The "is it cheating or not" thread

[Legacy_CBrachyrhynchos]

               

WebShaman wrote...

For example, I have decided upon my build for the game.  For my entire party of halfling warriors, who all happen to have low Str and low Con (whatever.  Consider it an RP device).  That encounter now is more than just difficult, due to the build that I have selected.  It is now IMPOSSIBLE.

Well, on the one hand, encounters should be IMPOSSIBLE (or given the RNG highly improbable) for players that make bad and stupid strategic decisions on character builds. Neglecting primary and secondary stats for a character class is a handicap at best and just plain incompetent at worst.

In fact, I'd say that some stupid tactical decisions should be IMPOSSIBLE and result in messy and quick death, especially when the character has been abundantly warned about the dangers.

That said, encounters should be designed with alternatives for dextrious missile users, smart skill users, and/or squishy magic users. So there's nothing wrong with cheating to get around a bad design, or even an annoying design.

It is when one attempts to force things upon others that the dictatorship and tyranny starts.  Do not label someone in a Closed SP environment a "cheater" because they make and play by their own rules, purely for their own enjoyment.

Why not? I'm a cheater, you're a cheater. Almost everyone cheats. Why do you think there's anything wrong with being called a cheater in this context?
               
               

               

                     Modifié par CBrachyrhynchos, 13 mai 2011 - 05:12 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_The Fred]

               There's a fine line between modding and cheating, but then there's a line between the letter and intent of the law, so to speak. I wouldn't call a mod within the spirit of the game cheating, though it could be defined as such, but I would definately "label" anyone who makes things significantly easier for themselves without reason (other than "fun" etc); this doesn't make them a bad person, if that's what they enjoy, but it's still cheating (cheating =/= bad, necessarily, in an SP environment).
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_olivier leroux]

               But if someone treats a story mod merely as a "setting" to play around with and think up their own plot events, ignoring the ones provided by the mod author (no matter what the mod author thinks about that), can you still call that cheating? It's not even the same game anymore.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Guest_Lowlander_*]

               The thread that never dies. This thread has long moved past introducing any new information and has been going in circles for pages.

We simply have two groups with irreconcilable differences. There are some people in between, and some talk about the grey area, but it is the groups at either end of the spectrum that can never meet that will drive this topic endlessly in circles.

The first group, believes anything they do, isn't cheating, but "new rules". If playing a module about surviving with nothing after a shipwreck, where finding a driftwood to use as a club is a breakthrough.  They would simply give their character a set of +5 armor, +5 weapons, boots of speed, bags of holding. Hey It's not cheating, it's new rules.

The Second group, sees this as nothing but flimsy rationalizing.

On the old forum, I think we would have achieved lockdown a couple of pages back. Here I guess it can go forever in circles.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_olivier leroux]

               Put some more coal in the stove to keep the two groups warm and cosy. Ah, already done. Thank you! '>
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Elhanan]

               

Lowlander wrote...

The thread that never dies. This thread has long moved past introducing any new information and has been going in circles for pages.

We simply have two groups with irreconcilable differences. There are some people in between, and some talk about the grey area, but it is the groups at either end of the spectrum that can never meet that will drive this topic endlessly in circles.

The first group, believes anything they do, isn't cheating, but "new rules". If playing a module about surviving with nothing after a shipwreck, where finding a driftwood to use as a club is a breakthrough. They would simply give their character a set of +5 armor, +5 weapons, boots of speed, bags of holding. Hey It's not cheating, it's new rules.

The Second group, sees this as nothing but flimsy rationalizing.

On the old forum, I think we would have achieved lockdown a couple of pages back. Here I guess it can go forever in circles.

And here I thought we might see one post from you not being judgemental. My bad....

Personally, I have played the shipwreck scenr from PotSC numerous times without adding any new eqipment, but I have played with Epic characters; ones not intended by the mod designers to experience the scaling challenges.

One group sees this as expanding the rules, and increasing the enjoyment found in the mod. Hey; it's not cheating, it's new rules.

The Second group sees this as a violation of the intent of the Mod Design, and see this as cheating; some even going as far to label those doing so as cheater, perhaps in an attempt to rationalize and elevate their own self-focused behaviour.

And this ain't the old forums which would end on p10, if I recall. But I can see that all this possible circular talk might be problematic with one that is not fully grounded in the first place.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Elhanan, 13 mai 2011 - 07:57 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Shia Luck]

               

Lowlander should have written...

The first group, believes anything they do, isn't cheating, but "new rules". If playing any module...  They would simply give their character whatever was neccessary to increase their enjoyment of the game. This might be mods to make the difficulty harder, items to make their character weaker, mods to enable them to change their character's appearance, haks that add clothing options, anything, in fact, to increase the rp potential of their character and many many other ways of customising and modding the module.  Hey It's not cheating, it's new rules.

The Second group, has nothing but flimsy rationalizing to attempt to brand this as cheating.The only logical argument is that this is changing the module from the designers intent, which is exactly the same as modding something, but the 2nd group are scared to call modders "cheaters" and prefer to fall back to repeating illogical accusations and emotional rhetoric.

Just try it lowlander. Substitute your usual examples with "items that make the character weaker" or "mods that make the game more difficult" instead of lamely going on about adding in uber gear.

*snuggling up to the fire*

Have fun '>
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Shia Luck, 14 mai 2011 - 12:34 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_WebShaman]

               Shia, we have already firmly established that Lowlander's debate does not stand up, logically.  It is a moot point at this time in the conversation.  It is a belief, nothing more, nothing less.

It will not be changed by any type of parading of facts, evidence to the contrary, or logical argument or proofs.  There is a major study that was concluded that explains how this type of human mentality acts, that attempting to convince such belief in someone of the contrary that it just pushes said person further into their belief, reinforcing it.

Should Lowlander ever offer a rebuttal (a logical one, that is) to the main fact proven (Cheating is breaking the rules; in a Closed SP environment the Player themselves make the Rules, therefore the Player cannot be breaking the rules as they, themselves, have made them), then perhaps we will reopen that portion of the debate.  Seeing as how no-one has been able to do so in the many years following the last one, I hardly think that we will see any really new contradictions here.

What is now at the center of the debate is the position that there MAY be cheating in a Closed SP environment vs there is no cheating in a Closed SP environment.

We just need to get past that point here, with those who are now ready to accept it.

Then we have reached the consensus that was reached on the old forums, and it is a done thing.  Of course, there will always be a strong vocal minority that cannot believe the facts, cannot follow a rational, logical argument and debate and come to the consequential conclusion.

After all, there are still those who believe despite all evidence to the contrary (note the word believe here, it is the important distinction) that Obama was not born in the US, there are those who still feverently believe that the world is flat, etc.

They remain as they are, fixated in their belief, in denial of the facts and the logical conclusion of the proofs.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

WebShaman wrote...

in a Closed SP environment the Player themselves make the Rules, therefore the Player cannot be breaking the rules as they, themselves, have made them)

Which is part I dont agree too.
I dont think you can make rules. I thought about it carefully, I firstly though that if there is a group of players that makes a guild where they use their own rules it won't be cheating.

But when I read some posts here and start to think about it more + I read about one political issue in newspaper today I don't think so anymore.

Look.

There are some default rules thats not written, spoken, but agreed by majority of players and that are based on engine, common sense and morale. Can agree to this peoples?

Now, you can think that you can change these rules for yourself and if you do it in your house you are not breaking them. Yes you can, BUT you have to expect that other peoples will call you cheater if they ever find out (therefore the idea of Closed single player doesnt seem to me possible). Cos they are playing just the same game. Telling them that you can cheat in your house cos there are only your rules in acceptance is BS.

And this thought does work not just for any game but real life too. Like you would murdered your childrens and then call the court that you can do that cos its your house and was your childrens.

Someone argumented that NWN is special case but his arguments why it should be didnt persuaded me to accept them so I treat NWN, any SP game, even MP game the same way.

And BTW Im cheater. I cheated in SP (not anymore cos found out its only me who is losing fun) and even in multiplayer games mainly NWN. I dont need to rationalizing this, if I get banned and I was few times I can accept this.<><>

               

                     Modifié par ShaDoOoW, 14 mai 2011 - 03:09 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Elhanan]

               

WebShaman wrote...


... What is now at the center of the debate is the position that there MAY be cheating in a Closed SP environment vs there is no cheating in a Closed SP environment.

We just need to get past that point here, with those who are now ready to accept it....

While I concur that there may be reasons to add rules beyond the start of the game, I do contend that a Player may be tempted as in life to stray beyond the intended guidelines of play they wished to use. If the Player's new rules do not break such intent, then that would not be cheating.

However, if that Player spoils the game thus cheating themselves of a better gaming challenge or experience based on their chosen rules, then I hold that the Player bit the lure, and snagged themselves. Reload!


               
               

               
            

[Legacy_olivier leroux]

               

ShaDoOoW wrote...

WebShaman wrote...

in a Closed SP environment the Player themselves make the Rules, therefore the Player cannot be breaking the rules as they, themselves, have made them)

Which is part I dont agree too.
I dont think you can make rules. I thought about it carefully, I firstly though that if there is a group of players that makes a guild where they use their own rules it won't be cheating.

But when I read some posts here and start to think about it more + I read about one political issue in newspaper today I don't think so anymore.

Look.

There are some default rules thats not written, spoken, but agreed by majority of players and that are based on engine, common sense and morale. Can agree to this peoples?

Now, you can think that you can change these rules for yourself and if you do it in your house you are not breaking them. Yes you can, BUT you have to expect that other peoples will call you cheater if they ever find out (therefore the idea of Closed single player doesnt seem to me possible). Cos they are playing just the same game. Telling them that you can cheat in your house cos there are only your rules in acceptance is BS.

And this thought does work not just for any game but real life too. Like you would murdered your childrens and then call the court that you can do that cos its your house and was your childrens.

Nope, this is something I strongly disagree with for a change. If we have to call something BS, then it's using moral arguments in a NWN single player environment, comparing it to committing murder or even just stating that the SP player is breaking some written or unspoken laws of a community. He (or she) is not because it's a SINGLE PLAYER game, noone is hurt, there is no police, no judge and jury, no referee but the player himself and whatever he does doesn't affect the community one bit because there is no community in single player  unless you step out of your own house and compare yourself to other players or tell them to adapt your ways.

In a Multiplayer environment it is reckless to play by your own rules and will most likely impair the fun of other players. It's not your own house, and by joining a Multiplayer server you automatically accept becoming member of a community and agree to the terms of conduct. Since you forcibly agreed to them, you can't just switch to your own set of rules (unless the server's rules allow it). If you do, you break the rules and are a cheater and since you thereby disrespect the community and its laws, the community has the right to punish and expel you.

All of this has no relevance in a single player environment, as stated. It doesn't make any sense to mix these two totally different concepts.

And btw, as trivial as this sounds, children are living beings not anyone's property and as a father you are not a single player but a member of the small community of your family, and the law is only there to protect the life of your children (who count as members of a greater community, too) not to impose rules of conduct unto you in your own house. The law doesn't care what ingredients you mix when cooking and if you eat your meals from the floor or the table or in bed, or if you eat the dessert before the main dish, or if you nourish yourself by eating desserts and sweets only, unless someone else (e.g. your children) is negatively affected by it. Human law or more specifically law enforcement is only relevant for communal life and loses its relevance if you're the last human on earth on a lonely isle - or a single player who is just enjoying himself (although you may still value and abide some laws you think sensible and useful for your own life or game). '>

And yes, you always have to expect that other peoples will call you all kinds of names. That doesn't make them right though.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par olivier leroux, 14 mai 2011 - 05:36 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Guest_Lowlander_*]

               

WebShaman wrote...

Should Lowlander ever offer a rebuttal (a logical one, that is) to the main fact proven (Cheating is breaking the rules; in a Closed SP environment the Player themselves make the Rules, therefore the Player cannot be breaking the rules as they, themselves, have made them),

LOL!

You insisting that your beliefs are facts, doesn't make them proven facts.

Simply giving yourself piles of gold, +5 weapons, bags of holding to a starting character because you are too lazy to play the module as intended, isn't "new rules". It is simply cheating.

Just about everyone does and has done so throughout the history of computer games and they have referred to it as cheating throughout that time. It really should NOT be that big a deal to talk about it in that context.

But here it is such a big deal for a certain group of cronies, that it requires this bizarre justification and rationalization, that you are making "new rules".

To me the real story here isn't single player cheating, it is the baffling defensiveness, rationalizaions and self deception around it. 

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks".
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Lowlander, 14 mai 2011 - 06:02 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_jmlzemaggo]

               Let's use gaming for what it is: no rules but ours, the only way to fully experiment everything.
I quite enjoy playing evil here in NWN. But never in my life.
Maybe because that game showed me that it wasn't my thing after all.
Also trying to keep any NWN thread out of the personal fights, that's the only morality I could care about.
That thread could get very interesting, when it's about cheating only, not about who is good or who is bad.
Or who is right and who is... wrong. My most hated despicable word.  
Let's stick to the title of the thread, please?
Philosophy being the only science that can't afford being cheap. 
Cheat! 
               
               

               

                     Modifié par jmlzemaggo, 14 mai 2011 - 07:30 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_WebShaman]

               

Elhanan wrote...

WebShaman wrote...


... What is now at the center of the debate is the position that there MAY be cheating in a Closed SP environment vs there is no cheating in a Closed SP environment.

We just need to get past that point here, with those who are now ready to accept it....

While I concur that there may be reasons to add rules beyond the start of the game, I do contend that a Player may be tempted as in life to stray beyond the intended guidelines of play they wished to use. If the Player's new rules do not break such intent, then that would not be cheating.

However, if that Player spoils the game thus cheating themselves of a better gaming challenge or experience based on their chosen rules, then I hold that the Player bit the lure, and snagged themselves. Reload!

Elhanan, it is not about what one may think or believe about it, it is what the logical conclusion is to what we are discussing and debating here that is important.

I think this concept is what some here are not considering.  Sure, one can have beliefs about the topic, or even think or consider it to be something that it is not.  However, logically following the proofs leads to the only conclusion that I have given.

It is that simple.

Cheating is breaking the rules (given).

In a Closed SP environment, the Player is Dev, Mod creator, DM, and Player all in one (defined, given).

In a Closed SP environment (defined, given), the Player (defined, given) themselves make the rules (logical conclusion following the definition of what a Closed SP environment is).

As such, a Player cannot break their own rules, as they make and decide them. 

For example, if it is possible for a Player in a Closed SP environment to break their own rules (without having a split personality), then Devs break the rules everytime they make changes to the game, and Mod Creators, etc, as well.  For the original "game" was first decided upon, and then changed during the course of development, and afterwards (through patches, for example).

So are the Devs and Mod creators "cheating"?  What if the changes make things easier (this often happens in the QA rounds, btw)?  Is it cheating?  Are they "falling to temptation" to make things easier?

Now, I have also defined what a Player is in a Closed SP environment is, as stated above.

For example, what if I choose to play my game without the engine?  Yes, one can do this.  Turn off the creature AI with the DM client, and do rolls manually for all involved.  I have actually played combat out this way - it is unique, much closer to the PnP feeling, and can be quite fun (though time-intensive).  You may need two computers to do this in a Closed SP environment (run the Mod as a Server, log in with the DM client, and then play through another).  Now I can do anything that I want, in any manner or fashion.

@ShaDoOw - your example does not meet the definitions that I have set here.  Therefore, they fall outside of the debate.  Any comparison with others is no longer a Closed SP environment.  And yes, I have already proven that a Closed SP environment exists, as I and others have experienced such.  This is also reliably repeatable by others, so it stands up to peer review.

It sounds to me like some just do not wish to accept that 1+1=2.  Not accepting it, however, does not make it false.

@ Lowlander - please submit your rebuttal to the proof, please.  It should be able to be repeatable and stand up under peer review.
 
               
               

               

                     Modifié par WebShaman, 15 mai 2011 - 02:18 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Elhanan]

               @ Web - The glitch I see in your objective problem review is that the DM in a solo game is not infallable. I contend that one may cheat themselves out of a better game, ruin play, and spoil the experience; not just break technical aspects.

I guess the difference in our positions is that while you contend for a completely objective def of cheating as breaking the rules, I also included (see early in thread) the def of spoilage as cheating; as it violates the intent of the rules which is to enjoy the game. This is the heart of the Law. And the Law is (or should be) both motive and method, IMO.