Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Online Games That Redefine Risk

Posted by simoniker on from the get-fragged-can't-afford-groceries dept.

Thanks to the New York Times (free reg. req.) for their article on the growing world of pay-to-play Internet FPS gaming, concentrating particularly on the YouPlayGames and Ultimate Arena sites, the latter of which is run by former Quake world champion Dennis 'Thresh' Fong. The article points out that "...groups concerned about the impact of computer games say that what these sites offer is gambling, which can make the games even more addictive." But according to pay-to-play FPS-er Tyler Hatton, the cash aspect is a positive thing: "Without money, if you're down a few kills, you might get lazy and accept defeat. When you're in a serious game for money, you put all you have into it. You start doing things you didn't know you could do, pulling off great moves."

21 comments

  1. media by Dreadlord · · Score: 1

    I haven't read the article yet, but plz don't say it blames games for making gambling more popular or something, this sucks, looks like the media is trying to link every single bad thing in thw world to gaming :/

    --
    The IT section color scheme sucks.
  2. Liability for cheating by dafoomie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If somebody cheats, and wins, who is liable? The cheater? The host? All I see are lawsuits from sore losers... How many times have you heard, oh he cheated, I didn't lose. Oh sorry, that was a practice, you didn't actually win. And of course, the 'do-over'.

  3. Hello? Clue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Without money, if you're down a few kills, you might get lazy and accept defeat. When you're in a serious game for money, you put all you have into it. You start doing things you didn't know you could do.

    Ummm, yeah, that's the problem. You've done nothing but reinforce his point. Good job.

  4. Yeah, what a hustle... by EarwigTC · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From the Ultimate Arena ToS:

    Ultimate Arena reserves the right to reset the win-loss record of players suspected of cheating in tournaments offered on the Site.

    Right, because detection has worked so well on free services. These will eventually be used only by the best cheaters out there. The plus is that some cheaters will be there instead of playing casual games.

    --
    Promote civility: mod down any post starting with 'ummm'.
  5. it's not gambling.. it's a skill game. by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    a big difference between the two(from a legal point too).

    if 3rd parties are betting on the outcome of the match then that's gambling, but it's not gambling for the players to submit a fee and then compete and for the winner then to get that prize.

    horses don't gamble, they compete.. is tiger woods gambling? are football teams gambling? no.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    1. Re:it's not gambling.. it's a skill game. by smallfries · · Score: 1

      Its a very good point and leads to the question, 'Is this the beginning of pro-gaming?'. After all, these are players competing at something for money, and you can assume that over time all of the best players will gravitate towards pay services. How long before games-player becomes a possible career move?

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    2. Re:it's not gambling.. it's a skill game. by anon*127.0.0.1 · · Score: 1

      Pretty strange definition of gambling there. Seems to me that if you're competing in an event in which you can lose money, you're gambling. Don't poker players gamble? I suppose you could argue that they're submitting a fee (the ante) and then competing, but it sure looks like gambling to me.

      Tiger Woods isn't gambling because he doesn't pay a fee to play in a tournament. If he and I go out on Monday and play for five bucks a hole, we're gambling.

      --
      I am NOT a man!
      I am a free number!
    3. Re:it's not gambling.. it's a skill game. by Flamerule · · Score: 1
      if 3rd parties are betting on the outcome of the match then that's gambling, but it's not gambling for the players to submit a fee and then compete and for the winner then to get that prize
      Pretty strange definition of gambling there.
      Actually, it's the dictionary definition:
      gamble
      v. gambled, gambling, gambles
      v. intr.
      1. a. To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest.
      1. b. To play a game of chance for stakes.
      ... omitting the other, more general definitions of doing anything risky. It's only gambling for the participants if they're playing a "game of chance". FPS doesn't qualify.
      Seems to me that if you're competing in an event in which you can lose money, you're gambling.
      No. Strictly, you don't "lose" money; you can only gain it. In Ultimate Arena, for example, everyone pays a tournament entry fee, and whoever wins takes the prize. I'd compare it to, say, one of those stupid carnival games, like where you try to toss a ring over a bottle. There, you pay a fee to get in, and you have the possibility of winning a prize.
      Don't poker players gamble?
      Yes, because poker is a game of chance. To forestall your objection over this category, the dictionary defines "game of chance" as
      A game, usually played for money or stakes, in which the winner is determined by a chance event, as by drawing numbers or throwing dice.
      Actually, that's kind of limp. Well, I'll just say that chance plays a larger role in a game of chance than it does in a game of skill. I don't think anyone would argue with me that FPS is 95% skill.
      I suppose you could argue that they're submitting a fee (the ante) and then competing, but it sure looks like gambling to me.
      It's not "arguing", it's a fact. That's what they're doing.
      Tiger Woods isn't gambling because he doesn't pay a fee to play in a tournament. If he and I go out on Monday and play for five bucks a hole, we're gambling.
      The defining factor isn't the (non-)existence of an entry fee, but the nature of the game. I don't know if Tiger has to pay entry fees or not -- I imagine he at least has to pay a PGA membership fee or some such -- but if I entered myself into a local tennis tournament for $5, for which there was a $500 winning prize, would I be gambling? Clearly not, except in some small semantic sense in which anything risky someone tries to accomplish is "gambling".

      Oh damn, that's not what you're saying, is it? If so, who gives a crap? It's not like casino gambling, and no one should be complaining over it. Actually, I have no problems with casino gambling, either.

    4. Re:it's not gambling.. it's a skill game. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      not at all strange definition.

      that's the definition most places use for gambling(placing bets on things of which outcome you cant effect, or so). poker can be in a gray area since it can be considered to be a partly skill game, but with some rules it too can be turned into (theoretically) luck based as well and played against house.

      and entering in most sport competitions does cost you an entrance fee, of course being on slashdot not many us have entered. heck, entering a demoparty competition costs money usually in the way of the ticket.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  6. The rainbow colours of money by AllenChristopher · · Score: 1

    I've been considering dropping out of life to hustle Puzzle Bobble for a living. Is there anywhere on this too-sad planet you can do that?

  7. bad bad bad.... by JFMulder · · Score: 1

    You start doing things you didn't know you could do
    This is exactly what obcessive gamblers have been doing for years. They pull off bold moves, INCLUDING selling their house, car and clothes to fuel their gambing habit.

    Bad analogy.

  8. "suspected of,"/ gaming insurance/ gaming logs by SolemnDragon · · Score: 3, Insightful
    to reset the win-loss record of players suspected of cheating

    So... is there any word on what recourse a player has who is 'suspected' of cheating but wasn't, or is this Homeland Security for Virtual HomeLands? I know that this has been going on for years, and i know that the host company has the right to change scores as it sees fit. However- is there any posting in the game that explains how they will determine cheating, etc.?

    I'm guessing that regardless of the validity of click-through contracting, there are going to be more lawsuits. Lawsuits get brought in a lot faster when money is on the line, and someone who plays for long periods of time only to lose said money is going to want a method to get it back.

    I'm a pessimist, i suppose, but i can see this eventually opening up into another huge money pit- 'gaming insurance,' 'virtual lawyers,' and 'third-party player advocates,' who get paid solely to witness the game. MAybe even the development of the personal game log, which follows you around logging everything that you do in the game so that it can be presented as evidence that your 'suspected cheating,' was not cheating but was legitimate gameplay.

    On the other hand, maybe a third-party player advocate/ game log might not be an entirely bad thing, if the user had the ability to turn it off and on, knowing that only actions logged in a continuous series of play would be admissable, and if the user got to control how it was used- for example, a game log that the user could turn on and that the user could store but not open (which would require some form of regular reportage, to ensure that it was working properly) but could turn over if there was a dispute and then get it back again???

    On the other hand, if the hosts weren't so unwilling to pay attention, none of this would be necessary...

    --
    "I'd say 'Have a good time,' but arson is still illegal.
  9. Try it on a LAN by frenchgates · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Some friends and I did this years ago when we had Marathon on a Mac LAN. We had been playing after work daily until one of us said "Hey, let's each put in a dollar this game and the winner takes the pot." We played a game like this and there was a totally different level of intensity. We never did it again, but could all see the potential. We discussed whether or not implementing this on the internet would be legal or practical, and decided the impossible to stop cheating mechanisms would kill it.

    --
    Syntax error: loose != lose, affect != effect, then!=than
    1. Re:Try it on a LAN by Stubtify · · Score: 1

      you should have applied for a patent.

  10. Imagine this applying this to a MMORPG by dauvis · · Score: 2, Funny

    Player A: "Man, that last raid cost me $25" Player B: "J00 5U>0R5"

  11. Re:The State of Employment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember Darwin ? The stronger will survive.

  12. UCB episode by pmsyyz · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is anyone else reminded of that Upright Citizen's Brigade episode (season 2 episode 1) where one of the guys playing chess has his heart stopped whenever he makes a bad move so that his survival instinct kicks in?

    --
    Phillip
  13. Precisely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Political Correctness is the yoke around our necks. All it takes is a genuine show of strength towards these subhumans, and they soon crumble. They are genetically and socially inferior, yet we are obliged to treat them as equals. The White Man's Burden.

    A liberal is a coward who would stab your children in the back in order to avoid offending a stranger.

  14. New meaning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This brings a whole new meaning to the phrase "0wn3d j00"...!

  15. Games of skill by phorm · · Score: 1

    There are many forms of "tournament" which you can pay for and lose, and yes, golf is one of them. You're not paying five bucks a hole with odds on you beating him, you're paying a flat entry fee with a flat prize to be one.

    There is a distinction between "games of skill" and "gambling." I believe this is why things like MacDonalds' "monopoly" games etc have that "skill testing question."

    In fact, I worked at a company that made golf-related (pay-per-use, you can win a prize for a good shot) games. There were certain things we had to do to ensure that we were classified as a skill game and not a form of gambling.