this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
146 points (97.4% liked)
Games
16745 readers
789 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Doesn't the publisher of the game have to approve for a game to be put on GeForce Now?
I mean, don't get me wrong - I know anti cheat detection has never been perfect, but you'd think this would be something they heavily try to make sure they get right.
Banning people for playing a game that they are not cheating in does not constitute getting anticheat right. It is not enough to catch cheaters but you have to do that without catching players that are not cheating. Playing the game on a different platform should not in of itself constitute cheating.
Right, I didn't mean to imply that playing on GFN was cheating by any means - I probably should've worded that a bit better.
I meant more of "If Call of Duty explicitly allowed GFN to add the game, then players who play via GFN shouldn't have a chance to be banned just for playing through it"
Even if they didn't allow it, that seems more of a GFN issue than the player's fault. Most players are going to assume that if they can play a game via GFN that they are allowed to play via GFN.
Correct on all accounts. Just to be more precise, I'm not placing any blame on the players in my prior comments - the blame goes to GFN and Activision since the player expects to be able to play a game that they've paid for, on a service that they have paid for.
Yes and no, I don't know how GFN works, but as a Linux user I've heard enough stories of people being banned because they were using Linux because we get the game running in a "non-authorized" way, i.e. using something that's easier to describe as a windows emulator (even though it isn't an emulator). And the way to do this is enable the feature on steam for all titles, and click play on the game, so also people assume it's safe. This does not apply to CoD specifically, because it's designed not to work with that "emulator" purposefully, so I would assume that if GFN is in any way similar they would also have discouraged from using it.
You must have missed the top comment where it was stated that publishers need to agree to have their games on GFN. Activision not only told Nvidia that it was okay to put their game on GFN, they likely had developers work with Nvidia to iron out any issues in creating the VM that it uses.
Wine/proton are unauthorized tools - most publishers don't care, and some even encourage it and help to fix issues (i.e., No Man's Sky), but it's still not officially agreed to like GFN.
I won't play any game that's like this.
No, it's a CoD anti-cheat issue. It shouldn't matter what platform you play on, you should only get banned if you're actually cheating.