I see no issues with it, infact, if it even stops 1 cheater I'm all for it.

Originally posted by DefinitelyNotMonk:

I see no issues with it, infact, if it even stops 1 cheater I'm all for it.

Lol, just the one. Millions are fine though.

I dropped Windows from my gaming machine over 3 years ago and I'm not looking back.

The last BF was no real loss, and this one would only kinda be if my friends REAALLLY wanted to play it but I'm not dealing with Windows again just for a game thats over priced whose anticheat doesn't even work.

I use my PC for everything and I'm not sabotaging that just for a game, there are plenty of others for me to play.

Is the red flag secure boot? If you don’t like it don’t play it.

I’m torn on the secure boot nonsense but the recurring statement of “you must have something to hide” makes too much sense.

Battlefield 6 is dumb anyways. Let the big guys fizzle out already so we get something new. I can’t imagine buying AAA slop of an ip double the age of the average fps player in today’s market.

You’d have just as much fun getting a discounted fps with a smaller playercount too. And yes, I’m ranting. Should this discussion even be held?

Do you want us to hold your hand and say ‘yes, it’s okay. Succumb to Microsoft’s business practices. Take the bullet so you can have immediate gratification on a military sim. The only bad coming out of Microsoft huge foot in your booty is taking two steps back in the reason you even dual boot. Go ahead and play that $70USD title that will be obsolete in five years time.”

But who am I to individually take a stand to big tech companies. Take it from the hundred of thousands of computer users who take the time out of their day to inform you on what Microsoft has been up to the past decade. Take it from the US congressman spoonfeeding you lies telling you that outsourcing has become too expensive, ultimately ripping more dollars out of working man pockets to subside a flatline of new companies and confirm the generational use of old technology also being spoonfed to dumb so called free-thinkers who will buy anything because it’s the “best on the market” according to the vampiric titans well established already.

Don’t buy new games. The price increases are because the average age of the people in power are climbing and they want MORE ZEROES on their salary.

Originally posted by om namo:

Is the red flag secure boot? If you don’t like it don’t play it.

I’m torn on the secure boot nonsense but the recurring statement of “you must have something to hide” makes too much sense.

Battlefield 6 is dumb anyways. Let the big guys fizzle out already so we get something new. I can’t imagine buying AAA slop of an ip double the age of the average fps player in today’s market.

You’d have just as much fun getting a discounted fps with a smaller playercount too. And yes, I’m ranting. Should this discussion even be held?

Do you want us to hold your hand and say ‘yes, it’s okay. Succumb to Microsoft’s business practices. Take the bullet so you can have immediate gratification on a military sim. The only bad coming out of Microsoft huge foot in your booty is taking two steps back in the reason you even dual boot. Go ahead and play that $70USD title that will be obsolete in five years time.”

But who am I to individually take a stand to big tech companies. Take it from the hundred of thousands of computer users who take the time out of their day to inform you on what Microsoft has been up to the past decade. Take it from the US congressman spoonfeeding you lies telling you that outsourcing has become too expensive, ultimately ripping more dollars out of working man pockets to subside a flatline of new companies and confirm the generational use of old technology also being spoonfed to dumb so called free-thinkers who will buy anything because it’s the “best on the market” according to the vampiric titans well established already.

Don’t buy new games. The price increases are because the average age of the people in power are climbing and they want MORE ZEROES on their salary.

A curious response.

Does anyone have anything to hide. Oh the suspicion!

Just because someone with microsoft spying, does not mean there is anything to hide.

It is about privacy.

As for secure boot being enabled, microsoft will basically have control over the whole PC.

Oh and why would I care what some US congessman says. I am not from there.

As for the game, I may buy at some point & play.

For me, it basically a tipping point to prudent move to cut off any microsoft/proprietary OS.

As I stated, the manged switches are cheap, and will easy to do, with some basic networking knowledge and/or following a youtube vid.

As for new games, I may buy or s not. The question is will secure boot be required down the track for more games?

Originally posted by The_Abortionator:

I dropped Windows from my gaming machine over 3 years ago and I'm not looking back.

The last BF was no real loss, and this one would only kinda be if my friends REAALLLY wanted to play it but I'm not dealing with Windows again just for a game thats over priced whose anticheat doesn't even work.

I use my PC for everything and I'm not sabotaging that just for a game, there are plenty of others for me to play.

good for you.

It depends on the games you play , but some anti cheat software will be an issue.

Nothing personal or identifying is gathered and far more is picked up about most people in their daily lives.

If things change in the future, my thoughts on the subject likely will also, but asut stands now, the 'spying' is kind of a joke.

As to if it aids anti-cheat I am genuinely all for it, be more invasive even!

The ammount if people heating in fps games these days has made anything that is not large scale mass killing like battlefield all but unplayable for me which has ruined one of my favorite genres.

Originally posted by Lord Flashheart:

Originally posted by om namo:

Is the red flag secure boot? If you don’t like it don’t play it.

I’m torn on the secure boot nonsense but the recurring statement of “you must have something to hide” makes too much sense.

Battlefield 6 is dumb anyways. Let the big guys fizzle out already so we get something new. I can’t imagine buying AAA slop of an ip double the age of the average fps player in today’s market.

You’d have just as much fun getting a discounted fps with a smaller playercount too. And yes, I’m ranting. Should this discussion even be held?

Do you want us to hold your hand and say ‘yes, it’s okay. Succumb to Microsoft’s business practices. Take the bullet so you can have immediate gratification on a military sim. The only bad coming out of Microsoft huge foot in your booty is taking two steps back in the reason you even dual boot. Go ahead and play that $70USD title that will be obsolete in five years time.”

But who am I to individually take a stand to big tech companies. Take it from the hundred of thousands of computer users who take the time out of their day to inform you on what Microsoft has been up to the past decade. Take it from the US congressman spoonfeeding you lies telling you that outsourcing has become too expensive, ultimately ripping more dollars out of working man pockets to subside a flatline of new companies and confirm the generational use of old technology also being spoonfed to dumb so called free-thinkers who will buy anything because it’s the “best on the market” according to the vampiric titans well established already.

Don’t buy new games. The price increases are because the average age of the people in power are climbing and they want MORE ZEROES on their salary.

A curious response.

Does anyone have anything to hide. Oh the suspicion!

Just because someone with microsoft spying, does not mean there is anything to hide.

It is about privacy.

As for secure boot being enabled, microsoft will basically have control over the whole PC.

Oh and why would I care what some US congessman says. I am not from there.

As for the game, I may buy at some point & play.

For me, it basically a tipping point to prudent move to cut off any microsoft/proprietary OS.

As I stated, the manged switches are cheap, and will easy to do, with some basic networking knowledge and/or following a youtube vid.

As for new games, I may buy or s not. The question is will secure boot be required down the track for more games?

I stepped on some toes with my comment. I didn’t mean to.

So go ahead, play and buy whatever. Weigh the pros and cons and make your own choices.

Not buying a win locked game would be only option

Originally posted by DefinitelyNotMonk:

Nothing personal or identifying is gathered and far more is picked up about most people in their daily lives.

If things change in the future, my thoughts on the subject likely will also, but asut stands now, the 'spying' is kind of a joke.

As to if it aids anti-cheat I am genuinely all for it, be more invasive even!

The ammount if people heating in fps games these days has made anything that is not large scale mass killing like battlefield all but unplayable for me which has ruined one of my favorite genres.

It of course depends on you & the situation.

I choose to keep privacy & security where practical.
Just because there are situations where your info is collected & beyond your control, I do not think is a reason not to do that.

Originally posted by HypersleepyNaputunia:

Not buying a win locked game would be only option

Windows & steam already collect a lot of information.
Also many games must have windows due to the anti cheat.

For me Windows machine - gaming only, unless I wish to severely restrict which games I play.

As I stated, I am looking to use a different machine for linux - for pretty much everything else.
Also make sure there is no network activity between them.

Think this requirement may be a bit of an issue for folks with an older PC that could still run the game:

TPM 2.0 Enabled UEFI

Originally posted by DefinitelyNotMonk:

Nothing personal or identifying is gathered and far more is picked up about most people in their daily lives.

If things change in the future, my thoughts on the subject likely will also, but asut stands now, the 'spying' is kind of a joke.

As to if it aids anti-cheat I am genuinely all for it, be more invasive even!

The ammount if people heating in fps games these days has made anything that is not large scale mass killing like battlefield all but unplayable for me which has ruined one of my favorite genres.

They do agressively scan your system and process this data on their servers to determine if you have cheats installed. For them this is a legitimate usecase, which allows them to do so under the GDPR and similar laws, they are likely not allowed to store the data however. It is invasive, but they are unlikely to do anything with the data outside of cheat detection.

I myself am more worried about the agressiveness of the anti-cheat, it digs itself in to the lowest levels of the operating system. The risk here is that if the anti-cheat dies it will also kill the entire OS.

It is also a huge security risk, it might have exploitable vulnerabilities which the developer may not timely patch when discovered. Due to its ring-0 access this is a massive risk.

And then there is the potential overhead when it is constantly, even when the game is not running, checking your system for cheats.

Nobody informed would willing run such crapware on their system.

So far all this ultra agressive anti-cheat is utterly ineffective, the Battlefield 6 beta had cheaters on day 1.

Kernel-level anti-cheat in itself is a lazy and stupid idea, it does not work. The best anti-cheat is none-invasive and runs mostly server side, a'la VAC combined with systems such as VACNet.

Originally posted by Omega:

Originally posted by DefinitelyNotMonk:

Nothing personal or identifying is gathered and far more is picked up about most people in their daily lives.

If things change in the future, my thoughts on the subject likely will also, but asut stands now, the 'spying' is kind of a joke.

As to if it aids anti-cheat I am genuinely all for it, be more invasive even!

The ammount if people heating in fps games these days has made anything that is not large scale mass killing like battlefield all but unplayable for me which has ruined one of my favorite genres.

They do agressively scan your system and process this data on their servers to determine if you have cheats installed. For them this is a legitimate usecase, which allows them to do so under the GDPR and similar laws, they are likely not allowed to store the data however. It is invasive, but they are unlikely to do anything with the data outside of cheat detection.

I myself am more worried about the agressiveness of the anti-cheat, it digs itself in to the lowest levels of the operating system. The risk here is that if the anti-cheat dies it will also kill the entire OS.

It is also a huge security risk, it might have exploitable vulnerabilities which the developer may not timely patch when discovered. Due to its ring-0 access this is a massive risk.

And then there is the potential overhead when it is constantly, even when the game is not running, checking your system for cheats.

Nobody informed would willing run such crapware on their system.

So far all this ultra agressive anti-cheat is utterly ineffective, the Battlefield 6 beta had cheaters on day 1.

Kernel-level anti-cheat in itself is a lazy and stupid idea, it does not work. The best anti-cheat is none-invasive and runs mostly server side, a'la VAC combined with systems such as VACNet.

It just get better and better.
I want to be able to play whatever games I want.
As stated, for me windows is gaming only.
It seems time to look into buying a suitable switch with vlan support.

Who knows how is could compromise windows.
Automatic backup are a must - doing already.

Originally posted by Omega:

Originally posted by DefinitelyNotMonk:

Nothing personal or identifying is gathered and far more is picked up about most people in their daily lives.

If things change in the future, my thoughts on the subject likely will also, but asut stands now, the 'spying' is kind of a joke.

As to if it aids anti-cheat I am genuinely all for it, be more invasive even!

The ammount if people heating in fps games these days has made anything that is not large scale mass killing like battlefield all but unplayable for me which has ruined one of my favorite genres.

They do agressively scan your system and process this data on their servers to determine if you have cheats installed. For them this is a legitimate usecase, which allows them to do so under the GDPR and similar laws, they are likely not allowed to store the data however. It is invasive, but they are unlikely to do anything with the data outside of cheat detection.

I myself am more worried about the agressiveness of the anti-cheat, it digs itself in to the lowest levels of the operating system. The risk here is that if the anti-cheat dies it will also kill the entire OS.

It is also a huge security risk, it might have exploitable vulnerabilities which the developer may not timely patch when discovered. Due to its ring-0 access this is a massive risk.

And then there is the potential overhead when it is constantly, even when the game is not running, checking your system for cheats.

Nobody informed would willing run such crapware on their system.

So far all this ultra agressive anti-cheat is utterly ineffective, the Battlefield 6 beta had cheaters on day 1.

Kernel-level anti-cheat in itself is a lazy and stupid idea, it does not work. The best anti-cheat is none-invasive and runs mostly server side, a'la VAC combined with systems such as VACNet.

Somewhat valid fears, though, to my knowledge, none of that has ever happened and it only runs when you play the game.

And yes, there were cheaters and also hundreds of thousands of bans on day 1 one alone.

If it meant cutting out 90% of cheaters I'd be fine with full drivers license level ID required to play, atleast then banning cheaters might slow them down a bit more.

So, yeah, I'll take the hit to privacy that doesn't matter to get a clean game, I think most innocent gamers would.