Kernel Patch Revved For Syscall User Redirection To Help Newer Windows Games On Wine

[ext73]

I use it all + my patches - in my kernel builds

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fglsq125k8...01039.png?dl=0

https://www.youtube.com/user/ext73

[aht0]

Not at all.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/overwatch/overwatch-linux-bans

atomsymbol how do you think the bans here where generated. Players are getting told they were running a chat program and that is why they were banned when it really was dxvk and wine. This is because companies like Blizzard are not in fact looking at the software running on machine they are looking at the jitter from there network server side anti-cheat. If you are inside a particular operational jitter pattern you are not cheating if you are outside that jitter pattern you are banned for cheating and depending on the patter of jitter you show is what the message tells you that you were doing to get banned. Yes this is NTP server to client stuff in reverse.

Not only jitters. Anti-cheat systems also actively scan your process list, hashes of the executed files and even files in your drive againsts pre-compiled lists of "known" stuff. It's sort of like an antivirus with the purpose-built function of looking for cheats and trying to find proof of user's circumventing that system. All sorts of virtualization is, as a rule, treated as you were trying to "get around anticheat" and punished worse than actual cheating (cheat may get you kicked off online server, global ban you get for being suspect of messing with anticheat - stops you from playing game online forever).

Companies developing anticheat programs have vested interest in banning, they can show their potential customers that their "systems work" while at the same time Linux users are safe target - they are so niche that they are not hurting prospect of moneymaking.

[oiaohm]

Not only jitters. Anti-cheat systems also actively scan your process list, hashes of the executed files and even files in your drive againsts pre-compiled lists of "known" stuff. It's sort of like an antivirus with the purpose-built function of looking for cheats and trying to find proof of user's circumventing that system. All sorts of virtualization is, as a rule, treated as you were trying to "get around anticheat" and punished worse than actual cheating (cheat may get you kicked off online server, global ban you get for being suspect of messing with anticheat - stops you from playing game online forever).

Companies developing anticheat programs have vested interest in banning, they can show their potential customers that their "systems work" while at the same time Linux users are safe target - they are so niche that they are not hurting prospect of moneymaking.

Linux users getting banned happen to be a fairly good way of generating a lot fo bad PR as well. The overwatch case playing under wine was allows by Blizzard heck playing in vm is allowed but there is still an anti-cheat system there. Blizzard was not use pre-complied lists of known as that basically means wine does not work. Example of using list of known is punkbuster wine is likely to never support because.

If you are not going to scan the client system with like an anti-virus like anti-cheat system you go for a server based anti-cheat system. Server based anti-cheat system need to have a base line of what is normal response times and so on. Cheating the resource times is too fast. Game running faster than on Windows and the base line is from windows opps you are now a cheater.

Something interesting Linux users might be a minority of users but they are also highly vocal with their friends on what they get to work. Keeping Linux users mostly happy is cheap marketing.

[aht0]

Linux users getting banned happen to be a fairly good way of generating a lot fo bad PR as well. The overwatch case playing under wine was allows by Blizzard heck playing in vm is allowed but there is still an anti-cheat system there. Blizzard was not use pre-complied lists of known as that basically means wine does not work. Example of using list of known is punkbuster wine is likely to never support because.

If you are not going to scan the client system with like an anti-virus like anti-cheat system you go for a server based anti-cheat system. Server based anti-cheat system need to have a base line of what is normal response times and so on. Cheating the resource times is too fast. Game running faster than on Windows and the base line is from windows opps you are now a cheater.

Something interesting Linux users might be a minority of users but they are also highly vocal with their friends on what they get to work. Keeping Linux users mostly happy is cheap marketing.

Bad PR does not matter when there's no money in the niche, they can just ignore it. Anticheat companies have very thick skins and only care about what gaming studios think anyhow.
As is, Linux multiplayer gaming is not existing if compared against windows platform = there's no money in it to be made. And if you cared to argue, think first if gaming studios were interested in Linux gamers to begin with - considering multiplicity of possible configurations, potential amount of support cases, need to hire more staff to handle it and developers to develop for it.

That percentage or two of Linux users among their player base is not simply worth the effort economically.

[oiaohm]

That percentage or two of Linux users among their player base is not simply worth the effort economically.

That were things get interesting. 1 to 2 percent Linux users have habit of increasing Windows sales of the same game. Valve is finding they are getting return supporting Linux to a point.

Please note there is a big difference between allowing wine to run game and investing effort into making game native to Linux.

And if you cared to argue, think first if gaming studios were interested in Linux gamers to begin with - considering multiplicity of possible configurations, potential amount of support cases, need to hire more staff to handle it and developers to develop for it.

Basically this is a presume. Game company being interested in Linux Gamers using their game does not mean they have to be interested in porting to Linux. Blizzard has been a fairly good case of this. No interest in porting to Linux. But they are also interesting in allowing Linux Gamers to play there games by wine because it equals greater total game sales. 0.5 percent Linux users can equal 10 percent more Windows copies sold.

Basically it economically makes sense not to do anything intentionally to prevent game from working under wine. Also makes sense economically to say sorry and fix it if something goes wrong and breaks the wine support.

Wine case means for game studios they are not hiring more staff to handle it and shunt the problem off to distributor to deal with like Valve. Of course to be able to shunt the problem of means they cannot have done anything intentional to break the support.