cheats
May 18, 2003 7:19 PM Subscribe
I haven't enjoyed online gaming for years. If I play a game (which is rare nowadays) I play over a LAN with friends.
Or, last summer, over a null-modem cable.
posted by j.edwards at 8:09 PM on May 18, 2003
Or, last summer, over a null-modem cable.
posted by j.edwards at 8:09 PM on May 18, 2003
g0d... states that he enjoys "ruining tk'ing and cheating and raging people.
and the opposition:
On the other hand, "General Jap", leader of another prominent cheating clan, [JAPS], is completely opposed to myg0t's practices - "we cheat to beat other cheaters scorewise to be the "best cheaters", "they [myg0t] are a disgrace to the cheating community".
how these two words can stand next to each other ... I do not get it! :-)
posted by MzB at 8:23 PM on May 18, 2003
and the opposition:
On the other hand, "General Jap", leader of another prominent cheating clan, [JAPS], is completely opposed to myg0t's practices - "we cheat to beat other cheaters scorewise to be the "best cheaters", "they [myg0t] are a disgrace to the cheating community".
how these two words can stand next to each other ... I do not get it! :-)
posted by MzB at 8:23 PM on May 18, 2003
I've never figured out why people like to cheat in online games - there's nothing really thing at stake in a game of Quake 3 or whatever, it's simply a contest of skill. If you use an aimbot or a wallhack, people figure out that you're cheating pretty quickly. The only possible explanation is that the cheaters enjoy making the other players angry.
posted by GriffX at 8:31 PM on May 18, 2003
posted by GriffX at 8:31 PM on May 18, 2003
The only possible explanation is that the cheaters enjoy making the other players angry.
Quoted for emphasis
posted by fnord_prefect at 9:21 PM on May 18, 2003
Quoted for emphasis
posted by fnord_prefect at 9:21 PM on May 18, 2003
I've never figured out why people like to cheat in online games - there's nothing really thing at stake in a game of Quake 3 or whatever, it's simply a contest of skill
You're assuming people are logical. I see joggers taking shortcuts all the time.
posted by srboisvert at 9:28 PM on May 18, 2003
You're assuming people are logical. I see joggers taking shortcuts all the time.
posted by srboisvert at 9:28 PM on May 18, 2003
I've never figured out why people like to cheat in online games...
Some people enjoy playing. Some people enjoy winning. For the latter, there is no such thing as a game with "nothing at stake" -- they have to win, they must 0wnz j00, or there is no point to playing.
posted by monkey.pie.baker at 10:00 PM on May 18, 2003
Some people enjoy playing. Some people enjoy winning. For the latter, there is no such thing as a game with "nothing at stake" -- they have to win, they must 0wnz j00, or there is no point to playing.
posted by monkey.pie.baker at 10:00 PM on May 18, 2003
I cannot imagine what kind of sad person has to inflate his/her self-esteem by cheating. Especially when the reward is nothing but resentment from persons unknown.
posted by spazzm at 10:16 PM on May 18, 2003
posted by spazzm at 10:16 PM on May 18, 2003
I am an avid Counter strike player, and the level of cheating on a multiplayer level is astounding. In regards to the folks at Toms Hardware, I agree that recently they have not been as bad as before, but cheating in multiplayer environments is a cancer; Slowly destroying the heart of the game.
I hope to be speaking for most online gamers when I say that cheating ruins the game. And in this post september 11th country, we should regard them as terrorists. Break into their homes and take their computers. Its an assault on our freedom!
posted by Keyser Soze at 10:17 PM on May 18, 2003
I hope to be speaking for most online gamers when I say that cheating ruins the game. And in this post september 11th country, we should regard them as terrorists. Break into their homes and take their computers. Its an assault on our freedom!
posted by Keyser Soze at 10:17 PM on May 18, 2003
(hopefully everyone will regard that last sentence as jest)
posted by Keyser Soze at 10:18 PM on May 18, 2003
posted by Keyser Soze at 10:18 PM on May 18, 2003
(or will they?)
posted by Keyser Soze at 10:18 PM on May 18, 2003
posted by Keyser Soze at 10:18 PM on May 18, 2003
I used to play online chess pretty regularly, until realizing that a lot of players fire up their copy of Chessmaster 6000 to make their moves for them. Of course, it's difficult to recognize who is using a chess program and who just happens to be a flawless player. The inevitable result: constant suspicions and accusations followed by a lively exchange of obscenities.
At any rate, after getting repeatedly roxored by players who knew how to execute the Caro-Kann defense and yet, simulatenouly, had no idea how to spell the word "faggot," I decided to give it up for good. And I've been happier ever since.
posted by Ljubljana at 11:28 PM on May 18, 2003
At any rate, after getting repeatedly roxored by players who knew how to execute the Caro-Kann defense and yet, simulatenouly, had no idea how to spell the word "faggot," I decided to give it up for good. And I've been happier ever since.
posted by Ljubljana at 11:28 PM on May 18, 2003
I once wrote esr about my concern that people modifying Carmack's source code for "Quake I" posed a serious problem for the whole concept of opensource software. Evidently, I wasn't the only one (we hashed it out on /.), cuz a few day laters Raymond released a very nice essay (The Case of the Quake Cheats") framing and argument and rebutting the concern.
posted by RavinDave at 1:58 AM on May 19, 2003
posted by RavinDave at 1:58 AM on May 19, 2003
I know one thing...if writers were prevented from using the phrase 'Webster's/Dictionery.com defines X as blah, blah...' at the start of articles then the whole of US publishing would grind to a halt.
Ljubljana: players who knew how to execute the Caro-Kann defense and yet, simulatenouly, had no idea how to spell the word "faggot,"
There's a lesson for us all there ;-)
posted by i_cola at 2:32 AM on May 19, 2003
Ljubljana: players who knew how to execute the Caro-Kann defense and yet, simulatenouly, had no idea how to spell the word "faggot,"
There's a lesson for us all there ;-)
posted by i_cola at 2:32 AM on May 19, 2003
I've been playing games online for quite a few years, predominately the Quake series and mods for them, and I've never found cheating a serious or even particularly noticeable problem. Maybe it's because I'm in .au and there just aren't as many players as there are in the US and Europe. Perhaps it's because I stopped playing CS in the early beta stages, I don't really know. *grin*
posted by Onanist at 6:20 AM on May 19, 2003
posted by Onanist at 6:20 AM on May 19, 2003
I've been an avid online gamer since about 1997. Cheats have been present for every major online game from Quake II and Ultima Online to the latest FPS craze, Battlefield 1942.
I've been on both the receiving end and giving end of hacks in the FPS world (I've never used hacks in any MMORPG).
I used to fancy myself a "white hat" hacker. For instance, Unreal Tournament had quite a few hackers. This made your game of Capture the Flag less than enjoyable. So, I would drop out, fire up the hacks, out-hack the hacker till they got frustrated and left, and then drop back and rejoin clean. I've done the above in Q3 and CS too.
I also did it for education purposes for some players and admins. I remember clearly one day how a server admin said that the latest UT update had "stopped cheating completely" so I fired up my hack and after executing 30 headshots in under 2 minutes he agreed with me that hacking was still possible.
About 2 years ago I completely abandoned hacking. Even if I was doing it for "the right purpose" it was still wrong. It wasn't' fair to the other legit players even if I was trying to harass another hacker.
The only time I use hacks now is when reviewing demos of suspected hackers offline. I will fire up the wallhacks and view the demos to see if I can see what they see. (I used this method to catch a fellow league player cheating.)
It really is an eye-opening experience. During the heyday of CS v 1.3, I would estimate that on most popular public servers, about 1/2 were using a cheat of some kind. This mirrored opinions of both the cheaters and the anti-cheaters. On some servers like the Speakeasy clusters, it was possibly higher (leading most players to call it the "cheateasy" servers).
Online cheating has reduced greatly, partially through the efforts of the gaming companies themselves, but MOSTLY through the effort of 3rd parties. HLGuard has probably caught 200x more hackers than the built-in Valve security module.
Lets say that the anti cheating tools have taken cheating in CS from 50% to 10%. But, consider, if you're playing on a full 20-person server, and only 10% are cheating, then typically you're going to have 2 people on that server cheating. That is still completely unacceptable.
The game studios need to make securing their engine a top priority for any game with an online component.
I loved Battlefield 1942 when it first came out. I bought the box on the 2nd day of retail. It was a tremendous amount of fun and I really enjoyed it. But, once the first crop of cheats came out, it started to spiral into a cesspool. I specifically didn't buy the Road to Rome expansion because EA/Dice did nothing to address the cheating. An expansion was the perfect opportunity to shore up the engine.
I've gone on way too long I realize. I'll try to wrap up.
Just suffice to say that it is not a Chicken Little scenario. The sky for online gaming really is falling. The developers are going to have to enact DRACONIAN measures if necessary to stop cheating. I applaud Blizzard for their mass banning. My only complaint is that they only scratched the surface. Diablo is perhaps the most-cheated-in online game in history.
The novelty is starting to wear off, and now players are demanding quality and a level playing field.
posted by Ynoxas at 8:07 AM on May 19, 2003
I've been on both the receiving end and giving end of hacks in the FPS world (I've never used hacks in any MMORPG).
I used to fancy myself a "white hat" hacker. For instance, Unreal Tournament had quite a few hackers. This made your game of Capture the Flag less than enjoyable. So, I would drop out, fire up the hacks, out-hack the hacker till they got frustrated and left, and then drop back and rejoin clean. I've done the above in Q3 and CS too.
I also did it for education purposes for some players and admins. I remember clearly one day how a server admin said that the latest UT update had "stopped cheating completely" so I fired up my hack and after executing 30 headshots in under 2 minutes he agreed with me that hacking was still possible.
About 2 years ago I completely abandoned hacking. Even if I was doing it for "the right purpose" it was still wrong. It wasn't' fair to the other legit players even if I was trying to harass another hacker.
The only time I use hacks now is when reviewing demos of suspected hackers offline. I will fire up the wallhacks and view the demos to see if I can see what they see. (I used this method to catch a fellow league player cheating.)
It really is an eye-opening experience. During the heyday of CS v 1.3, I would estimate that on most popular public servers, about 1/2 were using a cheat of some kind. This mirrored opinions of both the cheaters and the anti-cheaters. On some servers like the Speakeasy clusters, it was possibly higher (leading most players to call it the "cheateasy" servers).
Online cheating has reduced greatly, partially through the efforts of the gaming companies themselves, but MOSTLY through the effort of 3rd parties. HLGuard has probably caught 200x more hackers than the built-in Valve security module.
Lets say that the anti cheating tools have taken cheating in CS from 50% to 10%. But, consider, if you're playing on a full 20-person server, and only 10% are cheating, then typically you're going to have 2 people on that server cheating. That is still completely unacceptable.
The game studios need to make securing their engine a top priority for any game with an online component.
I loved Battlefield 1942 when it first came out. I bought the box on the 2nd day of retail. It was a tremendous amount of fun and I really enjoyed it. But, once the first crop of cheats came out, it started to spiral into a cesspool. I specifically didn't buy the Road to Rome expansion because EA/Dice did nothing to address the cheating. An expansion was the perfect opportunity to shore up the engine.
I've gone on way too long I realize. I'll try to wrap up.
Just suffice to say that it is not a Chicken Little scenario. The sky for online gaming really is falling. The developers are going to have to enact DRACONIAN measures if necessary to stop cheating. I applaud Blizzard for their mass banning. My only complaint is that they only scratched the surface. Diablo is perhaps the most-cheated-in online game in history.
The novelty is starting to wear off, and now players are demanding quality and a level playing field.
posted by Ynoxas at 8:07 AM on May 19, 2003
I'd like to believe you, Ynoxas, but as long as there are teenagers playing online games, I'd guess that there will always be people for the novelty to be introduced to.
Plus getting shot and called a FAGOT isn't my idea of a good time. If it was, I'd be enjoying the affordable real estate in the midwest.
posted by kevspace at 10:21 AM on May 19, 2003
Plus getting shot and called a FAGOT isn't my idea of a good time. If it was, I'd be enjoying the affordable real estate in the midwest.
posted by kevspace at 10:21 AM on May 19, 2003
I used to play online chess pretty regularly, until realizing that a lot of players fire up their copy of Chessmaster 6000 to make their moves for them. Of course, it's difficult to recognize who is using a chess program and who just happens to be a flawless player.
I still play online chess fairly regularly, and that issue simply doesn't matter to me--because registered players are generally rated on the various online chess servers. If a player is rated 2200, I know that I, with my rating of 1600 or so, have very little chance of beating him, and I generally don't play him--it doesn't matter to me whether the 2200 rating is from the player's own ability, or whether it was achieved with the assistance of a computer. Either way I'm not going to have much fun playing someone rated that much higher than I am.
(OK, so there's nothing really analogous for cheating in FPS-type games, I just wanted to defend online chess.)
(Short, oversimplified explanation of chess ratings for those unfamiliar with them: it's a logarithmic scale, with a 400-point difference corresponding to a 10-fold difference in skill. So if I'm playing someone rated 600 points higher than me, as in my example above, the odds would be about 30:1 in his favor.)
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:16 PM on May 20, 2003
I still play online chess fairly regularly, and that issue simply doesn't matter to me--because registered players are generally rated on the various online chess servers. If a player is rated 2200, I know that I, with my rating of 1600 or so, have very little chance of beating him, and I generally don't play him--it doesn't matter to me whether the 2200 rating is from the player's own ability, or whether it was achieved with the assistance of a computer. Either way I'm not going to have much fun playing someone rated that much higher than I am.
(OK, so there's nothing really analogous for cheating in FPS-type games, I just wanted to defend online chess.)
(Short, oversimplified explanation of chess ratings for those unfamiliar with them: it's a logarithmic scale, with a 400-point difference corresponding to a 10-fold difference in skill. So if I'm playing someone rated 600 points higher than me, as in my example above, the odds would be about 30:1 in his favor.)
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:16 PM on May 20, 2003
« Older Ionaut: web-based question answering | Playboy: the Video Game Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Aha! So this is why bad things happen to good people.
posted by eddydamascene at 8:04 PM on May 18, 2003