Re: Cheating Cheat-sheet

On Tue, 09 Apr 2024 21:25:25 -0600, PW
<iamnotusingonewithAgent@notinuse.com> wrote:

On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 17:10:11 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07
<candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
>

PW <iamnotusingonewithAgent@notinuse.com> wrote at 16:49 this Tuesday (GMT):

>

Still, if you're interested in a surface level description of how the
'pro' cheaters are doing it*, this is a good video to start with.
>
>

>
I am interested because it is a techie thing but I am not willing to
spend 40 seconds or even 4 seconds on a video.
>
I avoid cheaters by not playing games on-line! :-)
>
I will end up watching a little of this vide though Spalls.
>
Thanks.
>
-pw

>
>
What about cheating AI?

*--
>
It exists?  Explains a lot over the years!

AI cheats all the time... but usually to provide a better experience.
The most visible example is in racing games, which use 'rubber band'
mechanics to maintain a constant challenge. Get too far ahead of the
other racers, and the AI will preternaturally zoom forward until it is
right behind you again (at which point it - usually - resumes its
'normal' racing behavior). But it also works in reverse; fall too far
behind, and the AI often slows down to give you a chance to catch up.

(The "Need for Speed" games are infamous at this, with varying degrees
of success. There was almost no rubber banding in "Underground", and
it worked to the detriment of the game (I often lapped the AI). I
think EA did it pretty well in 2012's "Most Wanted", where it was hard
to notice the rubber banding happening at all. On the other hand,
2011's "The Run" had some of the worst rubber-banding I've ever seen
in a racing game, with the AI achieving almost supersonic speeds to
keep up).

But the AI cheats in other genres too; in strategy games, the
developers often grant it the ability to see the whole map, or give it
bonus resources. In shooters, the AI often dodges your bullets even if
it can't see you actually shooting at it (the Scarj mosnters from
1998's "Unreal" were infamous for this). Even in "Alien: Isolation"
(which worked hard to make the AI 'fair', the eponymous xenomorph
would instantly detect you if you stood right behind you, because the
AI had a vision cone facing straight back.

Of course, are these really 'cheating'? The thing is, it's not really
hard to make it so the computer can trounce a player in most video
games. Even if the computer isn't granted any special bonuses, the
sheer speed at which it can make its moves can make it an unbeatable
opponent. If the developer just keeps increasing the tic-rate,
eventually even the best player is going to be overwhelmed. The
challenge often isn't beating the player, it's providing a reasonable
level of challenge... and (equally importantly) expressing how its
being done to the player.

Because often when players complain about the AI is cheating, it's not
because of the specific techniques, but because those techniques
aren't communicated to them. If you go into a RTS game assuming the AI
has the same limits as you* and then find out that some or all of
those restrictions are reduced for the AI, that seems profoundly
unfair. But if you go into the match knowing that it can churn out
units faster (especially if you give it some in-universe lore to
explain it) then it's less 'cheat' and more 'challenge'.

But, yeah, the AI in pretty much every game has advantages the player
doesn't. Then again, players have a real brain and aren't limited to
scripts, so maybe it should be the AI complaining about humans. ;-)




* e.g., the same resources as you, that it can only see the parts of
the map that it has specifically explored, that it can only build
units at the same rate at you, and has the same build-limits as you
do)