search

AreWeAntiCheatYet / AreWeAntiCheatYet

A comprehensive and crowd-sourced list of games using anti-cheats and their compatibility with GNU/Linux or Wine.
https://areweanticheatyet.com/
MIT License
386 stars 51 forks source link

Supported Status #180

Closed MathiewMay closed 2 years ago

MathiewMay commented 2 years ago

Can we all agree that games should only be set as supported if the anti-cheat was officially implemented to work with Linux by the game's developers?

Some games might work on Linux with their anti-cheat yet they are not officially implemented in that case they should remain unsupported.

Some example are #14 and #166

Trollwut commented 2 years ago

Maybe some kind of "unofficial" color?

This could be especially important, as there has been games where it would run on Linux, but game devs had players banned.

pktiuk commented 2 years ago

This seems to be also the case for World War 3: https://www.protondb.com/app/674020

Starz0r commented 2 years ago

While I certainly don't want to add a status for games that don't fully commit to support, Valve has put me in between a rock and a hard place. Classifying game support into different categories is difficult because "Proton" and "Native" support are separate, but similar goal, on which I intentionally don't discriminate between on the actual table.

With Proton, you have developers, usually unrelated to the actual games, adding support to games that aren't officially supported on the GNU/Linux platform. However, the case could be made that there is a distinction between developers that explicitly go out of their way to enable Wine/Proton support in their anti-cheat versus those who don't. Even some games on the list just happen to work without much developer intervention, but how much of this is actually enabling the anti-cheat to work properly on the platform? Most of these games that don't have the explicit support are many years, even decades old! These games have no chance of getting updated, much less a “checkbox” ticked to enable Wine support.

A good example is League of Legends is a game actively in development, but it happens that there is also a community around that game helping keep that game runnable on a Linux based platform. Riot developers even explicitly state they currently aren't going out of their way to do anything that might disable this support, but it's obvious they may not want to commit, among other things. Should I list this game as "Supported" on the list? I don't think so. Riot as a company could go out of their way to "officially" support the game by allowing the game to run in Wine out of the box, but I don't see that happening without a big enough marketshare.

I don't want to possibly incentivize developers to be wishy-washy by having a "Partially", or "Unofficial" status, and would much rather them either out right disable Wine support, or not. Personally I'd like to keep the Supported Status for games that can at least do the following, which I consider the bare minimum for this status:

  1. Run the game on GNU/Linux, ensure Multiplayer works for an extended amount of time without being kicked, or being unfairly penalized for running under a platform that's not Windows.
  2. For third-party anti-cheats, enable Wine/Proton support in the dashboard.
  3. Explicitly state that GNU/Linux is supported either natively or through Wine/Proton.
Starz0r commented 2 years ago

I've sorta peeled back on this slightly with the redesign, with regard to allowing two different statuses to refer to the game being playable on the platform. However, this does not completely absolve developer responsibility as it still requires developers to allow their game to be playable, while not patching it out, lest they get put in the Denied or Broken category.

Closing this as solved. If there are any further questions, feel free to reopen.