PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Bits o' Crap: Napster, GameFan and cheating
October 3rd 2000, 13:31 CEST by andy

My subjective guide to some current stories. You'll read it because you're weak...



Napster

According to this CNET story, Napster is considering a subscription charge. The figure being thrown around at the moment is $4.95 per month, intended to help pay off record companies. Absolutely no plans to make a profit, I'm sure.

Napster's ongoing claims of innocence are starting to convince people that really shouldn't be convinced, according to a quote in this BBC story. Judge Mary Schroeder is quoted as saying, during the Napster hearing on Monday: "Napster doesn't have any idea what's being transmitted." (Hasn't anyone at Napster ever used their own service?) The same BBC story includes a picture of Shawn Fanning, founder of Napster, posing in front of the Stars & Stripes. How patriotic does that make you feel, Americans?

Another BBC story reports the findings of researchers at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center in California. According to the story: "Some experts are starting to ask if Napster-type services have any long-term future, and if the attitudes they encourage are doing more harm than good... The analysts believe the current band of net song-swappers will be superseded by similar systems set up by the record companies themselves that aim to make money and protect intellectual property." There's much more to it than that so click the link.

GameFan

Three days after GameFan told their affiliates to pack up and go home, the company's web site now says: "Please excuse the interruption of this site, but our servers are currently experiencing some technical problems. Our crack team of engineers is working on getting this site up and running, so be sure to check back soon!"

Express.com's PR director Daniel Wool is interviewed on Gamers.com, saying some stuff that a lot of people won't believe. Here's a quote: "GameFan.com and a few other Express.com properties will continue to operate as they always have. Unfortunately, there are currently some technical difficulties with the transition to another hosting provider and we are working on getting them back online as soon as possible." And check out the bold word in this quote: "We are currently reconciling payments against true contractual obligations and will be issuing notice to Associates shortly." I wonder who decides what a "true" obligation is? Probably the same people who are telling us about these "technical difficulties", ie: the most honest people you could ever hope to meet.

Fatbabies is quoting an e-mail sent by GameFan director Justin Brunell to "VE STAFF" (the staff at VoodooExtreme). One source tells me that the e-mail is genuine. Not surprisingly, the contents of the e-mail don't quite tally with the interview on Gamers.com, ie: "GFN is not performing at the level we had all anticipated. This lack of GFN advertising combined with the high burnrate of a pre-IPO company puts Express into an unsatisfactory financial situation." Let me remind you: Technical difficulties.

Kevin Deselms of GameFan Online posted this message to a web forum explaining that "three of the remaining five GameFan Online staffers ... were let go by Express.Com today", himself included. He even had to sign a non-disclosure agreement when he left. Let's all say it again: Technical difficulties.

Cheating

Another interview about cheating on Barrysworld hands an open mike to the maintainers of three cheat sites, giving them just enough rope to hang themselves. Here's a quote from one of them: "We constructed our 'cheat' in first place to gain an advantage. We played Quake 1 a lot in former times, and by then the clever people who painted the model skins white won more often. So we see cheating as a bit of cleverness. Capitalism sometimes is very similiar: some people call it cheating, some just got an idea to change things for their advantages..." Good point about capitalism if you ask me, but I'm sure capitalists will disagree with a resounding chorus of "that's different".

C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Bits o' Crap: Napster, GameFan and cheating

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "asspennies"
2000-10-03 13:37:18
asspennies@coredump.org http://www.coredump.org/
Hey, I'm a big fan of music piracy.  Count me in Napster's corner.

Let's face it, this is about control, the RIAA's control over the music industry.  I never turn on a popular station anymore because I simply can't stand the music that is being fronted by these pathetic labels.  Give me non-commercial radio any day.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#2 by "Eyegore"
2000-10-03 14:20:34
eyegore@cfl.rr.com
Napster's move to a paid subscription service model would have almost the same effect as if it were forcibly shut down.  A dozen napster-like programs would take it's place, all of them free of charge and Napster would fade into obscurity.  The programmers and suits behind Napster didn't make it the phenomenon it is today.  The people did, and no money was ever involved.  Whoever is looking at Napster as some sort of potential goldmine of money will be sorely disappointed.

Free music is nothing new.  We've had free music pumped in through our radios for well over 50 years.  The idea is that you hear it, want to buy the CD, and more importantly you might want to go see the band when they come around on tour.  That's where the musicians of the future will make the majority of their money...just like they did since medieval times.  It's nothing new.
#3 by "glock"
2000-10-03 14:32:58
shawn@stomped.com
On Napster: Eyegore is right...if Napster begins to charge, a dozen free services will take its place.  Free music will continue to be distributed over the Internet.  It's not whether it's ethical or not...it'll just happen.

On GameFan: That, like...sucks.

On Cheating: Online cheating is dispicable.  It's these kids that just can't stand to lose that decide "well, since I can't aim worth a crap, I'll have a bot do it for me...look, no I'm l33t!"  There have been times when I've played online against opponents in FFA and 1v1 matches and I was sure they were cheating.  However, I didn't say a thing.  I couldn't prove it.  Shouting "cheater!" at someone when you cannot prove it ruins the game for everyone within broadcast distance.  Here's a tip: if you think your opponent is cheating and he's really giving it to you...suck it up.  This kind of thing is going to happen to you your whole life.
#4 by "Milamber"
2000-10-03 14:48:45
milamber@amoeba.com.au http://www.wagz.net
All this talk of cheating reminds me of something I used to do way back in my QWorld days. If I remember correctly, you used to be able to download great big skin-packs, I'm not entirely sure whether they were official or not, but a *lot* of people played using the skins in the skin packs. A good proportion of the skins would be really excellent, some of Ken Scott and Rorschachs' finest stuff are Q1 skins. However, for every good skin, they would be one that was entirely black, brown, or black with a letter/scrawl on the back. Whenever I downloaded one of the skinpacks, I'd go through them and colour in all the fully black skins in fullbrights.

The burning question is, was that cheating? I don't think I was gaining any tactical advantage, because generally the people that chose skins like that were those who would stand in a dark corner and fire blindly, believing themselves to be invisible. There were a couple of blackish skins that I always found that I left a fair few darkish skins, mainly because it was obvious that a lot of effort had been put them.
#5 by "Whisp"
2000-10-03 15:21:30
whisp_@hotmail.com
<b>#4</b> "Milamber" wrote...
<QUOTE>All this talk of cheating reminds me of something I used to do way back in my QWorld days. If I remember correctly, you used to be able to download great big skin-packs, I'm not entirely sure whether they were official or not, but a *lot* of people played using the skins in the skin packs. A good proportion of the skins would be really excellent, some of Ken Scott and Rorschachs' finest stuff are Q1 skins. However, for every good skin, they would be one that was entirely black, brown, or black with a letter/scrawl on the back. Whenever I downloaded one of the skinpacks, I'd go through them and colour in all the fully black skins in fullbrights.</QUOTE>

If you are still interested in these, <a href="http://www.polycount.com">polycount</a> still offers this sort of thing.  While they haven't really had any large skin or model packs since q2, they have many, many, many skins and add-on models for Q2, Q3A, HL, and UT.  Some of them are very good, others just passable.  They also refuse to post "cheat" skins or models.

-Whisp
#6 by "Whisp"
2000-10-03 15:29:08
whisp_@hotmail.com
<b>#5</b> "Whisp" wrote...
<QUOTE>If you are still interested in these, <A href="http://www.polycount.com">polycount</A> still offers this sort of thing.</QUOTE>
Apparently the redirection is broken at the moment.

Try <a href="http://www.planetquake.com/polycount/">http://www.planetquake.com/polycount/</a> instead.

-Whisp
#7 by "Eyegore"
2000-10-03 15:36:35
eyegore@cfl.rr.com
<quote>Whenever I downloaded one of the skinpacks, I'd go through them and colour in all the fully black skins in fullbrights.</quote>

That's interesting...a cheat that only counters another cheat.  Personally I find the idea of coloring skins to give a player an advantage to be highly despicable, especially since my favorite q2 mod of all time is gloom, and a good part of it involves spiders creeping around in the shadows.  I've seen screenshots showing how some human players modify the skins to make the spiders glow in the dark and it makes me sick.  It really takes a big part of the games strategy and flushes it down the toilet.  It'd be nice of they could could add in some code to future games to detect this sort of tampering.
#8 by "Prfbrain"
2000-10-03 15:45:20
brain@arn.net
<b>Napster:</b> There are far too many other ways for people to get mp3's other than napster for them to charge for it. Napster may be the most convenient, but I still don't see people shelling out $5 a month for it.

<b>Gamefan-Express.com:</b> Biggest hunk of bullshit I've ever read. Seems to me they neither have the willpower or the finances to pay those sites that are still owed money. If they can keep spilling lines of bullshit to keep the hounds off their ass, they will.

<b>Cheaters:</b>I can't believe they actually try to justify their actions. <quote>CR0N0S/H3X: The reason we make cheats or make the available on our website is because after playing a game for such a long time the game eventually becomes boring. Cheats bring a new perspective on the game, and therefore bring a new level of fun to the game.</quote> Yeah, it makes it tons of fun. Yay, I just got sniped from across the map again by someone using a wallcheat. Yippeee!! Fun!! Wheee! Oh the mapmaker didn't mean for this dark corner to be a hiding spot, so there's nothing wrong with having hot pink skins on all the models. /me sighs<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#9 by "PainKilleR-[CE]"
2000-10-03 15:52:16
painkiller@planetfortress.com http://www.planetfortress.com/tftech/
Napster's only useful as long as a lot of people are using it. Charging $5 a month for it's use is a good way to cut down the audience, and therefore reduce it's usefulness. After a while, people will start to realize they're paying for less than they were getting for free, and eventually Napster will (or should) fold. No big deal, there're already plenty of Napster clones out there that access all of the same servers and more.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#10 by "David Long"
2000-10-03 16:05:54
ogv@gamestats.com http://ogv.gamestats.com
<b>#Main Post</b> "andy" wrote...
<QUOTE>The same <A href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_953000/953921.stm">BBC story</A> includes a picture of Shawn Fanning, founder of Napster, posing in front of the Stars & Stripes. How patriotic does <I>that</I> make you feel, Americans?</QUOTE>

Doesn't this guy remind you of the smarmy fucks that you used to hate back in school? You know the ones, they always had plenty of money from mommy and they always seemed to get away with something illegal while hiding behind some ridiculous notion of "rights". I hope this guy and his company crash and burn. It'd be nice to see some of these dips with the <i>new money</i> end up getting a taste of humble pie.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#11 by "PainKilleR-[CE]"
2000-10-03 16:06:26
painkiller@planetfortress.com http://www.planetfortress.com/tftech/
<b>#Main Post</b> "andy" wrote...
<QUOTE>Another <A href="http://www.barrysworld.com/news/columns.asp?Author=43&Category=34&Item=18571">interview about cheating</A> on Barrysworld hands an open mike to the maintainers of three cheat sites, giving them just enough rope to hang themselves. </QUOTE>

You know it can't be a good thing that I actually know what site one of those people runs. Guess it comes with the territory, though, as you certainly can't tell if someone's cheating if you don't know what cheats are out there. It's somewhat interesting to read, but it's nothing new. All 3 of them sound like someone stole their lunch money at various parts of the interview, though ;p

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#12 by "Game Watchdog"
2000-10-03 16:35:37
editor@gamewatchdog.com http://www.gamewatchdog.com
Actually Steve Fanning has little to do with the actual operation of Napster anymore.  He made the thing, but his Uncle and investors own most of the rights.  He only gets about 10% of its take.  Now, while this doesn't exhonerate him form the shiesty behavior Napster is involved in, he's not really a posterchild for all that was wicked in high school.  He had an idea.  He made good with that idea.  Then he got $$ in his eyes and became what he despised.  

As for GameFan... I know plenty of folks who are getting cheated by these pukes.  Can anyone say "class action suit"?

Cheaters?  About the same as Warez in my book.  They both really ruin the industry for me....
#13 by "Axel"
2000-10-03 16:48:42
axel@fatchicksinpartyhats.com
<QUOTE>
He even had to sign a non-disclosure agreement when he left.
</QUOTE>
That sounds like a bunch of bullshit. You can't be forced to sign a NDA, that would be unconstitutional. People sign NDA:s in order to get something else in return, usually classified technical information or a good job.

"Hey, punk. Sign this NDA or we won't fire you!"

Yeah, right...
#14 by "fyrewolf"
2000-10-03 16:58:50
I loved the comment that if Napster charged $4.95 a month, they could bring in $500 million dollars for the RIAA in 2001.  Even if they gave every dime to the RIAA, they would need to keep at least around 9 million users.  Is this even feasible?  Even though they have 28 million users, how many of them have been active in the last six months?  And of those active accounts, how many are willing to pay for mp3s?  That's not wishful thinking, it's delusional thinking.
#15 by "Len"
2000-10-03 16:59:56
From <a href="http://www.gamefan.com">
www.gamefan.com</a>:
<quote>Our crack team of engineers is working on getting this site up and running, so be sure to check back soon! </quote>
So they're relying on their "crack team of engineers" to secure funding for the company... Well, it's pretty obvious where their problem is.
#16 by "GrifteR[BTEG]"
2000-10-03 17:30:32
schwaaby@home.com http://www.bteg.com
On Cheating:  I think the whole cheating scene is shit.  I play Team Fortress for Quake and basically there are 2 servers I play on, Intel Midwest Anti-Cheat server and Im12's Jungle Gym.  For a cheater to come on there and be lame to use a wallhack or an autoaim bot is just flat out shitty due to the fact that TF doesn't have many servers left.  Cheater's say they cheat for "fun".  Yea, go cheat for "fun" on yer own private server instead on a public server where you fuck up our game.
#17 by "Woo-Fu"
2000-10-03 17:39:21
random1@speakeasy.org
Napster, hahahaha.

For them to implement a subscription system, they'd also have to implement active monitoring of what is/isn't downloaded and who is doing it, exactly the things they've said they can't do.

I thought we only saw bald-faced piracy of this scale in places like China.

If they're smart, they're building newnapster, tailored to protect most if not all of the copyright holders rights and then marketing it as an engine for digital music distribution.  Then they can license it to the different labels.
#18 by "err head"
2000-10-03 17:39:23
err_head@yahoo.com
<b>Napster</b>
It's difficult to justify paying napster when they don't even provide the servers.  The thing that makes napster useful isn't the # of users, it's the # of songs those users share out.  Now if they structured the price so that you're costs are a function of how many songs you download vs. how are downloaded from you.  If they provide enough of an incentive to share they might even be able to beat the <i>tragedy of the commons</i> which really seems to be plaguing gnutella, scour, and others. maybe something along the lines of a quarter a song, .05 to the server you grab the song from, .05 to napster, .15 to the copyright holder of the song.
Given the # of transfers per month (as <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13699.html">reported by the register</a>) at 1,400,000,000 this would be 70mil/month for napster, and 210mil/month for the record industry. People with spare bandwidth could make money, people who just suck songs would pay the most, and copyright holders wouldn't be missing out.

<b>Gamefan</b>
From www.voodooextreme.com
<QUOTE>Please excuse the interruption of this site, but our servers are currently experiencing some technical problems.
Our crack team of engineers is working on getting this site up and running, so be sure to check back soon!

-- Billy "Wicked" Wilson
</QUOTE>
Is billy really just parroting the company line? I can feel the McBlink withdrawls starting up...

<B>Cheating</B>
I think it would be cool to watch a variety of bots playing away to see who's better. I don't think i've run into a Starcraft or Age of Kings bot yet, but it would just be a strategic/tactical challenge to outplay the computer that I for one would welcome. But I play mainly games that require thought, I guess I can see how if the game is based simply on how quick ones reflexes are it would be hard to compete against a computer.  

<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#19 by "PainKilleR-[CE]"
2000-10-03 17:40:03
painkiller@planetfortress.com http://www.planetfortress.com/tftech/
<b>#16</b> "GrifteR[BTEG]" wrote...
<QUOTE>On Cheating: I think the whole cheating scene is shit. </QUOTE>

Definitely agreed, and doesn't it make you feel even better that at least one of those guys in that interview is hosting TF cheats? (actually, it was the main purpose of his site until CS became so big) If it hadn't been TFC that got me to stop playing TF, it would've been the cheating, especially after the release of the QW source. It seemed like every game I went into after that had at the least a speed cheater (though those guys were fun to kill), and over time there just seemed to be more cheats here and there as people found more things they could easily hack into the exe file by editing one or two numbers here and there.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#20 by "David Long"
2000-10-03 17:45:20
ogv@gamestats.com http://ogv.gamestats.com
<b>#18</b> "err head" wrote...
<QUOTE>

<B>Gamefan</B>
From www.voodooextreme.com

<quote>Please excuse the interruption of this site, but our servers are currently experiencing some technical problems.
Our crack team of engineers is working on getting this site up and running, so be sure to check back soon!

-- Billy "Wicked" Wilson
</quote>
Is billy really just parroting the company line? I can feel the McBlink withdrawls starting up...


</QUOTE>

Is that for real? Hey Apache, did Billy really put that up there or is this Gamefan covering their asses? It has no reference to lubing or wack-ass server crap so I imagine this isn't a direct BW quote.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#21 by "Nick Burns"
2000-10-03 17:47:28
The_Nick_Burns@hotmail.com http://www.planetcrap.com
<b>#10</b> "David Long" wrote...
<QUOTE>Doesn't this guy remind you of the smarmy fucks that you used to hate back in school? </QUOTE>

Aren't all Brits smarmy fucks?  Well, except your Flamethrower, your a super smarky flaming fuck!  ;)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#22 by "NOIDIE"
2000-10-03 17:53:50
#12- who the hell is STEVE fanning?
#23 by "PainKilleR-[CE]"
2000-10-03 18:06:50
painkiller@planetfortress.com http://www.planetfortress.com/tftech/
<b>#18</b> "err head" wrote...
<QUOTE>I don't think i've run into a Starcraft or Age of Kings bot yet, but it would just be a strategic/tactical challenge to outplay the computer that I for one would welcome. </QUOTE>

Starcraft may not have bots, but it's definitely had multiplayer cheats since day one. A quick search brought up three main hacks, for both StarCraft and the Brood Wars expansion, those being a maphack (I guess it reveals the whole map without having to explore), a speed hack, and a never lose hack. Created by the same people that made many of the Diablo trainers, too. Age of Kings, on the other hand, reveals nothing more than the standard single player cheat codes. That doesn't mean the cheats/hacks aren't out there, just that the standard, somewhat simplistic search methods I use to find out about the existance of such things turned up nothing. It could just be due to the sheer number of people playing (or that did play) Starcraft online vs. Age of Kings, or it could have something to do with the ease with which people seem to be able to make these hacks/cheats for Blizzard's games.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#24 by "Kynn"
2000-10-03 18:11:02
kynn@no-skill.net
First off, this post is purely to add another viewpoint to the conversation - it does not necessarily entail my opinion on the matter.

If I were a quake3 fanatic, enjoyed playing the game for whatever reason - I may at some time be in the position to use a cheat.  Why should I say no?  To appease those people who don't want me to use them?  To follow some sort of moral code in gaming? I thought I bought this game so *I* could have fun? (Forget for the moment that I may have pirated it).

Where is the obligation for someone who pays X amount of money for a game to play it by your rules?  If he wants to cheat, then he will cheat.  The fact that we don't like it isn't a part of the argument.  He has paid his money, and deserves the right to play it however he feels outside of competitions or tournaments where a prize is at stake.

Why should any of us play a game the way other people want us to?  We should play it in the way that makes us have fun.

For a forum that touts that gaming should focus on the 'fun' aspect, we sure are trying to tell other people how they should enjoy their games by our rules.

Isn't this what we slam developers for?
#25 by "Shinji"
2000-10-03 18:12:01
shinji@gameloft.co.uk http://www.gameloft.co.uk
<quote>So they're relying on their "crack team of engineers" to secure funding for the company... Well, it's pretty obvious where their problem is.</quote>

Ahh, a basic translation problem you see; what they mean is, "our team of engineers on crack"...<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#26 by "Andy"
2000-10-03 18:15:13
andy@nospam.planetcrap.com http://www.meejahor.com/
<b>#24</b>, Kynn:
<QUOTE>
For a forum that touts that gaming should focus on the 'fun' aspect, we sure are trying to tell other people how they should enjoy their games by our rules.
</QUOTE>
I've seen it more as people telling them that they shouldn't force <i>us</i> to play by <i>their</i> rules. I don't think anyone would object to a bunch of cheaters getting their own server and cheating against each other.
#27 by "Kynn"
2000-10-03 18:22:54
kynn@no-skill.net
#26, Andy

Good point, but who get's to choose which side should force the other to play a certain way?  Why do non-cheat users have more rights than those who do?  Sure, they're cheating, but they paid for the game and have a certain right to play it how they like.

In an ideal world, sure, we'd all play on different servers... but that's not going to happen.
#28 by "Gabe"
2000-10-03 18:33:05
gakruger@hotmail.com
<b>#27</b> "Kynn" wrote...
<QUOTE>
Good point, but who get's to choose which side should force the other to play a certain way? Why do non-cheat users have more rights than those who do? Sure, they're cheating, but they paid for the game and have a certain right to play it how they like.

In an ideal world, sure, we'd all play on different servers... but that's not going to happen. </QUOTE>
Given that the game did not come with these cheats, I would say that the non-cheaters have a stronger position in saying the game should be played without cheats.

For the most part, cheaters are being assholes. There are no laws against that, but it just isn't friendly. :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#29 by "Whisp"
2000-10-03 18:34:56
whisp_@hotmail.com
<b>#13</b> "Axel" wrote...
<QUOTE>That sounds like a bunch of bullshit. You can't be forced to sign a NDA, that would be unconstitutional. People sign NDA:s in order to get something else in return, usually classified technical information or a good job.

"Hey, punk. Sign this NDA or we won't fire you!"

Yeah, right... </QUOTE>

Sign this NDA or you lose any severance benefits, and we tell everyone you "weren't a team player"....

-Whisp
#30 by "asspennies"
2000-10-03 18:35:50
asspennies@coredump.org http://www.coredump.org/
<b>#27</b> "Kynn" wrote...
<QUOTE>Sure, they're cheating, but they paid for the game and have a certain right to play it how they like.
</QUOTE>

I think there's no legitimate way to <b>justify</b> cheating.  They are ruining the game for many people, plain and simple.  But it's also pretty much impossible to stop.

And once the files are out on the internet, it's like pissing in a pool.  There's no way to remove them.  So you're stuck with having to continously update, or simply abandon your game to the cheaters, who will, if unchecked, run rampant.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#31 by "PainKilleR-[CE]"
2000-10-03 18:36:02
painkiller@planetfortress.com http://www.planetfortress.com/tftech/
<b>#27</b> "Kynn" wrote...
<QUOTE>Sure, they're cheating, but they paid for the game and have a certain right to play it how they like.
</QUOTE>

Shouldn't everyone have a right to play the game as it was intended by the developers to be played? Once someone comes along using a hack like the aimbot, it starts infringing on the rights of the other people on the server that bought a game that didn't include an aimbot (and the aimbot isn't something that was allowed by the EULA either).

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#32 by "mother"
2000-10-03 18:37:56
mother@codenet.net
<b>#24</b> Country and Western Recording Star "Kynn" wrote...

<QUOTE>Why should any of us play a game the way other people want us to? We should play it in the way that makes us have fun.</QUOTE>

That's what I told the mean policeman who threw me in jail for driving my car on the wrong side of the road.  He didn't seem to see it our way either.  "But officer, I bought my car just like everyone else.  Who are you to tell me how to drive it!"  Damn society!  They set up all these rules and regulations for my social interactions! Screw them! Screw the man!

mother
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#33 by "Kynn"
2000-10-03 18:48:52
kynn@no-skill.net
#31 Painkiller,

<quote>Shouldn't everyone have a right to play the game as it was intended by the developers to be played? Once someone comes along using a hack like the aimbot, it starts infringing on the rights of the other people on the server that bought a game that didn't include an aimbot (and the aimbot isn't something that was allowed by the EULA either). </quote>

Does this mean that mods should be banned if you don't like them either?  That's not how the developers 'intended' it to be played in a few cases aswell.  Naturally, mods are a different story since you can choose to play it or not - but it does have some small similarities.

#32 mother,

<quote>That's what I told the mean policeman who threw me in jail for driving my car on the wrong side of the road. He didn't seem to see it our way either. "But officer, I bought my car just like everyone else. Who are you to tell me how to drive it!" Damn society! They set up all these rules and regulations for my social interactions! Screw them! Screw the man! </quote>

Hi mom!
This is a little different as there are no hardset rules on how we should play games - it's based on user preference... imho :)
#34 by "mcgrew"
2000-10-03 19:00:56
mcgrew@famvid.com http://theFragfest.com
"Napster's ongoing claims of innocence are starting to convince people that really shouldn't be convinced, according to a quote in this BBC story."

I didn't se the story, does the BBC say that the people being convinced shouldn't be, or is that your take? Whose ever, I would disagree that napster is doing anything wrong. With you or the BBC, whoever said it.

"There's much more to it than that so click the link."

I'm in text right now but I will later, thanks.

"This lack of GFN advertising combined with the high burnrate of a pre-IPO company puts Express into an unsatisfactory financial situation..."

Close enough to a "technical difficulty" for a marketing weenie, I suppose. Marketing weenies have technical problems, too (assuming a "technical problem" is defined as any insoluble problem)

"He even had to sign a non-disclosure agreement when he left."

They would have to bribe the HELL out of me to get me to sign something like that after firing me! WTF? I can't believe he signed!

"Capitalism sometimes is very similiar [to a quake cheat]: some people call it cheating, some just got an idea to change things for their advantages...' Good point about capitalism if you ask me, but I'm sure capitalists will disagree with a resounding chorus of 'that's different'."

I've never had enough capital to be a capitalist, but I don't see anything different at all. IE, microsoft should be broken up, just like the law says. Cheater gets caught, cheater gets his balls busted. Sounds fair to me.

"Our crack team of engineers is working on getting this site up and running, so be sure to check back soon!"

"Our team of crack engineers..." Yeahm, that sound more honest, their spokesman must be dyslectic.


      [1] asspennies "I never turn on a popular station anymore because I simply can't stand the music that is being fronted by these pathetic labels. Give me non-commercial radio any day."

Yeah, what moron decided that lame bizkit and eminenema belonged on a rock station? Oh yeah, empty v, sorry.

I listen to commercial radio- but only with a remote.

What's agravating is these stations KNOW how to play mucic I like, as they do it when they first start. For a year a new rock station will kick ASS, w/o one minor key whiner song, then when they get an audience the labels shovel shit their way and they feed it to us.

Fuck empty v, long live REAL rock.


      [2] Eyegore "The idea is that you hear it, want to buy the CD, and more importantly you might want to go see the band when they come around on tour."

Except from what I've read and heard the concerts are money losers but they can't get airplay without them. I guess it sucks to be a Hole.

"That's where the musicians of the future will make the majority of their money...just like they did since medieval times. It's nothing new."

That's where most musicians are making their money now; only 1% or some tiny number like that have a contract with a label, most of them are in bars or at the Ramada or somewhere. Many give lessons. You'ld be surprised at how many menbers of bar bands hold advanced music degrees.


      [3] glock "Free music will continue to be distributed over the Internet."

And how else would you know the Jungle Dogs exist? Where else would you buy one of their CDs? I mean, besides at the bar...

"Shouting 'cheater!' at someone when you cannot prove it ruins the game for everyone within broadcast distance."

Which is my only bitch against cheaters. I HATE having a bad day and being told "you sUx0rz", then having a good day and being called a cheater. It's lose/lose, and the cheater with the high score didn't win, either, as he wasn't really playing; his bot was.


      [4] Milamber "The burning question is, was that cheating?"

IMO, yes (unless you were standing against a bright background), but I see where that is debatable. Is the "kenny" skin cheating, though? It's a small, hard to hit target, and nobody wants to be called a bastatd (well, except the GSI guy)


      [9] PainKilleR-[CE] "No big deal, there're already plenty of Napster clones out there that access all of the same servers and more."

This gives me a belly laugh- Gnutella isn't being sued, because there is nobody to sue! When napster charges, napster dies.


      [10] David Long "I hope this guy and his company crash and burn."

He just wrote the program, his uncle turned it into a business. I'm sure they've both cashed in now that the VC have stepped in.
#35 by "mother"
2000-10-03 19:01:37
mother@_HI_MOM_codenet.net
<b>#33</b> Country and Western Recording Star "Kynn" wrote...
<QUOTE>This is a little different as there are no hardset rules on how we should play games - it's based on user preference... imho :)
</QUOTE>

You forgot the unwritten rule of PLAYING BY THE RULES!  User preference don't count for jack when you have to play with other kids.

mother<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#36 by "VeeSPIKE"
2000-10-03 19:03:54
appliedavoidanc.dont.fucking.spam.me@triton.net
On cheating:

I found this comment to be particularly hypocritical

<quote>Q3. Do you use the cheats you write or collect yourself?</quote>

It was met with this answer:

<quote>S_N_A_A_K: if we can... 100% but in these days not, since we do not play so much at the moment - and on LAN parties, noone cheats.</quote>

What the hell? Does this mean you cheat only when you are not going o get your monitor situated around your neck if you get caught? What is the sacred quality associated with a LAN game that the Internet is not allowed to have.
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#37 by "PainKilleR-[CE]"
2000-10-03 19:05:01
painkiller@planetfortress.com http://www.planetfortress.com/tftech/
<b>#33</b> "Kynn" wrote...
<QUOTE>Does this mean that mods should be banned if you don't like them either? That's not how the developers 'intended' it to be played in a few cases aswell. Naturally, mods are a different story since you can choose to play it or not - but it does have some small similarities.
</QUOTE>

mods aren't done by reverse-engineering the executable (which violates every EULA I've ever bothered to read), and they also can't be played by only one person of a group on the server. It could also be argued that models and skins are in a gray area as well, especially since it's easily possible to use the ability to edit those to your advantage (as has been seen quite extensively in Half-life), but for the most part, as long as the pure mode works in Q3, the servers have some control over that.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#38 by "Darkseid-[D!]"
2000-10-03 19:05:12
Darkseid-d@planetcrap.com http://www.pcinformer.co.uk
To borrow/paraphrase a quote from Dick 'Rogue Warrior' Marcinkos business guides.

The people at the top of an industry set the rules, you cannot beat them when you play within _their_ rules. The answer to beating them? Change the rules. I dont mean break the law or do anything illegal, change the approach, find alternatives. Do things that are against the tack of common thinking. Think outside that box.  As sure as you stay inside that box trying to beat someone at their own game, you'll lose.

Take Mr Dyson and his bagless vaccum cleaners as an example, his designs and ideas were laughed at by the industry. He made his own rules and look where he is now today, multi millionaire, best selling vaccum cleaner in the world. *personal addition* He's also just kicked the crap out of HOOVER for patent infringement thats going to cost them heavily.

end paraphrasing.

Now, is rocket jumping _cheating_, is bunny hopping _cheating_, is wall strafing _cheating_, is turning the gamma up _cheating_, is capping the frame rate to get through certain gaps _cheating_.

I detest people who resort to aimbots or spiked models to 'win' at games, Ive played around with quite a lot of them in the past. I dont use them against other people because I wear that [D!] which is/was a mark of sportsmanship and excellence in the game.

People shouldnt cheat, its not fair.  Buckle up folks LIFE isnt fair, gee what a surprise.  If someones cheating, fine, you too have that choice, cheat or not cheat. If you choose not to and someone else does, change the rules, change the situation, or leave. They have just as much right to cheat as you do not to cheat. Alls fair in love and war, rings very very true here.

Deep down inside tho, cheats know that theyre not winning on their own abilities, they know that sooner or later, karma catches up with them and payback is extracted.

IN summary, many things we take for granted in games are construable as cheats. Theyre not, theyre exploitation of the rules in the game to someones advantage. If they can do it, so can you. You just dont _have_ to do it.

Ds

ps Cheating sucks, to borrow from EED 'Get some skills'<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#39 by "Kynn"
2000-10-03 19:07:37
kynn@no-skill.net
#35 mother,

<quote>You forgot the unwritten rule of PLAYING BY THE RULES! User preference don't count for jack when you have to play with other kids.</quote>

Well, that's my point.  If someone chooses not to play by the rules the community sets, who are we to say they 'have' to ?  They are enjoying a game they paid for, and because we dislike it we tell them not to.  If I were a cheater I'd tell us to fuck off myself.  I don't want anyone telling me how I should play a GAME.  

When I do play q3 I enjoy using the railgun, if someone doesn't like me using it due to map imbalances, does he have any right to say I can't ?  After all, many consider it an 'unfair' weapon in Q3A.
#40 by "Kynn"
2000-10-03 19:10:21
kynn@no-skill.net
#37 Painkiller,

<quote>mods aren't done by reverse-engineering the executable (which violates every EULA I've ever bothered to read</quote>

We're going to base our arguments of what's right and wrong off lawyers now? ;)

Good point all in all, just thought I'd give you shit for that one snippet :)
#41 by "^mortis^"
2000-10-03 19:13:22
mortis@goddamnindependent.com http://www.goddamnindependent.com
#38, Darkseid-[D!]<I>Deep down inside tho, cheats know that theyre not winning on their own abilities, they know that sooner or later, karma catches up with them and payback is extracted.</I>


I don't know if Karma's wasting her precious time with video game cheaters...
Luckily, most Highschool Bullies will take over where Karma fails.

^M^
#42 by "Kynn"
2000-10-03 19:15:19
kynn@no-skill.net
#38 Darkseid,

There you go, you've explained it better than I was able to.
#43 by "mother"
2000-10-03 19:16:25
mother@_HI_MOM_codenet.net
<b>#39</b> Country and Western Recording Star "Kynn" wrote...

<QUOTE>Well, that's my point. If someone chooses not to play by the rules the community sets, who are we to say they 'have' to?</QUOTE>

WE are the majority.  If some jerk wants to run around the bases in the wrong direction, WE can throw the ball at their head the next time they come up to bat.  That's who WE are.

mother<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#44 by "PainKilleR-[CE]"
2000-10-03 19:17:58
painkiller@planetfortress.com http://www.planetfortress.com/tftech/
<b>#40</b> "Kynn" wrote...
<QUOTE>We're going to base our arguments of what's right and wrong off lawyers now? ;)
</QUOTE>

and you really think that the developers want people reverse engineering their executable? In the case of Quake 3, the developers pretty much decide what code is available to the public (up to a point, the publisher might have some say in it), and reverse engineering gets around the limits set by the available code. It's like the difference between the cheats available for QuakeWorld before the source code release and after the source code release. The cheaters had a much easier time once all of the code was available, because they didn't have to reverse engineer anything. Generally speaking, if it can't be done with the released tools, there's not much chance that the developers wanted it to be done (and that being said, I'm sure someone out there could probably find a way to make an aimbot without reverse engineering the executable or making a proxy).

In the long run, there are a lot of gray areas for what's considered cheating, but I don't think you'd find a lot of people out there that would say an aimbot is anywhere near that gray area, it's just completely off the scope of the intent of the developers.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#45 by "Darkseid-[D!]"
2000-10-03 19:24:48
Darkseid-d@planetcrap.com http://www.pcinformer.co.uk
btw Ive played Goodguy (and his partner Onyx) on various servers.

decidedly AVERAGE player, he's shite without the cheats


on one game he played, I consistently got in his way and spoiled the game for him, like standing in front of the crate he was 'seeing' thru and sniping people, or flashbanging him.


the saddest part was he admitted cheating and bragged 'you all want scores like mine'

he was 29-12, I was on 18-1 without cheats, and most of the kills were on him.

Hell Im note even claiming to be 'great' at Cs but with what I did to him and his lamer playmate, I rest my case

Ds<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#46 by "mother"
2000-10-03 19:26:37
mother@_HI_MOM_codenet.net
<b>#38</b> Country and Western Recording Star "Darkseid-[D!]" wrote...

<QUOTE>Buckle up folks LIFE isnt fair, gee what a surprise. If someones cheating, fine, you too have that choice, cheat or not cheat. If you choose not to and someone else does, change the rules, change the situation, or leave. They have just as much right to cheat as you do not to cheat. Alls fair in love and war, rings very very true here.</QUOTE>

Have you ever thought about becoming some kind of motivational speaker :P

To paraphrase:

"Life is full of cheaters...if you don't want to cheat, perhaps you should leave..."

Buckle up my ass...that's more like give up.

mother
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#47 by "Darkseid-[D!]"
2000-10-03 19:34:36
Darkseid-d@planetcrap.com http://www.pcinformer.co.uk
mother, go back and read again.

'If you choose not to and someone else does, change the rules, change the situation, or leave.'

if your boss cheats you out of a pay rise in work, you can quit or move to another job. If the taxman takes too much in taxes you can change the situation.

you dont have to just sit there and whine about it.

Ds<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#48 by "Kynn"
2000-10-03 19:35:24
kynn@no-skill.net
#44 PainKiller,

<quote>In the long run, there are a lot of gray areas for what's considered cheating, but I don't think you'd find a lot of people out there that would say an aimbot is anywhere near that gray area, it's just completely off the scope of the intent of the developers.</quote>

Sure, it's not a gray area, I never denied that an aimbot or any other method ISN'T cheating.  I'm simply saying that I feel we don't have the right to tell someone how to play a game.  If they want to cheat, more power to them, go nuts... if they're having fun doing it, so what?  It doesn't ruin my fun in the slightest, I don't get angry when I've lost to a cheater as I haven't really lost at all (I'm capable of admitting that an algorythm can aim better than I can in most cases).

The question I pose to you isn't 'are they really cheating?' it's 'Do we have any right to tell them not to?'.  They're enjoying playing the game a certain way, you and I don't ... so what?  Sure, the developers didn't intend the game to be played that way - but if it makes the experience more enjoyable for 'em... by all means, go nuts and do it.  It's not our place to tell them they 'can't' play the game that way because we dislike it.

If it's a case where it's impossible to compete with the cheaters, then perhapts it should be stopped - however, from my experience that isn't the issue.
#49 by "mother"
2000-10-03 19:51:01
mother@_HI_MOM_codenet.net
<b>#47</b> Country and Western Recording Star "Darkseid-[D!]" wrote...

<QUOTE>you dont have to just sit there and whine about it. </QUOTE>

So the burden of doing something about it falls to the guy who follows the rules as intended.  I just wanted to play a game - not chase cheaters around with a rolled-up newspaper.

mother
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#50 by "PainKilleR-[CE]"
2000-10-03 19:56:33
painkiller@planetfortress.com http://www.planetfortress.com/tftech/
The two biggest problems I have with cheaters are:
1) they tend to be full of themselves, for reference:
<b>#45</b> "Darkseid-[D!]" wrote...
<QUOTE>the saddest part was he admitted cheating and bragged 'you all want scores like mine'
</QUOTE>
I've seen many more cases like that, the most recent being a case where a guy was shooting off about how great he was at playing sniper in TFC on various message boards, and someone finally tricking him into revealing himself as a cheater (using a spiked model pak).

2) they don't know where to draw the line, and not caring about someone using a cheat in a public server leads to that person sometimes believing it would be ok to use the same cheats in a competetive match. Just the existance of cheats brings a lot of doubt into play in both competetive and non-competetive play, because some people just can't believe that a good player wasn't cheating. At least one TFC clan has recently been kicked out of a league because one of their players used the spiked model pak in a match, and there have been a lot of rumours going around about other clans using them. It's a detriment to the game when there's no available method to combat it short of having an impartial spectator and having every player in the game turn in a screenshot taken at a time of that spectator's choosing. In other words, the cheating doesn't just effect the people in the game with the cheater, it effects every match and public game being played in that particular game, simply because the cheats exist and go unchecked.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Bits o' Crap: Napster, GameFan and cheating

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]