Per wrote:So let's say we add such a ridiculous anti-cheat measure, and the next day someone releases a modified copy of the latest release with cheats built-in for everyone to download.
The end result? Wasted time, added bugs, more complicated codebase, and just as much cheating as before.
Let's also say tomorrow the sun explodes.
What I'm trying to illustrate here is that "let's say" is rather useless unless you have reason to believe such a scenario is actually likely.
Implicit in your "let's say" are two assumptions:
1. Someone will publicly release a modified copy of the latest release with built-in cheats.
2. Nearly everyone who currently cheats will download this modified copy.
I believe the first assumption is relatively unlikely, but for the purposes of this discussion, let's assume it does happen.
Your number two assumption is false. This is why software has DRM at all. Even if it's broken, the DRM still stops a significant portion of pirates (the lazy portion).
More importantly, the barrier to entry is much higher.
Currently, the barrier to entry is: Anyone who has cheat engine software, and knows how to use it. This is can be done without ever searching for Warzone cheats, or understanding C, or being able to compile a program. Or: anyone who looks for instructions for using cheat engine software.
The new barrier to entry is: Anyone who knows how to both write C and compile software, or how to find a pre-built cheating version of it. This is a significantly increased barrier to entry.