Support us on Patreon
PayPalWere you hoping to easily play Fortnite on the upcoming Steam Deck? Well, Tim Sweeney the Epic Games CEO has made it clear that it's not going to happen officially. The thing to remember right now is that both Easy Anti-Cheat and BattlEye do support Linux. Both for native Linux builds and for Windows games run through Steam Play Proton. However, it's all user-space with no Kernel modules.
On Twitter, user Stormy178 asked if there were plans to make Fortnite compatible with Steam Play Proton to which Sweeney replied:
Fortnite no, but there's a big effort underway to maximize Easy Anti Cheat compatibility with Steam Deck.
The questioning continued and when asked why, Sweeney followed up with:
We don’t have confidence that we’d be able to combat cheating at scale under a wide array of kernel configurations including custom ones.
Another user mentioned it seemed that Epic's CEO didn't trust their own product, Sweeney obviously couldn't let that remain unanswered with:
With regard to anti-cheat on the Linux platform supporting custom kernels and the threat model to a game of Fortnite's size, YES THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT!
In a number of ways, he's actually right. Windows is closed source, so is the NT Kernel and usually 99% of drivers for it are too. Client-side anti-cheat obviously relies a lot on security by obscurity, so people can't see everything it's doing. This is part of the problem on Linux, where the Kernel and practically all development on it is done right out in the open and it changes rapidly. Developing anti-cheat against such an open Kernel probably isn't going to be even remotely easy. There will be ways though, especially if something like the Steam Deck had a fully signed Kernel and some sort of guarantee it's being used - probably numerous ways smarter people know of.
Really though, overall it doesn't give a lot of confidence for developers who might be looking to hook up their anti-cheat ready for their games to work on the Steam Deck.
The big difference it seems, is the size of the playerbase and how much of a target each game is. Sweeney is not saying it's not suitable as a whole, just that Fortnite is a massive target for cheaters:
The threat model for anti-cheat varies per game based on the number of active players and ability to gain profit by selling cheats or gain prominence by cheating. Hence anti-cheat which suffices for one game may not for another game with 10, 100, or 1000 times more players.
One user followed up by suggesting it was just a case of Sweeney not wanting Fortnite on a "rival's platform", to which Sweeney gave this answer:
Epic would be happy to put Fortnite on Steam. We wouldn't be happy to give Steam 20-30% of its revenue for the privilege. Supporting Steam Deck hardware is a separate issue, but the market for non-Steam-hosted games on limited availability Steam Deck hardware is how big exactly?
With that in mind, you're going to need Windows or to stream it via GeForce NOW on the Steam Deck. At least for games without such anti-cheat, you should be able to use the Heroic Games Launcher on the Steam Deck.
It does mean there's space open for another game to take its place on the Steam Deck officially.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Quoting: XpanderHe probably has all the statistics and knows the insides, So i think he is right. I find it stupid that people just start calling out with names for no reason though :( but i guess its the internet.
But thats probably bad news for every other big game like Apex Legends and so on also sadly.
But he's probably not technically savvy enough to give an answer that is outside the monetary side of the issue.
If the only issue with Linux kernel is the fact that you can modify drivers, then you have the same issue with Windows as there is no limitation or whatsoever if I want to install a not signed driver. And iirc, Deck was going to use a non modifiable boot image, so it may even have an advantage against Windows PCs regarding anti cheat security.
However, I could go at great lengths arguing against the usefulness of anti-cheat.
I'll try to make it short. If it were left to me, I'd:
- have pro players play in controlled environments during tournaments
- let competitive players opt-in to stronger anti-cheat measures, like in-kernel/streaming
- relax anti-cheat measures in casual lobbies
- let people play without anti-cheat...
- ... and I would even integrate cheat inside the game
For instance: playing against your friend who is much better than you? Add a bit of aimbot to make it more fun/interesting to everyone. Just make it clear in online lobbies who uses what, and give players the ability to opt out from playing with "cheating" players. Also pit players vs (player+cheat) at similar skill levels. Well, just my 2c.
Oh, of course that can't really work with some business models of selling cosmetics, probably not if trying to extract maximum value. With cosmetics, you need a big, unified player pool to address.
Quoting: NociferExactly. The fact alone that Epic a.k.a. Tim Sweeney has already collaborated with Valve to bring official EAC support to Proton and the Steam Deck points to him at least sincerely believing what he says about Fortnite. He didn't block Proton from using EAC, it's rather the opposite, even though he could. And after all, EAC is one product (and its use affects the game companies that opt to enable it, not Epic) and Fortnite is another product - a company can have vastly different strategies for its different products, according to the target market for them.
not to mention that their investment to port EAC to linux, may be enough to guarantee that the cheaters will not have enough of a demand to hack other games, but hacking fortinite will raise the demand, and it may raise enough that their investiments would render useless.
in other words, bringing fortinite may be enough to kill EAC on linux and all the other games in the process...
Quoting: Doc AngeloI'm not talking about exact numbers either. Maybe I was unclear about what I mean with "the other way around". I am saying that there are 10 times more Linux users than Fortnite players. That's why I asked if you mean Linux gamers or Linux users.
sigh
first off , windows has about 1.5 billion of users with 90% of marketshare, linux has 1%, wich is about 16.7 millions.
some statistics vary the number of users, the best data that i saw say it have 5% of marketshare, lets work with that number.
at the best case scenario 83,5 millions of users. (excluding android)
the last time i checked, fortinite had 250 millions of players.
not all pc or linux users are gamers, not all gamers play fortinite.
so why do you think linux has more users than fortinite has players?
maybe on pc, considering fortinite is also avaliable for android, iOS, playstation, xbox and i think switch.
Doc Angelo Feb 8, 2022
Quoting: elmapul(excluding android)
You've written so much, and even this in particular, but you're still not seeing it. I'm gonna leave it at that.
Quoting: elmapulQuoting: Doc AngeloI'm not talking about exact numbers either. Maybe I was unclear about what I mean with "the other way around". I am saying that there are 10 times more Linux users than Fortnite players. That's why I asked if you mean Linux gamers or Linux users.
sigh
first off , windows has about 1.5 billion of users with 90% of marketshare, linux has 1%, wich is about 16.7 millions.
There probably are more Linux users than Windows users (phones, routers, ... toasters?)...
... but that doesn't help Fortnite on Linux.
WINE allows dll side-loading, so one can easily use a modded d3dx100500.dll with some functions (like drawing of walls or other effects) dummied-out and a modified custom Linux kernel would report everything is fine. User's access to kernel is a 0-level vulnerability in the "trust-chain". That is why WINE/Linux is not, and shall never be treated as "secure" platform. All hopes that a "client-side" anti-cheat will be a thing on WINE are just pipe dreams.
Linux and client-side anti-cheat systems are antithetical to each other as the very ideology of client-side anti-cheat measures is to strip user of any control of one's personal computer. From "trusted computing", through cryptographic measures down to "security through obscurity" concept. And Linux in particular and Open Source in general are against it all (see "libdvdcss").
Doc Angelo Feb 8, 2022
Quoting: Alm888User's access to kernel is a 0-level vulnerability in the "trust-chain". That is why WINE/Linux is not, and shall never be treated as "secure" platform. All hopes that a "client-side" anti-cheat will be a thing on WINE are just pipe dreams.
Is there anything that can be considered a secure platform, where nothing can be loaded before the anti-cheat is loaded?
Quoting: EikeThere probably are more Linux users than Windows users (phones, routers, ... toasters?)...
... but that doesn't help Fortnite on Linux.
i dotn think you read the context
slaapliedje Feb 8, 2022
Quoting: crt0megaAs much as I'd love to say fsck Tim and Epic, I can't blame him on this one.I still say fuck that dude. Somehow Epic went from one of the few companies supporting native Linux gaming to absolutely hating on them. While Unreal Engine is ported and works great on Linux, there still are far too few Unreal Engine games ported to it natively.
Thing about Anti-Cheat and kernels... well why does it even need kernel hooks? That seems kind of scary to me, if the anti-cheat crashes, it's more likely to take the kernel with it. Even if they insisted on that, couldn't they use a dkms style kernel module that does it? Granted it isn't like most users would know how to install such things... and I think that's what it comes down to, is they want root access to your system to install a game, and he knows damn well most Linux users are going to basically say what I just said, 'Fuck off, Tim.'
See more from me