There’s a lot of super invasive stuff companies are doing that I don’t support, but hijacking execution to inject code is something they won’t and shouldn’t permit. (If they’re detecting it by touching the kernel they should be in prison, but with any legitimate methods they have at their disposal, if they can detect anyone hijacking their execution, it should always be a ban. There is no legitimate source or way to do that in a competitive game.)
AMD working with the companies directly to patch in what they need is the only way it can work. Just shipping that code was insane.
No, users were banned because AMD took it upon themselves to intercept and change code execution.
It was a completely fucking bonkers decision that anyone remotely aware of game development in any context should have known was literally guaranteed to get anyone who used it banned. It was not, and fundamentally cannot be, acceptable in a competitive game.
The only possible valid way to do it is by working with developers to make the required changes.
You have an authoritarian view on competitive gaming. And you’re saying this should be a hard requirement for hardware development. That’s an extreme point of view.
It’s video games we’re talking. If some asshat is cheating in a video game, that’s irrelevant to hardware development.
I mean, do also endorse softwares that plague your kernel to prevent cheating? Why don’t you use special hardware for your competitive gaming if that’s so important?
That’s how it has to be.
Hijacking a game’s execution willl get you banned from anything with any kind of anticheat every time.
I don’t necessarily disagree but anticheat can be adjusted.
There’s a lot of super invasive stuff companies are doing that I don’t support, but hijacking execution to inject code is something they won’t and shouldn’t permit. (If they’re detecting it by touching the kernel they should be in prison, but with any legitimate methods they have at their disposal, if they can detect anyone hijacking their execution, it should always be a ban. There is no legitimate source or way to do that in a competitive game.)
AMD working with the companies directly to patch in what they need is the only way it can work. Just shipping that code was insane.
So you argue that video game anti-cheat should prevent good technology from existing. Cool cool cool.
There’s a legitimate way to do it.
Hijacking code is not good technology.
That’s not hijacking code. That’s working on a data flow.
No, users were banned because AMD took it upon themselves to intercept and change code execution.
It was a completely fucking bonkers decision that anyone remotely aware of game development in any context should have known was literally guaranteed to get anyone who used it banned. It was not, and fundamentally cannot be, acceptable in a competitive game.
The only possible valid way to do it is by working with developers to make the required changes.
You have an authoritarian view on competitive gaming. And you’re saying this should be a hard requirement for hardware development. That’s an extreme point of view.
It’s video games we’re talking. If some asshat is cheating in a video game, that’s irrelevant to hardware development.
I mean, do also endorse softwares that plague your kernel to prevent cheating? Why don’t you use special hardware for your competitive gaming if that’s so important?
The world doesn’t live around competitive gaming.
It’s a gaming only “feature” that is guaranteed to get 100% of people who use it banned.
Yes, intercepting code is bad.
I mostly agree. I’m assuming AMD working with the companies also means anticheat will be adjusted to allow it.
yeah but then it will only really work if the developers decide to implement it.
Thats my point sorta.
It would be cool if it did.
deleted by creator