The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
We are all aware of cheats, comprende? We all know that cheats can help us, for good, or for bad, correct? Well, there is a new age of cheaters among us, who are smarter, more calculated, kaniving and concise, than the "old age" of cheaters, that took us to the next stage, admitted us to the secret level and elevated us to the top of the gaming pedestal. These people are now considered obsolete - as they are either giving up the cheating world or "converting" to the new age, where a simple level skip is considered "insufficient". In this day and age, flying around at break-neck speeds and killing 7 enemies in a minute is labelled "acceptable" - nothing more. What I am grabbing at in a nutshell is that cheating has now crossed the line to online and multiplayer gaming. There are an ever-growing number of cheaters-only servers springing up. Load up Return To Castle Wolfenstein, and you will find that a lot of the servers are cheat-orientated warfare, which really hurts a lot of fans. Cheating wears people down. Many people have never cheated in their lives and are opposed to the whole idea, so much that they question bureaucracy and think that there should be some sort of revolution, or revenge tactic against cheaters. I was thinking, would matches like this be more interesting? Seeing how players use available hacks to make a more tactics based game, avoiding each other, outwitting the opponent?
This may bring towards chaos for online gaming. Gaming may no longer be a tactic-based competition, but a drivel-based triathalon to see who can download the most patches and utilise them mercilessly. The fun would be lost and it would only be played by very sad people indeed. To irridicate this, there could be a limit to only one or two cheats programmed in by each player. Of course, there is no way to ensure this, but if mods were positioned in each server, they could heftily boot any offending players and possibly give them a permanent ban if they are repeat offenders. It could work like the Predator Tag Mode in Alien .vs. Predator, working like hunter .vs hunted, in that only the cheater can score, and if you kill the cheater, you are the cheater and can score - it would push people to fight back and resist against the cheaters! To add more pressure, people would find ways of getting these hacks into the "normal" bog-standard, non-hacks servers, with some clever brainchild device. I'm quite sure that the only hack a lot of people want to see is if someone is cheating, the map changes to a single room. Everybody has only crowbars, and the cheater is the only one that can be killed. A lot of the cheaters are spotty, pre-adolescent script-kiddies who up the intensify the level of cheating to fit their own unsatisfied ego. Although, to be fair, this would work with some games. With FPS games, this would be a total flop, as you would barely re-spawn before hitting the floor again, popped with 7 or 8 bullets. With RTS games, this could be very exciting, in that you'd never run out of supplies!
For non-conformists of the new era, they will relish at the fact that you will now be able to see cheater .vs. cheater to see who has the best hacks. In lamens terms, you get to see one cheater annihilated by a better cheater. Also, this may show them how annoying it is to get defeated by a cheater and possibly stop. Unlikely, but not impossible! This could just cause a complete decline in the ammount of people playing the games, as they get fed up with the cheaters, and only the "fittest" cheaters survive. In other words, a large population of the servers would be cheaters. For or against, it is certainly interesting and has so many prospects, good or bad. Personally, I would love to see a special mod released, designated for the cheaters, which unlocks supernatural features, such as complete loss of gravity or lava guns etc. To be fair to the non-cheaters, the cheats could have a time-frame on them, so they can only run for a certain ammount of time before having to re-execute them, or they could do a trial period and a vote at the end, where we could find out once and for all - Are gamers pro-cheating? It would definately spice up games, like it or lump it! A problem with accepting cheaters, is that we would have gangs of cheaters .vs. gangs of non-cheaters and the upper would get a considerable victory. I think that if it was instated and accepted by world-wide gamers, there would have to be terms and conditions for people to abide by, as to stop mass-cheating, which is a big no-no. a way of reducing cheating could be introducing handicaps, which used to be common place in the gaming world in the early 90's. Handicaps wouldn't even be classified as cheats, are they are mediocre at best. Cheating steals hard-sought glory from players that should be allowed to bask in their glory, but it is snatched away by cheaters, who get it easy. There are definitive reasons why people cheat - a lot of it being that they lack the gaming skill that they require. If players were not so fierce and unforgiving, cheaters would be a recluse in the corner.
Cheating can be battled - whether it be hack .vs. hack, or be it by teaming up the cheater and peforating him to pieces, until he is beaten into submission. We can beat the cheaters, or we can accept them. At the end of the day, it is up to us, our friends and gamers worldwide. As I type, online gaming hangs on a thread, a thread, which is waiting to either fall, or be rescued and pulled from the wreckage of the "Titanic", so to speak.
We can make a difference!
This may bring towards chaos for online gaming. Gaming may no longer be a tactic-based competition, but a drivel-based triathalon to see who can download the most patches and utilise them mercilessly. The fun would be lost and it would only be played by very sad people indeed. To irridicate this, there could be a limit to only one or two cheats programmed in by each player. Of course, there is no way to ensure this, but if mods were positioned in each server, they could heftily boot any offending players and possibly give them a permanent ban if they are repeat offenders. It could work like the Predator Tag Mode in Alien .vs. Predator, working like hunter .vs hunted, in that only the cheater can score, and if you kill the cheater, you are the cheater and can score - it would push people to fight back and resist against the cheaters! To add more pressure, people would find ways of getting these hacks into the "normal" bog-standard, non-hacks servers, with some clever brainchild device. I'm quite sure that the only hack a lot of people want to see is if someone is cheating, the map changes to a single room. Everybody has only crowbars, and the cheater is the only one that can be killed. A lot of the cheaters are spotty, pre-adolescent script-kiddies who up the intensify the level of cheating to fit their own unsatisfied ego. Although, to be fair, this would work with some games. With FPS games, this would be a total flop, as you would barely re-spawn before hitting the floor again, popped with 7 or 8 bullets. With RTS games, this could be very exciting, in that you'd never run out of supplies!
For non-conformists of the new era, they will relish at the fact that you will now be able to see cheater .vs. cheater to see who has the best hacks. In lamens terms, you get to see one cheater annihilated by a better cheater. Also, this may show them how annoying it is to get defeated by a cheater and possibly stop. Unlikely, but not impossible! This could just cause a complete decline in the ammount of people playing the games, as they get fed up with the cheaters, and only the "fittest" cheaters survive. In other words, a large population of the servers would be cheaters. For or against, it is certainly interesting and has so many prospects, good or bad. Personally, I would love to see a special mod released, designated for the cheaters, which unlocks supernatural features, such as complete loss of gravity or lava guns etc. To be fair to the non-cheaters, the cheats could have a time-frame on them, so they can only run for a certain ammount of time before having to re-execute them, or they could do a trial period and a vote at the end, where we could find out once and for all - Are gamers pro-cheating? It would definately spice up games, like it or lump it! A problem with accepting cheaters, is that we would have gangs of cheaters .vs. gangs of non-cheaters and the upper would get a considerable victory. I think that if it was instated and accepted by world-wide gamers, there would have to be terms and conditions for people to abide by, as to stop mass-cheating, which is a big no-no. a way of reducing cheating could be introducing handicaps, which used to be common place in the gaming world in the early 90's. Handicaps wouldn't even be classified as cheats, are they are mediocre at best. Cheating steals hard-sought glory from players that should be allowed to bask in their glory, but it is snatched away by cheaters, who get it easy. There are definitive reasons why people cheat - a lot of it being that they lack the gaming skill that they require. If players were not so fierce and unforgiving, cheaters would be a recluse in the corner.
Cheating can be battled - whether it be hack .vs. hack, or be it by teaming up the cheater and peforating him to pieces, until he is beaten into submission. We can beat the cheaters, or we can accept them. At the end of the day, it is up to us, our friends and gamers worldwide. As I type, online gaming hangs on a thread, a thread, which is waiting to either fall, or be rescued and pulled from the wreckage of the "Titanic", so to speak.
We can make a difference!
Page:
He is Shaneo.
So you are Shaneo? Hmmm, I had a wee think on that..... and I was right, ah well, never mind. :D
Salevaa wrote:
> Twain wrote:
> How long did it take you to write that?
About 40 minutes.
> God bless my hands!
Yes god bless them, if it wasn't for them you wouldn't be able to copy paste.
So where you getting these topics from Shaneo?
Cheating hehe, you're one to talk, how many times have you been banned for cheating before then?
> Twain wrote:
> How long did it take you to write that?
About 40 minutes.
> God bless my hands!
Yes god bless them, if it wasn't for them you wouldn't be able to copy paste.
So where you getting these topics from Shaneo?
Cheating hehe, you're one to talk, how many times have you been banned for cheating before then?
Salevaa wrote:
> Thanks for all the kind comments! (Kid Rock, AfroJoe)
"Lotus SmartSuite
> Millenium counts exactly 1000 words in all of that"!"
Good god!
> 1000 words exactly!? That's uncanny - a 1/1000 chance! Thanks for working it out
> Twain.
Strange. My last topic turned out to be 1000 words exactly too, and, a couple of people also mentioned that it could be in the running for a GAD. Still waiting for the list to be updated though to see if anything comes of it!
> Thanks for all the kind comments! (Kid Rock, AfroJoe)
"Lotus SmartSuite
> Millenium counts exactly 1000 words in all of that"!"
Good god!
> 1000 words exactly!? That's uncanny - a 1/1000 chance! Thanks for working it out
> Twain.
Strange. My last topic turned out to be 1000 words exactly too, and, a couple of people also mentioned that it could be in the running for a GAD. Still waiting for the list to be updated though to see if anything comes of it!
I know this is off subject, but weren't you banned for cheating, Shaun?
Authenticity wrote:
> Mr. Nice Guy wrote:
> There are cheats for Red Alert 2?!?!?
yep.
and mods that give you things like unlimited money.
> Mr. Nice Guy wrote:
> There are cheats for Red Alert 2?!?!?
yep.
and mods that give you things like unlimited money.
Mr. Nice Guy wrote:
> There are cheats for Red Alert 2?!?!?
yep.
> There are cheats for Red Alert 2?!?!?
yep.
I have heard about cheaters on online games, didn't know it was quite so bad. I can't play online games. Firewall problems so I wouldn't know.
There are cheats for Red Alert 2?!?!?
i hate it when people cheat online on red alert 2.
Page: