On Gamers Whining About Cheese

Thanks to GameSpot for its editorial discussing the fine art of 'cheesing', and the annoyance of those who complain about it. The write explains of 'cheesers': "These gamers (either intentionally or unintentionally) use the same moves or tactics over and over again [in games such as Soul Calibur II or Top Spin] to defeat opponents and, as a result, are often treated as the redheaded stepchildren in gaming circles." However, he argues: "Repetitive moves and tactics can become annoying, but what irritates me more are the people that whine about them", and concludes by suggesting: "The challenge then, for those who prefer to take the high road, is to find ways to beat them... Don't get mad. Get better." But is whining actually a good, natural part of videogaming?

Comments

Obvious

[Mr.Dippy]

"Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and f*ck the prom queen" Gamers should grow some balls and not whine. This just helps feed the stereotype that the majority of gamers are 13 year old bitches who spend too much time playing games online and can't handle being schooled by another player and are reduced to speaking l33t in order to seem cool and elite.

Cheesing, gaming and whining

[Anonytroll]

But is whining actually a good, natural part of videogaming?
No, whining is a good, natural part of being a human being. No matter the circumstances, we need to have something we can whine about or we are unhappy (and end up creating artificial problems so we can whine about them).

That said, I can understand people whining about cheese. If someone just acts following a tight formula (that in most cases wasn't even made by them, they found it on a FAQ site) he's somewhere around the capacities of a script kiddie.
However, if they are capable of doing more than just cheesing (and just prefer not to because it just works, not because they are too dumb to do something more challenging), then more power for them and learn how to play (and stop whining because you are not able to counter a tactic that has been used against you several times in a row)!

Spawn sniping

[etymxris]

Note that the writer didn't offer an effective counter-strategy to spawn sniping/camping. I can't speak to the other "cheese" moves he's talking about, but I can certainly understand why people complain about spawn camping. The reason why it is universally reviled is because it degrades the quality and enjoyment of the game. When the game comes down to who can spawn camp the best, then it's really no fun at all. The solution to spawn camping is temporary invincibility. That is, a newly spawned player cannot be injured for 5-10 seconds after spawning unless he or she engages in an offensive attack. (This last part is to stop those that are newly spawned from tipping the balance of power in reverse.)

Absent such technical solutions, admins are free to kick or ban players they see as using cheap moves, and players are free to discontinue playing with those they feel can't play fair. There is no a priori reason that video games have to be anarchistic. What does this mean? Well, it seems the writer of the article assumes that just because something can be done in a video game, that it is perfectly acceptable to do so. But I disagree. Suppose I was playing a real-life tennis match with Sampras, pulled out a gun, and shot him in the knee. Would my subsequent win (assuming I wasn't arrested or handcuffed) be honest or fair? Certainly not.

Similarly, just because we are used to being able to get away with anything in video games doesn't make those things we get away with right. There are already rules against automated helpers in most games. There is thus no reason to assume that just because an action is possible in a game that it should be allowable or rewarded.

Re:Spawn sniping

[GypC]

There is a simple solution to spawn camping. Spawn at a random point on (your team's half of) the map. Developers really have no valid reason to code in "spawn points", except for tradition, do they?

Re:Spawn sniping

[nifboy]

But that's a developer's solution to the problem, not a player's. It's not like you can just force the game to spawn you at something other than a spawn point.

So the question is, what can you do while waiting for someone to make a game with fully random spawn points?

(oh, wait, they did.)

Re:Spawn sniping

[AndrewHowe]

Well, what you can do is, while you're waiting to respawn you start whining about their spawn camping. If you whine enough they sometimes stop to whine back. If you time it right you can be half way to somewhere else before they realise what's going on.
Also realise that a spawn camper isn't taking or defending flags.
I don't think spawn camping is necessarily bad. Most people will whine about it, then turn around and do it to the other team as "punishment" anyway.
Another thing, most games allow you to choose your spawn point. If you have only one spawn point left, and it is getting 0wned, then you're probably about to lose anyway... Get over it.

Re:Spawn sniping

[apoc.famine]

There is indeed a vaild reason to code in spawn points - so that nobody spawns closer to major powerups or the best weapons. The problem with random spawns is the randomness of it all - most map makers try to make maps fairly - no spawn point has a major advantage, no team has a major advantage by spawning closer to team-based goals. Randomness throws this out, as well as occasionally spawning people in rather dangerous spots.

There are a few easy ways around spawn camping. First and foremost are server admins who pay attention, and ban lame-ass campers. Secondly, if you have about 2x the spawn points as the # of players, it becomes almost pointless to try to camp one point. Lastly, a couple seconds of invincibility for newly spawned peeps should kill any remaining problems.

Personally, we run two things to prevent spawn-camping - a 2 second invincibility period, and the Matrix Moves. Our mobility is good enough that even if we spawn in where someone is camping, we can usually get away or at least get to a decent weapon.

Frankly, only n00bs camp, and if a n00b camps on our server, they will get their ASS handed to them. About half our regulars would probable smite them with the default weapon, and everyone else would take the time to hunt them down and smite them until they quit playing. We generally don't have to ban people - if a handful of clanners get pissed off at someone, they gang up and obliterate them. There's nothing like spawn-camping with a major weapon, only to have someone sneak up behind you and beat you to death with a melee weapon...

Re:Spawn sniping

[way2slo]

"I can't speak to the other "cheese" moves he's talking about..."

I can. The one example was Top Spin, a tennis game. In video game emulation of tennis, you are thrown right into the mental aspects. His "cheese" was to hit an acute angle shot, a drop shot, that the other team could not return. Quite frankly, that is exactly what you are supposed to do. You play enough, you learn how hard and where to hit the ball to increase your chances.

If your opponents are living at the baseline, come to the net and do drop shots. If they are always at the net, lob it over them or try to smash it past them down the lines. If they try to do both, catch them in transition and they are dead in the water. There is no perfect strategy, you win the point by realizing where you need to be, what you need to do, and doing it.

With fighting games like Soul Calibur, the cheese move is to fight with Siegfried and just do the "circle button mash" move where he swings that big sword up twice and then down once. Nearly invincible. This is due to the priority of the move. Most moves in fighting games have a priority, just like processes in your OS. The higher ones hit first no matter when you decide to use it. You know, "Unblockable!" Sometimes it's not just a move that is "cheese" but the entire charachter. It is a flaw in the game design. They designed the game and made it unbalanced because this move makes this character practically invincible. Perhaps they wanted it like that, to make single player really tough when you have to defeat that character. *shrug*

I believe the elegant solution is to have the game balanced. No one character, strategy, or move will completely dominate the game. Yin and Yang. Balance. You want the unblockable move, give it a drawback of some kind...like it's slow. I remember this one game where you were fighting with swords, except for one character that had a gun. *shakes head* You could be this charachter and kill your opponent within one second after the match started by shooting him. Just like the scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Yes, it's realistic, but for the sake of balance they could have nerfed it in some fashion.

Hahahah

[Apreche]

I'll admit it, I'm a whiner when it comes to cheese. The way I see it is this. If there is a game where cheese is possible. For example, a fighting game. Then the design of the game is flawed. Now if its like a tournament or something with a prize, all is fair cheese away. But when you're playing with friends the idea is to have fun. If everybody just does the cheese move what's the point? There's no fun there, it's just plain stupid. Everyone lines up to push the same exact buttons as the previous guy, and if they don't push those same exact buttons they lose because the cheese is unstoppable. (I know its not always unstoppable, but often it might as well be ).

So, if you have a poorly designed game in which cheese exists and you want to play it with friends and have fun. Don't do the cheese or you're going to ruin everyone's fun. If there is a cheese whore in the current group of gamers you must play a game that has no cheese. So as a whiner even though I'm saying with my mouth "Stop that you cheesy whore!" what I really mean is "ok, this game sucks and has bad design, but we can have fun with it anyway if we don't do the cheesy crap. Losing isn't a big deal fanboy, pick a different character for once".

It's always the losers who whine

[Saiai Hakutyoutani]

Gamers seem to think up an endless number of terms for ridiculing those who beat them, "cheeser" and "camper" being just two.

If anything, I think these people are letting themselevs be fooled by the game. The whole point of introducing the possibility of loss in a game is to leave the player with a feeling of being treated unfairly. But it is not so.

I think the point when these gamers can admit to defeat and say "I got owned" is the point when they'll start enjoying the game.

The thing is...

[nifboy]

The skill required to counter "cheesy" moves often requires more skill than either player actually has. If the "cheeser" had more skill he wouldn't spam one move. If the "cheesee" had more skill he wouldn't be suckered into being killed by it.

(Cue "WELL DUH!" from the article)

The thing is, skill isn't acquired immediately. It's not like you can just "get better" as the article suggests and start kicking ass. If that was the case everyone would be tournament-level material. It takes time, and in the meanwhile, you're faced with a "cheesy" move you can't find a way around.

Plus, fighting a "cheeser" isn't going to increase your skill in the least: The only thing you're going to learn is how to win by spamming one move.

Re:The thing is...

[polyp2000]

I think it works both ways, if you can defeat the chesser by being more skillful, the cheeser will soon learn that his cheesy tactics are not working anymore. It is at this stage that the cheeser must learn to use a less cheesy approach and thus learn more skills if he wants to win! Thats how the learning process works.

Re:The thing is...

[fmaxwell]

I think it works both ways, if you can defeat the chesser by being more skillful, the cheeser will soon learn that his cheesy tactics are not working anymore.

And what if you can't beat the cheeser with skill? What if you have reached the limits of your skill, reflexes, and coordination? That's what pisses people off about cheese moves. They allow a less-skilled, and less ethical, player to consistently win.

Fix the Cheese

[TwistedGreen]

The first time I played Soul Calibur II was the first time I had played any kind of fighting game since Mortal Kombat. And I kicked ass.

Let's face it, these games require very little skill, and this is no accident. There are purposefully two ways to play: one for beginners who aren't even sure which button is kick and which is punch, and one for the people who spend all their time memorizing combo moves. But the thing is, the beginner's technique is often more powerful than any advanced player's most complex combo attack!

Is this a flaw? No, it's definitely a feature, but perhaps it's a feature that a player should be able to turn off. How about customizable rulesets like in Worms? This is an obstacle that can easily be circumvented if the players really want it. But for now, it is part of the game, like it or not.

Re:Fix the Cheese

[SamSim]

Perhaps you could implement a Tony Hawk's Skateboarding-style system, whereby the more you repeat a given move, the less damage it does.

Either you miss the point, or you're one of them

[danaris]

I have been a casual gamer for about 9 years. I have *always* been by far the worst among the people I play with, at least until a couple of years ago. I never objected to losing, since I knew I was bad at it, and was likely to lose a lot--UNLESS the person who fragged me was camping.

Even when playing against someone of totally unknown relative ability, I don't mind losing so long as they adhere to the same standards as me, which are unwritten rules of polite gaming: don't cheat, don't camp, don't cheese. I enjoy the game, even if I'm losing horribly, but if the reason--whether or not it's the only reason--I'm losing is because my opponent uses cheesy techniques, then it's not so much fun, because the point of those techniques is to never give you a chance to do anything, and thus removes any element of fun from anyone but the cheeser.

I would guess you either never play games, or you are one of these cheesers simply trying to defend your right to keep beating us without having to learn to really play the game.

Dan Aris

Rationalizing

[fmaxwell]

"I'm certainly not above all this. Sometimes I can ride a move or two all the way to victory, and it makes me smile... The challenge then, for those who prefer to take the high road, is to find ways to beat them... Don't get mad. Get better."

What a load of crap! This guy just likes to exploit flaws in games for his own advantage. He knows damned well that there are often no effective counters to the cheese moves he's so fond of -- that's why he uses them. He's no better than the people who hop, run, and jump for three hours at a time in FPS games (exploiting the flaw that your character never tires from such acrobatics).

Moral of the story: People suck. They rationalize that whatever they do in the game is okay, whether it's bunny-hopping through FPS games, repetitive moves for which their is no counter, or 60 keystroke macros.

Re:Rationalizing

[fmaxwell]

Ummm, UT and Quake are not supposed to be accurate simulations of reality.

No, they are not, but neither are they supposed to be something totally alien, which explains the humanoid characters, conventional aiming sights, physics models, injuries from falling too far, etc.

Is using medkits cheap because they exploit the flaw that people can't really instantly heal themselves?

That's not a flaw, it's an integral part of the game design. It's not an unintended consequence or side-effect. You accept that when you buy the game.

Stop whining and learn to aim.

Gee, now you sound like the author of the article: 'I like to cheat and anyone who doesn't like it is a whiner.'

Racism galore!

[raygundan]

I was just pointing out what I thought was a gross overreaction, and a comical one at that. I mean, seriously-- getting "really pissed off" about someone having a stereotype of you as "having a temper" is pretty silly in a circular sort of way.

If it will make you feel better, go ahead and mock my racial heritage. Do it all you want! Don't feel bad about it, either, because IT DOESN'T MATTER. What matters is that we recognize the qualities in individuals, and don't get so worked up about it that we end up removing things like "master/slave" and "red-headed stepchild" and "white men can't jump" from our historical and linguistic record. No amount of wishing these things had never been said will make it so-- but you can remove any hurt such a remark may have by simply not giving it that power.

If someone doesn't attack you personally, then don't take it personally.

If you want an "obvious injustice," you might want to look a little farther than your own horizon. If you think the red-headed stepchild remark is an obvious injstice, you might want to look to the Rwandan genocide, or the massive disparity in Redhead-American vs. African-American salary, Apartheid, or the Holocaust. *those* are obvious injustices. Being the butt of jokes is true for everybody, whether your a stiff, awkward, greedy white guy, a "fiery" redhead, an overweight american, a messy bachelor, a gay guy who knows how to decorate, or an old woman who drives too slow, etc... I think it gets spread pretty evenly. If we can't poke fun at eachother without it erupting into this sort of hatred, what does THAT say?

And as to the beer thing, that was unintentional. I really meant that having a couple of beers might be a good way to relax and get over it. See what jumping to racist conclusions gets us? You take an innocent remark like that, and we're so touchy THAT gets labelled racism.

Re:Racism galore!

[Gid1]

Hey, I can't say it made me furious, or that it was any sort of hate-crime.. I don't get offended easily. The whole attitude just annoys me, in the kind of way that makes you bitch about it on Slashdot.

It's just that it's one of those things that pretty stupid to begin with, but the thing that gets me is that it's seen as acceptable to ostracise someone due to a particular genetic factor (redhead), but not for another (sex, race, etc.).

Hey, I'm all for ostracising people for things they've chosen to label themselves as (eg. "pro-wrestler", "lawyer", "republican", etc.) but not things they're stuck with.

Of course, it's not like it's a big deal, in comparison to the examples you've given, but it's an issue, and it sucks. It wouldn't even be the slightest problem at all if boneheads didn't make comments about redheads having tempers, and dumb epithets like "carrot-top", "Duracell", "Ginga", etc.

As far as the beer comment goes, no problem at all :-)

Re:My take on spawn camping...

[Anonymous Coward]

If defense gets bored, then either the teams are unbalanced, or your team sucks.

Spawn camping still sucks. They dont usually last that long, considering the gibb factor.

you just suck

[Ender Ryan]

What do you mean there's nothing you can do about spawn camping? Defeating spawn campers is easy. They can't camp near EVERY spawn point! If spawn camping is winning someone matches, those matches are pretty pathetic. Get better, and then when you stomp on the pathetic campers, find some real gamers to play with.

And your analogies to real life are ridiculous. In real life tennis or whatnot, there are rules. Shooting someone in the knee is against the rules. If you did that in a real match, you'd be disqualified, and then arrested. In an FPS, the rules are built into the game and breaking them would consist of using an aim bot, turning off clipping, seeing through walls, etc., all which require modifying the game in some manner.

Now don't get me wrong, an admin is free to add rules to the game, or even remove rules! If you want to ban spawn camping on your server, more power to you. In fact, it's not a bad idea, as it will force the pathetic campers to get better, and when everyone is better, cheesy tactics won't work so well anymore. Similarly, if you want to allow disabling of clipping and seeing through walls, well, have fun with that.

Re:you just suck

[Ender Ryan]

I disagree with you. Most games do not have huge flaws that destroy the balance. Just because something in a game is difficult to overcome, for you, doesn't mean it was an oversight of the developer.

I've been playing FPSs for over ten years as well, my favorite probably having to have been the original UT. I didn't play the specific map you mention much, but I was a damn good sniper, and in a good match I have never been able to freely sit and target spawn points. But I was usually the guy wiping the map with the wanna-be sniper who was trying to target spawn points. Wherever you can see other players, they can see you too, meaning snipers are far from invincible. If the other team is sniping spawn points, you setup your own sniper to guard them. Anything the other team/guy can do, so can you.

Like I said, though, administrators are free to implement their own rules.

And of COURSE people should behave as gentlemen. If the consensus with a group of people is that spawn camping isn't allowed, well, don't fucking do it. But don't play on someone else's server and whine about the way they play the game.

Re:you just suck

[Ender Ryan]

Look, I never said that game developers aren't fallible, and I even admitted that there are sometimes problems, but as a long-time gamer, I have seen far more people complain who simply suck, than those that are good and just don't like one of the gameplay elements and conclude it's a flaw.

In general, your arguments should not be contingent upon any specific facts of the person you are debating with. One, it's invalid reasoning, and two, it makes you look especially silly when those assumptions turn out incorrect.

Huh? WTF are you talking about? What arguments have I made that are contingent upon facts about you? Sure, in jest I said, "you just suck," but no argument I have made depends on anything about you. This is a discussion about gaming, afterall. Lighten the fuck up.

But, whatever. Back on-topic.

Take the example of Soul Calibur. A beginner player is extremely dangerous, because button mashing is quite an effective technique in SC. However, once one begins to master the game, a button masher can be put down with a few swift, well-timed attacks.

The FPS genre is over 10 years old now, and spawn point camping has been an issue for a long time. Some games have tried to completely eliminate the "problem", while others have only made it a bit more difficult to get away with.

Therefore, it stands to reason that developers are quite aware that people can camp near spawn points, and it's up to the players to deal with it however possible in the game.

But in the end, it comes down to communities. Some will have specific rules that you're expected to follow, others, not so much. Behave like a reasonable human being, wherever you are playing. If you don't like the way a group of people play, tough luck. Don't bitch or whine, just go somewhere else.

Cheese, the noob myth

[mateomiguel]

Well, I play alot of games online, and I get to experience alot of gamers. I even run a small gaming guild online. I have always liked to play games against other people, and I usually try to be competitive. I've found that you can always identify newer players because they, uniformly, belive the following things:
1. You have the rules of the game, that everyone knows, and in a computer game they cannot (usually) be broken.

2. In addition to the rules of the game that are clearly laid out, there is another subset of 'unwritten rules' that act much like a code of honor.

3. Each new player has his own little version of these unwritten rules, and cries foul each time that their own version of the rules is broken.

4. These new players that play by two sets of rules consistently, and without fail, LOSE. ALL THE TIME.

Such players will continue to lose until they see the light, and move on to the next level of gaming: playing only by the game's rules rather than their own.

I.E. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CHEESE

Now, I don't know about you, but I dislike losing. If your goal when you play a game online is to make up some sort of imaginary rule-set for yourself and the other people you are playing with, and then proceed to bitch and moan when these rules are violated, then go right ahead and do so. I won't stop you. In fact, I will aid you by becoming the person you can bitch and moan about.

However, if your goal in playing online games is to experience the evolution of learning that good games put the player through; to practice the process of ability refinement, knowledge, and experience in a game; to just become better, then you might want to put that childish subset of rules behind you and step into a truer gaming experience.

I firmly believe that games are thorougly healthy pursuits, and that in them you can practice many of the skills that make you successful in real life in a short amount of time. That is why I still play them, and that is why I try to play every game I play well.

A matter of tactics

[0x0d0a]

When you beat someone with tactics that they are unprepared for and not experienced in countering, they get frusterated and angry.

It happened to the British in the American Revolutionary War -- "hiding behind trees and rocks is unfair and cowardly!".

It happened to the US in Vietnam -- "using ununiformed troops and ability to blend into civilian environments is unfair and cowardly!"

Now it's happening to the US again in the form of bin Laden's tactics -- hit and run, avoiding allowing the enemy to get a good swing at you, attacking vulnerable points.

War is war. It is not a card game. If you want to play a limited strategy game where certain behavior is prohibited and you want to see who wins with such constraints and you have agreed on such behavior, with either technological or social power to enforce these constraints, that's one thing. If someone is playing an FPS, they should by default expect someone not to make the most of the map, the game system, their abilities, and the weaknesses in that player's own playing style.

Re:Play To Win

[Daetrin]

Regarding shooting Pete Sampras to win in tennis: You wouldn't win the match! That's not legal within the limits of the game.

Is there actually a clause in whatever rulebook tennis has that says you are not allowed to shoot the other player? Even if that one is covered, is there a rule that you can't take a baseball bat to their knees ten minutes before the game starts? I seriously doubt it.

If you tried to assult the other player before the game you'd get arrested if you were caught, however it probably wouldn't be breaking the written rules of the game itself. Steroids were presumably only made illegal because lots of people thought they were unfair and whined about them, i'm sure the original rules for most games didn't cover drug use.

Rules change over time based on what people consider fair, and some "rules" are enforced by an authority other than the literal rules of the game. You break your opponents kneecaps and you'll get arrested by the police, spawn-camp or bunnyhop too much and you'll be ostracized or banned by the other players.