AKA the way that is easiest to detect, and the easiest way to claim that the game doesn't have cheaters. Behavioral analysis doesn't work with closet cheaters, and they corrupt the community and damage the game in much subtler ways. There's nothing worse than to know that the player you've competed with all this time had a slight advantage from the start.
And it is possible to silently put you into a cheating game match maker, so that you only ever match with other cheaters. This, to me, is prob. the better outcome than outright banning (which means the cheater just comes back with a new account). Silently moving them to a cheater queue is a good way to slow them down, as well as isolate them.
Not with 100% accuracy. This means some legitimate players would be qualified as potentially cheating.
You don't have to play with wallhacks constantly on, you can toggle. And it doesn't detect cases where you're camping with an AWP and have 150ms response time instead of 200ms. Sometimes people are just having a good day.
> cheating game match maker
This is already a thing. In CS2, you have a Trust Factor. The lower your trust factor is, the bigger the chance you will be queued with/against cheaters.
We have two possible options here, it's pretty obvious which is the more likely one.
It is pretty ridiculous to suggest that nobody has ever been caught cheating in overwatch pro games.
What you are basically asking is that we should provide a "negative proof", imagine me going through all the pro matches to prove my point that it did not happen (going in this extreme) when you can just show me a proof that it did happen.
The reality is that it really couldn't matter less whether or not anyone has ever cheated in overwatch pro games, but we can pretty safely assume that somebody has.
Is this a topic that genuinely calls for greater precision than this? What's the benefit?
No, it’s abundantly clear that people cheat. We’re calling the GP comment out for claiming that overwatch turns a blind eye to cheaters and have ignored cheating in competitions.
> take a break
You’re the only person of the three of us getting very very worked up about it.
> is this a topic that genuinely calls for greater precision than this? What’s the benefit
Yes. It’s about the integrity of the discussion. There’s no point in being here if we can just post nonsense and have it accepted as truth.