Post by: Karl Castaneda #2 on February 21, 2007, 04:00:00 AM
It's just Windy and me, so all you Mike-lovers can just high-tail it out of here.
Episode 40: Angry Karl Rides Again
Since it's our 40th podcast, we decided to go old (school) and do another two-man show. Windy and I really go to town though, discussing everything from Smash Bros. at Evolution 2007 (and why I'm right about wavedashing being for chumps) to why Zelda's formula needs to change after Twilight Princess.
While we're at it, we also discuss the new Wii Channel, Everybody Votes, and give out insight on what might be coming next. Somewhere along the way, I lose my mind and call Steven a Nintendo Apologist. Enjoy the rage!
Credits:
This podcast was edited by Karl Castaneda. Commercials performed by Karl Castaneda.
Music for this episode of Radio Free Nintendo is used with permission from Jason Ricci & New Blood. You can also purchase their album directly from the iTunes Music Store.
Post by: TheYoungerPlumber on February 21, 2007, 07:50:33 AM
Post by: NeoThunder on February 21, 2007, 01:34:15 PM
I also hate someone who corners you and just hits the same button over and over and over and over. When you resort to cheap methods to win such as that, sure you won.....but you didn't earn it. If you play to win and are so content with winning....I wana know, what do you win by being such a d*ck. If playing online you win 100 matches in a row, you still don't win anything. Why not just be a man a play a gentlemans match in the first place instead of playing the A-hole pokemon card
Post by: WindyMan on February 21, 2007, 02:54:40 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: NeoThunder
I also hate someone who corners you and just hits the same button over and over and over and over. When you resort to cheap methods to win such as that, sure you won.....but you didn't earn it. If you play to win and are so content with winning....I wana know, what do you win by being such a d*ck. If playing online you win 100 matches in a row, you still don't win anything. Why not just be a man a play a gentlemans match in the first place instead of playing the A-hole pokemon card
First of all, read this: http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=34747
Now think about what you just said. The only reason why you'd hate someone who "just hits the same button over and over and over and over" is probably because you were the person getting hit over and over and over and over. Here's a question: Why are you letting them do that to you? Are they "cheap" for employing such tactics, or are you an idiot for letting them get away with it every time? (Here's another question: Why don't you block?)
Fighting games aren't supposed to be "gentleman's matches." Their primary and sole purpose is to determine a winner between two (or more) players. If two people agree to ignore this and play under a set of "gentleman's rules" to make the game "fair" for both people, then these people will never improve. Why should everyone else abide by made-up house rules when the game everyone else is playing already has them clearly defined?
Play within the rules of the game. As long as you do this, it is not cheap, cheating or any of that other crap. The simple reason for this is because you can do it too. If you can't, you need more practice.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 21, 2007, 07:46:21 PM
That's a game design flaw, in a properly balanced game there's a way to escape that and most likely put some heavy hurting on the fool who tried using the same attack all the time. In SSBM there's the shoulder buttons for that, dodge through him and you're no longer cornered.
Post by: Karl Castaneda #2 on February 22, 2007, 10:32:37 AM
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on February 22, 2007, 10:46:16 AM
Post by: ShyGuy on February 22, 2007, 11:22:22 AM
Post by: WindyMan on February 22, 2007, 11:54:26 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ViewtifulGamer
Windy's obviously forgetting that the point of a competition is to find out who has the most refined skills. If you're employing a cheap, bug-induced strategy, then there's no skill involved, and your participation might as well be moot.
First of all, there is a huge difference between a bug and getting the most out of a game's set of rules. Marvel vs. Capcom 2 has several bugs, and their exploitation is banned from tournament play. Everything else in the system is fair game. Everyone has access to the same game system, which is why it is not cheap.
The point of competition is not to see who has the most refined skills. It's to see how people apply their skills against an opponent. Look at Super Bowl III. Everyone knew that the Colts would win. There was no way they could lose, considering how much better they were than the Jets. Karl, you're saying that the point of competition to see who is more skilled. Well, the Colts were more skilled. Everyone knew it. You know what happened? The Jets won. How could that be, if by your logic, the winner of a competition is supposed to be one that has more skill?
There's an old adage in sports. "That's why they play the game." Competition's sole purpose is to determine a winner given a set of rules. That's it. Even if you played a great game, it means nothing if you lose it. Even if you were better at a game, if you don't win, who gives a damn? No one remembers who came in second. The whole argument about people being "cheap" stems from the fact that people who lose try to find justification for why the "better" player lost. This happens in sports, too: Blame the referees. Because there's no way it was your own fault that you lost, right?
If you choose insist that certain tactics are "cheap," then you truly know nothing. You do what it takes to win the game. The better player or team doesn't always win because of this. It happens in sports. It happens in games. Accept it.
Post by: oohhboy on February 22, 2007, 01:04:45 PM
Even if it is a bug, if it is allowed with in the rules set down between competitors, then it is kosher.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 22, 2007, 06:21:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
YOU'RE THE SCRUB (unless you listen to the podcast)
I really don't like podcasts, they take a LONG time to play (certainly longer than it would to just read the transcript and even more when you consider how much you could reduce the talk by just taking the important points and removing the rest), they include a lot of useless banter that wastes time and isn't easy to skip, they are audio only which means I'm completely bored most of the time (I don't know about others but I just don't consider myself occupied if I'm just listening to something so I get bored of doing nothing), they're spoken English meaning I have difficulty to understand them and they just waste space since audio is much larger than plain text.
Post by: TrueNerd on February 27, 2007, 07:39:52 AM
Post by: NeoThunder on February 27, 2007, 12:24:34 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: WindyMan
Now think about what you just said. The only reason why you'd hate someone who "just hits the same button over and over and over and over" is probably because you were the person getting hit over and over and over and over. Here's a question: Why are you letting them do that to you? Are they "cheap" for employing such tactics, or are you an idiot for letting them get away with it every time? (Here's another question: Why don't you block?)
Fighting games aren't supposed to be "gentleman's matches." Their primary and sole purpose is to determine a winner between two (or more) players. If two people agree to ignore this and play under a set of "gentleman's rules" to make the game "fair" for both people, then these people will never improve. Why should everyone else abide by made-up house rules when the game everyone else is playing already has them clearly defined?
Play within the rules of the game. As long as you do this, it is not cheap, cheating or any of that other crap. The simple reason for this is because you can do it too. If you can't, you need more practice.
First of all, of course i'm not the one doing the punching and kicking to someone in a corner where they don't have a chance. If i'm doing it, obviously I have nothing to complain about. Second, if i'm doing it and then complain about people doing it, that would make me a hypocrit...and I can assure you I like to walk away from a game feeling like I "EARNED" the win rather than stole it.
It is not uncommon for people to want to have the upper hand in some way. When playing a game, just about all games that is what your trying to do. If it's getting certain weapons so you have them and the other team doesn't. What is cheap and wrong is when you somehow would start the game and you already have those weapons, and the other team doesn't. That is cheap, that is cheating, and it is wrong.
Why do people have such an urge to do this. If your in it to win something great, such a money. That would compell probley a lot of people, people who probley wouldn't normally cheat, to use whatever means to achieve a win, even if those means are "cheap". We all agree what cheating is, the arguement is cheapness. Just like people think using and exploiting glitches in a game is fair. How is it fair? Because you know about it and other people don't. Because anyone can do it, if they now how and sit there and pratice enough to figure out how to do it.......just like you had to in order to exploit it!!!!! I continue to not understand why someone would like nothing more than to always start out a game and right off the bat things are not equal. They win nothing from it other than the satisfaction of knowing the other person didn't have a fun or fair game. So ya, if you feel you need to always employ cheap tactics and glitches, you have no skill....absolutly none. After all it takes no skill the keep hitting the same button over and over. It takes no skill if you are somehow amune to attacks. ohh ya, it also takes absolutly NO CLASS!!!!! to be a cheap-ass-gamer.
also, i hope if for whatever reason you get in a fight with someone, they employ cheap tactics and kick you right in the balls.......after all, if you can do it, it must be fair
Post by: WindyMan on February 27, 2007, 05:27:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: NeoThunder
First of all, of course i'm not the one doing the punching and kicking to someone in a corner where they don't have a chance. If i'm doing it, obviously I have nothing to complain about. Second, if i'm doing it and then complain about people doing it, that would make me a hypocrit...and I can assure you I like to walk away from a game feeling like I "EARNED" the win rather than stole it.
It is not uncommon for people to want to have the upper hand in some way. When playing a game, just about all games that is what your trying to do. If it's getting certain weapons so you have them and the other team doesn't. What is cheap and wrong is when you somehow would start the game and you already have those weapons, and the other team doesn't. That is cheap, that is cheating, and it is wrong.
What are you talking about? Everyone has access to the same "weapons." It's just that some people are experienced enough to know how to use them. If I played a game for three years more than you have, is it cheap or cheating that I know how to use nine characters, and you only know how to use one? Will you complain if I beat you with nine different characters? Or will you call me cheap because I never gave you the chance to win? (Why would I?)
Quote
Originally posted by: NeoThunder
Why do people have such an urge to do this. If your in it to win something great, such a money. That would compell probley a lot of people, people who probley wouldn't normally cheat, to use whatever means to achieve a win, even if those means are "cheap". We all agree what cheating is, the arguement is cheapness. Just like people think using and exploiting glitches in a game is fair. How is it fair? Because you know about it and other people don't. Because anyone can do it, if they now how and sit there and pratice enough to figure out how to do it.......just like you had to in order to exploit it!!!!! I continue to not understand why someone would like nothing more than to always start out a game and right off the bat things are not equal. They win nothing from it other than the satisfaction of knowing the other person didn't have a fun or fair game. So ya, if you feel you need to always employ cheap tactics and glitches, you have no skill....absolutly none. After all it takes no skill the keep hitting the same button over and over. It takes no skill if you are somehow amune to attacks. ohh ya, it also takes absolutly NO CLASS!!!!! to be a cheap-ass-gamer.
Just because you know how to take advantage of a game system doesn't mean you're automatically always going to win. In Capcom vs SNK 2, an exploit known as roll canceling allows special moves to be invincible. (Example) I can't do it as well as some people, and I've played CvS2 for more than five years. But that sure looks like the way to an easy victory, doesn't it?
So what happens when both people use roll cancel? Is the winner of the match legitimate? You can't say no, because both people are experienced enough to use every tool available in the game. If that's the case, you can say that the use of roll canceling can still determine a true winner. And if one person uses it and the other person doesn't? Why is that any different than me beating you with a different character? I know more about a game than you do, so it would naturally follow that I would have an easier path to victory. How can that be considered cheap?
If you think all you need to do to win is to learn the exploits and tricks of a game, you are sorely mistaken. Like I said, it's all about how you apply your knowledge against an opponent. If you lose, then you need to improve your skills against that opponent. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
Quote
Originally posted by: NeoThunder
also, i hope if for whatever reason you get in a fight with someone, they employ cheap tactics and kick you right in the balls.......after all, if you can do it, it must be fair
Every time I lose in a fighting game, I analyze what my opponent did right and what I did wrong. Did he do something "cheap?" If he did, it's up to me to figure out how to avoid getting into it the next time. I don't complain about it and continue to get my butt kicked by the same tactic. You need to learn how to adapt to opponents in fighting games.
Post by: NeoThunder on February 27, 2007, 10:06:15 PM
I was thinking more in terms of halo 2, in that if one team started out with weapons the other team didn't have, that would be wrong. If one team fought to get to "the good weapons" grabbed them up and had them while the other team didn't......that would be fair cause each team had an equal chance from the begining.
If you had played a fighting game for three years and were real good at it......I never said that was cheating or being cheap!!!!!! If you were able to beat me with any character and I haven't played that game a lot....if I managed to win I would call it luck, there would be no reason to allow me to win. I was speaking about methods that require no skill (like cornering someone and using the same kick over and over, where even hitting a block button doesn't help). Or exploiting something like your roll canceling where developers overlooked a flaw in the game that weilds an unfair advantage. LISTEN TO THE KEY WORDS I JUST SAID!!!!!. A gllitch that weilds an unfair advantage and is usually unknown to the common player.
So it comes back to the question, "if your so good at a game", why would you need to exploit a glitch that allows you to be invunerable to enemy attacks. Your statement about both people using the same glitch is dumb.....cause they are both playing by the same rules.
How about this for a question. Say you are fighting someone and you have to use the "cheap" tactics to try and win. For the sake of arguement lets say it's ok with the other guy. Suppose that dispite your cheating, you get your ass kicked. Wouldn't you agree that he would be seen as a better player because he was able to defeat you even though you had the advantage of cheapness. Lets say you didn't use the cheap method, and he beat you......you would say he was a good player, but he's even better since he was able to beat you even though you tried to cheat and still couldn't win. So if thats true......the opposite must also be true.
And my wise crack about if you were to get in a fight.....that was a real life senario. Like if you got into an arguement or physical altercation with someone, and they decided to kick you square in the balls, and maybe even kicked you while you were curled up on the ground. Would that be fair because it was there and they could exploit it?
I think all in all, you are not the popular opinion on this. The attitude of "anything to win" even if that means exploiting glitches. We all want to win, just some of us want to win at the expense of a fair game, not an unbalance one.
Post by: Entroper on February 27, 2007, 11:47:11 PM
If your only goal in playing games is to win, I feel sorry for you, I really do. I play games to have fun. Do I usually have more fun when I win? Probably, but how fun is it to just repeat the same exploit over and over again, and win with no effort? Not much in my opinion.
The fact that cheapness sometimes takes a lot of practice to be able to pull off doesn't make it any less lame, either. If you've practiced some exploit, be it wavedashing, snaking, whatever, to the point where you can pull it off flawlessly anytime you want, well, I think you've just wasted an enormous amount of time. The rest of us have better things to do with our lives. The time that I do put into a game is spent trying to be good at the whole game, not good at one or two exploited features.
One could argue that in a tournament setting, this all goes out the window, since the goal is to win the prize at any cost. I still say this is BS. Games are supposed to be fun whether there are prizes involved or not, otherwise why even have a tournament? If a contest isn't supposed to be fun, I'd rather it be a contest of doing something productive.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 28, 2007, 12:06:52 AM
The rules of a game are those that are programmed in. Most people who play the game seriously know all of the visible and invisible rules of a game and know when to use what exploit. Any tournament-level player will know about all exploits and any tournament level game won't include unbalancing exploits since imba games don't get played that seriously.
For example during an SSBM match a friend kept using Pikachu's lightning. At first he hit us all the time with it, then I learned how to cope and all he got from spamming that move more was a severe beating. If a game had an unbeatable imbalance noone would play it seriously so since these games are played there's guaranteed to be a way to avoid and return a "cheap" attack. If you can't do it you may not have figured the correct response out.
So in summary: Stop whining about imba and LERN 2 PLAY N00B!
Post by: NeoThunder on February 28, 2007, 08:21:04 AM
Listen carefully, A Cheat is.....any modification or exploitation of a glitch in a game that weilds an unfair advantage to a team, an unfair advantage that would normally not be there.
A Glitch is......any fault in the game that requires a player to go out of his way of normal play to behave in an odd way usually giving them an advantage that developers forgot to correct during development. Glitches are usually difficult to pull off and generally take those who exploit it lots of practice to be achieve the ablility.
A Cheater is...... any moron who has read what I said but still doesn't understand and/or disagrees and still wants to achieve a win by any means possible in a public arena. If I never have to run into these people it would be too soon.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 28, 2007, 09:07:24 AM
Exploiting is different from changing the hard and software, exploits are in the game already. Some aren't even really glitches, some just use movement physics in ways not intended. E.g. when would you call something snaking? Are you just going to ban all forms of powerslide boosts? What about streafe running in an FPS? Are you going to ban pressing two directions at once? Would you employ a group of judges to decide when something looks like abuse vs. normal play? Especially when everyone does it at that level anyway?
And hell, how do you know what's an exploit and what isn't? Case in point: Arena Wars had a bug that allowed teleporting near the enemy flag and teleporting away immediately. People started using it and the developer decided to just balance the bug to be part of the gameplay. In Quake the rocket jump was an exploit, in Team Fortress it was a critical part of your repertoire.
A Glitch is......any fault in the game that requires a player to go out of his way of normal play to behave in an odd way usually giving them an advantage that developers forgot to correct during development. Glitches are usually difficult to pull off and generally take those who exploit it lots of practice to be achieve the ablility.
It's trivially easy to hold two directions down in an FPS to strafe run. That allows you to run faster than normal and even jump across gaps you aren't supposed to cross. How do you ban that?
Powerslides and boosts are pretty much mandatory if you want to win in MK. How many of them can you use before you are snaking?
Parrying in fighting games often takes just as much if not more skill to pull off than most exploits, would you ban them, too?
A Cheater is...... any moron who has read what I said but still doesn't understand and/or disagrees and still wants to achieve a win by any means possible in a public arena. If I never have to run into these people it would be too soon.
A n00b is a player who cannot cope with certain elements of a game and decides to declare rules that forbid them so he can win against players that can handle those elements. In the real world ignorance isn't strength. What you play is the game on the disc, not some imaginary game some people believe they are playing. The real game has strafe running, snaking, wavedashing, etc and people found that the skill necessary to use these to their maximum extend increases the challenge of the game and makes it more interesting for tournament play.
Post by: NeoThunder on February 28, 2007, 09:30:24 AM
anyone next?
Post by: WindyMan on February 28, 2007, 10:03:26 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: NeoThunder
Listen carefully, A Cheat is.....any modification or exploitation of a glitch in a game that weilds an unfair advantage to a team, an unfair advantage that would normally not be there.
A Glitch is......any fault in the game that requires a player to go out of his way of normal play to behave in an odd way usually giving them an advantage that developers forgot to correct during development. Glitches are usually difficult to pull off and generally take those who exploit it lots of practice to be achieve the ablility.
A Cheater is...... any moron who has read what I said but still doesn't understand and/or disagrees and still wants to achieve a win by any means possible in a public arena. If I never have to run into these people it would be too soon.
I think you're the one that doesn't understand. The whole point of the discussion is "cheapness," which is not the same as cheating. Cheating is the deliberate attempt to gain an unfair advantage by way of game modification. "Cheap" is the term applied to game acts that someone believes is an unfair means of playing the game, when in fact it is usually completely legal within the game rules. Cheapness does not lead to cheating, because cheapness doesn't exist in the first place. The term "cheap" is something made up by people who lose to legitimately better players. There is no definite line of what's cheap and what's not, so there can be no definition of what's cheap and what isn't.
Just because everyone can have access to a game's system, and everyone can have access to cheating methods, doesn't mean the full exploitation of both are one in the same. If you don't do anything to modify the game that is presented to you, it's not cheating, and therefore, not wrong or immoral. On top of that, it takes skill and practice to know how to take advantage of most of these game exploits, so it's certainly not as easy as some people make it out. Furthermore, if certain game exploits render a game totally unfair and unplayable for everyone (whether everyone uses it or not), then that's a sign that the game in question is not a very good one. Who in their right mind would want to keep playing a game full of bugs?
People will always try to take advantage of the rules in any competitive game. You can push these rules to the limit, but people who play legitimately will never break them. If you break the rules, you're a cheater.
Post by: Entroper on February 28, 2007, 12:41:25 PM
By my definition, a "cheap" exploit is one that makes the game less fun. Cheapness makes the game less fun for the person doing it, and less fun for other players as well. I could spend hours practicing snaking in F-Zero GX so that I could snake past all the computer opponents and easily win every race on Expert, but what's the fun in that? What would be the fun of snaking vs. my friends? They'd see that I was exploiting a bug in the game's physics (which is what snaking in F-Zero IS, a bug - powersliding in Mario Kart 64 was put into the game on purpose) and get bored of losing very quickly. Now, you're going to make the point that they should instead learn how to snake, but now you're playing a different game. Instead of seeing who's better at racing, you're seeing who's better at snaking. Is this still a fair game? Sure, in the sense that anyone can learn how to snake, and snaking done well is equally beneficial to whichever player is doing it. Is it still a fun game? I guess some people think so. I think racing is a lot MORE fun.
I don't think cheapness and cheating are the same thing. I think both are lame, with cheating obviously being more lame. At least if you're being cheap, you still have some respect for the rules of the game. But you can still make a distinction between "the letter of the rules" and "the spirit of the rules." In Formula 1 racing, for example, teams have been penalized for violating the spirit of the rules, even if what they did is perfectly acceptable according to the exact, precise definitions of what was laid out in the rules. If rules (or game mechanics) are designed to allow certain kinds of behavior, but written such that a small loophole exists which allows unexpectedly advantageous behavior, exploiting these loopholes are both cheap and lame.
Post by: NeoThunder on February 28, 2007, 03:55:27 PM
I'm sorry i'm not a cheater so i'm not down with all the cheater speak.
Post by: Entroper on February 28, 2007, 05:42:40 PM
I think the game gives you a slight speed boost when you come out of a slip, to somewhat counter the momentum lost while you're slipping. This was meant to lessen the penalty for sliding around sharp corners, but players exploited it by constantly weaving back and forth for an entire stage to build up speed.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 28, 2007, 06:33:23 PM
I read and understood it, I think it's bullsh#t.
By my definition, a "cheap" exploit is one that makes the game less fun. Cheapness makes the game less fun for the person doing it, and less fun for other players as well. I could spend hours practicing snaking in F-Zero GX so that I could snake past all the computer opponents and easily win every race on Expert, but what's the fun in that?
The computer will never use exploits. When you're playing against a human opponent snaking will no longer mean that you are faster than him, it means that you can keep up.
Instead of seeing who's better at racing, you're seeing who's better at snaking. Is this still a fair game? Sure, in the sense that anyone can learn how to snake, and snaking done well is equally beneficial to whichever player is doing it. Is it still a fun game? I guess some people think so. I think racing is a lot MORE fun.
Do you think you don't have to race properly when snaking? That may apply to a vs. CPU match but against a human player who will be just as fast as you you'll still have to perform all the other tricks of racing while snaking.
ahh....What the hell is snaking?
You know those sparks you can get during a powerslide in Mario Kart (DD at least) that allow you to get a boost once you let go of the powerslide button? Using that even when you aren't in a curve that needs powersliding. Obviously speed boosts are good so you should use it as often as possible even in the normal game, you'd need some arbitrary rule about how many powerslides are permitted per round or where they are permitted to stop snaking.
Post by: NeoThunder on February 28, 2007, 09:01:22 PM
Your snaking method you speak of I probley wouldn't go as far to say cheating, it's kinda walking the line depending on how much of an advantage it weilds, but a cheap move to be sure. Since seeing it you could probley understand how it is being done, thats what kinda makes it not cheating. Plus it doesn't take that much effort to do, we are talking about a move you normally in the game, just doing it over and over and over to weild yourself an advantage.....hmm, da ja vue.
I think if you were playing someone who didn't use that snaking method but the only way you could beat them was to use it. I wouldn't say that makes you a better player. So if you play people who don't use it and you always use it, I don't see how you would asertain your skill. The only way would be if you both use it. Again, if you both have to do it....whats the point, why not play it the way it was ment to be played in the first place?
My examples of cheapness, that I consider cheating mostly involve halo2, since that has been the game I have played online with others the most. One thing cheaters used to do is what was called "the dummy glitch". It allowed a player to get into a warthog jeep, and with some button presses and constant button pressing, that player could be driven to the enemy base however could not be seen or damaged while they were at the other base, infact, could stay there as long as they want without being discovered. In a shoot-em up match this didn't really matter, however, in a capture the flag, it allowed that player to grap the enemy flag, then transport all the way back to his base and score within just a few short seconds of the flag being taken. Many people used the excuse to themselves of saying, "it's in the game, so it's not cheating"....but come on, if you have that mindset....what goes on in your head. How can you bullsh*t yourself into believing your not a cheater when you clearly are. Bungie aknowledged on their website that this was indeed cheating and players shouldn't do it, and in turn, that particular glitch was patched by bungie and can't be exploited anymore, but their are still other glitches that allow you to jump extreamly high that allow you to get up on top of places that you normally can't get to, and would give you an advantage.....hence the term, and unfair advantage.
Again, just cause it's in the game....doesn't mean that it's not cheating....more than likely it means it was a glitch overlooked by developers.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 28, 2007, 09:59:39 PM
I think snaking is harder than normal driving, you still lose if you screw up but you have more ways to screw up (e.g. drift too far, activate boost too slowly, ...) making the game require more skill at that level. It's different from using a move over and over again in a game where you have multiple ways of doing something (e.g. attacks in a fighting game) since in that case every option has a counter option it loses against and spamming one move is a surefire way to get a humiliating defeat. Same goes for e.g. Zerg rushes, if you keep doing that your opponents will quickly know your playstyle, counter your rush and destroy you in no time (I've even seen Starcraft veterans call zerg rushes an insult because they work only against weak opponents and using them is akin to calling someone an idiot).
I think if you were playing someone who didn't use that snaking method but the only way you could beat them was to use it. I wouldn't say that makes you a better player. So if you play people who don't use it and you always use it, I don't see how you would asertain your skill. The only way would be if you both use it. Again, if you both have to do it....whats the point, why not play it the way it was ment to be played in the first place?
Because you'd have to add stupid arbitrary rules to prevent it. The distinction between normal powerslides and snaking is very small and you'd have a hard time deciding what a player can and cannot do. Therefore it's simpler to assume a player who plays at tournament level knows the game well enough to know such obvious tricks. Realistically noone's naive enough to walk into a tournament when he doesn't know about such tricks (or at least he'll lose in the qualification rounds), that's like playing a fighting game and not knowing your combos.
One thing cheaters used to do is what was called "the dummy glitch". It allowed a player to get into a warthog jeep, and with some button presses and constant button pressing, that player could be driven to the enemy base however could not be seen or damaged while they were at the other base, infact, could stay there as long as they want without being discovered.
That's the kind of glitch that would be either banned in a tournament or get the game/map/gametype removed until it's fixed (unless it wasn't of any practical use). However, many other glitches in games are permitted like the roll cancelling, wave dashing, strafe running, etc. We're talking about the latter kind, small glitches used to improve your play rather than huge bugs used to skip half the game. Though I think a game with huge bugs wouldn't be allowed in a tournament, they'd wait until it's patched or a sequel is released that doesn't have these issues.
Post by: NeoThunder on March 01, 2007, 09:44:37 AM
I gave an example of something thats in the game and to exploit it is clearly cheating. The statement I kept hearing was, "it's not cheating if it's in the game". Thats clearly not true, and you didn't aknowlege that.....even though thats what the arguement is clearly about. Just because it's in the game doesn't make it not cheating!!!!!!!!!
Sadly you have to use your brain to determain if something is unfair, and clearly nobody seems to want to do that.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 01, 2007, 07:35:24 PM
Post by: Entroper on March 01, 2007, 10:00:33 PM
Post by: NeoThunder on March 01, 2007, 10:54:40 PM
It's not bad games, it's bad people who sit there and waste their time seeing what they can get away with in the game. Seeing what glitches there are that can be achieved by doing certain things. Then other cheaters see it, then ask and are told or watch and try to duplicate what they see.
So....what kinda cheater are you?......a leader or a follower, i'm not sure whats worse though
Post by: KDR_11k on March 02, 2007, 12:44:46 AM
In a tournament you need very clear rules to make sure everyone is on the same page. You can only block exploits that are clear when used. For example a Madden game had a bug that allowed draining the other team's stamina by selecting different plays before starting. While heavy abuse would be clear it's subtle abuse that can't be detected yet make a difference. E.g. a player wants one play but deliberately pretends he's indecisive and changes 2-3 times instead of once. Are you going to disqualify him for not making his decision in one go? Or a popular real-life exploit, counting cards in Blackjack. How do you spot that except for the standard casino policy "if he's winning he's obviously cheating"? Therefore it is important to pick a game that has no damaging subtle exploits in first place.
It's not bad games, it's bad people who sit there and waste their time seeing what they can get away with in the game. Seeing what glitches there are that can be achieved by doing certain things. Then other cheaters see it, then ask and are told or watch and try to duplicate what they see.
You'll play against those people one way or another so you better make sure you know what he's doing and what that means. If you never snake in MK but play an opponent who is snaking you should better know how to do that.
Also I believe there was some discussion about spamming one move. I still say that if that succeeds something sucks, either the game or the losing player. A good game doesn't need a gentlemen's agreement not to use one move to work.
Post by: NeoThunder on March 02, 2007, 03:20:35 AM
I guess some people have other reasons to play a game.
For the record I was never referring to tournaments. Yes, a tournament is going to be more agressive and your seeking a prize of some sort. I was always referencing online play, play that doesn't matter other than the fact to get on and play and have fun. How you can sit there and say,"whats the point if you don't win", is very sad. Your never going to win every game. If you can't walk away from a game in second place or lower and tell the other person(s), "good game". Maybe that should say something about your sportsmanship
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on March 03, 2007, 08:24:33 PM
When I used to play a lot of Magic: The Gathering Online, if I could tell within the first few turns that the other player was using a common strategy which I find to be annoying and too specialized to counter in an otherwise great, well-rounded deck, I would just concede and spare both of us the wasted time. I would never have suggested that such strategies be banned from the playing environment, but if players insist on doing things that make the game less fun, I insist on disallowing them the opportunity to play against me, and so did many other players. In other words, they had a hard time finding anyone to play a full game against their annoying strategies. (For the Magic literate, I am mostly referring to focused land destruction, although there were a couple of others depending on the current meta-game.)
Post by: Entroper on March 03, 2007, 10:37:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117
The very nature of a tournament like Evolution means that people aren't playing for fun but rather to win, no matter what. There's nothing unethical about using a technique like wavedashing; it is a quirk of the game's physics engine that requires no special equipment or other modification of the game to use. I agree that it makes the game less fun, and in casual play I would not battle against someone who uses it. But this tournament isn't casual play, and the people who are in it to win it don't care if wavedashing makes the battles less fun.
When I used to play a lot of Magic: The Gathering Online, if I could tell within the first few turns that the other player was using a common strategy which I find to be annoying and too specialized to counter in an otherwise great, well-rounded deck, I would just concede and spare both of us the wasted time. I would never have suggested that such strategies be banned from the playing environment, but if players insist on doing things that make the game less fun, I insist on disallowing them the opportunity to play against me, and so did many other players. In other words, they had a hard time finding anyone to play a full game against their annoying strategies. (For the Magic literate, I am mostly referring to focused land destruction, although there were a couple of others depending on the current meta-game.)
This I can get on board with. The sentiments expressed by others seemed to imply that if I lose to someone playing 'cheaply', then I need more practice. Maybe if my goal is to win a tournament, sure, I need more practice, but if my goal is to have fun, then I need to either ask my opponent not to be cheap, or stop playing against him.
I still think that a tournament should be fun, and both the players and organizers should care about making it fun. But if people want to spend their time practicing exploits to compete in a win-at-all-costs tournament, I suppose I can't stop them.
Post by: WindyMan on March 04, 2007, 06:02:07 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117
The very nature of a tournament like Evolution means that people aren't playing for fun but rather to win, no matter what. There's nothing unethical about using a technique like wavedashing; it is a quirk of the game's physics engine that requires no special equipment or other modification of the game to use. I agree that it makes the game less fun, and in casual play I would not battle against someone who uses it. But this tournament isn't casual play, and the people who are in it to win it don't care if wavedashing makes the battles less fun.
When I used to play a lot of Magic: The Gathering Online, if I could tell within the first few turns that the other player was using a common strategy which I find to be annoying and too specialized to counter in an otherwise great, well-rounded deck, I would just concede and spare both of us the wasted time. I would never have suggested that such strategies be banned from the playing environment, but if players insist on doing things that make the game less fun, I insist on disallowing them the opportunity to play against me, and so did many other players. In other words, they had a hard time finding anyone to play a full game against their annoying strategies. (For the Magic literate, I am mostly referring to focused land destruction, although there were a couple of others depending on the current meta-game.)
You say that you have a hard time finding someone who doesn't employ strategy. Are you saying that when these people play against each other, they aren't having fun? Is "fun" only reserved for those that play only casually? At any level, people try to outwit and outsmart their opponents, using any tool within the rules of the game. If you can find someone at your level and you have a good battle, you'll have fun, win or lose. If a pro can find someone at his level and have a good battle, he will have fun, win or lose (but usually win). Whether or not the higher levels of competition are more fun than the lowers is debatable, but there's much more to consider and much more at stake in higher-level or tournament play that most will tell you they wouldn't have it any other way.
You're failing to take into account what the other guy is thinking. Yeah, he wants to win. But why would he play if he didn't want to have fun? The point of competition is to apply your skills against someone else doing the same to you. If you meet or exceed your abilities, most of the time you will walk away satisfied with your performance, win or lose. If an experienced person comes across an inexperienced person and beats the crap out of them, neither person will have fun. Just because the winner won doesn't mean he got much enjoyment or satisfaction out of it. I know, I've been there (on both ends). The difference is the experienced man will play anyway, because he knows the more games he plays and the more opponents he faces, the more tools and tricks he will have in his arsenal for when he actually needs them.
And Jonny, remember that you, as well as most people on these forums, have been playing Super Smash Bros. Melee for four or five years. Everyone playing it for that long is already on a higher plane than those who haven't; in other words, you've been engaging in high-level play without even realizing it. (I bet you're having a lot of fun playing it, aren't you?) The inclusion of SSBB in Evolution is significant because it will show everyone just how high the bar can go—and the amazing things that happen when hundreds of people try to set it higher with every match.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 04, 2007, 07:09:25 AM
Post by: NeoThunder on March 05, 2007, 05:35:54 PM
Well, if anyone knows whenever you go up against someone online playing as this kart. There's no way you can win. Simply put, that kart goes way faster than all the others.
Well, I know it's legal, and it's not cheating. However, I still hate the fact that even though you go threw and unlock this kart, your allowed to use it online. There is no balance, unless all use this kart, it's not equal. If there is one person using this kart....I haven't played a game that doesn't end up the bone cart winning.
Again, this isn't cheating....but it's still unfair to make a game that isn't balanced.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 05, 2007, 06:18:32 PM
Again, this isn't cheating....but it's still unfair to make a game that isn't balanced.
I doubt they went "hey, let's make this game imba!". Often imbalances stem from the developer not knowing all possible strategies or just careless balancing without bothering to really see what it does or just casually testing something. E.g. the balance tests were in a clean environment or forgetting that the player can do some things the AI can't or the testers just weren't great players, ....
Post by: NeoThunder on March 07, 2007, 06:13:02 AM
Post by: vudu on March 16, 2007, 09:05:30 AM
QuoteIf you're just downloading a demo and then playing it repeatedly and not buying the game you're not a consumer. Nintendo doesn't care about you and never will. Windy should have pimp smacked you right through your Mac.
Oh, boo hoo, Nintendo should let me play stuff that I haven't paid for. They're not catering to my every whim. Stop thinking of yourself for once and start thinking about me, the consumer. Blah blah blah, whoa is me.
EDIT: I just listened to some more; see what's coming down the grapevine? Seriously?
for all intensive purposes
Post by: KDR_11k on March 16, 2007, 07:47:38 PM
Post by: Karl Castaneda #2 on March 17, 2007, 04:20:01 AM
Something I refuse to do is play the part of the Nintendo fan who does nothing but praise the company. That's gotten NWR in trouble a few times (because I'm certainly not the only person who feels that way) with the Nintendo crowd, but if I wanted to be an extension of NOA's Public Relations team, I'd be studying that instead of journalism. I love Nintendo as a company, and when they do something right, I'm usually the first in line to applaud them, but that doesn't mean I'm going to knock them down when they're acting foolish.
As for being a Mac user, I sincerely doubt that in my nine or ten months of owning my MacBook, I've somehow adopted a whiney persona, but hey, if that's what you want to believe, go for it.
Oh, and as for grapevine, it's not like I have these words out in front of me to read - it's all improvised, so there are verbal foibles. Can't help that.
Post by: WindyMan on March 17, 2007, 06:45:12 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ViewtifulGamer
Something I refuse to do is play the part of the Nintendo fan who does nothing but praise the company. That's gotten NWR in trouble a few times (because I'm certainly not the only person who feels that way) with the Nintendo crowd, but if I wanted to be an extension of NOA's Public Relations team, I'd be studying that instead of journalism. I love Nintendo as a company, and when they do something right, I'm usually the first in line to applaud them, but that doesn't mean I'm going to knock them down when they're acting foolish.
Wait, when have we gotten into trouble? We've never given Nintendo praise unless they've done something earn it.
Post by: Karl Castaneda #2 on March 17, 2007, 06:54:42 AM
Post by: vudu on March 17, 2007, 07:14:04 AM
QuoteA demo isn't supposed to replace a game purchased at retail. Nintendo might not want you to easily be able to play a demo anytime you want (and rightfully so). The point of a demo is to try a small portion of a game to see if you would be interested in purchasing the full product. If you can play the same portion of the game over and over again you might be less likely to purchase the game.
I shouldn't have to repeat the process every time I want to boot it up.
QuoteCriticism against Nintendo is fine. Most of us are big boys (and girls) who can form our own opinions. The majority of us tend to respect each other and are open to hearing opposing viewpoints. However, that's something that's completely different from moaning about something you don't like and making idle threats like you refuse to buy the next Nintendo system because they won't let you download demos straight to your system. I don't honestly believe you'd go so far as not to buy another Nintendo product in order to make a convoluted point. I'm not going to say you definitely will buy the next system because it's much too early to even speculate that and there are countless unknowns at this point. However, I will go so far as to make the bold statement that if you don't buy another Nintendo system it will not be because Nintendo doesn't allow you to download and store Wii demos.
Something I refuse to do is play the part of the Nintendo fan who does nothing but praise the company.
QuoteI wasn't insinuating that using a Mac was making you any more or less whiny. The fact is you use a Mac so Windy would have to smack you through that. If you somehow used WebTV to connect to the Internet and record your podcasts I would have referenced that.
As for being a Mac user, I sincerely doubt that in my nine or ten months of owning my MacBook, I've somehow adopted a whiney persona,
Post by: Karl Castaneda #2 on March 17, 2007, 07:27:51 AM
Concerning Leaving Nintendo: You're right, and it would be hyperbole if I said not having a hard drive to store demos would lead me away from ever purchasing Nintendo hardware again, but the way that conversation progressed, Steven said that since Nintendo already had my money, they no longer had to worry about keeping my happy (not his exact words, but that's how I understood it). My point was that if Nintendo is going to continue that tradition, and let it leak into other facets of their strategy, then they're not someone I want to buy hardware from anymore. Obviously they're not at that point yet, but it remains something I stand by.
The Mac Thing: That actually wasn't aimed at you - I was talking to KDR. Sorry if it came off that way.
Post by: NeoThunder on March 17, 2007, 04:04:22 PM
Still, even if I had to redownload the demo to try it out...I would be ok with that. I think demo's just are that, and there's no reason to keep them on a hard drive so you can keep coming back to them.
If Nintendo is worried about that I think the whole, once you turn off your Wii you lose the demo (just like DS download stations) would be a good idea. It would encourage those who would think to do that to maybe go out and buy the game, and it would allow some demoing of games before they are bought.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 17, 2007, 06:07:48 PM
