Gatekeeping in cheating

[Monkey]

Personally I'm a big fan of invite only services. What are your thoughts?

Lowers the chance of users getting fucked over, that's for sure.

[YKJosh]

On 11/14/2021 at 5:05 PM, Monkey said:

Personally I'm a big fan of invite only services. What are your thoughts?

Lowers the chance of users getting fucked over, that's for sure.

Your damn right, the tarkov one speaks for itself

[YKJosh]

You're**

 

[billybishop]

I think it's a wise strategy, helps prevent the AC developers from getting their hands on the methods (barring leaks in the cheating community of course). Also prevents the games from being overrun with cheaters to the point that it ruins the fun of playing the game. When approached professionally by teams such as Elusion, and with novel methods, I think it's healthier for the game overall than if it wasn't invite-only.

On another note, there is something to be said about this reduced scale of cheating though, I think cheating online games should more so be used as an accessibility feature than as a straight-up rage hack, I've never found rage hacking to be fun. As I'm getting older and more and more young players are entering the online games it makes it difficult for me to compete on a level playing field, due to lack of time that I can invest in 'getting good' or simply my reaction time being not what it used to be. I try to use cheats as a way to level that playing field, like a subtle aim assist and chams (or visible-only esp/radar) is my preferred level of accessibility. It makes it so I can relax and enjoy the game for what it is without worrying about sweating over winning or losing.

[ken_kenif]

imho I can agree with billybishop. On the other hand, it would be probably enough to regulate with pricing. But I can understand the reasons for invites. 

[breakfiree]

All about safety.

I prefer to gatekeep for sure and lock the communities. 

Makes me feel safe when I boot the cheese . If I rage or something, that is on me. If I play smart, there is a very low chance to get banned with invite only hacks. 

100 % invite communities

[glokk23]

In my opinion it depends which side of the invite only status your on, some do applications for users instead of just invites which i think is much better than having 20 people get in and giving out invites to them in waves like gamesneeze does. And invite only cheats almost cause an arrogance of the users who have them. Applications in my experience have been the best middle ground.

[Dreamer]

I think it's good 

[apoch12]

It's real clever to ask for ID verification, usually the steps needed to be able to have a proper ID to show, along with verification of your username etc show some responsibility. When I first saw it I was all for it

[nevermorecities]

I love the idea of having an exclusive community that is trustworthy, reliable, and consistent. I agree with breakfiree -- there is comfort in knowing that responsible use of cheese is safe and pretty much undetectable. I don't plan on raging at all. I enjoy using soft features just to give me a bit of an edge when I play 🙂

[TarkyGamer]

I love every aspect of the private community, it gives you a sense of comfort knowing that you have the best possible chances of going undetected and enjoying the benefits you get. 

[TheFugspect]

On 7/6/2022 at 4:45 AM, nevermorecities said:

I love the idea of having an exclusive community that is trustworthy, reliable, and consistent. I agree with breakfiree -- there is comfort in knowing that responsible use of cheese is safe and pretty much undetectable. I don't plan on raging at all. I enjoy using soft features just to give me a bit of an edge when I play 🙂

I agree 100 percent with the chair being private it helps with a sense of security for sure.

[ThatGuy415]

For games that used BE and EAC a private community is a must, the sense that your in a close group community is assuring you get the best possibly security