu on 22 January 2022 at 5:34 pm UTC

If even just Apex gets it, then I'm going to be so very happy. That's literally the only game that I want to play as of late that has anti-cheat.

There are Linux binaries missing on GOG although a port is available on Steam. These developers don't have to do much but upload the existing build, besides their Windows and potential macOS releases, but simply refuse to avoid the work afterwards!

So I have my doubts that many games will be made compatible for a system of which many developers are unsure. They'll rather wait to see how many people will install Windows on the Steam Deck before committing to anything.

I think the situation here with Valve is different than the situation with GOG.
Because the support charge comes essentially to Valve instead of the developer.
If a developer enables EAC on Proton, the validation/testing is essentially made by Valve.
So yes they will have to support Proton, but it won't cost them as much as if they had to support native Linux.


Last edited by Spyker on 22 January 2022 at 8:01 pm UTC

I wonder whether there's an implied threat here. Do as we ask and get Steamdeck Verified.... or the algorithm might have something to say about surfacing your game on the Store.

I am hoping this will make battle-eye try and do the same thing

There is a simple reason, not to ship it: If they ship it, they have to support it! That will always cost resources (i.e. money).

Except they don't need to officially support Linux through Proton either. They can just enable it for anyone wishing to play the game while clearly stating they do not offer any support or guarantees about the compatibility continuing to work in the future.

Sure, sounds a bit hypocritical, because it is, but if this was opt-out instead of opt-in nobody would ever call them out for their game breaking at some point.

Lets be real, EAC and BattleEye won't just drop support for Proton now that it's officially included, not unless there's a huge reason to do so, nor would it just stop working for anyone using the official Proton builds from Steam.

The only real world issue with any of this is how userspace detection of cheats on the client side is never going to catch up with kernelspace detection, therefore devs might be reluctant to potentially downgrade the experience for the majority of their userbase over us.
With that being said, I'm not even sure if EAC or BattleEye is actually kernelspace on Windows at this point.

There is a simple reason, not to ship it: If they ship it, they have to support it! That will always cost resources (i.e. money).

False. Even today you can (try to) run any windows game on wine or proton, and if works fine, if it doesn't work the developers don't owe you support. You can open tickets ofc. But they can copy paste "not supported" and close them faster than you open them.

As a customer I would expect that "proton supported" games, with the badge clearly visible on the steam page, will offer support. But that's on voluntary basis.

Unfortunately, it may be a bit more complicated than that.
Sure, they may choose to enable compatibility and not support Linux users.

However, they still need to support their current users against cheaters, be they using Windows, Linux, or whatever. Which means testing, to be sure that some nasty people don't find a way to cheat through this compatibility, and ruin the game for your player base, which would be terrible.

There are two arguments against switching on anti-cheat for Linux that I will begrudgingly accept on their own but not together. And by "accept" I mean I accept that the person making the excuse believes what they are saying, not that I necessarily agree.

They are as follows:

1. The 1% Linux market is too small to support
2. If we enable our game for Linux we might get an influx of cheaters

These two excuses can not exist together.


Last edited by rustybroomhandle on 23 January 2022 at 10:42 am UTC

False. Even today you can (try to) run any windows game on wine or proton, and if works fine, if it doesn't work the developers don't owe you support.

If this was the case then we wouldn't be having this discussion. To quote Valve (emphasis by me):

[…] it does require you [the developer] to manually enable support for your build […]

Proton without EAC => Unsupported action by users
Proton with EAC => Supported action by the developers

Except they don't need to officially support Linux through Proton either. They can just enable it for anyone wishing to play the game while clearly stating they do not offer any support or guarantees about the compatibility continuing to work in the future.

Except, by enabling it they're saying it's supported. Steam Deck users will get upset. Yes, some will enable & then forget it. But I believe developers of, e.g., the top 10 games will be more conservative.

Sure, sounds a bit hypocritical, because it is, but if this was opt-out instead of opt-in nobody would ever call them out for their game breaking at some point.

The Steam Deck users would. I believe people here somehow mistake the target audience as Linux users who are aware of the pain due to Wine. But Steam consists mostly of Windows users and that's the target audience. Another reason why I believe developers will wait and see: It's uncertain if Steam OS support is actually necessary.

I think the situation here with Valve is different than the situation with GOG.
Because the support charge comes essentially to Valve instead of the developer.
If a developer enables EAC on Proton, the validation/testing is essentially made by Valve.
So yes they will have to support Proton, but it won't cost them as much as if they had to support native Linux.

That's my point: It'll cost them. I see no way around it after enabling support. I doubt that Valve can do anything to help with the anti-cheat related debugging.

The cost for the GOG release should be negligible, too. Only the upload of the existing build is required. And it's still not happening.

I wonder whether there's an implied threat here. Do as we ask and get Steamdeck Verified.... or the algorithm might have something to say about surfacing your game on the Store.

Obviously, it's a requirement to be Steam Deck Verified & Verified title will be more prominent on the Steam Deck. But it won't change anything for Steam in general, Valve would get sued for such a change.

So I have my doubts that many games will be made compatible for a system of which many developers are unsure. They'll rather wait to see how many people will install Windows on the Steam Deck before committing to anything.

Which would be a strange position since that would make them completely miss the free advertising that the Steam Deck launch will be for all who are verified. If I where a publisher, that alone would make it worth doing these 3 steps.

There is a simple reason, not to ship it: If they ship it, they have to support it! That will always cost resources (i.e. money).

Except they don't need to officially support Linux through Proton either. They can just enable it for anyone wishing to play the game while clearly stating they do not offer any support or guarantees about the compatibility continuing to work in the future.

Sure, sounds a bit hypocritical, because it is, but if this was opt-out instead of opt-in nobody would ever call them out for their game breaking at some point.

Lets be real, EAC and BattleEye won't just drop support for Proton now that it's officially included, not unless there's a huge reason to do so, nor would it just stop working for anyone using the official Proton builds from Steam.

The only real world issue with any of this is how userspace detection of cheats on the client side is never going to catch up with kernelspace detection, therefore devs might be reluctant to potentially downgrade the experience for the majority of their userbase over us.
With that being said, I'm not even sure if EAC or BattleEye is actually kernelspace on Windows at this point.

There is a simple reason, not to ship it: If they ship it, they have to support it! That will always cost resources (i.e. money).

False. Even today you can (try to) run any windows game on wine or proton, and if works fine, if it doesn't work the developers don't owe you support. You can open tickets ofc. But they can copy paste "not supported" and close them faster than you open them.

As a customer I would expect that "proton supported" games, with the badge clearly visible on the steam page, will offer support. But that's on voluntary basis.

Unfortunately, it may be a bit more complicated than that.
Sure, they may choose to enable compatibility and not support Linux users.

However, they still need to support their current users against cheaters, be they using Windows, Linux, or whatever. Which means testing, to be sure that some nasty people don't find a way to cheat through this compatibility, and ruin the game for your player base, which would be terrible.

Errr... That's EAC job, not mine. If I have to worry about with cheaters myself, I don't see why I should pay EAC license and bind my code to theirs.

False. Even today you can (try to) run any windows game on wine or proton, and if works fine, if it doesn't work the developers don't owe you support.

If this was the case then we wouldn't be having this discussion. To quote Valve (emphasis by me):

[…] it does require you [the developer] to manually enable support for your build […]

Proton without EAC => Unsupported action by users
Proton with EAC => Supported action by the developers

We're mixing different support meanings here.

One is technical support for proton. And, according to them, it's about getting the latest libray (which everyone will do at some point regardless) and tick the checkbox.

Another one is client support for proton. Which require I guess some kind of eula, or at least some kind of commercial campaign or documentation that sugggests to your (potential) buyers -and thus commits you- that you will support their proton setup.

One is not the other.

You can check the box and not "-contractually?-" commit yourself to support proton.

The only way I would, as a customer, require you to give support on proton is when you explicitly advertize proton compatibility. Like with the proton badge.

But if you don't want, you can check box, don't apply for the badge (and thus that marketing advantage against that "negligible purchaser audience" that is the 0.x% of deck owners) and just rely on protondb or the likes to generate interest on your product (from said negligible % audience).

Except, by enabling it they're saying it's supported. Steam Deck users will get upset. Yes, some will enable & then forget it. But I believe developers of, e.g., the top 10 games will be more conservative.

What are you on about? Enabling EAC's Proton support has absolutely nothing to do with announcing Linux support through Proton on Steam.

They could just enable it on the EAC side without updating their supported platforms on Steam and it wouldn't show up on Linux, including the SteamDeck, unless users explicitly enable SteamPlay for non-whitelisted games.

People would still be capable of playing the game if they knowingly decide to, but NWI would be clear about not providing any official support for it.

The only legitimate reason not to enable it at this point is being unsure about whether it'd weaken your game's protection against cheaters.

And that's indeed few clicks away. Unless a studio lost the sources or the libraries, there is little excuse now to not add support.

Well done, both Valve and Epic!

Even on a (terrible) situation like that, the developer with the Steam Dev credential could recover the base files get the extra Linux lib.so from Epic, place alongside the windows .dll file and resubmit to Valve this "new" version of the game.

Just some of the titles that could benefit include:

Apex Legends
Back 4 Blood
Dead By Daylight
Fall Guys: Ultimate Knockout
Halo: The Master Chief Collection
New World
Paladins
Rust
Warhammer: Vermintide 2

How does a compiler benefit from anti-cheat though?

Just some of the titles that could benefit include:

Apex Legends
Back 4 Blood
Dead By Daylight
Fall Guys: Ultimate Knockout
Halo: The Master Chief Collection
New World
Paladins
Rust
Warhammer: Vermintide 2

How does a compiler benefit from anti-cheat though?

Enabling anti-cheat in Rust turns it into C?

Programming in Rust enables few cheat codes, like thread and memory safety. With those enabled, it's possible to speedrun program development (assuming that target is to get stable program) and that's not fair.

Just some of the titles that could benefit include:

Apex Legends
Back 4 Blood
Dead By Daylight
Fall Guys: Ultimate Knockout
Halo: The Master Chief Collection
New World
Paladins
Rust
Warhammer: Vermintide 2

How does a compiler benefit from anti-cheat though?

Enabling anti-cheat in Rust turns it into C?

Programming in Rust enables few cheat codes, like thread and memory safety. With those enabled, it's possible to speedrun program development (assuming that target is to get stable program) and that's not fair.

I guess I cheat a whole lot