Slashdot Mirror
Online Games That Redefine Risk
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."
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'.
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'.
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.
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.
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
Player A: "Man, that last raid cost me $25" Player B: "J00 5U>0R5"
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