Here’s the thing, though: nobody likes to win all the time. Winning isn’t fun if you never lose, or if you can’t lose. Eventually it just becomes like intellectual masturbation, and you get bored and stop playing. If you can’t fail, where’s the joy in succeeding?
I’ll admit first and foremost that I have cheated in the past, while I was younger. When Diablo first came out, I discovered the trainer that could instantly make my character super strong, and give it weapons with whatever stats I could want. That pretty much killed the fun out of it after 10 minutes, and I stopped playing the game.
However, sometimes, after beating a game legitimately, I find it’s very fun to squeeze that last bit of enjoyment out of the game by cheating against the computer.
Take Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, for example. I beat the entire game to completion twice, and when you go back to boot up the game once more for kicks, there’s a certain thrill in seeing how much of a ruckus you can cause before the cops take you down.
However, this is all single-player cheating, and I would never cheat online because I know there are humans on the other side.
I still play CS 1.6, and I paid my $10 for it. I wouldn’t dare cheat because Valve is one company that takes their cheaters seriously. I’m sure they made lots of little kids cry by banning them for 5 years from EVERY server that went through WON or Valve.
But to re-iterate, I derive no enjoyment from cheating the moment a game is installed on my computer. That’s not the point of paying my hard-earned money for it. I don’t think it’ll ever be possible for me to understand the mindset of some of these cheaters.
===
What’s even more depressing is how games are designed these days. Back in the day, games were a challenge at the moderate and hard levels. You could legitimately die, and you’d have to start all over from the beginning. Kids these days stop playing a game the moment they feel the pangs of failure, and that, I believe, is why game developers make games “easier”.
Heck, one level of COD4 is entirely devoted to you firing high-caliber explosive weaponry at insurgents from 50,000 feet in the air. You can’t get shot, but you can destroy entire buildings with a click of the mouse.
Fun? Yes. Challenging? Hardly.
But that’s not a win. You didn’t win anything, you just skipped to the end. Where’s the accomplishment? Can this person claim they beat the game? Not to anyone who actually beat it.
As I’ve already said, this is fine, I do it sometimes too. But have you ever sat down at GTA and typed in the ‘you win’ code right off the bat? How about over and over over? That is what disturbs me. That is what I don’t understand.
I do. Of course, I see computer games as a form of electronic sandpit rather than If I can’t (ostensibly) win, then I’m not interested. That doesn’t mean I want to skip the game and go straight to “You Win!” every time, but sometimes it is nice- and, dare I say it, fun- to completely and utterly obliterate your AI opponent with Atomic Fire in 1287 AD.
Look, I’ve got enough of a "Challenge"in the real world (what with being a Masters student and everything). I play computer games to take over the world, blow stuff up, fly old aeroplanes, explore sunken cities, destablise African countries, or do any one of a million things that I could never hope to do in Real Life.
Which means that I play games for the experience of the game, not the challenge. I love games like Bioshock, Fallout (all of them), Oblivion, Civilisation/Colonisation/Alpha Centauri, the Total War series, and City-Building games. It’s unlikely I’m going to “lose” those games, thus meaning that I know I’m going to win, leaving me free to explore the game and enjoy the world that has been created within it.
Online, it’s an entirely different kettle of fish- the idea is to pit your skills against other players. But Single-Player? That’s all about my enjoyment, and I enjoy knowing I’m going to win- to win games I’ve paid good money for, I might add.
That’s my point. Sometimes you want to do that, but it gets old.
And I think in that case you’re neither winning nor losing, you’re simply playing the game the way it was designed to be played. From what I’ve read, all of those games are somewhat sandbox; you have certain objectives, but you can accomplish them however like, at whatever speed you like. it’s certainly not as if you entered cheat codes to make yourself invincible.
It’s not even cheaters that annoy me most, but people who behave like … this is the pit right? …Assholes in general. Playing CSS online has become a joke. Usually one team wins by a great margin, and half of the players who died join the winning team. The teambalacer shuffles some back, and so it goes every. Single. Round. This game could be really fun if 90% of the players were not bloody idiots.
The other thing are blatant aimbotters/cheaters in general. One guy spent hours on a server (I left, but checked out of couriosity later with the server browser) with an aimbot. Obliterated every enemy he saw a single pixel of. Why do people do that? These guys must be psychopaths or something.
I’m guessing he gets a sense of accomplishment out of it, if anything. He most likely justifies it somehow to himself. Perhaps he believes everyone else is ganging up on him, or some such.
He masturbates bitterly to images of women he will never have. Thus, he must kill you.
I disagree with this. It’s one thing when Galaga is hard and you had to start over, because all it has is points. Games today are less about getting the high score on King Kong, and more about going through a story that you get to be part of. These things are fun. Getting killed by a boss’ unblockable attacks and having to start over after 3 hours of gameplay? Not. There’s plenty of room for having an easy mode.
On the other hand, if you find challenge entertaining, it’s certainly easy to find. Heck, one level of COD4 is devoted to running through a plane packed with terrorists who kill you with 2 shots and you have to kill them all in less than one minute. Or this.
There is - work with people who will keep you safe. Every single interaction in that game is player against player, so I don’t see why human/human violence is especially bad, what with it being a prime theme in zombie movies, and one that the creator specifically never wanted to discourage (other than .5 XP). A zombie or two can do just as much damage as somebody going in guns blazing, and the encumbrance change dropped the damage possible/day down a whole lot.
PKers spend a whole lot of time dead, and getting revives is pretty difficult. I am relatively inactive in the game because of boredom, but my character with RedRum was the most fun. It’s harder, what with being listed as Kill On Sight for plenty of humans, all the zombies, and getting only random syringes. Playing a normal human or zombie is fun, but that one is different and good.
Because a human does more damage per AP, and can search multiple buildings far faster than a zombie. That means you go from perfectly healthy to dead without any opportunity to react.
My heart goes out to you.
Exactly – it’s more like saying you win than actually doing so.
I’m inclined to think it was like watching a movie – just skipping to the “everything blows up” scene for jollies – but the relentless repetition of it was creepily OCD, and the fact that the kid declined to play with people or to play the game differently, even once, just for a change of pace, was even creepier.
Just <setup> <cheatcode> <boom> and a hollow “ha ha!” or silence from the kid, over and over again.
Interesting point–I use quest-helpers fairly frequently for map references, since in WoW and (especially) in FFXI you can run into situations where you’d flail randomly without some guidance.
On the other hand, riffing on the “you’re participating in the story” thing, I don’t understand people who (like my wife, sometimes) use quest helpers AND skip all the story development, text, and cutscenes.
As for cheating in online games, burn 'em all. The only possible enjoyment I get out of aimbotters, for example, is when trying to figure out how to whack them without them seeing me and getting the shot off. But then again, I’m not playing to “win”, I’m playing to have fun and ideally get a good team dynamic going.
There’s a gray area as to what constitutes “exploits”, but in the BF2 tank armor case, pulling off a shot to that particular panel:
A. still requires a lot of extra skill and/or risk to get right
B. doesn’t rely on any other outside resource other than knowledge of the game.
This sets it apart from other flagrant game exploits (hypothetical example: the developers code was inadvertently set up in such a way that holding down the “B” key while firing a rocket causes it to do quadruple damage against tanks) that don’t require any real skill to perform.
The vast majority of the time, they aren’t cheating; you just suck.
Cry more, carebears.
:rolleyes: The vast majority of the time, you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about, apparently. To prove your point, all you have to do is find one instance where I called someone a cheater, but they weren’t cheating.
Actually, Tubes has to find that most of the instances in which you called someone a cheater were uncalled for to prove his point.
Funnily enough, that’s pretty much exactly what most of the people found to be cheating on a BF1942 server I used to frequent said, right before the Sysops booted them for… you guessed it, cheating.
There are some people that are insanely good at these games, but almost anyone who spends any length of time playing online rapidly learns to differentiate between people who are just really, really good and people who are cheating.
People who are really, really good are not invulnerable to in-game small arms fire administered at point-blank range by other players with single-digit pings, for example.
Side switching was REALLY REALLY bad on Battlefield 2 before they nerfed the War College Ribbon. It originally required a 2-to-1 W/L ratio so people were either team switching or logging out at the tail end of every single game.
War ribbons period is a recipe for douchebaggery. People logging on to jump into an anti-aircraft gun just to sit there so they can get their “Spend 5 hours in Anti-Aircraft Gun” medal. :rolleyes:
Perhaps you should join me in EVE Online so I can teach you the actual definition of “carebear”. With high-caliber autocannons. =P
I mean, please, we’re not talking about guys making a through-a-wall hit once in a while, or who’re good at finding a spot and holding it, we’re talking about people making beyond-visual-range shots and being invulnerable and the like.