The presence of cheaters is perhaps the most frustrating factor in online games, but some say kernel-level anti-cheating software is a notorious second. Major games are regularly released with this type of cheater combat. Subsequently, a heated debate invariably erupts within the gaming community about the usefulness and risks of kernel-level anti-cheats, while developers do everything they can to justify the use of this technique.
For example, Arrowhead surprised the gaming world in early February with the monster hit Helldivers 2. Despite the immense commercial success of this co-op horde shooter, a quarter to more than a third of all Steam reviews in the weeks surrounding its release were negative. On the one hand, this had to do with the game’s overwhelmed servers; After all, who would have expected it to be such a great success? On the other hand, gamers strongly criticized nProtect GameGuard, the game’s controversial anti-cheating software.
More than a month later, there was another big fuss about the technology; this time in relation to hacked systems of professional Apex Legends players. Critics quickly concluded that an exploit via the most widely used kernel-level anti-cheat, Easy Anti-Cheat, would be the problem. No evidence has yet been provided for this, but it underlines the suspicion of gamers regarding this technology.
Helldivers 2 and Apex Legends are not the first games with such software, and certainly not the last. In fact, it seems like more and more major games are using kernel-level anti-cheating software. The developers’ considerations seem – at least at first glance – to be in favor of the average player; On paper, a heavy form of anti-cheat software means better protection against cheaters. But what does the innocent gamer have to give up for this? And the question is whether kernel-level anti-cheats provide better protection at all. There is also much disagreement on that point.
Main image source: Arrowhead Game Studios
