Translation: We don’t feel like taking the effort to support Linux, so we need a scapegoat.
Anyone wanna just get some games crowd sourced and developed for Linux exclusively just to fire back at the people who think it’s a good argument to point at software developed by anti Linux companies?
Eh, I think it would be better to just make a really good, competitive game that supports Linux day 1. Show these devs that you can support Linux and have a decent player experience wrt anti-cheat.
Nah, support Windows as well, otherwise the game will likely flop. It needs to be pretty successful so it actually gets noticed, and if people are interested in Linux, they’ll be able to switch w/o giving up that game.
bullshit. there will be zero decrease in cheating. I highly doubt any paid cheat devs offer linux support either.
Linux is just a source of exploits and cheats and nothing more, the developer said
Sure, and so is Windows. Is the difference then who will accept draconian anti-cheat?
Assuming that there really is significant cheating on Linux clients, this can just be the company saying that there are not enough users to make development of more robust anti-cheat cost effective.
This is basically the same argument that software and hardware vendors have used for decades for why they won’t support Linux
My favourite from the old days was “we stopped/don’t support/only support Ubuntu Linux because customer support is too tough across different systems”.
Yeah. I’m not sure that this has changed much.
I suspect that was a large part of what drove the excitement for something like Valve’s Proton. It was supposed to make it easier for studios to make games available across platforms, because they would. “just work” without having to put special effort in.
This sounds like the same sort of “We found out that the cost is not actually 0, and we want out. We can’t say that though, so it’s your fault”
Even though EAC and BattlEye have both supported linux for 3 years now, and the devs don’t actually have to do anything as Proton functionally ports the game from Windows to Linux automatically at no cost to them.
… They’re lying.
Maybe for a smaller game studio, I could actually believe they don’t know these things.
But massive AAA studios that have direct business ties to MSFT?
They’re lying.
They’re saying anything they can to slow down linux adoption, because MSFT wants to dominate as a PC gaming OS.
They used to just ignore, play dumb, feign ignorance or perhaps just actually be incompetent… now they’re just lying to our faces.
Sure Apex. Show us your stats for how many cheaters you caught who were running on Windows vs running on Linux, and show us how at least a smidgen of methodology you used to determine the bare metal OS of someone running on a VM.
They may well be lying about their reasons/justifications, I don’t have any way to know one way or the other.
This just isn’t a new thing. Companies fave been blaming the high cost of supporting the relatively small number of users on an “alternative” OS for a very long time. Unfortunately, I think that as long as desktop Linux is in the single or low double digits of percentage of users, this is something we’re going to keep hearing.
A company is unlikely to do a thing if it’s cheaper to not do the thing.
Cheating software running on Linux is more challenging to detect than Windows-based kernel-level tools, and they require an increasingly higher level of attention from the Apex Legends team.
So, for starters, this is not a direct quote (of the interviewed Apex dev), so this is basically just the author’s opinion.
More to the point: Purchasable cheats that currently defeat AC on Apex are far, far more easy to find for Windows machines.
… and they defeat Kernel level AC on Windows all the time.
Also, Apex uses EAC which uh… supports linux, has for 3 years.
EDIT 2: The article states Apex uses BattlEye, not EAC for AC… but all the info I can find on Apex says they use EAC? Maybe there was a recent change?
Either way, BattlEye supports linux/SteamDeck as well, also for 3 years now.
https://store.steampowered.com/news/group/4145017/view/3104663180636096966
https://www.pcgamesn.com/steam-deck/proton-battleye-anti-cheat-support
I mean maybe there is some truth to cheat developers preferring to develop their cheats on linux…many programmers prefer to develop things on linux… but they develop them for Windows users.
Like… I obviously do not support cheating, so I won’t post the links… but a quick web search very, very easily reveals that all the cheats one can purchase… well they work on Win 10/11… no support for linux is indicated.
Granted I am no uberl33th4x0r, but I don’t see any Apex cheats which are easily acquirable which support linux.
…
EDIT: Oh right, it is probably also worth mentioning that after CrowdStrike Y2K’d half of the world’s enterprise Windows machines… through pushing a malformed update… that interfaces directly with the Windows kernel…
… MSFT is now re-evaluating giving kernel level access to 3rd parties, and is looking to create higher level APIs (above the Kernel) that are less likely to expose Windows to massive system stability errors from 3rd parties, and looks to want to at the very least have much more involvement with reviewing any 3rd party code that accesses the kernel:
Maybe these Kernel level AC proponents are a bit worried about their Kernel access on Windows being either much more stringently reviewed, or limited, and are making a fuss about it by scapegoating linux, you know, as a misdirect?
Just a thought.
EDIT 3:
A quote from the article I linked pertaining to BattlEye
BattlEye’s Steam Deck compatibility is great news, but its arrival on the handheld comes with small print. According to the anti-cheat solution’s clarification, developers will have to “opt-in”, suggesting that specific games could forgo compatibility. While it’s hard to think of a compelling reason why a company would want to do this, Valve’s PC competitors could, in theory, use the option to their advantage.
Pff, what an outlandish notion, that giant AAA studios (who all have massive business ties to MSFT) would exert pressure to limit linux marketshare/adoption, what a baseless and silly worry.
=P