Separator

Gaming Honestly

Greg_ford
Monday, June 15, 2009
Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

Two games have been dominating my time over the past couple months: Punch-Out!! on Wii and the DS' Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars. Both are great games that I'm continually impressed by, and both have me thinking about the way I've been playing them.

Punch-Out!!

 

GTA's gigantic tiny world and drug-peddling side metagame have kept me from getting much progress done on the main story. Man, those drugs.... For those who don't know how it works, you come across dozens of dealers throughout Liberty City, from whom you can buy coke, heroin, weed, and other narcotics. The twist is that every dealer has different prices depending on location and demand, so to score big bank, you need to buy low and sell high.

GTA: Chinatown WarsWhile missions net you a couple hundred a pop, in order to get real spending money, you need to sell drugs, which can earn you thousands in one transaction. The problem is, if you get busted with any on your person, the police confiscate them. Sounds reasonable -- or at least I thought so until the first time it happened to me when I had about $5,000 worth of downers on me. After the game restarted me outside of the police station and I realized what happened, an idea crossed my mind: turn off the machine and reload the previous save.

I know, brilliant, right? Now, you have to understand I didn't want to play this way. I want to play the "right" way, but the alternative of turning a few hundred dollars into multiple thousands again -- and the time it would take -- simply didn't appeal to me. And so it went each time I got busted with $7,000, $10,000, or more dollars' worth of drugs on me. I'd feel a twinge of guilt -- but it's not like any repercussions actually exist.

Similar deal with Punch-Out!! This beautiful game -- from its puzzle-esque showdowns to its characters overflowing with personality -- does a great job of creating a boxing game for the Wii masses. And as anyone who follows boxing knows, so much is made of a pugilist's record. Something like 22 wins versus 18 losses doesn't compare to 33-1, but it's sure better than a losing record.

My copy of Punch-Out!! arrived a week late (the cost of free shipping), so I began hearing people talk about how tough the game was before I ever got my hands on it. I even heard of some people reaching 100 losses and getting a wuss helmet as an ironic award in order for the game to take it easier on them.

With this in mind, I was pretty pleased when I started off 6-1. But as the fights got tougher, my record began to even out, until it hit the .500 mark late in the game. When I figured out how to beat Super Macho Man but got off to a bad start -- I was probably distracted but couldn't tell you by what -- I paused and decided to hit the Restart option for the fight, at which point I easily took out the chump.

Punch-Out!!

When I lost my first match to Mr. Sandman and realized I need to win the next game to finish the World Circuit with a winning record, I decided not to play him again until I went into practice mode and learned his tricks. When the fight resumed, I clobbered the guy and ended with a respectable 13-12 record.

My question is, how much does this dishonesty matter? Should my Punch-Out!! record have an asterisk by it when I relate it to friends? For single-player campaigns like these, the stats are a record of what you've done. So if you take some shortcuts to save some dough or maintain a decent record, it's not an accurate representation of your complete experience. You could argue you're just cheating yourself.

On the other hand, you know exactly what you did, and it's not like this goes on any sort of permanent record. Besides, who does it benefit for you to slowly rebuild a decent stash of coke that you felt was unfairly confiscated anyway? (Come on, those cops can be cheap!)

I don't have a great answer for this. I keep telling myself that I'll play the fullly honest way, that I'll live with all the game's repercussions. I'll then do as much for a while, even sucking it up when I lose an impressive arsenal of weapons when I get busted in Chinatown Wars. A few missions later, though, I'll get busted with a slew of drugs and quickly hit the power button.

Online, this type of behavior is reprehensible, especially in ranked games. Offline, am I just cheating myself? What's the call here, and do any of you take shortcuts and think doing as much is dishonest?

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (23)
Brett_new_profile
June 16, 2009
I don't see any problem with doing what you need to do to make yourself happy when playing a single-player game. When you restart a fight or reload a mission on the $60 game you just bought, I don't call that dishonesty: I call that avoiding frustration so you can have a good time. Here's an example: I'm playing through Splinter Cell: Double Agent at the moment, and I've been saving after pretty much every stealth kill because I want to satisfy the various "no alert\" objectives. I don't feel a lick of guilt about that, because that's how I want to play. In fact, I'm glad the game has a quicksave option, because it means I can play out different strategies to find the best way to clear out a room. If every time I alerted a guard I had to restart the entire mission, I would've tossed the game aside long ago. Instead, I'm having a blast.
Shoe_headshot_-_square
June 16, 2009
Your Punch-Out example: That's fair game. The training mode is built right into the game in order for you to improve. Seems legit if it helps you get a winning record. Now, resetting to your last save when things don't go right, that is cheating. But on the spectrum of all things cheating, I'd say this is a Mickey Mouse offense. We've all done it, I'm sure. Online multiplayer hacks...now that's a crime worthy of a real-life beatdown.
Default_picture
June 16, 2009
This reminds me of when I bought Splinter Cell Pandora Tommorrow a long time ago. Every time I was seen, I'd load the previous checkpoint. I wanted to figure out the most perfect way of getting passed each guard or achieving an objective. A friend of mine was watching me play once and it started a debate on whether or not it was cheating... In the end, I didnt care... I just wanted to know the best way to do any given task. I dunno. I think offline play is a "whatever does it for you" realm. Whereas online... No one likes an exploiter/cheater online.
Default_picture
June 16, 2009
I used to be too honest with games when I was younger. If a friend ever told me how to solve a puzzle (or other tasks), I'd never play the game again. I felt like a dirty whore. Looking back at it now, I feel terrible for my friends. They'd just watch me play games for hours... silently.:'(
37425_412468101714_719286714_4780931_4814727_n
June 16, 2009
I think the whole (dis)honesty in gaming thing may be rooted in something talked about in response to Robert Ashley's question of why we game (including on Pixel Revolt). When we play games, we love feeling like the conquering hero and that we are in total control of what is happening. So then if suddenly that control is taken away from us because of something that we didn't intend, our knee-jerk reaction may be that since we control what's happening, we can simply hit that reset button and make everything better again.
Greg_ford
June 16, 2009
You guys have me feeling better about myself already ;) Seriously, you all make some good points. @Michael, that is kinda sad. And @Derek, that's an interesting angle. Of course, a result we don't intend can also be our own fault, but yeah, resetting does allow us to exert some control over the game...if that is indeed [i]why [/i]we game.
Default_picture
June 16, 2009
This is how I played Oblivion, man. It got to the point where I saved before doing anything remotely risky -- even the possibility of breaking a lockpick was worthy of a save. So maybe it's being a little cheap, but games are meant to be fun. Whatever way of playing makes the experience more enjoyable for you is "the right" way to play. Those are my feelings, anyway! :)
Default_picture
June 16, 2009
For some reason, I view restarting in Chinatown Wars more "immoral" than restarting in Punch-Out. Punch-Out is much more repetitive than the explorable environment of GTA. I actually approve of the reset button in Punch-Out, for the sake of time management - if you know you can't win this match, why wait out another two rounds? Restart and get back in the saddle. In GTA, however, I feel there's more of a permanence to the world, which puts a greater importance on the durability of your actions. I feel like there's more honour in building up your drug running character than merely maintaining a record, so I would rather keep my honesty intact there.
Default_picture
June 16, 2009
To use Shoe's expression, I "Mickey-Mouse-cheat" on all RPGs that allow me to. I look to an RPG for cool environments, bosses, stories, collectibles; not for the grinding. So if I find a loophole that lets me level up faster, or earn money faster so I can always buy the best equipment (DQIII comes to mind), I'll do it in a flash.
Default_picture
June 16, 2009
When playing Chinatown Wars, I usually saved at a safe house before I did a mission or anything that got me busted because I hated losing my weapons. I almost always made sure to go to a safe house and stash whatever drugs I had just bought. If I needed to sell to somebody I would then just go get them out of my stash box. Chinatown Wars is a great game. I enjoyed playing it and even though I'm usually a completionist, I just can't bring myself to get 100% in that game.
Default_picture
June 16, 2009
I think you need to trade china town wars for Ninja-Town and you will be more happy with yourself.
Andrewh
June 17, 2009
Nothing wrong with this type of behavior... except in Sports games. When running a franchise or season, you have to take your losses. Going 150-12 is just ridiculous. Besides, if you have a losing season, hello high draft picks. For whatever reason there I see a higher standard of honesty in sports games instead of other games. Maybe because it tries to accurate reflect real life. Meaning sports, which aren't real life at all.
Default_picture
June 17, 2009
I remember the Proffesor Layton/Ace Attorney exploit that would let you beat the game with minimal baggage on your record or health. I thought I was cheating, and I was, but then I realized that that was the only way I was going to beat those games (Ace Attorney more than Layton) because sometimes those puzzles were super trial and error, so I gave up the "honesty" act and beat them.
Default_picture
June 17, 2009
I do the same type of "Mickey Mouse Cheating" as well. I think it's hard to save a game after you have only drained your resources, with nothing to show for it. In terms of game design, I think that it's silly when a game lets you save changes to your progress that are only negative; if you spend time/money in the game, you should at least be rewarded with some experience points, unlocking special features, or something. I've been playing Demon's Souls though, and I really like that this game won't let me cheat. It makes me feel like every step I take in the game is truly part of the adventure, and also like the game is just smarter than the average game. I find myself more afraid of dying in this game than others, but success is so much more rewarding for it.
Shoe_headshot_-_square
June 17, 2009
All us "Mickey Mouse" cheaters will pay for our sins someday. Our hell will be filled with shiny Game Genies...only we have to manually figure out the codes ourselves.
Greg_ford
June 17, 2009
@Andrew: That's a great point on the sports games. It's easy to get frustrated and turn off the system in rage when the computer team miraculously beats you, but if you accept those losses, the wins are that much sweeter. And like you also pointed out, that makes for more true to real life as well. I remember playing a season of Tecmo Super Bowl in college with three friends. I was the No. 2 seed in the playoffs, and I remember playing a computer opponent in the semifinals who just wasn't going to lose. All my possessions were turnovers; all of his were long TDs. I had no choice but to reset, at which point is was a balanced game that I won. I still stand by that as not cheating :) (I hate those games in which the computer flips a switch as if to say, "there's no way in hell you're winning this one, puny human!") And hey, I lost in the championship, but at least my bud beat me, not some computer-controlled roboteam.
Jason_wilson
June 17, 2009
In many of the RPGs that I play, when it becomes clear that I'm going to lose the fight (and die), I speed the process up and load my previous save. In other games, well, I try to just deal with the consequences or backtrack if possible. My Tiger Woods 09 player is almost as bad as I am in real life, and that's because I took all the shanks and chili-dips as they came and didn't reset them. No wonder I always lose in online Tiger Woods play.
Default_picture
June 18, 2009
I only lost twice playing punch-out, and only practiced once. But not out of some crazy skill. I retried the fights over and over again until I mastered the patterns and tko'd boxers in the first round. The record wasn't terribly important to me, instead I had a strategy that maximized my enjoyment. Sometimes I would take a fight into the second round to see how it changed, but I rarely played into the 3rd round. Punch-out isn't really a boxing game, and with no online component, nothing about how one plays it strikes me as cheating.
Default_picture
June 19, 2009
I would love to see more shit like this from the bitmob staff.
Profile_pic4
June 20, 2009
As a side note, something about that GTA drug-deal-your-way-to-millions thing reminds me of the old PalmOS game DopeWars. Spent many a train commute trying to find the cheap coke. I reset sometimes, but always feel dirty afterwards. Not going to hell dirty, just dirty lite. I reset playing Bioshock once because I didn't like one particular exchange, and it felt like the act tarnished the whole experience in a minor, yet still noticeable way. Like that brilliant game in particular deserved more from me.
Greg_ford
June 20, 2009
@Keith: Some notes on what you brought up. DopeWars was definitely an influence on that drug-trading thing. One of the producers even referenced it when they were showing it off. Hehe on feeling dirty lite. As for BioShock, I like that. That the game deserved more from you. It's definitely one of the greats from this generation, and it is one that made you regret some of your decisions, so I can absolutely understand why you'd want to replay a portion.
Default_picture
June 21, 2009
The developers that worked on the console versions of Sacred 2 may have come up with a solution for this: the unforgiving save system. How does it work? Let's say you are working on an achievement like [i]complete the game without dying[/i]. Imagine you are 9 hours, 55 minutes into an arduous 10 hour campaign when during the final battle, your characters lifeless husk lies where your warrior once stood. Time is short, you must react quickly and decisively. Honed rage quitting, ninja like reflexes kick in to thrust you towards the power button and swiftly press it. Unfortunately, with your attention affixed to the consoles glowing green button, you failed to notice the saving emblem on your screen. Upon returning to your character select screen, you are greeted with an unfamiliar message like, "Sorry bud, but your game file is corrupt. Delete it and try again." There will be no clemency through restored backups, recovery utilities, or patches. In essence, Game Over you cheating bastard. :o
Profile_pic4
June 22, 2009
@Bob: Judgement! That's the #1 thing I look for when I retreat into any gaming world. Funny you should bring up Sacred - I was playing Sacred 2 just last night, and at level 36 and a survival bonus of around 75%, I was feeling pretty good about the virtual bump my growing survival bonus was giving my stats, when KAPOW I got surrounded by 6 champion bears and warthogs. I should have survived the encounter - I retreated twice, but only far enough to cast more spells of meanness and take down two of them - which was part of the enticing curiosity which killed this cat this time out. I didn't reset (partly because I have already died like 6 other times with this char, mostly because I own up to my failures, the Bioshock situation notwithstanding). But I suppose I could have...

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.