Okay, first big post, first topic posted, etc etc. Woo. This is going to be fun.

Alright, so I'm Cassy, I'm sort of the "head" of an experimental dev studio currently called Grey Room Studios. (There's been talks of changing it before release to something less esoteric, but we're not sure yet if we will or what to.)

Experimental, in this case, means unique games and unique solutions to traditional "problems," gone at in the best tradition of problem solving: the scientific method. However, given that our first release is a multiplayer FPS, one problem I'm having currently is finding a half-decent anti-cheat solution that doesn't lead to heavy DRM.

Initially I was considering using Steamworks to take advantage of the bevy of cool features it has (including automatic updates, in-game DLC, etc) on top of the VAC system, but then I remembered that I've heard a lot of bile projected Steam-wards here. (Worth mentioning that I've only heard it here, would the proponents of this view say that their perspective could be considered an "extreme" one?)

But not using Steamworks is a problem. VAC prevents cheating pretty well, but the only other solution I know of, PunkBuster, is awful at such things. Extremely so, especially in my experience. Being an independent developer with a budget of 0, I doubt there are many options out there for me. And preventing cheating is integral to the way this game will work.

So that's where you guys come in. I need ideas, suggestions, discussions, anything that might help in the end. Even theoretical solutions might come in handy later on, after our first game -- but try to focus on stuff that will help now.

Thank you!

It's hard to beat VAC for anti-cheating to be honest and you are right that Punkbuster is bloody awful. Steam itself isn't the worst DRM solution out there and probably the reason many indie studios turn to it. Personally I don't have an issue with Steam as long as there isnt DRM used on top of it like Arkham Asylum's limited activation SecuROM or the layer cake Rockstar used on GTAIV. Then again I have always on access to the internet and you will find those that take issue with Steam are the ones without it or who use their laptops and have to deal with Steam's quirky offline mode.

I don't think that using SteamWorks isn't a big problem... a lot of people denying DRM do use Steam as this is a sort of DRM, that isn't as mean as others.

SteamPunk is a problem in my opinion. It is an additional installations with services running in the background. I do now have 2 games using PunkBuster and I already hate the installation process, checking my system, installing and uninstalling stuff.

For myself go for Steam, it is a really good platform with a lot of benefits and least haters.

Agreed. Steamworks is cool; automatic updates for example, would work great with a multiplayer game since it ensures that everyone has the same version. VAC is also pretty damn good as far as cheating prevention goes.

+1 for Steamworks.
While I don't adore Steam, it is not for it's DRM but for it's "Pay sum moar, European scum!" attitude (and that is for different discussion).

I don't think anyone cares about Steamworks and similar DRM on a multiplayer title. You need internet and servers to play multiplayer no matter what. I would go Steamworks, as others have said... should be free for you and consumer pleasing.

When you make a singleplayer game, THEN you need to worry about DRM.

Valve allows developers to choose regional pricing, doesn't it? So, if the OP does do Steam, at least make the pricing fair.

I don't like to be forced to use steam/steamworks if I only want to play the single player campaigns. I think that's the biggest problem for most people here - to install software and make accounts for something which they don't need.

So, if there are no other or better solutions for a multiplayer game than steamworks, go for it.

I hate to say it but Steam would appear to be the lesser of the evils (i feel dirty just saying that)

If you want a multiplayer-focused FPS, Steam might be a good solution, though truthfully I'd much rather the game be given an in-house treatment. The other solution you have to stopping cheaters is to provide support for admins. A game with a well-behaved community doesn't need an anti-hack system. From my experience with online communities, games that have smaller communities (which likely will be the case for an indie multiplayer game) with mature, self-moderated attitudes from the regulars usually will coalesce into creating a more cohesive environment for other players to get into, as well as enforcing responsibility in looking after the general state of affairs.

Though, if you don't intend to have anything related to playing offline in the game at all e.g. bots, then you might as well just go along with Steam.

Steamworks is pretty cool me thinks, but I don't think I can share your guys enthusiasm for VAC. PunkBuster is kinda cumbersome and is causing a lot of troubles with certain processes and driver modules running in the background, but VAC is not perfect either. There are still way too many cheaters on TF2 Servers for example.

As far as Steam as some form of DRM goes, I think they did a really good job there (as long as there's no 3rd party DRM involved like GFWL, SecuROM...). Some people may not like that the offline-mode is still not working properly for everyone but that's a minor problem I think.

Hell no! I've seen to many times the admins abusing their power regarding cheats and banning legitimate players, even in small games. I'd rather have a dedicated anticheat system coupled with admin options and NO general player blacklist that's generated by admin bans.

+1 for Steam here as well

Steam isn't a bad choice for what you want it for, to be honest. Yeah, Valve recommend pricing, but publishers / indies can change it if they want.

Weird; as long as the server is VAC secure and pure mode 1 is set (or a good defined pure mode 2) then you won't see cheaters. Exploits because of map issues sure, but cheats as in aim-bots or other things like that no.

Or at least that's been my experience so far (since the game launched) as both a player and server admin.

You seem to be the sort of person I want to hear more from on this point.

What would be bad about Steam in this particular case, assuming I myself don't cock up regional pricing or similar? I notice your implied opinion doesn't match up with what I've seen so far in this thread, do you think it's possible you've got an "extreme" view of the matter? Could you think of an ideal solution in this case, which still assumes that there are cheating bastards out there?

I'm interested in implementation, but I'm also interested in hearing about what could be, however unlikely it actually -is-. It lets me know what I can hope to work on in the future, with more people, more money and more knowledge.

Anyone else can answer the above questions too, if they think they have something to say.