Unsporting Gaming. a problem.

http://www.sirlin.net/

It'll change your life.

Its because your playing a 360. If you played PC games you wouldn't have these problems. Its also the fact that Halo 3 is notoriously bad for attacting those sorts of players, try Call of Duty 4 or something like Flatout. Or better yet just play private games with your friends.Gribb85

Did you just say PC games don't have those problems? :lol: You must not play games on the PC then.

[QUOTE="Gribb85"]Its because your playing a 360. If you played PC games you wouldn't have these problems. Its also the fact that Halo 3 is notoriously bad for attacting those sorts of players, try Call of Duty 4 or something like Flatout. Or better yet just play private games with your friends.howlrunner13

Did you just say PC games don't have those problems? :lol: You must not play games on the PC then.

Yeah, I guess all the cheaters on Counter-Strike don't count...

Actually, this is a case where you should hate the game and not the player. When they have a way to win, they're going to use it. It's not cheating, and trying to win doesn't mean you have your prioraties wrong. You talk almost as if you make no effort to win in Halo 3. I don't know about you, but if I get a killing spree, I don't care if it ruined your time or not.

Actually, this is a case where you should hate the game and not the player. When they have a way to win, they're going to use it. It's not cheating, and trying to win doesn't mean you have your prioraties wrong. You talk almost as if you make no effort to win in Halo 3. I don't know about you, but if I get a killing spree, I don't care if it ruined your time or not.AtomicTangerine

QFT.

It should also be noted that the act of winning itself is an inherently enjoyable one (at least for the person winning), and other players are never at all responsible for any enjoyment you get (or don't get) from a game.

Its because your playing a 360. If you played PC games you wouldn't have these problems. Its also the fact that Halo 3 is notoriously bad for attacting those sorts of players, try Call of Duty 4 or something like Flatout. Or better yet just play private games with your friends.Gribb85

Why do these people find it fun to get one kill and hide in a place on the map obviously overlooked by devs. Case and point. HALO 3. Narrows people hide under the bridge, the pit people hide in their spawn room, snowbound people hide behind the gaurdian. Isnt the whole point of gaming is to have fun? What fun is this? Wow I ranked up my Halo 3 profile *pushed pen back into pocket protector* who are these nerds and when did gaming get so sketchy?notoriousmatty

I agree that deadweight on team games (the guys who come out of a 30 minute game with zero kills) sucks. I don't really get mad at those types of players, but I honestly don't see why they play. I suppose some people might hide out in a room and feel a thrill of accomplishment when the team they are technically a part of happens to come out on top, but for me, the fun is had not in the winning or losing but in the playing. That isn't to say I don't try to win, but the 15 second victory screen or the infinitesimal change in my win/loss ratio isn't the reason I play.

Its because your playing a 360. If you played PC games you wouldn't have these problems.Gribb85

Isn't cheap heat fun?

There's isn't really anyway to avoid jerks online (on ANY platform)unless you're playing soley amongst those on your friends list. At the rate I was going with XBL, I was blacklisting at least two people per game.

Here's a news flash for everybody. Winning is fun. Here's another. Players aren't responsible for whether or not their opponents have fun. Whenever someone uses something overly effective, there are two kinds of players who react; the kind that will put serious effort into finding a way around it, and the kind that will put that otherwise-valuable time and energy into complaining.

Anyone want to guess which one will get the favorable results?

Now, there are times when there's no way around a tactic, but whatever happened to blaming the game and/or developers? Hell, that's why I've always been so rough on Mortal Kombat! MK2 was a game that ultimately featured one character with one nigh-unstoppable way of winning. You can't fault players for using a valuable tool like that - it was a popular game, so winning yielded good times (usually in the form of tournament prize money). Any decent player, rather than whining about the "cheap" tactics, just realized that the game was a turd after enough failed attempts to dethrone Mileena.

When you get down to it, the object of the game is to win. Even the packed-in instruction manuals, which offer almost nothing to good players, clarifies this as the developer's main intention. Of course there will still be haters - those who piss/moan/emo because it's somehow easier than solving a good tactic. I've seen it plenty of times, myself. I have a ton of negative feedback on Xbox Live to tell me I'm pretty damn good at Virtua Fighter, and I've had plenty of actual complaint messages from players who don't like my willingness to repetitively use what works against them. I simply tell them to come back when they know how to block - that if they're not going to block/punish Goh's 66K, I'm not going to stop using it (in a few cases it really was that simple!).

I just find it hilarious that there are actually people offended by other players' willingness to play to win.

I really think it comes down to sportsmanship. while I don't really care in the end if so-and-so wins, or how they did it (provided no exploit was used) I will say that the constant whining and trashtalking does get to the point where I just want to put my own gun-barrel in my mouth.

Example: I work at an Internet Cafe where I have a certain group of guys that play Counter-Strike: Source all the time. Every time they come in I know exactly what I'm going to hear from them as they use the VOIP stuff. A string of explitives, and always comments about body parts and acts that are done with them. I can't help but want to gag them, but seeing as how there's a bit of discrepancy in how to enforce it, it can't be enforced.

The bottom line is that sportsmanship, trashtalking, and whining all bring down the experience more than "winning" does. It's something that needs to get in check before everyone on Xbox Live, and the internets yell in unison to each individual smack**** to "shut the **** up already!"

I don't really care in the end if so-and-so wins, or how they did it (provided no exploit was used)FreyarHunter

Even exploits are okay on a case-by-case basis. Unless it's a situation like Mortal Kombat II where it seriously breaks the game, they should really be embraced.

The best example is Capcom vs SNK 2. Shortly after the game was released, Ohnuki Shin'ya discovered that if you executed a special move within the first few frames of a roll, that special move would take on the invincibility properties of that roll (meaning the animation of the special move cannot be hit by anything but a throw).

Capcom vs SNK 2 was suffering as it was. Sagat, Blanka, Honda, and maybe a couple others were dominating the game with a very defense-heavy, safe, slow approach. RoninChaos (Leigh Lamb, who used to post on the old GS boards) once criticized CvS2 by calling it "the only fighting game that rewards you for doing absolutely nothing."

The bug, dubbed "roll-cancelling", actually opened things up, giving the technically "safe" characters something to be afraid of - actual invincible attacks - in the face of their previously almost-invincible attack priority. To an extent, it solved the balancing problems CvS2 was suffering from, without either creating a new, more juiced-up top tier, or rendering once-good characters meaningless.

Just because something wasn't part of the original design plan, doesn't mean it should automatically be thrown out.

[QUOTE="FreyarHunter"]I don't really care in the end if so-and-so wins, or how they did it (provided no exploit was used)DarkCatalyst

Even exploits are okay on a case-by-case basis. Unless it's a situation like Mortal Kombat II where it seriously breaks the game, they should really be embraced.

The best example is Capcom vs SNK 2. Shortly after the game was released, Ohnuki Shin'ya discovered that if you executed a special move within the first few frames of a roll, that special move would take on the invincibility properties of that roll (meaning the animation of the special move cannot be hit by anything but a throw).

Capcom vs SNK 2 was suffering as it was. Sagat, Blanka, Honda, and maybe a couple others were dominating the game with a very defense-heavy, safe, slow approach. RoninChaos (Leigh Lamb, who used to post on the old GS boards) once criticized CvS2 by calling it "the only fighting game that rewards you for doing absolutely nothing."

The bug, dubbed "roll-cancelling", actually opened things up, giving the technically "safe" characters something to be afraid of - actual invincible attacks - in the face of their previously almost-invincible attack priority. To an extent, it solved the balancing problems CvS2 was suffering from, without either creating a new, more juiced-up top tier, or rendering once-good characters meaningless.

Just because something wasn't part of the original design plan, doesn't mean it should automatically be thrown out.

Yeah, but today a little technical oversight can be patched. That is one example where you should complain, but to the developer, not the guy using the glitch. Kinda like the weapon-slide in Gears of War that let you keep moving as you picked up guns- it was unintentional, but a patch was put out that eliminated it or at least decreased its effectivness. Even if they didn't though, everybody could do it, it didn't make you invincible, and was hardly game-breaking.