171
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2025
171 points (99.4% liked)
PC Gaming
12996 readers
491 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Its already made a difference there is no debating that it does reduce cheaters. If you force people to buy specialised hardware to cheat less people will do it. Cheaters dont need to be 0 for it to be worth it. All you need is for players to not regularly run into cheaters and perceive there to be competitive integrity inthier online games.
The debate is that it's far less effective than server-side anti-cheat, but that costs more money to operate so they'd rather inconvenience their users and invade their privacy in the process.
What's a good server side anti cheat for comparison?
Proprietary code that won't be known by a single product name like the client-side ones are. So it's impossible to make a good comparison as a member of the general public, only their developers will know how they work and how effective they are. But you can look at anti-botting measures all MMO's employ as a rough comparison, it's almost the same thing.