Sign In or Create an Account
Thanks for the reply. Id like to keep the discussion going. Though I am not sure that going back and forth about specific rules or parameters themselves serves any purpose in this moment of the discussion. Rather are there descriptive ways to define human from inhuman input, in such a way that would make it useful for detecting cheaters? If the answer is definitively no, than the parameters are meaning less.
I believe there is a distinct and detectable difference between human input and software driven input. Software for Aimbots must follow a pattern, therefor its action is detectable like a fingerprint. One would think that some fairly basic algo should be able to detect a pattern fairly easily, especially once identified. Given the fact that most cheaters are customers of software they have purchases.
I have reviewed various cheat software and they offer quit a variety of features. You can choose how the aimbot actually behaves in some aspects. For one, you can select that the aim bot automatically targets the nearest limb first, with a dedicated amount of bullets first going to the limb before then locking onto the head.
With this protocol, you should easily see an inhuman input pattern emerge from those implementing the software versus those who do not. Why cant someone just code into the game, after (x) reports of cheating, review user mouse input for series of matching identical or near identical mouse input?
One could expand on such variable to develop a comprehensive anti cheating system. One could easily download the same software that I can simply google and then test myself to see how its operate without even looking at the code.
There are only so many pro players for any FPS based game, and it would take little effort for a dev team to identify those exceptionally talented players and white list them from the software if needed.
There are ways to appeal a ban, at least with Apex. My bothers account was banned after it was hacked while he was deployed for a few months. This was as simple as reviewing the login IP location. Not that the other example's solution would be as easy, but the path exist already to some extent.
Why not staff a dozen or so employees for immediate review? Give out a Twitter or discord handle for reporting live? The could focus on recent reports, as in a single player has been reported 20 times in the last hour or two. They could just review the game play of that player live.
I had one night, a while back, a few months ago. Some buddies and I are playing ranked matches and we can see the same team wiping the lobby for several hours. We can easily see the names in the kill feed, and ended up losing to the same team 4 times, winning once, over the course of 2.5 hours.
We could not have been the only people reporting them over and over. We ended up just quitting playing ranked for the night because it was to demoralizing. Similar circumstances arise over and over and we just end up not playing the ranked mode or switching games because cheaters dont restrict themselves to ranked.
I honestly think the issue is worst than most imagine it to be. Its just that most people dont have 4,000 hours on Apex Legends. I personally have only 1,000 hours but 3 of my frequent players have over 3,500 hours. I actually think that amount of time on the game is kinda nutty, but Im not here to judge.
I know what its like to come across some of the best players in the game. Everything about them is distinctive. When you see the way they move and the decisions they make, reveal their skill within moments, as an experience player. I know what its like to be shot at by the Best-of-the-best. Its very hard to compete with them but they are obviously good. This is strikingly different than been laser'd down in an instant by someone who moves and acts like a potato. This person loots at the speed of a senior citizen, the movement is terrible, but they are never in doubt of the enemy location, and have laser accuracy at a moment in need.
If software can drive a car down the road, detect faces down to a specific individual, I see no reason why gaming software that has millions of hours of human input cannot differentiate natural human input from that driven partly or wholly by software.