To the "Moral" Player

[Footwork]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

"I, personally, Ban anyone who "Bunny Hops" or "Dolphin Dives" on my Unit's server. I don't allow it, I don't stand for it, and it completely destroys the feeling of "Squad Level Tactical" gameplay for my unit. I don't even warn people. I see them hop. They are gone, permentaly banned."

u rule sir.

[spartan915]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

[quote=Wargimp]
Now, to get to the actual point;
The community has dubbed, en mass, certian behaviours to be exploits.
People have every right to put voice their distastes. If they don't, then no ajustments to mechanics will ever be made and the game will never evolve into something better.quote]

I agree that the game has flaws major/minor. I don't choose to use these tactics but they are there for the people that do which is an issue. I just don't think we should/need to abuse that JackA**es that employ them. Kill them, Boot/Ban them whatever. I'm just tired of reading all the threads about it. PS. love the name, Wargimp. Laugh everytime I read it.

[evilzucchini]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

It dosnt prevent people from having fun, and using it is not equiviliant of cheating. If anyone is to blame, it is EA for enabling it, not the people doing it.

That's like saying if I leave my wallet out in front of my apartment and YOU steal it, it is my fault.

Sure, I made a mistake, but you still committed the crime.

[UnrealAlex]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

Jeez why did you write an AP English sized Essay on this -.- Too much time on your hands man

[Jlspence]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

Let me outline a premise, which I have thought long and hard about:

As a player, you have absolutely no right to criticize another a person's style of play. You have every right to criticize a flawed game, but not how someone chooses to play it.

If you choose to abstain from bunny-hoping, or any other tactic that's labeled "unrealistic", within a game engine that was never intended for "realism", then BRAVO!

But please, keep your self-righteous indignation to yourself.

TAW_Ender, I understand your premise but disagree. First of all, everyone here has a "right" to criticize any other person's style of play, their grammar, their spelling...anything they want to criticize as long as it is done in a manner consistent with the Total BF2 forum rules. Unless and until the rules are changed to preclude posts complaining about playing styles (which would be dumb), it is most certainly within everyone's right to be self-righteous and indignant.

Similarly, bunny-hoppers, dolphin-divers, spawn campers, noob tubers, lone wolfs, etc. have the "right" to post the wonders of their playing styles and snub their noses at the self-righteous and indignant.

Bottom line, what difference does it make? Sure it would be nice if everyone could discuss topics in an intelligent (legible and readable) manner without resorting to childish personal attacks but the maturity level of all who play BF2 varies greatly and that is directly reflected in the posts that show up in forums like this.

[TAW_Ender]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

Personally, I don't give a damn how people play (now). So I really do fall into category 1. At first, when I sucked and I was really only frustrated with myself, I complained that other players cheated. However, I had an epiphany where I realized that I play the game for me and for fun so I shouldn't let other numbskulls ruin my fun.

That being said, I disagree with your premise (Although I applaud you for starting a real and well thought-out debate).

The problem is that the intent of the design is not always fully realized when the game is complete. Without having the thousands of people playing the game constantly, it is nearly impossible to discover all the imbalances and exploits in the game.

Certainly, I would hope, you would not condone someone hacking the code and giving themselves god like powers. These people exploit a hole in the code.

What about if you discovered a way to warp underground and shoot up through it to kill people simply by jumping and sprinting in a certain order that is not immediately obvious to all players? Do you think it would be okay to do this because it was in the game and everyone could do it? I would hope not because it is quite an exploit of the game.

I, personally, consider either of the above people to be cheaters. They are exploiting a hole in the game that was not meant to be there. Certainly it was not the intent of the programmers to allow people to give themselves god like powers or fall through the floor to gain an edge.

Now comes the sticky part, defining the intent of the programmers. . .

I know there is a fine line between the balance of realism and playability but undeniably this game was supposed to have a real type feel to it. Considering the bulk of FPS's out there are zero deviation on your shots and this game requires you to do certain things to minimize that deviation, I would be hard-pressed to say that they weren't going for some kind of realistic feel to it.

What I am driving at is that I doubt that the programmers, while designing this game, envisioned fields of soldiers jumping around and proning in the air only to fall down on the ground and then stand up and do it all over again. I don't think it is completely off the mark to say that this flies in the face of the intent of the programmers. Although, granted, I do not know. However, at the same time, if I were able to get underground, one could also argue that we do not know that the intent of the programmers was for this not to happen. However, in both cases, I think the answer is fairly obvious.

That being said, like any other situation where people take advantage of things the programmers didn't think about (such as hacking a way they didn't think about and thus didn't protect from exploiting a bug in their code) and go against the INTENT of the programmer, taking advantage of a hole in the game that flies in the face of the intent of the programmers can be considered a form of cheating and it is completely understandable why some people would be ****ed off about it.

That being said, I do think they have the right to bitch about people playing the game a way it was not intended as, like other exploits, it could be considered cheating. . . However, I do think they are really only frustrating themselves as it is a fact of life that people are going to take advantage of mistakes by the programmers and play the game in a way that gives them the best chance of winning (as you said).

Their best recourse, as you have noted, is to take aim at having the program itself fixed so that the intent of the programmers can be fully realized.

I understand the ambiguities you're trying to draw attention to.

However, I feel my first post made it readily apparent where I stand on "hacking" - it's cheating. Working within the game engine to achieve an advantage is not cheating.

Of course, with any principle, there are overriding circumstances.

If a player were able to "warp" without hacking, this would be an exploit the developer never concieved of. It could be constituted as cheating, just as hacking should be. An example would be the "ghosting glitch" within Halo 2, an exploit that allowed players to warp and capture flags without fighting the enemy team.

(Note, on purely logical basis I don't believe the above mentioned exploit, or any simmilar exploit, can be considered "cheating" without a clear statement from the EULA or developer. This statement is in effect the word of "God", and forms the basis for gaming "morality". Although they are entitled to make criticism, the individual attitudes of the community are irrelevant.

No such statement has been issued for dolphin-diving, or bunny-hoping. You will not stats reset for using a questionable "tactic".

I admit to being in vast minority with this particular stance. Again, I feel the burden rests on the programmer to engineer a game that allows for "balanced" play. The player cannot be held accountable for working within the game engine.)

The primary purpose of "game", by any definition, is to WIN. "Realistic" fighting techniques will only be used if they are required - if they are an effective strategy in achieving a WIN.

We each enter a game with different expectations. One could make the argument that where the average player enters the game expecting immersion, the "amoral" player derives his enjoyment from the intellectual challenge the game presents to him. Neither player is any more "correct" in his attitude.

I argue that DICE was fully aware of the potential for bunny-hoping and dolphin-diving to be exploited - through some lapse in quality assurance they allowed it to remain in the initial release, perhaps believing players would decide it was "dishonorable" to use it.

It would take a small child no more than fifteen minutes of play testing to discover it's advantage.

I find it impossible to believe a developer could release a "modern combat" themed first person shooter in 2005 without paying careful attention to the "jump" system.

America's Army, COD1, DOD, Counter-Strike 1.6, and Counterstrike Source all are examples of games that have experienced the same sort of problem, implemented fixes, or were released with mechanisms in place to prevent the abuse of the jump function.

Granted, Battlefield 2 is some what of an enigma.

If the developer found the jump and prone exploits to be a serious problem, or to be a "cheat", they would have fixed it in the first patch released. We've had two successive patches without such a fix.

In fact, DICE themselves admit the changes being introduced within the next patch are based primarily on "community opinion", not their own concerns, or own wishes to fix what they percieve to be "problems" or "glitches" within their game.

Ultimately, it's irrelevant to speculate about the "intention" of a developer. The "game" must be thought of as existing in a completed state.

[WarGimp]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

I agree that the game has flaws major/minor. I don't choose to use these tactics but they are there for the people that do which is an issue. I just don't think we should/need to abuse that JackA**es that employ them. Kill them, Boot/Ban them whatever. I'm just tired of reading all the threads about it.

Unfortunatly, as I mentioned it's not only an expected element of a community to harp on things they don't like, but it is in fact a requirment if we want things to improve. Granted, it tends to go overboard, but if a big stink isn't made the devs will never know what they need to look at.

It's unfortunate that Dice doesn't have better communication with the community. If they were willing/able to give us more interactivity with them, most of the anger and frustrations would vanish. Without it, all we can do is yell as loud as we can and hope they notice.
Game companies in general need to look towards Bioware and Irrational Games as models of good community involvment. Both run their own community sites where they speak and listen to their following. It works wonders. EA, on the other hand, is so bound down in being a huge corpration that they gag their developers. If you work for EA, you can be fired for making posts on any gaming forum!

PS. love the name, Wargimp. Laugh everytime I read it.

Yer welcome. Makes me giggle too.
It think tells people that I don't take myself or the game overly seriously while my posting lets people know I've got a brain in my head.

[iewgnem]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

EA made a buggy game, bunny hopping and all that, you can argue both ways, its cheap, but its built in, so the conclusion?

EA built a game with built in hacks, decreasing the amount of fun people get out of it. It dosnt prevent people from having fun, and using it is not equiviliant of cheating. If anyone is to blame, it is EA for enabling it, not the people doing it.

However now that EA have it built in, you just have to adapt or leave, or whine until it is hopefully fixed.

[imported_The 13th Raptor]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

Just in case I ever go to vegas. Please prove you are not the minority. If you were the majority, "this place would be a tad more packed than it is."

I cant prove it, i do believe im part of the majority, but that is not even an educated guess.

The Battlefield series has always been arcade style. That is part of my enjoyment. Who do you think you are to demand the artist changes his art for you?

I got plenty ground to request a change in the game, i bought the game just like you did, you voice your opinion, so do i. Dice/EA decided to change the game, its their property. The difference is that one group is happy, and the other isnt.
If people care about their game, they should be part of the community. Where else is Dice suppost to get feedback from?

You have no ground to stand on when you are provided tools, for free, to create the battlefield of your dreams on thier canvas. In other words go play a mod, and leave vanilla for those of us that enjoy it the way it is. I am not trying to say there is never any reason to request a change. I am saying that some things have to be accepted when playing an arcade style game. I bear you no ill will, it just seems as though our opinions differ on what BF was designed to be.

I enjoyed BF1942, i enjoyed BF:V, those were arcade, i didnt mind, but in some ways, BF2 takes it to far, so i complain. Its my opinion, we all own a copy of the game, which gives me the right to request a change as much as you have a right to be against a change.

We have gone off topic a bit. It is not about the threads complaining about this or that, it is about the threads insulting those that use tactics that are provided within the game. Like the O.P. said, you can chose not do do those things but dont you dare look down on or personaly insult those that do. Afterall you are the ones that are not content with the current game and wish to impose your own vision on the rest of us.

I agree that the insulting is not neccesairy at all, but it goes both ways. People who request nerfs and changes are called "babies", "whiners", they are told to "deal with it". People are getting called the same things for being against the nerfs.

we just need to learn to respect eachother, and eachothers opinions. Its not "your" game, its not "my" game, its Dice's and EA's game.

[TAW_Ender]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

TAW_Ender, I understand your premise but disagree. First of all, everyone here has a "right" to criticize any other person's style of play, their grammar, their spelling...anything they want to criticize as long as it is done in a manner consistent with the Total BF2 forum rules. Unless and until the rules are changed to preclude posts complaining about playing styles (which would be dumb), it is most certainly within everyone's right to be self-righteous and indignant.

Similarly, bunny-hoppers, dolphin-divers, spawn campers, noob tubers, lone wolfs, etc. have the "right" to post the wonders of their playing styles and snub their noses at the self-righteous and indignant.

Bottom line, what difference does it make? Sure it would be nice if everyone could discuss topics in an intelligent (legible and readable) manner without resorting to childish personal attacks but the maturity level of all who play BF2 varies greatly and that is directly reflected in the posts that show up in forums like this.

Certainly, within this forum community you have the right to criticize another player.

But logically, those criticims are nothing more than the opinion of an individual player or group. The game is the only thing that can be objectively analyzed, not the player.

[TAW_Ender]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

[quote=SpartanODST]

Now, to get to the actual point;
The community has dubbed, en mass, certian behaviours to be exploits.
People have every right to put voice their distastes. If they don't, then no ajustments to mechanics will ever be made and the game will never evolve into something better.quote]

I agree that the game has flaws major/minor. I don't choose to use these tactics but they are there for the people that do which is an issue. I just don't think we should/need to abuse that JackA**es that employ them. Kill them, Boot/Ban them whatever. I'm just tired of reading all the threads about it. PS. love the name, Wargimp. Laugh everytime I read it.

Wargimp's logic is flawed because he offers no definition of the "community" he describes.

The totalbf2 community? The BF2 community? The CAL community?

Without such a definition, this argument breaks down.

Irregardless, the "community" of which we speak has no right to impose its own game ethic on the individual player.

Different "communities" view the game in different ways, and form their own individual defintion of exploits.

[A_Dirty_Hippie]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

I got plenty ground to request a change in the game, i bought the game just like you did, you voice your opinion, so do i. Dice/EA decided to change the game, its their property. The difference is that one group is happy, and the other isnt.
If people care about their game, they should be part of the community. Where else is Dice suppost to get feedback from?
I enjoyed BF1942, i enjoyed BF:V, those were arcade, i didnt mind, but in some ways, BF2 takes it to far, so i complain. Its my opinion, we all own a copy of the game, which gives me the right to request a change as much as you have a right to be against a change.
I agree that the insulting is not neccesairy at all, but it goes both ways. People who request nerfs and changes are called "babies", "whiners", they are told to "deal with it". People are getting called the same things for being against the nerfs.we just need to learn to respect eachother, and eachothers opinions. Its not "your" game, its not "my" game, its Dice's and EA's game.

I agree Dice will change the game as they see fit to fulfill what they invisioned BF2 to be. Perhaps I went a little far with the whole artist thing. I respect the fact that some players want a more realistic enviornment for thier digital combat, but those players have to realize that some people wish to have a more arcade experiance. There is nothing wrong with suggesting changes that you would like in the game. However to incessantly complain about one or two aspects of the game becomes counter productive and results in flameing and thinly disguised insults. My only request is that if you want a change please discuss it with an open mind. Realize that the game was not made that way and you are requesting a change not demanding a fix.

[evilzucchini]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

If a player were able to "warp" without hacking, this would be an exploit the developer never concieved of.

Ultimately, it's irrelevant to speculate about the "intention" of a developer. The "game" must be thought of as existing in a completed state.

These comments, IMO, directly contradict each other. If the current state of the game is to be able to warp or to exploit it in anyway (which would be fully within the game engine), such as being able to get into buildings that you should not be able to get into, then, according to the latter quote, you should have no problem with it until EA addresses.

Personally, I think you are just drawing a line like most other people on what is reasonable to assume was the developers' intent. I agree that it is impossible to define where the line exists. . . however, IMO, considering the general feel of this game, i think it is obvious that they did not want bunny hopping/dolphin diving.

Sort of off topic question: When you play in clan matches (I think I picked up that you do) are there absolutely no rules?

If the developer found the jump and prone exploits to be a serious problem, or to be a "cheat", they would have fixed it in the first patch released.

I disagree with that especially considering the fact that BF has been so buggy and, IMO, there were much more pressing issues (and still are) than this to deal with. They rushed the game out, what would make you think that they wouldn't rush the patches out as well?

On top of that, they may have seen the exploit but couldn't come up with a way to properly deal with it without affecting something else that they did not want to change.

Granted, Battlefield 2 is some what of an enigma.

LOL! (and this is just joking around)Your whole premise falls apart because you expect EA and DICE to have actually THOUGHT about things before hand!

In fact, DICE themselves admit the changes being introduced within the next patch are based primarily on "community opinion", not their own concerns, or own wishes to fix what they percieve to be "problems" or "glitches" within their game.

I am not sure where you are getting this sentiment from. I read variable's post that had the updates in them and it didn't appear that they said this.

Note, on purely logical basis I don't believe the above mentioned exploit, or any simmilar exploit, can be considered "cheating" without a clear statement from the EULA or developer.

Considering they released a list of the updates and made it clear that they are going to do away with this in the next patch, do you now consider it to be an exploit?

[Sloi sauce]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

Oh, look... I can crack my copy of Windows, find an exploit and use it to **** with other people: I suppose it's okay to do so because the programmers left something that has allowed it to happen.

Get ****ing real.

[Sloi sauce]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

Bottom line: dolphin-diving and other exploitative methods of play are obvious to everyone. The question is, are you part of those who will stop at nothing to gain an advantage you know shouldn't be available to you in the first place ? Proof for this viewpoint ? They're patching the game. Go ahead and preach about your right to use these 'tactics' if the engine allows for it, but understand that some of us have realized that all of them were programming/design oversights that had to be fixed in time.



EDIT: missed a word :P