Slashdot Mirror
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?
> But is whining actually a good, natural part of videogaming?
Is anything good and natural about gaming?
SURELY NOT!!!!!
"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.
-Dipster
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)!
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.
OMG! YOU SUCK! What kind of a post is that? GO AWAY YOU n00b!
*WHINE*
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".
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
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 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.
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.
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
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
"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.
Spawn camping can not be exercised of the team you are trying to camp are aggressive. I frequently play a video game called Team Fortress Classic(a conversion of Team Fortress for Quake for Half-Life :)) where everyone spawn in one or two places most of the time. In the game you have distinct offense/defense roles.
Sometimes a team will put more(all) people on defense than offense, that way the other teams defenders will get bored and go off to the enemy team - not for capping flags though, that's up to the offense, but guess what: They spawn the camp looking for easy kills instead. Yep, that's how it is. On bad servers anyway.
Having played at probably over 100 fighting game tournaments at 8 on the break and other arcades on the east coast during the peak of fighting game popularity (ie 1994 - 1997) I can tell you that all fighting game tournaments come down to a combination of skill, and exploiting an overpowering move or character. Players that refused to embrace a top-tier character never won tournaments and usually were the ones who bitched about cheese. Players that won tournaments could usually play with any character, but embraced the cheesy/exploitable strategies that went with the game. For example:
Mortal Kombat 2 - Most players used Jax (Ground pound was over powered) or Millena (Jump away and air throw sai all day).
Street Fighter Alpha 2 - Most players used Chun Li (insane damage on custom combos) or Ken (alpha counter with glitched range which made it too long)
X-Men vs Street Fighter - People would constantly fly off screen with storm and use her "float" move to stay off screen to charge their super meter then come down, use a super, and fly back off screen.
Killer Instinct - there were a number of infinate combos in KI, which I saw used in tournaments plenty of times.
All in all I see the same crap playing games online today. Go play any FPS and 80% of the players are running around with whichever weapon is overpowered, not to mention the ones that run maphacks, aimbots, etc. Log onto a MMORPG and who usually has the most money? The people who are duping, macroing, or just exploiting stuff in game. A good example is in Star Wars Galaxies, a Jedi who uses their powers in front of any other player is subjected to instant PvP. This means Macroing any of these powers to gain experence while you are AFK is suicide. So, what the Jedi's do is they go inside a large house with a balcony, climb to the top where no one can get them and AFK macro there. While using their powers inside the house would push them outside with a temporary enemy flag to everyone, for some reason on the balcony they are immune. So that is where they camp and level.
The point is, any game with 2 players that isn't co-op is going to have exploits/cheese and the players who exploit the cheese along with having skills in the first place are always on top of the heap.
There are a lot of uninformed highly-rated posts already so hopefully I can shed some light.
Regarding shooting Pete Sampras to win in tennis: You wouldn't win the match! That's not legal within the limits of the game. Spawn camping is legal in several FPS games. Maybe the games were designed so poorly that this is the best tactic. If that's the case, you should do it better than your opponent if you want to win. If that means the game is not "fun" anymore, then play a better game. Possible within the rules of a game by definition DOES mean allowable (including exploiting bugs). Competitive games are about winning within the rules of the game... if you make up your own rules about honor, you are playing a different game that you've made up && you have no basis in reality or even agreeable reason. Scrubs cry "unfair!" but they just need an excuse to soften the blow that they can't defeat a simple tactic or that their game does not stand up well to serious competition. Do you want to win or whine?
Regarding Soul Calibur II requiring very little skill: Think again. Soul Calibur II was designed to have a more gradual learning curve than most other fighters on purpose to be easy to pick up but don't kid yourself in thinking your "beginner attacks" could in any dreamworld be "more powerful than any advanced player's most complex combo attack". You are way off base. If this is your opinion, I know I could defeat you 63/0 with one hand. Enter a competition to test your theory rather than replying with some anecdotal evidence about your living room experiences.
Regarding "cheese" practitioners having the capacities of "script kiddies": What do you say to someone who wins tournaments against the best players in the world with your so-called "cheese"? That they have no skill? They may have the best execution skill of anyone on the planet && also the best understanding of the game to know the greatest tactic (which could be a simple one). You're right that a simple tactic is often easily defeated so anyone wishing to win should figure it out but just because a tactic seems simple doesn't mean it's not the best thing (which you should do too && do better if you want to win).
Regarding fighting a "cheeser" isn't going to increase your skill in the least: Of course it will increase your skill if you constantly experiment with all the tools (moves) at your disposal in order to find the best counter. In Soul Calibur II particularly, almost every move in the game (including throw attempts) can be parried (called Guard Impact in SC2 terminology) which was designed in as a balancing feature. If you know when someone will attack next, you have the advantage. Studying even a simple tactic in order to either emulate or defeat it does make you a better player. You explore areas of the game you might not have needed to otherwise. Isn't this obvious?
Regarding "riding a move or two all the way to victory" as the same thing as "exploiting flaws in games": If a game has a design flaw, then it is not a good game. Get over it. If there are moves in a game that are arguably the best tactics, you will learn, practice, && execute them consistently if you want to win. Your fake morality about some arbitrary realism element in FPS (players not getting tired from jumping) is foolish. Jumping is a fair part of those games. If you think games should penalize jumpers with noticable fatigue, write such a game && play it. Otherwise, you're just making up your own weird rules that most reasonable people wouldn't even agree are right. Are you playing a game? What are the rules of THAT game? I'm not asking what you think the rules SHOULD be or what you wish they were. Nobody knows your made up rules except you && I bet your rules change even on you once you start getting beat by some other tactic. Learn to play the real game.
My close friend, David Sirlin, has written four popular articles on this
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.
As long as you're only whining about camping in deathmatch games, I'm fine with it. What really pisses me off is whining about camping in team-based games! Uh, hello people, that's not "camping" that's "defending." I'm not "camping the flag" I'm defending it to keep it from getting taken! That's part of the design of the game!
I've gotten accused of camping for defending a power node in Unreal 2004 Onslaught mode, and it boggles my mind. Why *wouldn't* our team want to defend power nodes? Especially the important one at the middle?
Anyway, rant over.
Comment of the year