Wendell was playing PUBG in a VM for demonstration purposes, but I think that should seriously be backtracked. It is NOT okay to play PUBG in a VM.
Uh care to explain? Why is it ânot okay to play PUBG in a VMâ, but seemingly it is okay to play any other game in a VM?
Battleye canât make up their damn mind, and now theyâre actually enforcing an Anti-VM stance.
Basically, patch your kernel and build it from scratchâŚ
1 Like
Is this a new thing. I actually played PUBG in a VM for like 3 month and did not get any problems?
They honestly canât decide. Now they are cracking down again.
Ufff, spoofing seems like the way to go now, but I seriously do not know if I want to follow this guys instructions. For me it seems he just randomly changes things because he read some stuff in a StackOverflow article without knowing what actually happens or if he is messing things up.
The pure fact that he is not simply providing a *.patch file but descibing what stuff to change in which line makes me question his abilities.
That makes things worse. This is danger zone territory now.
Oh and I got downvoted for saying those patches should be in unRAID, because Arch elitistsâŚ
Not true, some random speculated that it might be it, and when questioned he stated that he has no proof, itâs just guess work. There is no reason why any AC software would ban based on having LG running.
3 Likes
WellâŚ
Letâs put it this way.
This is a game of cat and mouse. Theyâre going to catch on to this eventually, and detect it.
If youâre willing to risk the ban, go for it, but without fully knowing whatâs being set up here, and what this stuff is being used for, it could have unintended impacts on system stability.
Iâm personally not in favor of it, but also Iâm happy playing single player games in a VM.
Yeah, Iâm planning on playing all my Unreal Engine single player titles in a VM because DXVK is too inefficient and slow for Unreal Engine. In case of single player games, I donât even think I need 10, since 8.1 would work.
DX12 exclusives Iâll wait for VKD3D-proton.
Btw, the title is incorrect. I have been playing both PUBG and ArmA3 which are both BE games for months without any issues, and even did some testing just yesterday also. It seems that R6 is using a stricter rule set for BE, thatâs all.
Thatâs part of the problem then, itâs the game dev that dictates what level of protection they need from Battleye making it inconsistent. I stand by the âRainbow Six in questionâ statement.
Itâs like Widevine Tier 1 vs The Witcherâs Widevine Tier 2.
Look mate, theyâre stuck between a rock and a hard place.
They want to provide a good gaming experience free from hackers, so they need to provide cheat-detection tools.
They assuredly want to allow as many people as they can to play the game, but the market for passthrough is so niche itâs barely a rounding error in their revenue if everyone who was even interested in passthrough just stopped buying the games.
It sucks, but life fundamentally sucks. Just take it in stride and enjoy what you can.
2 Likes
In a similar vein, I donât even think it is of malicious intent. Why would they give up free revenue (even if it is essentially a rounding error as you say), it doesnât make sense at all.
I doubt they are deliberately enforcing anything against VMs (again, one random guy on the internet claiming somethingâŚ). Itâs just the anticheat tripping on something. The anticheat doesnât care what it is tripping on. It flags it and it carries on.
We will never know and this whole thread including the reddit thread is pure speculation. There is no hard proof and there will never be unless one of you starts working at Ubisoft.
It might have not gone high enough in the chain and might have been stuck in offshore support. Thatâs how I see the situation played out.
i have 0 issue with beeing banned from a game which TOS donât forbid VM use because they system though i was cheating. This can happend, cheat detection is hard.
But i also have 0 affection for a company that, after explaining the issue, and within you right from the TOS, refuse to unban you afterward or refund the game. Because now itâs not anti-cheat, itâs steeling, and if i were in a country where you could sue without spending 10K, i would do it every time.
To me a company with harsh anti-cheat isnât evil (unlike a company with drm so harsh that they hurt UX), But refusing to give back access to something you paid, and also refusing to prove that you did break the rule, itâs not harsh anti-cheat.
1 Like
Yup.
A great tool for the EU inhabitants is the GDPR
(Video has a bit of a strange start, contains a load of info)
3 Likes
Interesting video, but really hard to listen to. Iâm actually not sure if itâs a real person or Googleâs Text-to-SpeechâŚ
edit: Got through it.
TL;DW: Dude got banned in a game and made a GDPR request that contained the cheat detection logs. The MD5 sum of the âoffendingâ file is the result of hashing an empty string (or file). He got in contact with the data protection officer (sidenote: he mentions in the reddit post ânever got a nameâ, yes, that is normal) to have it escalate into the dev team. They reviewed the incident and unbanned any player affected by this specific mistake.
4 Likes
Looks like someone that got their account compromised is also getting the offshore tech support runaround: