Steam Games Must Disclose Kernel Anti-Cheat

Steam Games Must Disclose Kernel Anti-Cheat
[Oct 30, 2024, 6:57 pm ET] – Share – Viewing Comments

A Steamworks Development Update explains the role of a new tag developers must apply to games sold on Steam that use anti-cheat software (thanks Neowin). Word is: "players have been requesting more transparency around the anti-cheat services used in games, as well as the existence of any additional software that will be installed within the game." Use of the new tag is just a suggested best practice for run-of-the-mill anti-cheat solutions, but is considered mandatory for any game that installs kernel-level anti-cheat software on the client side:

Going forward, when you submit a new game to Steam, if your game installs a client side, kernel mode anti-cheat, you will need to fill out this new field. We will be going through old games and contacting partners with games that fall into this category.

If your game contains a client or server based anti-cheat that is not kernel based, submitting the field is optional but we generally think that any game that makes use of anti-cheat technology would benefit from letting players know.

View : : :

Post Comment

Search Log In

Search Log In Post Comment

Re: Steam Games Must Disclose Kernel Anti-Cheat
Oct 31, 2024, 04:23

Zerg

Re: Steam Games Must Disclose Kernel Anti-Cheat Oct 31, 2024, 04:23

Oct 31, 2024, 04:23

Zerg

TorchMaster wrote on Oct 31, 2024, 00:28:
Thank you, Valve. This is exactly how you should use your monopoly power: helping the consumer. This is a small improvement but welcome.

I've been yelling at the sky for a long time that Valve should use its power to ban additional launchers and auxiliary installations. I think they can successfully argue that additional layers of launchers damages the quality of their platform and the products sold on it. Flagging kernel-level installs is at least a step in the right direction.

I am fully unbothered by third party launchers or, as you called them, auxiliary installations. However, I understand why people would find them annoying - why have two launchers to launch one game?
But your request is unreasonable. Such bans would most definitely invite legal action (which would most likely be successful, we've seen less valid complains passing before court) and would constitute monopoly-level abuse.

It's also obvious how good we have it in the PC gaming space if our biggest complaint (and it is BY FAR the biggest complaint by Steam users) is that "Boo hoo, we don't like launchers".