Quasimodo
Bell Ringer
Shaggyofwv said:
Gotta chime in for the P51. That was a nice one.
Patch 109 breaks cheats?
- Thread starter warp_kez
- Start date
Gotta chime in for the P51. That was a nice one.
Dtry said:
I was playing a custom scenario, so theoretically I should have been the first player.
From further testing, whatever empire you choice determines the array order.
For instance, if there are 9 empires, and gamer picks the 7th, then adjusting for starting at 0, the command needs to be "Player.SetGold 6, blah".
The FWTA-183 more or less replaced all prior jet and properller based aircraft.
Of course, hat would have occured if WW2 in Europe had lasted until 1946, by then the multi role Gonthier 229 would have been in services.
Pragmatic said:
Source? It seems to me the people who cheat at everything are not only a tiny minority, but also a strong crossover with the people who pirate games rather than buying them anyway.
If this was really the case, why don't more games have an easily accessible cheat menu?
If I were you I would have second thoughts about wild claims to make you more comfortable in your habits.
Vulpes said:
Give me a list of games that you believe don't have cheat codes, and I'm sure I can find a website proving you wrong. If cheats weren't so sought-after, there'd be more sites dedicated to strategy, and less dedicated to shortcuts.
Cheats run the gamut from "save game before major battle" to "invulnerability trainer, with walkthrough printed up and sitting next to the keyboard." You don't have to cheat at everything to be a cheater. (And most cheaters wouldn't have the technical skills to pirate the game, anyway, so please refrain from setting up "strawmen.")
automator
King
So ... people buy games for cheats but don't buy games without cheats? I'm confused here. I've always thought cheats were for two uses:
a) the game is too damn hard for you to even learn how to play, so you use a cheat. Example: When I was 8, Contra was too hard, but by going through the game a few times with upupdowndownleftrightleftrightABABstart behind my back, I was able to learn how to play. Soon, I was playing with no cheats and winning.
b) you get bored with playing the game as usual so you use a cheat to just see how royally you can **** up the objective. Example: If I'm using a Civ cheat, I'll see if I can take out a rival civ in one turn using a horde of unlimited swordsmen or something, just for kicks.
You want to cheat, go ahead. I just don't see the point of dropping $50 for a game that you're not even going to treat like a game. I have a cheater in my house -- my girlfriend plays Sims, but never plays the game. She uses the cheat for money, then builds really big, nice houses. I play it for the "playing".
a) the game is too damn hard for you to even learn how to play, so you use a cheat. Example: When I was 8, Contra was too hard, but by going through the game a few times with upupdowndownleftrightleftrightABABstart behind my back, I was able to learn how to play. Soon, I was playing with no cheats and winning.
b) you get bored with playing the game as usual so you use a cheat to just see how royally you can **** up the objective. Example: If I'm using a Civ cheat, I'll see if I can take out a rival civ in one turn using a horde of unlimited swordsmen or something, just for kicks.
You want to cheat, go ahead. I just don't see the point of dropping $50 for a game that you're not even going to treat like a game. I have a cheater in my house -- my girlfriend plays Sims, but never plays the game. She uses the cheat for money, then builds really big, nice houses. I play it for the "playing".
Some people use cheats because they want to bypass the learning curve. They want to jump into the thick of it, without having to wait through three or four hours of building up their civ.
And so on.
Different people have different tastes. As long as they aren't infringing on your enjoyment, how are they harming you?
And so on.
Different people have different tastes. As long as they aren't infringing on your enjoyment, how are they harming you?
jimkirk
Prince
hey its his money let him play how he likes besides why allow only the ai to cheat?
warp_kez said:
It still works, don't put the comma in.
Better yet, check these out:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=144772
Building big, nice houses is playing the game. It's just not playing it your way.automator said:
I can't imagine just "playing" The Sims and not building. Yay, they want to watch TV again! Whoo-hoo...Also, equating cheating in a single-player computer game with cheating at "everything" and with piracy... I'm reminded of a certain argument I had with someone over cheating in Baldur's Gate 2, in which he said cheating was an insult to the dragon being killed in it. Computer code does not have feelings, it can not be wronged. The reason cheating is wrong is that it gives us an unfair advantage over other people. Remove the other people from the equation, do whatever the heck you want. Puritans may feel guilty about doing certain things that hurt no one, but atheist-agnostics like me don't
.And I don't think people buy games without cheats, because I don't think that's possible. ARE there any games released without cheats? Besides exclusively multiplayer ones, of course.
neriana said:Building big, nice houses is playing the game. It's just not playing it your way.
Ah, yes, the sheer fun of taking a virtual person through the sheer drudgery of life. Give them the bare basics, try to get them fed and clothed and out the door in time to meet their ride, then try to fulfill all their needs when they get home. All the while, trying to get them to climb the career ladder.
No thanks, I'd rather jump in with a lot of money. If I want to know what it's like to be poor and in a crappy house and in a crappy job, I don't need a game to show me: I've lived that already. I play games like the Sims for escapist fantasy.
neriana said:
There's got to be cheats. Otherwise, game testers would have to go through the entire game to test problems in the late game, and that would seriously cut into the QA time.
DemonDeLuxe
Warlord
To all those who prefer to flame this guy and cheaters in general: Ask around among some veteran gamers and computer nerds and say: "IDDQD, IDKFA". You might be quite amazed about how many know these codes even a DECADE after they used them...
Wlauzon said:
For the love of YHWH, Buddha, Allah, Jesus, Vishnu, and whatever other deity people might worship...
No, this is NOT a joke. I am completely serious. I am for real.
There are very few "Ironmen" out there. People who play without using at least one cheat (running the gamut from saving before a major battle, all the way up to editing the map and giving yourself gold and anachronistic units) are rare.
Here's a little shocker for you: Not everyone who buys a strategy game will be an expert strategist. They're not going to be able to compete even with the anemic opposition the AI can put out. If game companies only sold to the purists, the ones who can regularly defeat the game on deity or above, they'd go bankrupt. And yet, these purists feel the need to look down on the run-of-the-mill gamer.
Argh. Go ahead and keep abusing single-player (as opposed to multiplayer) cheaters. Drive them away from turn-based 4x games. Reduce the consumer base of the games you most love. It's not like we won't experience another drought of decent games, right? And it's not like there aren't a half-dozen other genres willing to cater to them, to take their money (RTS, FPS, sims, and so on).
Seriously, what are the ages of the people with whom I'm arguing? I've played these games for going on 20 years now, I know of what I speak.
