/CS2 Has a Legal Cheating Problem

Professional Counter-Strike is a game that comes down to differences in perfected muscle-memory, millisecond plays, and thousands of hours of practice. Recently, companies like Razer and Wooting have developed keyboards that arguably break the game at all levels. Counter-strafing is a core mechanic of the game, and Razer’s Snap Tap and Wooting’s new Simultaneous Opposing Cardinal Directions (SOCD) effectively guarantee the player perfect counter-strafes every time. Even though these features are fairly new, they have already infiltrated the professional scene. I think it's clear that this hardware does not have a place in Counter-Strike whatsoever, but it's up to Valve to take action.

Counter-strafing is a critical skill in Counter-Strike, allowing players to stop their movement accurately to improve their shooting accuracy. It requires precise timing and refined muscle memory, developed through countless hours of practice. The new features introduced by Razer and Wooting automate this process, eliminating the skill gap and giving users an unfair advantage.

The introduction of these features into the professional scene is particularly alarming. According to this article, it is entirely possible to detect this kind of assistance through demo parsing. They were able to show that 8 players in the recent Esports World Cup tournament were using these features beyond a reasonable doubt.¹

What is even more concerning is the rapid adoption of these features by other keyboard manufacturers. After Razer introduced Snap Tap, Wooting followed suit with SOCD, and now Steelseries is considering implementing similar features. If this trend continues, it could become a standard across all competitive play, further eroding the skill-based nature of the game.

A point of contention is that similar assistance can be achieved in-game through the use of null-binds. However, null-binds have been banned in professional leagues:

Null binds are no longer allowed in ESEA matches. - FACEIT Darwin

This creates an inconsistency where the software-based assistance is prohibited, but the hardware-based assistance is allowed. This discrepancy is setting a dangerous precedent. How can we ensure fair play if one form of cheating is banned while another is permitted simply because it is embedded in the hardware?

Personally, I would be tempted to try out the Wooting keyboard if I didn't love my personal keyboard so much. But I feel like I wouldn't like the feel of their switches as much as my Zealios V2s. It's worth noting that I already use a customized jump bind that some might consider controversial. De-sub-ticking your +jump bind in game makes hitting bunny-hops substantially easier.

bind "mwheeldown" ";+jump;-jump"

This de-sub-ticked bind makes bunny-hopping substantially easier. While not as impactful as perfect counter-strafing, it does provide an advantage. Tournament organizers are grappling with how to address this issue. ESL has banned de-sub-ticked movement binds when created with alias, but the status of hardware-based assistance remains unclear. This approach to rule-making creates a confusing landscape where players constantly toe the line between what's allowed and what's banned.

Valve needs to take immediate action to address this issue properly. They must either ban both the hardware and the binds or neither. Allowing one while banning the other creates an uneven playing field and undermines the competitive integrity of the game. Whatever the decision, it needs to be consistent and clearly communicated.