Linux is now the best gaming system. ｜ fernvenue's Blog
blog.fernvenue.com
When it comes to gaming on Linux, many many many people’s understanding stil remains in the Jurassic era. For the past few years, I’ve been using Linux as my main operating system for both work and gaming. From my personal experience, the gaming experience on Linux is far superior to that of macOS and Windows. I know I know…whenever I mention this, there are always some old-school individuals who come out to say that Linux’s driver configuration is complex, its game support is not rich enough, and its compatibility issues are significant, among other problems. In this article, I will directly address these issues and let everyone understand how much the gaming experience on Linux has developed by 2025.
  • MudMan@fedia.io
    1·
    1 day ago

    “Completely” is not the goal. Consoles aren’t “completely” cheat free, either.

    The goal is to make cheating hard enough that the average twelve year old can’t easily do it or conspicuous enough that you can ban them when they do.

    Because at that point most players will go from encountering multiple cheaters per game to encountering a cheater every many games, so the game looks like a mostly fair thing with a few outliers as opposed to an absolutely unplayable mess.

    And since cheaters and hackers tend to flock to whatever is popular, particularly if they’re monetizing their cheating in some form, the more popular the game the more of an interest they have in a secure-enough environment.

    If you can’t get that on PC they will focus on consoles. If you can’t get that on Linux they will focus on Windows.

    • Kraiden@kbin.earth
      3·
      21 hours ago

      You DON’T need kernel access to achieve that.

      Developers that go down this route are substituting good architectural design for god tier access to your machine. Kernel access is the proverbial keys to the kingdom, there is literally nothing they cannot do with it.

      It’s like a gardener saying they need access to water, so you give them the alarm codes, a copy of every single door key, the safe code, the wifi password, a silicon mold of your fingerprint, and a urine sample for good measure.

      It is WAY beyond overkill, and any developer that claims to need that level of access to prevent cheating is lying. There is NO justification for it. They. Are. Being. LAZY and they are putting you at risk in the process.

      • MudMan@fedia.io
        11·
        20 hours ago

        Well, hey, if there is an easy way that is just as secure and is hardware and OS agnostic I thoroughly recommend you go ahead and develop it. I hear there’s good money in it.

        Or is your proposed scenario that every single vendor of anticheat software working today is not only deliberately avoiding the use of equally good non-kernel level Windows anticheat but also deploying deliberately inferior, less secure Linux anticheat when they could deliver a solution just as good as the Windows alternative? How do you think that works?

        • Kraiden@kbin.earth
          1·
          12 hours ago

          I’m saying the use of 3rd party anticheat is a crutch that developers use to avoid thinking about cheating in the first place. If they put some proper thought into their architecture, you wouldn’t need such heavy handed anticheat in the first place.

          There is nothing inherently more secure about kernel level ac, it just gives you so much access to the underlying system that you can tell if the client is being manipulated.

          I’m saying that’s a lazy approach, and you should instead be building your game to be resistant to client manipulation in the first place, rather than asking the user for a stupid level of privilege.

          • MudMan@fedia.io
            1·
            12 hours ago

            Yeah, so the problem with that is you’re typically not building a security platform with a game on top, you’re building a game. The scope of the issue is not the same for Fortnite or LoL than for… I don’t know, Fatal Fury City of the Wolves, if we’re getting topical.

            Especially in a multiplatform game where the PC is not your primary target and your targeted consoles have a semblance of platform integrity it is not unreasonable to expect the platform to handle at least the basics. And hey, if Windows gives you that through a third party service that’s resources you can put in… you know, the game part of the game.

            That’s not being lazy, that’s the second law of thermodynamics. Resources are limited, from developer time to server time (which goes up if you can’t offload literally anything to the client).

            You’re more likely to have me meet you in the middle if we agree that there probably should be a middle ground where the layer of security that is now being offloaded to a third party service having kernel-level access should instead be handled by the OS. I don’t know if that’s better or worse, but it certainly isn’t as weird and scary as having a bunch of mid-sized vendors have crazy access to people’s computers just so they can play games semi-functionally. But to bring this back to the original argument, that sounds like something you’re at best going to get from Microsoft. Linux being what it is, that isn’t an option and is not going to become one.

            • Kraiden@kbin.earth
              1·
              10 hours ago

              Just to be clear, I’m not arguing against 3rd party ac entirely, JUST the heavy handed kernel access ac solutions. I believe that if the less insane options were the only ones, the overhead on developers would be present, certainly, but not insurmountable, even for small indie studios.

              To slightly exaggerate my earlier example: If you give the gardener access to your security cameras, there’s no reason for them to walk around the back and check if the sprinklers are on. It might be easier, but that does NOT mean your gardener needs access to the security cameras.

              The way things are now, developers lean on that insane system as a crutch, and build their games without any regard for client integrity whatsoever. Because why should they? THAT is the laziness I’m complaining about.

              there probably should be a middle ground where the layer of security that is now being offloaded to a third party service having kernel-level access should instead be handled by the OS

              I don’t believe kernel access should be required at all. 3rd party, OS, whatever! It’s NOT necessary.

              Having said that, If you’re arguing for a system service that can verify client integrity and pass that back to user space, sure, I could live with that. In that case though:

              you’re at best going to get from Microsoft. Linux being what it is that isn’t an option

              I grant you that Microsoft at least acknowledge the problem, but they are dragging their feet on a solution, and they’ve said they’re not going to enforce it, once it becomes an option.

              Linux being what is is, and Valve investing what they have, I’d be surprised if something like this wasn’t already in the works