I've been reading a lot of comments by gamers who hate that UWP apps don't support overlays. Particularly steam overlay i think. It's simply not true that UWP doesn't support overlays, but rather, what it seems to prevent, is the game being hacked and the frames modified. As far as i can tell, so many overlay technologies that rely on hacking the frames don't work. There is nothing preventing an application based overlay system from being delivered with the game, which could be developed and provided by Steam or whoever.
Isn't preventing some hacks a good thing anyway? If wall hacks don't work anymore because they can't show you where the enemy is. Isn't that a fantastic feature of UWP. I would say that's the #1 issue in gaming today, not whether a game supports overlays. Overlay support must be only issue #3 or 4.
Can anyone clarify the situation on overlays and in particular application to hacking. And explain how externally driven overlays can be provided without also creating a doorway for hacks?
UWP Overlay support (and hacks).
Isn't preventing some hacks a good thing anyway? If wall hacks don't work anymore because they can't show you where the enemy is. Isn't that a fantastic feature of UWP. I would say that's the #1 issue in gaming today, not whether a game supports overlays. Overlay support must be only issue #3 or 4.
Can anyone clarify the situation on overlays and in particular application to hacking. And explain how externally driven overlays can be provided without also creating a doorway for hacks?
The problem is that UWP won't prevent a hacker who wants to rig the game. He just has to defeat an extra layer of security and that's it. Even if that means installing a kernel mode driver that will allow access to the UWP's process address space.
However, for all legit users who need hacks for making the game playable (XBox360 Gamepad/XInput emulators, VSync fixes, framerate limiting fixes, resolution unlockers, specific-GPU bug fixes, custom antialiasing hacks, glitch fixes, Chat overlays for multiplayer games such as the one provided by Mumble and Ventrilo) can't because these users don't like messing with the OS to bypass that extra layer; and it also means pre-existing solutions will not work with new games, while cheating-hacks will because they are specifically developed for that game after the game has released.
Can anyone clarify the situation on overlays and in particular application to hacking. And explain how externally driven overlays can be provided without also creating a doorway for hacks?
It can't. There is no backdoor for only the good guys.
However UWP will fail at preventing cheating hackers, and will only annoy people wanting to hack the game for legitimate uses.
Just as an example, this hacker who fixed Arkham Knight's glide glitch would've probably not done anything if the game had been running in UWP.
Isn't preventing some hacks a good thing anyway? If wall hacks don't work anymore because they can't show you where the enemy is. Isn't that a fantastic feature of UWP. I would say that's the #1 issue in gaming today, not whether a game supports overlays. Overlay support must be only issue #3 or 4.
Can anyone clarify the situation on overlays and in particular application to hacking. And explain how externally driven overlays can be provided without also creating a doorway for hacks?The problem is that UWP won't prevent a hacker who wants to rig the game. He just has to defeat an extra layer of security and that's it. Even if that means installing a kernel mode driver that will allow access to the UWP's process address space.
However, for all legit users who need hacks for making the game playable (XBox360 Gamepad/XInput emulators, VSync fixes, framerate limiting fixes, resolution unlockers, specific-GPU bug fixes, custom antialiasing hacks, glitch fixes, Chat overlays for multiplayer games such as the one provided by Mumble and Ventrilo) can't because these users don't like messing with the OS to bypass that extra layer; and it also means pre-existing solutions will not work with new games, while cheating-hacks will because they are specifically developed for that game after the game has released.
Can anyone clarify the situation on overlays and in particular application to hacking. And explain how externally driven overlays can be provided without also creating a doorway for hacks?
It can't. There is no backdoor for only the good guys.
However UWP will fail at preventing cheating hackers, and will only annoy people wanting to hack the game for legitimate uses.
Just as an example, this hacker who fixed Arkham Knight's glide glitch would've probably not done anything if the game had been running in UWP.
..In before a new COM vulnerability/design issue come out :lol:
In my experience .. this group of people .. 'legit users who need hacks for making the game playable (XBox360 Gamepad/XInput emulators, VSync fixes, framerate limiting fixes, resolution unlockers, specific-GPU bug fixes, custom antialiasing hacks, glitch fixes, Chat overlays for multiplayer games such as the one provided by Mumble and Ventrilo)' Is a small percentage of people. I'd rather have better software security. And I'm not an advocate of 'devs might as well just give up, because hackers will bypass any measures they take.' Surely, that's only true for a diminishing percentage of hackers as stronger measure are implemented.
It's just a fact of life seen in games that increased security means less privacy and less freedom. I think that it would be nice to see developers and publishers provide more options in the compromise of security and freedom.
It would be great if players are all notified of the security measures so they can make an informed decision if they want to join a particular group of gamers playing a game or not. I was involved in a heavily modded flight simulation for several years which evolved into transparency on the security rules of the game. Different groups formed with different levels of security. Some were wide open to cheating, while others were so strict that almost no hacking worked because the server was monitoring their copy of the modded game, even making hash counts of their build.
How much 'till single hypervisored applications? is it a problem about performance (which should no more with current CPUs extension) or only software (eg: driver model)? Just asking...
How much 'till single hypervisored applications? is it a problem about performance (which should no more with current CPUs extension) or only software (eg: driver model)? Just asking...
It's an interesting consideration. There are attempts at streamed games, so basically running thin-clients and having no access to scene data (i guess). But I've used some streaming over my own home network, playing in the living room with my laptop streaming from my desktop in the office. And to be honest, I found the experience to be unsatisfactory with hiccups occasionally. Now do that over the internet, I honestly don't see it as a solution for any hardcore gamer like myself who would immediately reject any experience that had serious lag/stutter. It's only viable to serve to kids/light gamer's who don't want to spend money on great computer setups at home.
Edit: And to tie this back to the the main-thread, streamed games offer even less opportunity for modding. And yet, I only see excitement about that technology, without any concern for the issues that UWP raises. Seeing the difference in reaction makes me feel that people will attack one technology and hypocritically praise another that has similar restrictions based more upon popular mood than real consideration of the technologies themselves. Like how Quantum Break has led to a plethora of criticisms against UWP, but mostly, the criticisms should be pointed at the game studio for not fixing the game for PC. It didn't even have a quit button in the menu !! It was basically a straight console port. And the performance issues should have nothing to do with UWP, that's the developers biting off more than they can chew.
I was not talking about streaming, I meant running every single application under a hypervisor layer, like it is on XB1 in game mode. A hypervisor layer could be quite optimal solution for security and would make any annoying DRM completely useless. It also still allow an easy mod and add-on support (excluding binary alterations) and improve anti-cheat systems on online gaming. And I bet by a CPU point of view it would run faster than many current and aggressive DRMs.
Like how Quantum Break has led to a plethora of criticisms against UWP, but mostly, the criticisms should be pointed at the game studio for not fixing the game for PC. It didn't even have a quit button in the menu !! It was basically a straight console port.
That's because other games that have shipped with limitations or just broken on launch have been fixed by 3rd parties using external hacks. Which are not possible because of UWP.
And the performance issues should have nothing to do with UWP, that's the developers biting off more than they can chew.
It does when UWP forces VSync, disallows exclusive fullscreen, and prevents SLI & Crossfire (admitedly it's DX12 title so Multi-GPU is explicit there).
