Yeah honestly, I bought Tarkov second-hand for $8 and even then I felt like I was getting ripped off.

It’s probably not news to anyone but the game has extremely lax anti-cheat controls, to almost no anti-cheat controls.

As for why people would cheat in an online game, always seems obvious, but the cheats for Tarkov are so egregious they’re like full blown developer offline DEBUG TOOLS.

I don’t mean “oh no, aim assistance, and they can see you through walls” – the cheat tools are hooking into features of the GAME ENGINE ITSELF, allowing players to see:

PlayerName, Current HP, Current Level, Full inventory contents, currently equipped weapon, position, heading, estimated value of inventory, estimated value of your account, age of account creation, and so on.

They can also: Teleport, FLY, increase or decrease their run speed, jump height, and so on.

The cheaters are basically running around with admin privileges in the game, and the developers don’t give a flying fuck. It’s like GTA5 levels of cheating.

Why would anyone play such a game, much less pay $150 for it? You can pay to be abused by people for a lot less than that.

Whats sad is that people keep wanting more client-side anticheat to fix this, when the real answer is server-side anticheat and changing the engine to stop being so leaky with that much information.

It’s easy to just handwaive and say “Server side will fix it” but here’s a major issue:

You have to render people in before they appear. How do you do that without the client knowing where people are?

If the trajectory and speed says either the client or another player will cross a wall soon where the player sees them THEN it could send the data to the client. You need some tolerance for ping up to maybe 200ms but that’s it. Wallhacks could give you at most a flash of a couple specific people.

You need to account for every gap in the wall, nook and cranny and peephole for these sightlines. You’d have to bake so much detail into every calculation server side that it would effectively be rendering the entire map to host a single game.

It could be a client-side check with verification on the server. Basically transmitting which places are in view. Ray casting like the other person said. Not raytracing which is much more computationally intensive. A server side check basically so that the client can’t just say they’re looking around every corner at once.

But then you’re adding extra latency to all visual calculations.

Your client needs to know if something is visible within the framerate of their PC.

You cannot do that fast enough.

Why not? More computationally intensive things are done to calculate lighting in a lot of modern games as I alluded to. Yes it would increase the load on your CPU but that’s less of a problem nowadays with higher core counts and clock speeds and it’s not like modern anticheats don’t steal some CPU cycles already. I think you underestimate the power of modern computers. I’m not trying to be condescending here but it is worth remembering that gigahertz means BILLIONS of calculations per second.

We’re only talking in theoreticals right now anyways, it is entirely possible that a game studio has tried this and it hasn’t worked, I just don’t put a lot of faith in modern game companies.

You cannot break the speed of light with computational effort.

You’re saying that you want to have a round trip from client to server and back happen in-between frames.

You cannot do that. Period. You will not ever have latencies that low.

Even if you frame lock it at 60fps that means you’re calculating views, sending the data up the tube, checking it on the server, responding back with all the data about the new character that should appear and then rendering the new guy within 17ms.

That is physically impossible.

That’s why I already proposed tolerance for ~200ms with trajectory projections

So you’re going to take all the places a character could be in the next 200ms, do Ray casting on all of them and send that data to the server to check every 17ms?

While the server also does that for 15 other players at the same time.

Do you know what algorithmic complexity is? Big O notation? If so - that’s a n³ * 15m³ problem space that you’re expanding out across 200ms every 17ms, where n is player locations possible in x/y/z and m is the other players locations. Physics collisions are usually the biggest drain on a computer’s cycles in game and in the worst case that’s n² complexity.

You’re talking insanely taxing here.

It’s mainly client side not server side. I’m not typing out an essay for you about a random ass idea I had one day on a forum.

I’m just baffled by the idea. No need to defend it though, this is all arbitrary anyways. It’s not like anyone is going to do this.