Worth noting: Valve’s own first party tournaments for their own game require kernel level anti-cheat (from a third party vendor). Valve themselves have given up on allowing players in their own title play competitively in a Valve sponsored event with a kernel level anti-cheat. I can’t imagine they’d ever be this brash.
There is no adapting without a proper solution for securing game integrity.
The reason third-party anti-cheats are commonplace at these events is because most tournaments opt to use Faceit or similar for game scheduling. This was the case before VRS (with RMRs) and the TO could choose an anti-cheat of their choosing. This always ended up being Faceit AC or whatever platform the matches are scheduled via (For example, PGL used Challenger Mode, which used Akros Anti-Cheat). ESL of course uses Faceit because (ESL Faceit Group).
You do not understand how Majors are run. It is very hands off from Valve. Only recently, with the introduction of VRS has Valve started controlling and implementing dedicated rules into the ecosystem for TOs.
> The reason third-party anti-cheats are commonplace at these events is because most tournaments opt to use Faceit or similar for game scheduling. This was the case before VRS (with RMRs) and the TO could choose an anti-cheat of their choosing. This always ended up being Faceit AC or whatever platform the matches are scheduled via (For example, PGL used Challenger Mode, which used Akros Anti-Cheat). ESL of course uses Faceit because (ESL Faceit Group).
No it isn't. They're not using it by happenstance, because it is a feature of the platform, they're using it because it would not be competitively viable without it. PGL caught major flak for using Akros [0] because the tool was not good enough at the time to handle a Major qualifier. Just because something is not specified in the rulebook does not mean it is not de facto. Not a single Valve-sponsored major has ever lacked a third-party kernel anti-cheats, from the qualifiers (when they existed), to the VRS eligible events.
Yes, I am simplifying for the audience by calling them first-party. They're technically all contracted events on a tender process [1] (well, even TI is contracted out to PGL as of late).
The point still stands: events on Counter-Strike, with sponsored by Valve and with tight in-game integrations in the form of stickers, blog posts[2], and other advertisements, all rely critically on kernel-level anti-cheat for game integrity purposes.
Or to put it more succinctly: there is no viable pathway for a player to get their autograph into Counter-Strike 2 playing on Linux.
There is no adapting without a proper solution for securing game integrity.