AI visual Anti-Cheat

[stuck canopy]

Just wondered if this has reached the eyeballs of the OHD devs, this type of anti-cheat basically fingerprints a user's playstyle and if they are caught cheating they can end up being banned across all types of games.
Eliminating the possibility of simply buying a new instance of the game and making a new account.
https://youtu.be/LkmIItTrQP4

[cedar bane]

what if someone had the exact same playstyle as an already banned hacker?they'd get banned too from all games.i don't trust it , and the money spent on this should be spent on the ai bots, to recreate the feel of pvp, on singleplayer. fps will never die like that

[stuck canopy]

Did you watch the video? That's like saying you might have the same fingerprint as somebody that robbed a store. That's not how it works.
Did you know that CCTV cameras can now identify people by the way they walk, you can't imitate that.
This is going probably be the only way to stop the hack anti-hack arms race for the foreseeable future.

[cedar bane]

yes i did watch it , it was great.AI is man-made, it could have flaws even if it's a small percentage.and getting banned by accident from all games is not cool. playstyle doesn't have that many factors to differentiate between players. plus ,it changes. i could play a certain way today,i'd change it tommorrow,my choice. so i don't think it's a good solution

[eager dawn]

Your concern is valid but false positives have long since been an issue with cheat tools, it's not something that would disqualify a potential tool because most tools for non-blatant related cheating should be used as flagging methods that lead to manual review, not just autobanning.

[stuck canopy]

I thought by using the different analogy of one's gait over my original "play style" might help you understand that your "play style" isn't like what class you choose and if you're "aggressive". It's how long do you take to aim at a target when you see it, and a host of other micro-actions you make as you play.
Tools using AI are going to be beyond our comprehension of how powerful they are. The guy in video specifically said he could tell the best player from the cheater.
I guess it really doesn't matter if i convince you, this is going to be the future, I just thought it would be cool if OHD jumped on this first instead of waiting for it to be adopted across the industry first.
Good talking with you, have a good one.

[prime shuttle]

So... what does the AI do if someone changes playstyles?
Like using an aim trainer or similar?
Does it go "this person suddenly got better, ergo hacks, ergo ban"?

[eager dawn]

Human behavioral patterns and idiosyncrasies are unique to each person, meaning that regardless of the way that you play, it's still you.

The AI doesn't have to "do" anything, it's a tool to analyze data, the "do" part is on the human end.

One easy test is to use 2 different people on the same computer, right? Recall that is the whole point of the software, no matter where you go, or what you do, you are detected.

That's the theory of course, whether it works consistently in practice? Eh, you kind of have to wait and see, but stuff like that is just the beginning.

The development of cheating software and the concept of an ongoing battle was always a losing on the part of the cheaters, assuming each individual's intent was in fact to acquire an unfair edge against other players, because the entire basis is founded around making the cheat software behave like a human, but if they succeed, that just means you now have AI software that replaces humans, meaning you can play a believable multiplayer game without humans. In addition, you now have the potential to tune to the players to how you want, or how the game designer wants.

As far as pure human vs human gaming, I suppose it becomes the classic walled garden situation, which in reality was how it always was with community servers back in the so called "Golden Age" of FPS gaming, which I suppose was mid to late 90's up through around 2012, especially with community ran servers moderating the playerbase.

Community servers acted as a barrier to people who wanted to intentionally disrupt games, which is not limited to cheaters, but does include them.

A major pushback to communities was the concept of "bad administrators" or "badmins", as in people running a community in a way that actually disrupts the game for the players looking for a fair experience. While "badmins" were a factor, in that span of over a decade, I'd estimate is was a factor less than 10% of the time, and I think the push away from that kind of setup in major games was facilitated disingenuously by people and companies who felt they were losing money to communities that would educate new ignorant gamers to what was possible in gaming, how to fight cheating, why they don't need cheats to compete and how games can be elevated far beyond what randomly occurs in your average pub game, or average matchmaked game as is often the case now.

In a way, all sides were "right" because human moderation was never enough to build the trust necessary for all players to believe they were/are playing a fair game. Unfortunately this isn't likely a solution to a financially predatory game industry, but I think it does lead to recognition and education on the topic while potentially better identifying motive to the actors involved in the total industry, or at least causing them to shift focus.