Aller au contenu

Photo

The "is it cheating or not" thread


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
244 réponses à ce sujet

#51
Gregor Wyrmbane

Gregor Wyrmbane
  • Members
  • 191 messages

CBrachyrhynchos wrote...

Gregor Wyrmbane wrote...

How do you know what the designers intended?


Sure we do. Because in this case, the designers of the ruleset were prolific publishers of printed material, with over a dozen bound monographs and two monthly periodicals (at least in English) for 3e alone on issues of how to balance fun and chalenge. There's more if you consider 1e and other tabletop games as informing the whole CRPG genre. Certainly there's a lot of flexbility in those rules, but basic principles like scaling XP and treasure rewards to effective hit dice and balancing classes like the monk by limiting weapon and armor choices are all there. Munchkins, Mary Sues, and your wonderful reinvention of Elric complete with a godlike Stormbringer need not apply.

Meanwhile, it's not as if the challenges of NWN are especially difficult, not with an abundance of scrolls, books, mysterious carvings, and helpful NPCs who practically tell you how to do it.


I'm reading a lot of assumption and personal opinion in your response, but not a single bit of proof. If you know of any published statement by the people who designed NWN where they specifically stated they never intended for anyone to use their "cheat codes" in SP, or that they consider anyone who does a "cheater", then please post the quote or provide a link. If such doesn't exist, then one can "logically" assume that they consider using the "cheat codes" in SP as playing within the constraints of the game. If that is the case, then my ASSUMPTION is this whole "cheating in SP" issue is something that has been fabricated by a few arrogant elitists who think everyone should be playing the game their way, and anyone who doesn't is somehow morally inferior. Thus their need to label them as "cheaters".

#52
muvs32

muvs32
  • Members
  • 21 messages
Reading through some, maybe most...but certainly not all of this thread has reminded me of a constitutional law class I had once.

If the Constitution, (exchange for game manual ext.) does not at least implicitly (open to argument there too though) cover a given rule or law, it may not make an given act outside of it legal but it does not necessarily, nor even probably or likely in many instances make the act in question illegal.

For a moment there I thought about changing the whole way I live my life....

But then again I thought, I'm just too lazy to go and change now :(

Thank all for a most entertaining thread, even if much ado' about nothing!

#53
CBrachyrhynchos

CBrachyrhynchos
  • Members
  • 21 messages

Elhanan wrote...

Then explain perm Haste, Harm, Heal, House rules, and any rule fix in 3.5E. If you speak of Bioware, explain rule fixes in patches; things often fixed first by Techies & Toolsets with feet on the ground.


It's almost always the case that rule changes and house rules are done with an eye for game balance and playability. Chosing, for example, to adopt a rule that 0hp means the character is unconsious rather than dead to avoid the messy logistics of hauling the body back to a temple, bribing a priest, and making a sales pitch to the gods is a very different thing from maxing out character gold at level 1 or giving a character a kama +7 in a campaign balanced around +3 weapons.

#54
Guest_Lowlander_*

Guest_Lowlander_*
  • Guests

Gregor Wyrmbane wrote...

I'm reading a lot of assumption and personal opinion in your response, but not a single bit of proof. If you know of any published statement by the people who designed NWN where they specifically stated they never intended for anyone to use their "cheat codes" in SP, or that they consider anyone who does a "cheater", then please post the quote or provide a link. If such doesn't exist, then one can "logically" assume that they consider using the "cheat codes" in SP as playing within the constraints of the game. If that is the case, then my ASSUMPTION is this whole "cheating in SP" issue is something that has been fabricated by a few arrogant elitists who think everyone should be playing the game their way, and anyone who doesn't is somehow morally inferior. Thus their need to label them as "cheaters".


It is a very reasonable assumption that the game was intended to be played without any use of the cheat codes.

The game arrived with 200 page manual about all of it's features.

There is ZERO documentation of the cheat codes in the manual.

If it was intended to played with cheat codes, they would be documented in the instruction manual.

Why are you even on this track? Is this a break from the other cheating rationalizers? Do you actually care how it was intended to be played?  It doesn't seem like the "Single player cheating is impossible" group thinks that designer intent has any effect on the existence of cheating at all.

Modifié par Lowlander, 06 mai 2011 - 04:06 .


#55
Gregor Wyrmbane

Gregor Wyrmbane
  • Members
  • 191 messages

Lowlander wrote...

It is a very reasonable assumption that the game was meant to be played without any use of the cheat codes.

The game arrived with 200 page manual about all of it's features.

There is ZERO documentation of the cheat codes in the manual.

If it was intended to played with cheat codes, they would be documented in the instruction manual.

Why are you even on this track? Is this a break from the other cheating rationalizers? Do you actually care how it was intended to be played?  It doesn't seem like the "Single player cheating is impossible" group thinks that designer intent has any effect on the existence of cheating at all.


Your ability to tap dance is dazzling, and your attempts at misdirection noteworthy, but you still haven't answered my question to you, or provided any documentation that the people who designed NWN consider using the "cheat codes" in SP as cheating. Your personal opinion that it is, doesn't make it so.

If you can do that, then perhaps I'll answer your questions about why I'm on this track, and whether or not I care how the game was "intended" to be played. Not that I believe you really want to know.

#56
CBrachyrhynchos

CBrachyrhynchos
  • Members
  • 21 messages

Gregor Wyrmbane wrote...

I'm reading a lot of assumption and personal opinion in your response, but not a single bit of proof. If you know of any published statement by the people who designed NWN where they specifically stated they never intended for anyone to use their "cheat codes" in SP, or that they consider anyone who does a "cheater", then please post the quote or provide a link.


Sure, Gygax and Suthernland (1979), Advanced Dungeons & Dragons: Dungeon Master's Guide is a good start.

If such doesn't exist, then one can "logically" assume that they consider using the "cheat codes" in SP as playing within the constraints of the game.


There are certainly some games where that's the case. I don't think this applies to the NWN official modules where console codes are convenience functions for DMs and module designers, and perfectly viable methods for solving every challenge are provided via object scripts, triggered events, and character abilities via the radial menu.

Sure, I can cheat at chess puzzles and solitaire. There's no harm in doing so, but I can't then pretend I'm following the rules of the games as described by the ICC and Hoyle. Likewise, if I'm spawning unlimited gold and extremely rare high-level equipment directly into my character's inventory, I can't pretend that I'm playing D&D.

There is another aspect at work here which is that we can't praise or criticize the designer's ability to design a game if we can overwrite every design decision he or she makes. If a cheat code is absolutely necessary to solve a particular problem, then the designer has failed in his or her design and testing. A great example of this is Sims2 in which every expansion pack was loaded with game-stopping bugs and cheat codes were sometimes necessary to deal with stuck items or sims that would run off and die off-screen.

If that is the case, then my ASSUMPTION is this whole "cheating in SP" issue is something that has been fabricated by a few arrogant elitists who think everyone should be playing the game their way, and anyone who doesn't is somehow morally inferior. Thus their need to label them as "cheaters".


As I've said clearly multiple times in this thread, there's nothing morally wrong with cheating in SP, and I liberally do it. The difference here is that I acknowledge that I'm breaking the rules of the game in doing so for my convenience.

Modifié par CBrachyrhynchos, 06 mai 2011 - 04:15 .


#57
Guest_Lowlander_*

Guest_Lowlander_*
  • Guests

Gregor Wyrmbane wrote...

Your ability to tap dance is dazzling, and your attempts at misdirection noteworthy, but you still haven't answered my question to you, or provided any documentation that the people who designed NWN consider using the "cheat codes" in SP as cheating. Your personal opinion that it is, doesn't make it so.

If you can do that, then perhaps I'll answer your questions about why I'm on this track, and whether or not I care how the game was "intended" to be played. Not that I believe you really want to know.


I was addressing how the game was intended to be played by the designers. Given that no knowledge of the cheat codes shipped with the game, it is only obvious that there was no intention that they be used to play the game. The designers don't need to publish statements indicatiing the obvious.

If you think otherwise the burden of proof is on you you establish it.

As to if I really want to know where you stand on designer intent, it is because I suspect this line of questioning from you is entirely facetious.

If there were no cheat codes at all and you had to use a third party hack to cheat, I suspect you still wouldn't consider it cheating. Therefore designer intent doesn't enter into wether you consider it cheating at all. So you are involved in line of quesitoning that has nothing to do with your values on this subject. 

Modifié par Lowlander, 06 mai 2011 - 04:29 .


#58
CBrachyrhynchos

CBrachyrhynchos
  • Members
  • 21 messages
And if people are free to choose the rules they want, it's a self-defeating argument because people can choose to play according to the rules provided by the modules. In fact, it seems that most people would prefer to play that way given the large number of questions along the lines of "How do I defeat ___ with a ___?"

But as I've said above, I cheat all the time on SP games and puzzles. Metagaming the heck out an problem and moving on is a better solution than throwing a tantrum and giving up entirely.

Modifié par CBrachyrhynchos, 06 mai 2011 - 04:33 .


#59
Elhanan

Elhanan
  • Members
  • 18 344 messages

CBrachyrhynchos wrote...

It's almost always the case that rule changes and house rules are done with an eye for game balance and playability. Chosing, for example, to adopt a rule that 0hp means the character is unconsious rather than dead to avoid the messy logistics of hauling the body back to a temple, bribing a priest, and making a sales pitch to the gods is a very different thing from maxing out character gold at level 1 or giving a character a kama +7 in a campaign balanced around +3 weapons.


I disagree, but will put that aside a moment.

Harm allows anyone with access to drop Dragons quickly, among other abuses; truly doubt this was intended. The 3E Ranger was so weak and under-fed that Bioware buffed it up considerably before placing the class into NWN1, all while being told not to fix Harm. Etc.

As far as cheating in a solo game, I am more on the side of those that say it cannot be done. However, I contend that one may cheat themselves thro violation of their own self-imposed restrictins; hence the phrase "Don't spoil it">

Maxing out gold does not violate my own rules, therefore I am not cheating myself. If I spend that gold and aquire a +7 kama, then I might/ would.depending on the setting.

#60
Shia Luck

Shia Luck
  • Members
  • 953 messages

Lowlander wrote...

Edit: You asked for a quote to reference what I am paraphrasing, it
isn't worth bumping the thread for it, but here is a section from your
first post as reference:


Well at least I got an answer for once. Nice to know "it isn't worth bumping the thread" to answer my question, but I guess I should be happy you deigned to acknowledge my existence. Now try replying to one of the arguments I make cause all you have done so far is keep changing the reason why you think you are justified to feel this way as I prove each one unjustified or not logical.

Lowlander wrote...

Shia Luck wrote...

I think it is rather rude of you to completely ignore my first post in this thread in which I detail the logic of that argument. kail has also explained it.


How did I ignore it? I paraphrased exactly what is in your first post of this thread. You are relying on the definition of the word "cheat" from the dictionary and stating that according to other uses of cheat, there must be a wronged party. 


Actually you didn't, you said it was wrong for my definition to rely on multiple people. But I can answer this one too if you like.

If there is no wronged party.... why does it make you feel sick? You have claimed that you are wronged by someone else cheating in an SP game. It's the only thing you have been consistent about.

The orginal one with your own bold type is...

Lowlander wrote...
My original paraphrase:

Lowlander wrote...
Because from my perspective all I have
seen so far, is a reliance on a narrow interpretation of the word, that
defines it to only have meaning when more than one person is involved.

That isn't a logical argument, it is simply an attempt to use a limited definition and ignore that for decades in the context of computer gaming, the word "cheat" has no such limitation.


You are claiming that someone else performing SP cheating injurs you. Therefore more than one person is involved. This is not exactly difficult logic.

Lowlander wrote...
I don't care if the word is cheat or smurf or whatever.  But "cheat"
happens to be the one in common usage for this activity.  You aren't
going to succeed in changing the vocabulary around this and even if you
did, it would change nothing.


I don't care what word you use. I do care which meaning. Cheat has multiple meanings. When used about SP computer games the meaning is very different to it's other meanings. For example, we say the sun comes up and flowers come up. You are trying to argue that because of the language use, the sun literally comes UP. Why can't you admit how ridiculous this is?

You also claim SP cheating is the same as MP cheating or cheating in an exam.

Lowlander wrote...
 It is promoting the activity that I dislike, changing the term used for it, would change nothing. 


Yes, it is simply that you dislike it even tho you have no justification. So you attempt to equate cheating in SP computer games with cheating in an exam to give yourself cause to denigrate and belittle other people. For example:

Lowlander wrote...

I shouldn't be surprised in this
shortcut, instant gratifications, cheating is OK if you don't get
caught, society that so many just use cheat codes to pimp their
characters rather than deal with the constraints of the game. But this
Attitude makes me sick.  [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/sick.png[/smilie]

... Heck these days people are more proud
of themselves when the get good results from academic cheating:

http://www.cheatingc...mic-dishonesty/


Lowlander wrote...
If you are upset that I hold some level of disdain for the activity being promoted, and speak my mind on it,  you are free to ignore me.


I am also free to consistently prove you have no grounds for your arrogant moral posturing. I like philosophy so it's no trouble to keep doing it. It's remarkably easy to do with your inconsistent and self contradictory arguments. At some point you will run out of these poorly thought out reasons. Until then, I'll be here.

have fun :)

(btw can we do the I-play-on-hardcore-and-you-play-on-normal-so-I-am-better-than-you argument next? Cos it has as much validity. *laughing*)

Modifié par Shia Luck, 06 mai 2011 - 06:27 .


#61
Guest_Lowlander_*

Guest_Lowlander_*
  • Guests

Shia Luck wrote...
I don't care what word you use. I do care which meaning. Cheat has multiple meanings. When used about SP computer games the meaning is very different to it's other meanings.


We agree up to this point. Cheat has a different meaning in computer games vs sexual infidelity, or misrepresentations on your taxes. Obviously. 

I never said they were the same thing and I have always indicated that in the context of computer games it  doesn't have the same meaning, nor does it have to.

The bizarre rhetoric that since in other contexts cheat has a different meaning than the usage in the context of computer gaming, then somehow, it is inappropriate to use the word cheat when referring to single player computer games is complete nonsense.

There are no rules in English that indicate a word must have the same meaning in multiple contexts, much to the contrary, almost the entire vocabulary of english is very context sensitive.

It is IMO downright silly to argue that people can't use the common term for cheating in single player games, just like they have for decades on the basis of a complete nonsense argument.

There never should have been an argument over terminology.  The reasonable answer if you take umbrage with my complaint, should have been: "so what, single player cheating doesn't affect you, or others etc..."

Not sophomoric arguments about why it is "impossible" for cheating to exist in SP computer games.

Cheating in the context of single player computer games has existed as long as there have been single player computer games and it was pretty much always called that and the terminology will likely outlive us.

Modifié par Lowlander, 06 mai 2011 - 07:12 .


#62
Shadooow

Shadooow
  • Members
  • 4 465 messages

Elhanan wrote...

Maxing out gold does not violate my own rules, therefore I am not cheating myself. If I spend that gold and aquire a +7 kama, then I might/ would.depending on the setting.

There is so many opinion now and there is somethin I can agree and disagree with in every one. But I will choose this:

This is it. You may not think its not cheating by your own rules, but from my view and my rules it is. I dont think that taking advantage of something thats not intended is not cheating only because you yourself claimed you can do that. Generaly either spawning gold on game start is cheating or its metagaming or its fine. Im more inclined to cheating.

Hmmm, just realised something. I understand thats isnt not that simple. I remeber similoar issue as I was at the beginning of Diablo2 modding and those peoples around called us cheaters. But while some of these mods were definitely cheats (drop mod) that you could use for trading between other peoples, others was rather new campaigns or challenges...

Also this "Closed Single Player Game" is interesting. I am able to admit that if you make a guild where you will want to play different modules from vault with special rules, and those rules will allow spawning gold, in order to compare with other players, it wont be cheating. Its "closed" really. But for me I dont think a single player can be considered as closed, probably at all or maybe only if you make these rules before you play it and not before you make a decision you will use this and that cheat.

All and all very hard issue I guess :innocent:

#63
Gregor Wyrmbane

Gregor Wyrmbane
  • Members
  • 191 messages

Lowlander wrote...

Gregor Wyrmbane wrote...

Your ability to tap dance is dazzling, and your attempts at misdirection noteworthy, but you still haven't answered my question to you, or provided any documentation that the people who designed NWN consider using the "cheat codes" in SP as cheating. Your personal opinion that it is, doesn't make it so.

If you can do that, then perhaps I'll answer your questions about why I'm on this track, and whether or not I care how the game was "intended" to be played. Not that I believe you really want to know.


I was addressing how the game was intended to be played by the designers. Given that no knowledge of the cheat codes shipped with the game, it is only obvious that there was no intention that they be used to play the game. The designers don't need to publish statements indicatiing the obvious.

If you think otherwise the burden of proof is on you you establish it.

As to if I really want to know where you stand on designer intent, it is because I suspect this line of questioning from you is entirely facetious.

If there were no cheat codes at all and you had to use a third party hack to cheat, I suspect you still wouldn't consider it cheating. Therefore designer intent doesn't enter into wether you consider it cheating at all. So you are involved in line of quesitoning that has nothing to do with your values on this subject. 


Again, nothing more than personal opinions and a lot of side stepping on your part. And you're wrong on all counts.

You claim it's obvious they didn't intend for people to play the game with "cheat codes" because they didn't include any documentation about them in the manual. Then why did they include a tool set with the game, and encourage everyone to make their own modules and/or modify the OC any way they want? I believe the obvious answer to that question is, because they intended for everyone to play the game any way they choose, and not just the way you think it should be played. 

#64
Shadooow

Shadooow
  • Members
  • 4 465 messages

Gregor Wyrmbane wrote...

Lowlander wrote...

Gregor Wyrmbane wrote...

Your ability to tap dance is dazzling, and your attempts at misdirection noteworthy, but you still haven't answered my question to you, or provided any documentation that the people who designed NWN consider using the "cheat codes" in SP as cheating. Your personal opinion that it is, doesn't make it so.

If you can do that, then perhaps I'll answer your questions about why I'm on this track, and whether or not I care how the game was "intended" to be played. Not that I believe you really want to know.


I was addressing how the game was intended to be played by the designers. Given that no knowledge of the cheat codes shipped with the game, it is only obvious that there was no intention that they be used to play the game. The designers don't need to publish statements indicatiing the obvious.

If you think otherwise the burden of proof is on you you establish it.

As to if I really want to know where you stand on designer intent, it is because I suspect this line of questioning from you is entirely facetious.

If there were no cheat codes at all and you had to use a third party hack to cheat, I suspect you still wouldn't consider it cheating. Therefore designer intent doesn't enter into wether you consider it cheating at all. So you are involved in line of quesitoning that has nothing to do with your values on this subject. 


Again, nothing more than personal opinions and a lot of side stepping on your part. And you're wrong on all counts.

You claim it's obvious they didn't intend for people to play the game with "cheat codes" because they didn't include any documentation about them in the manual. Then why did they include a tool set with the game, and encourage everyone to make their own modules and/or modify the OC any way they want? I believe the obvious answer to that question is, because they intended for everyone to play the game any way they choose, and not just the way you think it should be played. 

What has toolset and making your own module/possibly OC modification do with the cheating question?

And I didnt noticed that anyone in this thread claimed you cant cheat. If you want do it, no problem.

#65
Elhanan

Elhanan
  • Members
  • 18 344 messages
Would everyone feel better if one made a mod with the toolkit adding more items? Or adding a shopping mod that was encountered between Chapters? Same difference, IMO.

Where I differ is that I believe it is possible to cheat one's self by spoiling the game and pleasure of playing it. Personally, I get no pleasure of dragging loot to and from areas and comparing prices repeatedly, so I give myself gold. Mods being exceptions, in the Official games, this is most often done after my first completed game, as I do want to see what was offered.

Now some would hold that this is cheating, and maybe in their own game and rules, it would be for them. But in a solo game under my own control, I set the rules. I just happen to believe that it is possible for one to lose control, break those rules, and spoil the experience for themselves. Some may hold that this is extending the former boundaries; I do not, and call it cheating.

#66
Shadooow

Shadooow
  • Members
  • 4 465 messages

Elhanan wrote...

Now some would hold that this is cheating, and maybe in their own game and rules, it would be for them. But in a solo game under my own control, I set the rules. I just happen to believe that it is possible for one to lose control, break those rules, and spoil the experience for themselves. Some may hold that this is extending the former boundaries; I do not, and call it cheating.

Ok which is what I dont agree with :). Why the same thing should be something else only  because you yourself says that? Thats the way how childrens think, "if I can't see nobody, nobody can't see me", the same thing.

I don't think that there must be someone cheated in order to cheat. There wasn't in older games - and it was cheating. Whats changed now that many peoples says the opposite?

#67
jmlzemaggo

jmlzemaggo
  • Members
  • 1 138 messages

Elhanan wrote...
Personally, I get no pleasure of dragging loot to and from areas and comparing prices repeatedly, so I give myself gold.


Same. No one can force me to love money. It's not cheating, only a civilian act of life. 
I love mathematics, 'meaning I can't care for numbers. 

#68
qaerinju

qaerinju
  • Members
  • 40 messages

Shia Luck wrote...


Lowlander wrote...
(and why is a Carly Simon song playing in my head now?):D 


???  No idea. Whatever the reference is I don't get it. I suspect it is a put down of some kind but I will freely admit my suspicion and if I am wrong I will apologise. So, explain it please.


http://en.wikipedia..../You're_So_Vain

#69
TSMDude

TSMDude
  • Members
  • 865 messages
Dear Fellow Gamers,
I've never written to you before, but I really need your advice and since we are talking about cheating I figured I should post this here. I have suspected for some time now that my wife has been cheating on me. The usual signs. Phone rings but if I answer, the caller hangs up.

My wife has been going out with "the girls" a lot recently although when I ask their names she always says, "Just some friends from work, you don't know them."
I always try to stay awake to look out for her coming home, but I usually fall asleep as I sit there coding and building in the toolset all hours of the night.

Anyway, I have never approached the subject with my wife. I think deep down I just didn't want to know the truth, but last night she went out again and I decided to really check on her. Around 1 or so, I decided to hide in the garage behind my golf clubs so I could get a good view of the whole street when she arrived home from a night out with "the girls".
It was at that moment, crouching behind my clubs, that I noticed that the graphite shaft on my driver appeared to have a hairline crack right by the club head. Is this something I can fix myself or should I take it back to the pro shop where I bought it?
Signed,
Perplexed

#70
Gregor Wyrmbane

Gregor Wyrmbane
  • Members
  • 191 messages

TSMDude wrote...

Dear Fellow Gamers,
I've never written to you before, but I really need your advice and since we are talking about cheating I figured I should post this here. I have suspected for some time now that my wife has been cheating on me. The usual signs. Phone rings but if I answer, the caller hangs up.

My wife has been going out with "the girls" a lot recently although when I ask their names she always says, "Just some friends from work, you don't know them."
I always try to stay awake to look out for her coming home, but I usually fall asleep as I sit there coding and building in the toolset all hours of the night.

Anyway, I have never approached the subject with my wife. I think deep down I just didn't want to know the truth, but last night she went out again and I decided to really check on her. Around 1 or so, I decided to hide in the garage behind my golf clubs so I could get a good view of the whole street when she arrived home from a night out with "the girls".
It was at that moment, crouching behind my clubs, that I noticed that the graphite shaft on my driver appeared to have a hairline crack right by the club head. Is this something I can fix myself or should I take it back to the pro shop where I bought it?
Signed,
Perplexed


Dear Perplexed,

Sell your golf clubs, divorce your wife, and move to Tibet. There, you'll find the answers to ALL of your questions.

Signed,
Your wifes' girlfriend.

#71
Guest_Lowlander_*

Guest_Lowlander_*
  • Guests

ShaDoOoW wrote...
I don't think that there must be someone cheated in order to cheat. There wasn't in older games - and it was cheating. Whats changed now that many peoples says the opposite?


We now have a culture of instant gratification, taking shortcuts and rationilizing?  But for this specific discussion it really isn't that many, it is a handful at best. Google search other game boards on single player cheating. I have seen the cheating discusion, but never the "Cheating doesn't exist" rationalizing you see here.

Single player games existed before computer games and you can cheat there as well.

Take solitare: If any of the "SP cheating doesn't exist" crowd, know any older folks who still play the game. Watch them play, then suggest a "a shortcut" every time it looks like they don't see a move. Chances are they will say you can't do that because it is against the rules or cheating. If you then regail them with your "brilliant" rationalization that you can cheat in SP games, since you make the rules any way you want them, they will look at you like you are from Mars and probably be a little saddened that you so readily suggest shortcuts against the rules.

Take Crossword Puzzles: If you sit with a crossword puzzle in front of your computer and look up every clue on the internet, or check the answer key for every clue. You are not doing the crossword puzzle buy your own rules. You are cheating.

No one else has to be involved in single player gaming for cheating to exist. That is nothing but a silly rationalization to feel better about cheating.

#72
Elhanan

Elhanan
  • Members
  • 18 344 messages

ShaDoOoW wrote...

Ok which is what I dont agree with :). Why the same thing should be something else only  because you yourself says that? Thats the way how childrens think, "if I can't see nobody, nobody can't see me", the same thing.

I don't think that there must be someone cheated in order to cheat. There wasn't in older games - and it was cheating. Whats changed now that many peoples says the opposite?


I think I uinderstand your point, as if I had cheated on my taxes, or cheated at a game of solitaire. With taxes, the rules involve others (ie; the authorities), and any deviation from those rules is cheating. With solitaire, any deviation from the accepted rules of the player (ie; what kind of soliatire rules), is cheating. It is this latter definition I accept, as the player accepts and controls the rules for themselves. If I play strict casino rules, and start looking thru hidden cards, this would be cheating; ruining the game for myself. 

However, another solitaire player may choose different solitaire rules (; draw 3 cards instead of 1) which might be considered cheating by the other player. But both are acceptable versions of the game; just offer varied degrees of challenge and reward; same with Difficulty sliders. In NWN1, if I add the PGC3 mod to the front of my game and load up with more gold, while the lender or another Player may consider it cheating, I do not; as I choose more relaxed rules. What is cheating for me is to spend more on items than was possible before my gold cheat, thus making the game easier than I had indended by accepting my new parameters.

While one Player may hold more strict guidelines of play in a solo game does not nullify or invalidate lesser rules for another seperate Player. Some may hold that any alteration besides the Difficulty slider may be cheating; some other player may not. Some may adhere to strict NM play; others may open up console options, some may use a DM client to port about the areas bypassing doors, etc. As long as the varied rules are acceoted by that indv player, and are not enforced upon other Players does not invaldate the game in solo.

For myself, a great illustration is whem I was trying a mod for Dallo in NWN1. I was giving feedback when I mentioned using an exploit to retain all my equipment. He started to become a little ruffled, as he suggested that this would alter what he intended as the designer; this altering my feedback. But I explained I was not trying to test the item strip, but was trying to gather the story in a manner I deemed fun and acceptable, and would be open in posting about my more relaxed rules rather than declare something akin to owning the game.

Another example is PotSC mod which scales to lvl. It was not intended for Epic play, and has few items for Epic characters. But it is quite challenging for an Epic character, as I was quite surprised to see my Epic Monk on his backside after meeting an Epic panther on an island. Now when did panthers gain Knockdown?

Gold? Not so much fun. Remaining alive against Epic critters with only a stick and sausages; quite exciting! And I used a gold cheat on the shopping mod found afterwards to restock. All of this was after my first 'By The Book' playthrough, but in a solo game set for a single player, there are varied books.

Modifié par Elhanan, 07 mai 2011 - 02:46 .


#73
Gregor Wyrmbane

Gregor Wyrmbane
  • Members
  • 191 messages
 @ Lowlander

For the record. I've been playing chess since the early 1960's, (actually won a few, too) and D&D since the late 1970's. Not once have I ever cheated while playing ANY game with other people.

I use the command console occasionally to enhance my game experience when I play NWN in SP. Do I consider it cheating myself out of some level of fun? No. I've played through the OC, and other SP mods, many times without using the cheat codes, and I know the difference. Do I care that some others view it as cheating? No. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. What I do care about is when someone attaches derogatory labels to others simply because the others don't hold the same beliefs or agree with that person's opinion. If you want to play your game without using the cheat codes that's fine. If you want to believe that using them is cheating, that's fine too. But to insult other people just because they don't agree with you is arrogant and self-righteous, and shows signs of having serious control issues. That's the reason I've had this discussion with you. Not because I care one way or the other what anyone thinks about using the cheat codes in SP. Use them or not. It's your business. But don't insult other people simply because they disagree with you. That's just wrong.

Gregor

#74
AndarianTD

AndarianTD
  • Members
  • 701 messages

Elhanan wrote...

Now some would hold that this is cheating, and maybe in their own game and rules, it would be for them. But in a solo game under my own control, I set the rules. I just happen to believe that it is possible for one to lose control, break those rules, and spoil the experience for themselves. Some may hold that this is extending the former boundaries; I do not, and call it cheating.


I'm coming into this discussion late and confess at the outset that I haven't had time to read the entire thread. There are, however, two things that I would emphasize. The first is that I think that fundamentally, it's not the player, but the game developer in general and the module author in particular, who set the standard for what is and is not "cheating" in an SP game. If you use the dm_set... in the console to give your character an attribute score that would be impossible under the game's character creation and levelup rules, you're cheating. If I write a module that's balanced for a first level starting character and you play it wih a 40th level munchkin, you're cheating. If I create an area with a barrier that can't be passed except if certain plot conditions are fulfilled, and you dm_jump over it, you're cheating. And so on.

"Cheating" is, simply put, playing a game in a way that violates or disregards the game's rules. A set of rules that place limitations on how players can achieve the game's goal is one of the four defining characteristics of a game to begin with, so this is not a dispensible consideration. And in a good game, those rules -- as defined by the builder -- are designed to create a particular and engaging kind of play experience. In the context of an SP role-playing game, those rules usually come in the form of a series of plot events and story-related obstacles to be experienced and overcome. The intended play experience may allow for many different role-playing options, giving the player a host of ways to "co-create" it by choosing a path through them that is personalized for their character; but ultimately, those options are circumscribed by an "envelope" of RP variations that is defined by the game's rules. If the player disregards those rules and steps outside that "envelope," or presumes to rewrite them without the same kind of design effort the author put into creating the game, then it will start to come apart. If the player does that to any significant extent the result isn't so much a game any longer, but just someone mucking around in someone else's virtual environment.

The second and more basic question, though, is: is there any deeper "meaning" to the choice to "cheat," and is there anything "wrong" with it? The answer, as with most other things, is that it depends on your purpose. Good play experiences don't happen by accident; they're the result of a lot of time, thought and effort on the part of the builder. The reason to "play by the rules" in an SP game is to get the benefit of that (presumed) effort and to experience it as the author designed it. So if that's your purpose in playing, then no, you should not cheat; cheating would only defeat your purpose. If on the other hand what you're seeking is the experience of selectively "mucking around" in someone else's virtual environment, and you don't care about and/or are willing to forego possibly significant aspects of the play experience that the builder has created for you, then "cheating" will achieve your purpose.

I can't speak for others, but the reason why I devote the time to building is for players to experience my game world and story, as I designed them to be experienced. I can't stop anyone from cheat-playing my work, and I don't consider it worth making a fuss about if they do (but then it's "caveat player," and they're on their own). If they do that in any significant way, however, then they're not giving back to me as the author anything that I actually value in exchange for the effort that I put into creating it. Speaking personally, that's one of the main reasons why I try to avoid cheating when playing other builders' modules.

EDIT: I should add that it does make a big difference when you're talking about using cheat codes to deal with an SP module that has evident bugs and/or obvious design flaws. If you hit a game-stopping bug, for example, then it would be silly not to use the console to get around it.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 07 mai 2011 - 11:02 .


#75
Tybae

Tybae
  • Members
  • 22 messages
My 2 cents.  Can you cheat in SP?  Yes.  You are gaining an advantage.  However, you are only cheating on yourself.  It's like cheating at solitare.  It has zero repercussions, but just because there are no repercussions, doesn't mean it's not cheating. 

When it comes to NWN, I sometimes use cheat codes (by the way, they wouldn't call them cheat codes if it wasn't cheating) to get through the story.  I see fighting as a secondary aspect of the module(s).  It's the story that I'm after.  If I have to gain a few levels, give my character some gold or spawn an item that's not available, then I will.  I'm perfectly ok with that. 

Gregor Wyrmbane wrote...

 @ Lowlander

For the record. I've been playing chess since the early 1960's, (actually won a few, too) and D&D since the late 1970's. Not once have I ever cheated while playing ANY game with other people.

I use the command console occasionally to enhance my game experience when I play NWN in SP. Do I consider it cheating myself out of some level of fun? No. I've played through the OC, and other SP mods, many times without using the cheat codes, and I know the difference. Do I care that some others view it as cheating? No. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. What I do care about is when someone attaches derogatory labels to others simply because the others don't hold the same beliefs or agree with that person's opinion. If you want to play your game without using the cheat codes that's fine. If you want to believe that using them is cheating, that's fine too. But to insult other people just because they don't agree with you is arrogant and self-righteous, and shows signs of having serious control issues. That's the reason I've had this discussion with you. Not because I care one way or the other what anyone thinks about using the cheat codes in SP. Use them or not. It's your business. But don't insult other people simply because they disagree with you. That's just wrong.

Gregor


I'd just like to say how much I agree with the above statement.  Well said Gregor.