Why are people so quick to bandy around the term "cheat"?

Demerzel · August 20, 2002, 13:52

It always amazes me that people can take a game so seriously that they'll accuse others of being lame or cheating for not playing it "fair". For instance, I saw someone accuse another of cheating because they restarted the game for having a bad starting position.

Surely, if individual A has bought the game then that individual has every right to do what they want with the game as long as no-one else if affected? For multi-player, a fair playing field must be maintained I agree but why does individual B feel (s/)he has the right to criticise another for playing/altering the game they want to ensure they have the most fun possible?

I've had this same discussion with people over other games, for instance Half-Life - peeps have had the audacity to accuse me of cheating for using the quick-save functionality to avoid playing through the entire level again when I die.

Just wanted to see if others agree or if not, why?

Thrawn05 · August 20, 2002, 14:00

I don't restart, but I don't care if other people reload games.

I only save in stragety games only because of the complexity and the fact it take time.

First person shooters like AvPGE, QII, and JK just for a quick example I never save. If I die I want to start from the start again.

Stuie · August 20, 2002, 14:01

Read this:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=39003

Demerzel · August 20, 2002, 14:03

bah 8mths ago? which normal person would remember something that long ago? plus attitudes change in that length of time surely?

Moonsinger · August 20, 2002, 14:12

I agree with what you said.

Since I don't like hollow victory, there are rules that I'm imposing upon myself that I don't expect others to follow.

If people like to send a modern amour to run over the poor archer, so be it! It's not my place to judge. It's just a game; as long as they don't do that in real life, I have no objection.

Anyway, I think victory is so hollow when that happen; and the same would go for cheater too. Only them would know what they actually did with their games. It doesn't matter what people think about you, it's what you think about yourself that counts a lot more.

Stuie · August 20, 2002, 14:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Demerzel
bah 8mths ago? which normal person would remember something that long ago? plus attitudes change in that length of time surely?

Hey, who said I was normal?

Adagio · August 20, 2002, 14:28

Who the h*** cares about when people are cheating as long as it doesn't affect anyone else? I couldn't care less... And is restarting because of bad starting position really called a cheat?

I have several times, been in an argument, about if there should be cheat codes in a (SP) game... I just can't see, why people are doing anything they can, to avoid a game to contain cheat codes, as long as those (cheat codes, or what-so-ever) only works in SP...

Egyptian · August 20, 2002, 14:54

I used to restart all the time to get a better starting position. Lately, I stopped doing that. I am playing random civs and always keep my original staring location. It makes the game much more chalenging, thus much more fun.

If people want to restart, no big deal. The cheating that bothers me is the AI on Emporer and Diety. I have won on Emperor, but I hate the cheating. I once started a game on Emporer, and had just finished building my second warrior, when a small stack of 4 Roman spearmen and three warriors marches by looking for Barbarians. THe AI advantage just sucks at that level, so I basically play Monarch only.

Moonsinger · August 20, 2002, 15:07

AI doesn't cheat! The AI was programmed (by humans) to behave certain ways and it does exactly just that.

Thrawn05 · August 20, 2002, 15:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Moonsinger
AI doesn't cheat! The AI was programmed (by humans) to behave certain ways and it does exactly just that.

Perhaps you should take a programming class.

The AI cheats because it is written to cheat. For example, free units, less corruption etc.

Doing that is the easy way to making a hard AI. A REAL (

) programmer makes the AI smarter.

Also, a REAL PROGRAMMER tends to display homicidal tendencies when asked the question "ARE YOU SURE?".

Moonsinger · August 20, 2002, 16:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05
Perhaps you should take a programming class.

Yeah right! I have been programming professionally over a decade, specialized in the field of AIs. Perhaps you should take some REAL programming class before you use the word REAL PROGRAMMER.

Moonsinger · August 20, 2002, 16:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05

The AI cheats because it is written to cheat.

What you said is no different than what I originally said?

Quote:

Originally posted by Moonsinger
AI doesn't cheat! The AI was programmed (by humans) to behave certain ways and it does exactly just that.

You are Mr. "glass half empty", aren't you?

DeepO · August 20, 2002, 16:25

Hey Moonsinger, cherio mate! I was going to say the exact same thing (well, I've only been a professional AI programmer for 5 years, not over 10).

Cheating AI... if only people would have the slightest understanding of how intelligent they are themselves, they wold stop complaining on the lesser intelligence of software.

DeepO

Moonsinger · August 20, 2002, 16:41

Quote:

Originally posted by DeepO
Hey Moonsinger, cherio mate! I was going to say the exact same thing (well, I've only been a professional AI programmer for 5 years, not over 10).

Cool!

Please to meet you.

Quote:

Cheating AI... if only people would have the slightest understanding of how intelligent they are themselves, they wold stop complaining on the lesser intelligence of software.

Well said!

Coracle · August 20, 2002, 20:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05

. . .The AI cheats because it is written to cheat. For example, free units, less corruption etc.

Doing that is the easy way to making a hard AI. A REAL (

) programmer makes the AI smarter. . .

SO TRUE!! AI cheating is indeed the easy way to make a "hard" AI.

We are all sick of the sneaky insidious ways the Civ 3 AI cheats. I am also tired of Firaxis not giving us a LIST of all the AI cheats they have programmed into the game because their stupid AI was rushed and is sloppy and hence the game was designed to cheat.

AND WHERE IS THE CHEAT MODE we had in Civ 2?? Why did Firaxis vindictively kill the "multi.sav" cheat with patch 1.21??

The Civ 2 Cheat Mode was FUN. You know what FUN is, Firaxis?? We could change sides, control accelerated start ups, do lots of stuff. And if we wanted to actually "cheat" (like the Civ 3 AI does) SO WHAT? I paid my fifty bucks. Just LET ME have my fun.

But no. Firaxis took so much of the fun out of it all.

Give me back my Cheat Mode.

And if the AI didn't do so many stupid braindead things it wouldn't have to cheat like it does.

trickey · August 20, 2002, 21:47

I dont care if people restart, or whatever they do with the game. The thing that gets would get me mad, is if they began braggin about how good they did that game or something.

Wormwood · August 21, 2002, 01:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05
I don't restart, but I don't care if other people reload games.

I only save in stragety games only because of the complexity and the fact it take time.

First person shooters like AvPGE, QII, and JK just for a quick example I never save. If I die I want to start from the start again.

Sounds like you should try roguelike games.

Barchan · August 21, 2002, 03:08

Quote:

Originally posted by trickey
I dont care if people restart, or whatever they do with the game. The thing that gets would get me mad, is if they began braggin about how good they did that game or something.

Exactly. If I want to play the "perfect" game or I need to reload to correct a blunder, that's one thing. But it's another thing entirely to save before every combat or goody hut and keep reengineering the turn until it's optimal and then later crow about how you're such the "1337 d33t33 b33t3r" (or whatever). Unless you can take a starting position and play it out, without ever turning back, you really shouldn't be too quick to climb to the rooftop to shout out your score....

notyoueither · August 21, 2002, 03:28

Cheating AI?

Oh for frucks sakes, not this again.

Say after me... h-a-n-d-i-c-a-p. Once more with feeling. HANDICAP!

If you want to play even, play Regent. Learn to blow it away, it's too easy. So just like you give your niece or nephew an advantage to make the game interesting you give them an advantage, or in other words... you handicap yourself.

The only 'cheat' has been confirmed by Soren. The AI sees the whole map. That's it. If you can't overcome that, then he's done a pretty fantastic job.

frostycreep · August 21, 2002, 04:32

I think the AI needs to cheat in order to make harder levels a challenge. I dont think its possible to make the AI so intelligent that it thinks like a human, therefore on harder levels it needs to cheat. I see nothing wrong with this as im satisfied with the challenge im faced with on harder levels.

Coracle · August 21, 2002, 04:43

First of all, the AI does DUMB things, and we've posted them many times. There is no excuse for an AI so DUMB it sends over and over a settler/foot soldier team heading towards an open tile (resulting from razing) DURING war. I destroyed three of these braindead pairs in a row. And of course the AI was getting freebie settlers.

Why does the AI when on the defensive just build defensive units?? I once attacked China with tanks. They should have had enough cavalry and marines, and some tanks, to offer a nasty counterattack. But there was no counterattack as the stupid AI JUST BUILT DEFENSIVE units. All this proves is Soren knows nothing about strategy and planning.

Must the AI be allowed to magically TELEPORT settlers across my civ in one tuirn to open tiles it should not even know exist? That kind of cheating is intensely irritating.

Take away stupid, sloppy programming, you will, ipso facto, have a "smarter" AI.

At higher levels, let the AI cheat a little, but at least tell us what these cheats are. In Civ 2 at higher levels the odds during combat simply changed. I prefered that to the insidious sneaky cheating the Civ 3 AI does.

frostycreep · August 21, 2002, 04:55

Then play civ 2.

TacticalGrace · August 21, 2002, 05:20

The ultimate AI cheat would be for a *computer* player to restart because it got a bad starting position.

Grumbold · August 21, 2002, 06:18

Whoa, we seem to have gone from talking about the player "cheating" to the AI shortcuts. There's already a live thread on that issue

I'm tending to restart games a lot at the moment just to test out certain theories. For instance, its my current belief that certain player nations not only get situated near their historical neighbours, they also seem to get similar terrain from game to game (assuming you don't go mad wiht the world settings). For instance the Persians have an extremely high tendency to end up next to a mass of jungle. Having just played a game of early jungle clearing I might well restart until I get a truly different starting area. I do not consider that wrong, nor is it violating any rules. There's no law about having to finish any game before starting a new one. I rarely play any Civ game to the final victory since its the striving for dominance I enjoy, not mopping up the last remnants to get recorded on the score sheet.

Using a code to reveal the map and then continuing to play that map with foreknowledge of the location of good city sites and huts is something else, but I still don't have any problem with players who do that if it maximises their enjoyment of the product. After all, in the single player version they could rightly argue that they are only levelling the playing field a little with the AI, who already knows the terrain and additionally knows where all the resources will be.

In the long run, exploiting loopholes in the SP game, whether they be codes, reloads or AI weaknesses is all irrelevant when compared to multiplayer. In fact it makes those players who rely on such exploits easy opponents for those who have learned to play the game clean.

Qilue · August 21, 2002, 09:55

This is a response to all those who have stated how they are 'professional programmers'.

Considering the bug-riddled state of software these days, I would think anyone would be too ashamed to actually admit to being a 'professional programmer'.

Grumbold · August 21, 2002, 10:49

There are probably fewer bugs per line of code and there's no such thing as a standard PC any more. Unfortunately each software title has got about a hundred thousand times bigger since I first started playing games and learning how to write programs.

If you're going to write code, you might as well be a professional and get paid for it

Thrawn05 · August 21, 2002, 10:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Qilue
This is a response to all those who have stated how they are 'professional programmers'.

Considering the bug-riddled state of software these days, I would think anyone would be too ashamed to actually admit to being a 'professional programmer'.

I couldn't agree with you more.

I quite two of my jobs because my stupid bosses didn't want a clean cut and good program... they want a program that was done in the speed of "I want it yesterday!".

Coracle: This is the first time I agree with you. I think the end of the world is near.

Thrawn05 · August 21, 2002, 11:03

Quote:

Originally posted by DeepO
Cheating AI... if only people would have the slightest understanding of how intelligent they are themselves, they wold stop complaining on the lesser intelligence of software.

So far, I have yet to see an AI better then the one AvPGE. THe one in Q3/JK2 are nice, but I found them to follow a set path when you compile a map.

Of course, Chess AIs have done pretty good, and perhaps the best ones I've read.

DeepO · August 21, 2002, 11:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Qilue
This is a response to all those who have stated how they are 'professional programmers'.

Considering the bug-riddled state of software these days, I would think anyone would be too ashamed to actually admit to being a 'professional programmer'.

Hehe, I used to be an AI programmer (well, technically software engineer), I moved on. But I have yet to hear of any bugs in my products... and I can call them mine because I did more then half of the code on them. The reason why you're seeing bugs is that applications get so big, they become incontrollable. And the rush to market is also quite strong... Plus, there are millions of professional programmers at work, surely you don't imply that I have to feel responsible for some of the mess others are making? I'm still proud of what I did, and until someone tells me that I was wrong somewhere (and proofs it with bugreports an inch thick) I won't change my mind

Thramn05, chess AIs are indeed well done, but you can't compare these to the Civ III AI. (I'm repeating here, but what the heck). Big Blue was an engineering feat, and a big accomplishment in parrallel computing. The algorithms used for decision making, however, were very slim. It simply computed far more possibilities than Kasparov could, without taking any shortcuts or pattern recoginition that most of the times defines the I in AI. On a purely game level, it was worse then some of the available commercial packages (ChessMaster x000, for instance), as these are indeed relatively intelligent.

But even then, you can't compare ChessMaster to Civ. It is a series, which is centered around the AI, not around graphics. As such, it has a long standing evolution of its code (over 10 years), which progressively got improved. Civ III doesn't have this, the programming is far less focused on the AI, and it is a completely new system from both Civ II and SMAC.

Further, the level of complexity in Civ is far greater then a 'simple' chess board with limited moves. Chess is made for humans: the best (Kasparov) can foresee about 17 turns deep what is going to happen, and plan according to that. DeepBlue, through shear CPU power could see 23 turns... in Civ, I can plan ahead some 50-100 turns (inaccurately, of course), while my computer has trouble with 3 of them. So other algorithms are needed, as it is not a simple matter of doing all the possible moves, and judging what the results are. That's whay we need such 'stupid' algorithms that aim for some goal when certain conditions are met. Aiming for empty cities is obvious, but as the humans quickly see through these 'tactics', it becomes an exploit. If you want better strategies and tactics on the AI part, you either need cheats, or a development time of lets say 20 years... which in turn means you don't pay $50 for CivIII, but more like $500.

As to using cheats: everybody does as he pleases. But I object of alotting development time to including cheats, when that will only distract from having a better game in other areas. If I have to give away some of the AI functionalities because someone else has more fun when he can cheat, I think I have the right to give my opinion. So exploiting AI or game mechanic weaknesses: sure, do what you want. A Cheat mode in Civ III: no way!

DeepO

Moonsinger · August 21, 2002, 12:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Qilue
This is a response to all those who have stated how they are 'professional programmers'.

Considering the bug-riddled state of software these days, I would think anyone would be too ashamed to actually admit to being a 'professional programmer'.

There is nothing to be ashamed of. Unless you are writting a tick-tack-toe program or something, there shall always be bugs! It's as simple as that. In most of my projects, there are millions line of codes to consider. Moreover, not all of those codes are written by me. If the program runs fine for 99.9999999% of the time, that's a big success.

Btw, even a simple (less than 100 lines of code) tick-tack-toe program may not be not free of bug. Does it display? Does it play music? Does it animate? If so, you are probably calling certain Windows API or DirectX functions. Are you sure that those APIs/drivers are bug free? If a bug happens to crash your simple tick-tack- toe program, is it your false? Should you be ashamed of that? I see nothing to be ashamed of; you did your best! Since you can't possibly test your program in all computer systems out there, when bug occurs, you just have to correct it and move on. There are bigger fishes out there to catch, why worry about the little one like that.

IMO, complainers/whiners often miss the big piture.

Take civ3 for example, it gives many people countless of enjoyable hours, what is a big deal if it crashes once in a blue moon?