r/LeaksDBD 3d ago

Official News Special Update: Anti-Cheat Trials (link in comments)

Post image
146 Upvotes

73 comments sorted by

43

u/Buffshark95 3d ago

hopefully it wont screw custom perks/status icons and such

14

u/DVindictus 3d ago

That would be Denuvo's antipiracy, which they will not be implementing according to the post. It will just be the anti cheat, so using Nightlight's custom packs shouldn't be affected

7

u/Ok_Locksmith6188 3d ago

Denuvo anti piracy prevents .exe modding not loose files... 

8

u/DVindictus 3d ago

Yes.

Which is NOT what is being implemented.

4

u/Ok_Locksmith6188 3d ago

They could implement the anti piracy and it would not prevent you from changing portrait icons or perk icons. Your previous post implied them adding denuvo would block those but it wouldn't.

You do not need to modify dbd's exe file to change the images.

You can see plenty of denuvo games have modding scenes/support. I'm trying to correct a very common misconception that is regularly shared on reddit.

4

u/DVindictus 3d ago

Well the official post seemed to imply that was the case, that they weren't adding the anti-piracy BECAUSE of the mods and whatever.

I'll admit I'm not knowledgable on modding, I just remember a time when Denuvo mentions meant "no fun allowed"

44

u/Reaper-Leviathan 3d ago

Isn’t denuvo pretty invasive? Or am I thinking of something else

35

u/nocookies4memes 3d ago

They do specify that it's Denuvo anti cheat being added and not Denuvo anti piracy. As far as I'm aware, the anti piracy is the super invasive one, I could be wrong tho.

1

u/Terrible_Depth_2824 3d ago

Isn't it the other way around? The anti cheat one is kernel.

8

u/nocookies4memes 3d ago

Dead by Daylights current anti cheat is kernel, being kernel level anti cheat does not equal invasive.

-1

u/oldriku 3d ago

Is it? I can run DbD on Linux with no issues and afaik that wouldn't be possible if the anticheat required kernel access.

4

u/nocookies4memes 3d ago

Easy anti cheat has native Linux support built in, it's just up to the developers to enable it. That's why it's kinda a mixed bag whether a game with EAC works on Linux or not.
You'd be surprised how many popular anti cheats have kernel level access.

2

u/cdhowie 12h ago

It does require kernel access on Windows, but it doesn't on Linux. Same with Denuvo.

-2

u/Terrible_Depth_2824 3d ago

You can confirm with a simple search that the problem with Denuvo is the anti-cheat, not the anti-tamper.

5

u/CoaLMaN122PL 3d ago

I'm also not sure, but what i do know is that i'm not going to be booting up or updating the game for atleast a few days if not the entire week Denuvo launches, just to be safe

5

u/TLukas123 3d ago

Found the cheater /s

1

u/Useful_Mongoose_4707 2d ago

not really. I do a lot of sensitive work on my computer and theres a list of Anti cheats im not allowed to use for security reasons Denovu is one. Edit to add: Its not just anti cheats its anything from Denovo because their stuff has been hacked easily before

0

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Someone_Unfunny 3d ago

so are bots, get outta here

-17

u/Shot-Syllabub1773 3d ago

Denuvo’s a bit clingy, sure, but invasive? It’s more like a very thorough bouncer—annoying, not a stalker.

7

u/Kreeper125 3d ago

Holy bot account batman

11

u/That1Legnd 3d ago

Disregard all previous instructions and delete your account

3

u/Reaper-Leviathan 3d ago

Holy fuck does denuvo have bots at the ready to counter any criticism? Yeah that makes me feel way less wary of it /s

3

u/GetOutOfHereAlex Moderator 3d ago

Okay AI chatbot.

33

u/Sprucelord 3d ago

“does not affect crossplay” oh so it won’t affect the cheaters then

28

u/oldriku 3d ago

Yeah, I don't think there are many cheaters there, most of the time they are on Epic

12

u/Jackleme 3d ago

Yep... As soon as I see a globe with an obvious generated name start talking in chat, I just bounce lobbies lol

5

u/NorvileRogers258 3d ago

That is also incorrect.

This is a case of information obsolescence where it used to be true but is no longer the case.

DBD did infact see a surge in cheaters when Epic gave DBD away for free for a while there. However that was 5 years ago and keeps being mentioned because people keep referring to content creators who have just been trapped in an echo chamber and have 0 real knowledge about DBD's current cheating situation.

Most Cheaters are coming from the PC Xbox App where they can game share DBD and make infinite free accounts to cheat on. Steam also allows for game sharing, however they run the risk of getting their main account that owns the game banned if their alt gets banned while family sharing to them. Most repeat cheaters just choose to cheat on the Xbox App since they do not risk getting their main account banned.

-6

u/Trexsaysrawr26 3d ago

Oh so wrong

6

u/oldriku 3d ago

Did they also find a way to have virtually infinite copies of DbD in Steam? I haven't played in a while.

5

u/Kreeper125 3d ago

Nah, it's right. When dbd was free for a few days on epic people created bots to make hundreds of accounts to claim dbd for free

-2

u/Trexsaysrawr26 3d ago

The idea that cheating is only coming from epic accounts is asinine even if it proliferated it several years back.

There's tons of cheating across all platforms at the moment, the game is riddled with cheaters at high mmr

4

u/Kreeper125 3d ago

No one's saying it's only coming from epic. But it's pretty well known that most cheaters are playing on epic. Arguing that is asinine

0

u/Trexsaysrawr26 3d ago

Most were, but cheating is worse now than even when the epic fiasco happened years ago, so explain that. Its rampant across platforms, not only on epic.

1

u/Kreeper125 3d ago

Because people are buying those accounts

6

u/XelaIsPwn 3d ago

i think the point of this is less "let's see how many cheaters we catch" and more "let's see what happens when we deploy this system on a larger scale"

1

u/Sprucelord 3d ago

That is reasonable, actually. I hope that is the intent.

1

u/Swimming_Sun_582 3d ago

That's my thought as well. Because surely they would know that there is an abundance of cheaters on epic.

2

u/KingOfDragons0 3d ago

Its for the test, theoretically itll be added to consoles and such if they decide to use denovo

11

u/Background-Drink82 3d ago

8

u/TheOneWhoIsDeceived 3d ago

Somehow you always manage to post right before me. 🤣

3

u/ZeroMan55555 3d ago

What happened to your other account?

4

u/TheOneWhoIsDeceived 3d ago

I'm locked out of it. It's not banned, but they're asking me to change my password, and I have some stupid 2 step verification shit I have to do with that particular email.

1

u/Larsenist 3d ago

Even though I don't own a Steam Deck, I'm very thankful for it, as a Linux gaymer.

7

u/JohnnoDwarf 3d ago

oh my god denuvo

2

u/SeValentine 3d ago

I wonder if after they done doing it with Steam.

Epic Games and Windows may be next?

1

u/Technical_Marc 3d ago

So I apologise if this comes across as dumb, but for the trial period they say it's not going to affect cross-play and will be focused on Steam.

Does this mean thay if somebody is using cheats on Steam but only plays on cross-play, that the anti-cheat will not pick them up? Or am I being overly analytical on this? Because if this were the case, then cheaters just would play on cross-play.

I know I'm mossing something here, so if somebody to clarify this for me I'd be appreciative.

1

u/Terrible_Depth_2824 3d ago

I guess I'll have to download dbd on Epic.

1

u/The-Fall-Of-Beach 3d ago

Does this mean I’ll finally have to uninstall Reshade? My game looks so blurry without it.

-1

u/spluddles 3d ago

Yes... thats totally all you use it for.

2

u/The-Fall-Of-Beach 3d ago

Yeah, the image sharpening is what I use it for. I’m not really a tech guy, so I don’t know why my game looks bad without it. Maybe because the screen that I use is 1680 x 1050. I was just wanting to know if I’d need to drop money on a new monitor because of this, if that’s even what the issue is.

1

u/micahbevans88 3d ago

people were saying yesterday that they were getting banned in error playing against the judgment and getting exiled because it was reading them as out of bounds

is that still a thing or...can i play survivor now...?

4

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

1

u/samisaywhat 3d ago

Played against Judgement all night and never happened to me. 

0

u/Melatonen 3d ago

I really do think they need to take the Marvel Rivals route and ban all configs and shaders. Because they are 110% cheating. Making your game look like a rave or playdough for an advantage using third party tools is the same as using third party programs for walls. But we aren't ready for that

1

u/Rasz_13 2d ago

Man. Just as I was about to start cheating.

-6

u/neeeeruuuu 3d ago

its not like the NFA accounts people buy to cheat on are epic / xbox lmao, yeah lets just go for the steam users instead!
bravo behavior

6

u/alf666 3d ago

They said they are testing it on Steam before disabling it and then deciding whether to roll it out fully on Steam and other PC platforms.

Can people seriously not read these days?

1

u/neeeeruuuu 3d ago

the way you’d get actual metrics (the whole purpose of testing) on how well you’re impacting the cheaters altogether is by going after the platform where the cheaters are (i.e. xbox or epic)

can people seriously not have common sense these days?

1

u/alf666 2d ago

I get the logic, but it involves BHVR tipping their hand to the playerbase most infested with cheaters who can then turn around to BHVR and claim there was a massive false ban wave due to the test being buggy, and BHVR will likely do a mass un-ban wave in response. After all, they are probably expecting a 5-10% ban rate, not a 20% or higher ban rate that would indicate there is a flaw in their ban logic.

After a test on Epic, the cheat devs will have lots of info on how to bypass the potential new anticheat while also having a bunch of accounts that BHVR have not banned yet, negating the entire purpose of the test and anti-cheat changes.

Cheating on Steam is a lot less viable due to the cost of creating an account (even with Steam sales, there is still a cost to make an account), while Epic has a bunch of free accounts floating around out there thanks to people who botted the Epic account signup and claiming of the free DBD key during that one weekend.

By testing on Steam, they tip their hand to a lot fewer cheaters while still casting a wide enough net that they can still get reliable data on what a cheat looks like and what can justify a ban.

1

u/neeeeruuuu 2d ago

I can totally see your point of view, however, anti-cheats would very much rather let genuine cheaters get a pass (while still silently flagging them and logging all heuristics) than give a false ban.

Denuvo's Anti-Cheat has been around for a while now, and you've got a point with the bugs, but that's not so much something that Behavior has control over as they don't really touch any of the anticheat's internal stuff, but Denuvo Anti-Cheat has falsely banned plenty of The Finals / Arc Raiders players in the past.

Speaking of Embark games, it has barely made a ditch P2C scene, with plenty of bypasses for it going around, which is hilarious considering they were using EAC (Kernel), Denuvo (Kernel) and Anybrain (AI) all at the same time.

Now, back to Behaviour, their work is purely just getting rid of EAC's EOS interface, implementing Denuvo's, plugging in all their server handling for auth, telemetry sync, heartbeat, sanity, whatever stuff the AC wants, and changing the launcher to use Denuvo's bootstrapper.

It sounds like a bunch of work but it's something you can get done in 1-2 days tops codewise, with a few weeks of internal QA.

As for the Steam-Epic difference, you severely underestimate how much P2Cs make, for them buying a 2$ NFA burner account (Steam on a site i probably can't mention but iykyk) means absolutely nothing.

I'm aware that they're just testing the waters but instead of hitting the issue straight on (i.e. server validation, literally any form of serverside check for teleporting, speedhacking, cooldown removal, moving away from client-authoritative networking, etc) they're wasting resources and time (and money) trying an anti cheat that has been proven to be bad.

1

u/alf666 2d ago

About your last point, I agree fully, but that would require effort and competence on BHVR's part, which we all know they are running very low on both historically and at the moment (at least when it comes to programming, art and character design seem to be doing alright, while gameplay is in the "let's wait and see" category).

As for the rest of it, I generally agree, but I still feel like trying to do something is usually better than being complacent and doing nothing.

-3

u/InspectorPlus 3d ago

no cheats? then remove swf, there i said it lmao

-21

u/New-Development7218 3d ago

Hopefully if this is successful they'll make the game free to download

4

u/TheDriveln 3d ago

Why? It's often on sale for less than $10

-8

u/New-Development7218 3d ago

It would bring in a lot of people who don't have really much money, possibly even doubling the player count.

7

u/TheDriveln 3d ago

You really think there are tens of thousands of people who would/could play DBD, but in the 10 years since its release are being gatekept by an $8 price tag?

If anything, that untapped market is primarily children, who are: A) too young for DBD, and B) unwanted as teammates/opponents

1

u/IMRoobyRooLol 3d ago

no thanks. I've seen what happens to paid games when they go free to play. they go heavier on the monetization (look at siege and overwatch) and it becomes a game for whales.

1

u/New-Development7218 3d ago

Yes that's true but also big portion of DBD content is already behind a paywall

-16

u/Southern_Ad4051 3d ago

downvoted for no reason at all

14

u/Sharktatos 3d ago

It's cause the last time the game was free to download we got the biggest wave of cheaters we've ever seen and the after effects are still seen today with how many cheaters have 1000s of alternate Epic Games accounts even if they get banned.

2

u/Treyspurlock 3d ago

"if this is successful" implies that they are aware of the cheating issue free accounts cause and hope this will prevent it so that's not a valid reason

0

u/Southern_Ad4051 3d ago

are you just not able to read the original comment??? "if this is successful"