The Ultimate Privateer Question....

Quarto: Actually, my problem is that for a split second, I do feel it's a "cheat", but then have trouble putting my finger on exactly how or why.

A "cheat" tends to give a player an unfair advantage, in essence a free ride or free lunch. (Just go down the list of "cheats" on the CIC.) But the Steltek "option" doesn't seem to fit that description very well. The extra Steltek guns don't come free; you have to buy them by earning credits the same way you do for any other gun or tech the game offers.

Indeed, it's remarkable how well the game "balances the scales" if you do acquire the extra Stelteks. Yes, you can choose to get them before you reach Delta Prime, which at first might seem to give you an advantage in the various missions, but the game immediately "responds" by sending the indestructible Drone after you, making the missions more difficult than they would otherwise be. And when you continue the game in RF (unless you start from scratch), RF renders the guns useless and forces you to get rid of them, further causing you to forfeit the total amount of the 100,000 credits-per-gun you paid to get them in the first place.

Just where is the free ride or free lunch in any of this? What is the "cheat"?

Interesting issue in general too. Especially in light of the trend of some games to give players more freedom to "rewrite" default settings and "control" the gaming environment.

Wedge009: I've wondered about the Steltek's claim too. I've experimented, trying to "drain" a boosted gun, but have never succeeded. To the best of my knowledge, a boosted gun stays boosted, which is further borne out by RF's transfer program that consistently depicts the boosted guns as Stelteks instead of converting them back into (non-boosted) Fusions.
 
The cheat, Nemesis, lies in the fact that there's only one in existence. No others have been produced, and this is perfectly logical - the player couldn't afford even one (I'd guess that it would take about half a million for the research that would allow them to make copies of it), and Confed certainly has other things to worry about than guns of unregistered type. Please note that Confed does not know that the gun is an alien weapon. All they know is that it's not a normal gun. And given the seamy nature of the Gemini Sector, we can assume that every third gun or so comes up as unregistered, because of home-made modifications.

So yes, 100,000-a-piece Steltek guns give you an unfair advantage. This is not in any way reduced by what RF does to them.
Also, there's the fact that you said people should buy Isometal while they're at it. That is most certainly a cheat.

What it all comes down to though, is that you're suggesting people should shift their player forward into the future, and then back into the past. In Privateer, time travel doesn't exist. Therefore, it's a cheat.
 
Speaking of Privateer cheats, isn't there one that gives you a Centurion and lots of credits? If someone knows it, it could be added to the CIC's list of cheats.
 
Well... you can do almost anything with a Trainer. But currently to this date there is none...

... so what can I say?

Nee!

*ups all three of his chins*
 
Quarto: We're disagreeing mostly over semantics. By "cheat", I mean simply gaming cheats--asking whether a "change" detracts from, makes no difference, or adds to the game play. (BTW, I'm not sure about the Isometal--it doesn't seem to protect a ship's electronics much better than tungsten--but I certainly do think that giving the ships better engines and shields is a gaming cheat.)

Now if a "change" implies a certain fact that can't be harmonized with the game's storyline, then I wholeheartedly agree that should be pegged. But "cheat", in my opinion, is not the best word. Calling the conflict "non-canon" seems more accurate.

I'm puzzled by your claim, though, that I've posited time travel. You're reading far too much into how we as gamers get the computer to inject the Stelteks into Privateer. It's just code no matter the source. But if you believe that using RF's transfer program is really time travel, then your complaint is better directed at Origin since it made the program and thus permits such "time travel".

Regarding Privateer's plot, who says the one gun is the first one found or the only one around? The Steltek admit that "pockets of technology . . . weapons, drones . . . remain".

As for who knows what--In-Sys and the ubiquitous bartenders know the artifact is alien (and that our hero likely has it), the Kilrathi know about the Steltek and want to know all that Monkhouse knows, and the Retros know our hero has an alien tech (confronting him on his way to Perry). Just how far behind (and correspondingly dumb) can Confed be?

And speaking of Confed, how do we know that Terrell and Goodin don't lie through their teeth about the Drone? Our hero is just a civilian after all, and he's treated as a dupe by nearly everyone, who all obviously know more than they ever tell. (Even our hero could learn, know, and do more than the game reveals in its "abbreviated" stopovers on bases.) In the end, it's we players who are left in the dark with a lot of unanswered questions.

Still, the one advantage this does give us is that we're almost as free as free can be to craft any number of imaginative storylines that fill out the paper-thin plot, including ones that allow for extra Steltek guns as well as other Steltek tech. (For myself, I prefer a "one-gun" narrative. But to each his or her own.)
 
By cheat, I mean something which improves the player's situation where he normally wouldn't be able to do so. This doesn't mean altering files or using codes - it means exploiting in-game bugs as well. I don't know about you, but I would argue that it also includes exporting the player to a game set a few months later, and then exporting him back.
This, therefore, is a cheat. There's no doubt about the fact that it improves the player's situation, and that he wouldn't be able to own more than one gun without cheating.

As such, whether the storyline actually allows it (though, of course, we know it doesn't) is a moot argument - would you say that obtaining four mass drivers while paying for four lasers isn't a cheat because the storyline allows you to own four mass drivers?

You've posited time travel not by suggesting the use of the transfer program, but by suggesting going back. Moving forward in time, oddly enough, isn't time travel. It's what happens naturally - unless of course we're talking about skipping time. But the transfer program doesn't do this - it allows you, the player to skip time. We know however, that our character certainly doesn't skip time. For him, the intervening months did take place.
So, the problem here is that you suggest transferring the player to RF, and then back into Priv. Time flows only one way, last I checked.
Furthermore, "just code" is also moot. If I used a savegame editor to inject the Stelteks into Privateer, it would be a cheat. Therefore, the source is relevant.

We don't know if there are other Steltek guns out there (as you point out, the plot suggests there are) but we do know that Grayson Burrows (which, in case you didn't know, is the character's official name) has only one gun and no idea of the whereabouts of the others. As far as he's concerned, the gun is unique.

Confed does indeed know something - we have evidence that they were pushing the Exploratory Services to search the area as quickly as possible. But this doesn't mean they know about Burrows' gun. Furthermore, a gun isn't something you can borrow for a few hours and photocopy. Had the Confeds taken the gun, it would have been missing for a few weeks at least, and you can rest assured that Burrows would have noticed.

We know that Terrell and Goodin don't lie about the Drone because in your final mission, you're paid just for being there - not for destroying the Drone. Had they known what the Drone was, they would have known that none of their weapons could have even penetrated its shields.
 
Quarto is right theres only one steltek gun in privateer.It always seamed the best gun to me.I think that rumer with the astroid is a false but it could refure to wc3.


------------------
SEPHIROTH (ICEMAN)


[This message has been edited by SEPHIROTH (edited August 22, 2000).]
 
Quarto: Aha! You're a strict constructionist.

In any event, you seem to treat the games and the WC universe as intertwined and inviolable. I absolutely respect your point of view. But as they say, one person's truth is another's epicycle; my perspective on the games and the WC universe is different.

I see the two as separate "realities", each with its own distinct appeal to the mind. To me, the games are . . . games, with the "Kilrathi" and "Retros" just fancy names for an AI. I play the games for their entertainment, not for their representation of the WC universe as such. Accordingly, when I "travel forward" into RF to buy the Fusions and "travel back" to Privateer, I'm only "traveling about" on my hard drive. From that standpoint, your insisting that the Steltek guns must have come from the future makes no sense to me; we only talk past each other. But I believe our respective gestalts become clear (like the famous duck/rabbit montage) once we consider the same "trip" to and from RF simply to buy a Tachyon Cannon. (Anyway, we can certainly agree that there is a quantitative difference between one versus two-or-more Steltek guns. But for me, the issue is whether there is any qualitative difference that then renders the game some sort of pointless free ride, and for the reasons I've stated before, that has not been my experience; hence, no cheat.)

What your argument does present to me, however, is the question of how extra Steltek guns can exist in the Privateer storyline and thus the WC universe. Now as to that "reality", my approach is akin to a writer's and has nothing to do with the happenstance that one can inject additional Steltek guns into the game, but everything to do with what are and are not "hard facts" about the WC universe. More to the point, while the hard facts around which the games are constructed (that there are Kilrathi and Retros lurking in the cosmos, etc.) do bound me, they still leave me free to "roam" with common sense within what I would term the games' "reality gaps" (until my ignorance is corrected by better common sense, previously unknown hard facts, or a Forstchen who, with Origin's blessing, "fills in" those gaps).

In terms that reflect both our viewpoints: You appear to take as a given that there is only one Steltek gun because the game provides the player/character with only one (a perfectly valid, if very strict, point of view that I did duly acknowledge in an earlier post); but (while I'd prefer it) I would no more accept that proposition as a hard fact than I would the suggestion that none of the people in Gemini eat cookies, sleep on the equivalent of queen-sized beds, or marry their cousins because the game never shows them doing that. It's the same with our hero. The fact that we "play" him is pure artifice to me; I have no idea from his few comments and intonations whether he finds other guns, finds someone willing to copy the one for him, encounters other "owners" who are also being pursued by the Drone, or experiences yet another "dramatic turn" before or after he gets to Perry. Doubtless, you find such rounded-out plots incompatible and intolerable in your Weltanschauung; I find them complementary and at home in mine.

(I'm really enjoying our discussion. Thanks for making a newbie feel welcome.)
 
Wow Nemesis. That's the biggest load of semantic bullsh*t I have ever heard. If you are not allowed to do it in the game and it gives you an advantage that you were not meant to have, then it is a cheat. Just admit that you cheated and get over it.

------------------
There is no God but myself. No destiny but what I deem for me. I walk my path and no others, for I am free.

[This message has been edited by Vondoom (edited August 26, 2000).]
 
Hey, just relax. Can't we have a decent discussion without somebody coming in and yelling about bullshit?
smile.gif


Nemesis: I'll reply later, gotta go now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One problem with getting the gun copied is trust. Who is Grayson going to trust to do that kind of work? With the list of people we know that Grayson knows, we have the following.

Roman Lynch. Lynch, imo, did have Miggs try to kill Grayson. A weapon like the Steltek gun is rare and valuable. If Grayson took it to Lynch, Lynch would likely find it much more profitable to keep the gun and kill Grayson instead of making copies of it for Grayson. I don't see Grayson taking that kind of risk. Grayson does know a few things that might hurt Lynch's organization, but most of it would implicate Grayson as well, so that kind of threat wouldn't be very effective.

Tayla. I don't think she has the resources on her own to get that kind of work done. She'd most likely have to go through Lynch. Also, I'm not sure Grayson has anything on Tayla that can be used to make sure she holds up her end of the bargin.

Goodin/Terrell. If Grayson came along and told them the truth (even if he lied, Goodin & Terrell are bright enough to figure out the gun must have some advantage if Grayson wants it copied) Grayson would be shy one Steltek gun and the boys in Confed R&D would have a new toy. Grayson might get a reward, if Terrell is feeling generous. Gemini's frontier nature and the likelyhood of customized weapons (as mentioned earlier by Quatro) is why it wasn't seized by Confed earlier.

Masterson. Oxford has Retro problems, and seems more concerned with getting its data secure than with doing any research. If Graysn gave a large enough endowment, he might be able to get something done. However, Oxford always struck me as a place similar to the Great Library on Trantor. They were really interested in collecting and organizing old information, but not all that interested in the pursuit of new knowledge. Grayson can at least trust Masterson, but I don't know how much Masterson can have done. Not to mention the people doing the work likley will want to document everything and publish the results in peer-reviewed journals (which might bring unneeded attention to Grayson.) Finally universities aren't, imho, the place where you get quick turnaround. They aren't in a rush and trying to hurry professors only makes them slow down more (if they have tenure
smile.gif
) Granted, if Grayson is providing the funding, that saves a lot of time, but still...

Taryn Cross and Dr. Monkhouse don't have the resources. Their respective connections would be with either Confed or Oxford (or another university), which I've already discussed.

Grayson's best bet might be Lynn Murphy. She has contacts with corporations within confed, and likely some of those have R&D departments with the kinda of expertise to do the work. However, they may not be interested in doing work for someone like Grayson for PR reasons or worry that he may come back to them at a later date with some type of blackmail scheme. Also they may see the value of such a weapon to Confed and not wish for another corp to find out about the source of their new "invention" and they may find it more expedient to do away with Mr. Burrows. It's much more profitable if you own a clear patent
smile.gif


The only other option is the one Nemesis mentioned, someone outside the known cast of characters. However, most of them would fall into the category of "underworld" types and most of those in Gemini lead back to Roamn Lynch. Even if they don't, Grayson would still have the same problems and no reason to trust them. The only option might be to find some Pliers-esque person who likes to tinker with new tech just ofr the fun of it. He might be able to find someone like that in one of the many repair facilites in Gemini. However, whether or not they could get it to work is another question. Would kinda suck to have four nice Steltek guns that either fail when you need them or explode when fired. And that has to be a concern for Grayson, no matter who is doing the work. Lynch might have the work done but have the guns rigged to blow after they fire 100 rounds.

As far as the cheat aspect, the fact that you have to pay for the guns does make it less of a cheat, but you still get more than your money's worth out of it, if I read correctly. It does give you an advantage that was not, I'm pretty sure, intended by the creators of the game. It would be akin to letting the Broadsword come mounted with Particle Cannons, because it was an "oversight" on Confed's part to equip their bombers with shorter range guns. It may make sense to let the bombers be able to engage fighters at a longer range, but to make the game more fair, the ships came with certain limitations. Finally, I imagine that if you did have 4 Steltek guns at the start of RF, the retros would steal all four and you'd be in the same boat. So keeping them after the begining of RF is definitely wrong and detracts from the story. It is the uniquesness of the gun that drives the RF story.

[This message has been edited by Shane (edited August 29, 2000).]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We must decide for ourselves if the method described by Nemesis is a cheat or not. To assist you with your decision, I have some information from Mr. Webster, which was bound to sneak into this discussion anyway.

cheat 1. to play a game not according to the rules | | to use unfair methods

While this seems fairly straightforward, we all must realize that there are no rules to Wing Commander. With that said, I am positive that this discussion will continue for years until Nemesis and Quarto agree. At that point in time, the universe will promptly explode.

------------------
Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
 
WildWeasel: What? WC has no rules? Where the hell did you get an idea like that from?
smile.gif


Nemesis: Strict constructionist?
smile.gif
No, I'm just plain Quarto. There's no point in trying to classify me as anything else, because I don't stick to any particular philosophy.
smile.gif


Anyway, your argument that your character is merely a bit of data on your hard drive seems to make no sense. That is indeed the case - but if you use the "two realities" argument to justify your actions, you are treading on very thin ice. You see, there is no difference whatsoever with the way you manipulate the savegame using RF, and the way you could with a savegame editor. The only difference are the tools - instead of a proper editor, you use RF to edit the savegame. Thus, if you use the "two realities" argument as justification, then indeed, why not just go ahead and use a savegame editor? By your definition, that would not be a cheat. Since you earlier stated - quite clearly, in fact - that you consider savegame editors to be a form of cheating, you thus end up contradicting yourself.

Now, then. The second argument you provide is that it is possible that there are more than one Steltek guns in the WC Universe. I do not question this fact - indeed, I'm certain that you are correct. You then add that there's no reason for him not to find other guns - thus, justifying your... tinkering. And again, I see no reason why this wouldn't be the case. After all, we obviously don't follow Grayson Burrows' actions all the time.

However, you should now note the other implications of your argument. Essentially, what you're saying is that your tinkering is acceptable because we don't know of anything that would make it impossible. Well, what if I was to use a savegame editor to give myself a million credits, and then say that Grayson Burrows had a long-lost uncle in Enigma Sector, who just died and left Grayson a million credits in inheritance? Your argument implies that there is indeed nothing wrong with this. Thus, you once again end up claiming that savegame editors are not a form of cheating. Well, imagine if we take this argument to the extreme. There is a cheat for WC1 and 2 which allows you to destroy enemy ships simply by pressing three buttons on your keyboard. So, how about this? Blair's ship is equipped with an experimental super-weapon which triggers the self-destruct sequence in a targetted vessel. And again - we know nothing to prove otherwise, so if we go by your argument, we must assume that this is not a cheat.

What I'm getting at here, is that your argument is flawed. While on the surface it seems perfectly reasonable, a further examination indicates that you are justifying not only your particular action, but also all other forms of cheating. This is a two-fold problem - firstly, you are contradicting yourself (and thus invalidating your own arguments), and secondly, this just plain doesn't make sense. If there's no such thing as a cheat, then why would we be having this discussion?

My definition of a cheat, by the way, has nothing to do with giving the player an unfair advantage. As far as I'm concerned, a cheat is anything which is done outside the reality of the game - it doesn't matter whether the action is simply exploitation of a built-in bug, or altering the savegame file (only the game has any right to do that without cheating - and RF, in this case, isn't the game we're playing. Thus, it is no different to any other savegame editor). Whether I do so in order to give myself extra Steltek guns, or to swap my lasers for a pair of mass drivers is irrelevant.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll admit I skimmed over most of these posts (to save an hour
smile.gif
), but how do you guys know that the main character's name is Grayson?

------------------
Bastardly Productions: More fun than a piñata filled with bees
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah, I was wondering when one of you new guys would ask
smile.gif
. Way back in March '99, the CIC dug up an ancient Privateer-related press release (go to the news archive, check March '99). According to this release, the character's name was Grayson Burrows. It also contains several other interesting details about the Gemini Sector - though admittedly, a large number of things were changed before the game came out, including the name of the sector itself (it used to be Tolnidian Sector, apparently).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Didn't they mention his name in the manual as well? In that short story thingie?

------------------
The time is near.
There are still quite a few days remaining.

Hail to the king, baby.
-Ash, housewares

I don't care for fame, power or money...
I just want to FIGHT!
-Sanosuke Sagara
 
Don't think so. And even if they did, the story "changed the names to protect the innocent" Looked over that press release which I had seen before. A couple of those features would have been pretty cool. Wonder if they skipped the concept of rivals because of the AI. Rivals wouldn't be much of a problem because you could toast them without too much effort. Course you'd have to find them first and they could have delayed a space confrontation by not letting you find them until they wanted you to. William Riordianas described would be much more interesting than Salman Kroiz, at least based on those bios. Kroiz sounds like some rich kid stereotype.

I'm not sure I would have liked the increased focus on the war, which the release seems to have suggested, though siding with the cats might have been interesting... Particulalry if Confed is coming after you. Maybe a playing both sides against the middle type of thing.
 
"Just plain Quarto"? (You underestimate yourself, my friend. But I agree, you can't capture someone with a simple label.)

My last post obviously failed to get across a couple of points. First, our respective definitions are not the same and can easily conflict, with the result that we unavoidably "chop up" the world differently over what is properly called a "cheat". (Maybe I do a better job of illustrating that below.) Second, I'm not trying to justify the "tinkering" with Privateer via speculation about possible twists and turns of its storyline. The two issues are entirely separate and should be treated independently of each other (which is what I meant by "separate realities"). Also, I've never stated or meant to imply that savegame editors are, per se, a cheat.

So, to paraphrase Vondoom, are we just wasting time over semantics? (BTW, Vondoom, I appreciate your comment--reminds me of Rousseau's view that civilization took a tragic turn the first time somebody let somebody else get away with using the term "private property".) I think that how we use words does matter. (Reference: George Carlin or William Safire.) In this regard, my thanks to WildWeasel for doing the smart thing and pulling out the dictionary. The two definitions he cites--breaking the "rules" and using an "unfair" method--are helpful. Indeed, if we wanted to summarize Quarto's and my disagreement (AND DON'T WE?!), I think it's fair to say that Quarto is drawn to the first definition while I embrace the second. Further, we each appear to discount the complementary definition. To quote Quarto: "My definition . . . has nothing to do with giving the player an unfair advantage. . . .[A] cheat is anything which is done outside the reality of the game . . . ." As for myself, I don't care much for the rules-based standard because I just don't think it works very well in the context of a computer game.

For what it's worth (and if anyone cares), here's a fair sample of the questions I've pondered "behind the scenes" in my debate with Quarto. Forget about savegame editors, what about the plain-vanilla savegame function? Is it cheating if we can "try and try again" until we win? (Quarto, you seem to give the function a clean pass under your definition, but isn't "dying" and then loading a saved game the equivalent in your view of "traveling back in time" (as well as returning from the dead) and thus something that happens "outside the reality of the game"? Haven't you previously taken the position that such "abilities" are, per se, a cheat?) Similarly, what about the adjustable skill levels found in WC 4 and Prophecy? What if an experienced player (capable of playing "Ace" or higher) chooses "Rookie" just to get a free ride? He/she has seemingly "played by the rules" since the game allows the choice, but should we then conclude that there's no cheating going on here? Would each of us "pros" actually feel guilt-free playing the games this way? (BTW, Origin does not impose any penalty for saving games or adjusting skill levels, and so apparently feels such actions are not cheats. But should a programmer's intent in this respect (always/ever) dictate or control over a player's?) Finally, what about games that allow a player to "re-program" their default settings and create new "scenarios" according to the player's whims? Can a player ever cheat when it's the player who's "setting the rules" or creating the "reality"?

Having considered these and other questions, I for one have concluded that a definition of "cheat" tied to a game's technical or physical boundaries (or "rules") cannot consistently sustain or otherwise be true to the moral judgment explicit in our common use of the word. (It would be like saying that adapting "Hamlet" to a 19th or 20th century setting is always cheating Shakespeare. No, no.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top