Poll: Small question of morals...

[Angry Caterpillar]

Alright, so I'm curious where you escapists stand on this, and hopefully you can provide some insight for me.

My friend and I were playing Halo not too long ago and were matched against two people who happened to be away (not sure what they were doing staying in the doubles playlist while away, but whatever). We picked up sniper rifles and decided to use them for target practice. Nothing better to practice on than someone who wouldn't shoot back, right?
Well, seeing as they weren't shooting back, neither of us died. My friend had gotten to fifteen, and seemed fairly happy (to put it lightly) he was going to get that first perfection he'd wanted for so long.

I had a choice to make. A) I could have let him have the perfection and congratulate him. B) I could pick up the rocket launcher and put him down, forcing him back in line to get one legitimately. I chose A); after all, he is my friend, and I suppose I wanted him to be happy.
And this brings me to the issue I've been pandering about, which is whether that was the good thing to do. I feel like it kind of detracts from the meaning of my own two hard-earned perfections, and any someone else may have gotten. So what would you guys have done? If you can, provide any views you have on unfair achievements like this, I need a different opinion on this.

 

[About To Crash]

I suppose it's more up to him in the long run. If he wants an empty victory, it's his to have, really. Of course you don't need to be okay with it, or just let him, and I think if you don't like the idea then you're well within your rights to tell him and see how he feels. I don't think you have the right to choose his victories and losses for him either.
Does it detract from the real victories? Maybe. If at some point your friend becomes a bit of a braggart about his amazing perfect, then I think the most appropriate thing you can do is tactfully remind him how he got it, and try to do it so everyone he's bragging to can hear you. Otherwise, meh, who cares, let him have his petty win.

 

[Kollega]

I would have objected, said him that it's not really a "perfection" if you haven't earned it, then left.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

In that situation, I wouldn't have killed the enemies.
If they aren't fighting, I'd just run around the map trying to have fun. Amuse myself.
Not gonna kill them for free points. I've done it before, not killing people who are away.
But also, I wouldn't have killed the ally. I'd just leave them to do whatever the hell they wanted to.

 

[arsenicCatnip]

Empty victory. I choose option C: Use my rocket launcher to reduce him to pulp, tell him to get one legitimately, then laugh and go away.

I'm kind of a ***** like that. But a victory isn't a victory unless it's WORKED FOR.

 

[Ninjamedic]

Well, whenever my cousins nuke-boost on mw2, I set about griefing them. It's funny being the soldier of karma.

 

[SirDeadly]

I would have shot him just to be a bastard. I've done it before on cod, no killstreak rewards for you my frined! >=D

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

Well, whenever my cousins nuke-boost on mw2, I set about griefing them. It's funny being the soldier of karma.

Hey do you remember that Viper-Gun guy on TF2 we counter Griefed? Good times...

 

[Cherry Cola]

I would chose A. It doesn't matter if I think it's wrong or not, if I try and punish my friends because they don't share my morals, that's being a douche.

 

[fletch_talon]

I don't know much about the game, but it would seem to me that the only way to not get killed at all in a match would be in the case you just outlined, or in a match against severely outclassed opponents (ie. people who aren't nearly as good as you).

Assuming this is the case (as I said I'm not exactly knowledgeable) then I reckon there'd be more skill involved in a match that you win but die a couple times, as opposed to a flawless victory.

 

[TheNamlessGuy]

DELETED

 

[Talshere]

Ive nothing against blowing upto some idiot who goes afk. For whatever reason.

Do I think it cheapens the perfection achivment/games in general. Yes. Do I think you should stop him, no. His perfection is at least, more ligit than the guys who make a match with a friend who wont shoot back to get em.

If he starts getting to full of himself, you earned your perfects, he didnt. Im suspecting this means your better. So dont say a word, put him in a 1v1 with you. Hand him his ass a few times. Noone can brag after 3 or 4 consecutive losses. Even if they were close.

 

[RicoADF]

I feel like it kind of detracts from the meaning of my own two hard-earned perfections, and any someone else may have gotten.

I think people need to get over 'trophies'/'rewards' when they really dont mean anything. Yer their nice but in the end who cares. You were right to let him have it, after all it was the other players fault for going afk so long and all it would have done is ruin a good friendship over a silly icon that means nothing and doesn't even exist in the real world.

 

[Shepard's Shadow]

I would rocket launch my friend clean off the map. Getting "perfection" when no one is shooting at you isn't perfection, its crap. If he can't get perfection legitimately, he doesn't deserve it.

 

[Ekit]

I would've let him kill them. It isn't his fault that they were away. Just because the opponents don't pose a challenge doesn't make the perfection less legit.

 

[Latinidiot]

pffft, come on, it's a game. if you have fun with it, you've done something right

 

[Riobux]

I'm sorry to sound ignorant, but I'm not sure I understand what the problem is here. Is it how he "won the match" with no deaths at all thus stealing your achievement? Is it how he was overly excited about achieving something that required no element of skill?

I'm not really sure what direction you're coming from, sorry.

 

[muffincakes]

I'm sorry, but this is a VIDEO GAME. There are no moral quandaries here. Earning something in a video game only means something to...well...no one really, and in a game where you regulary attempt to kill others, trying to moralize that is just silly.

However, to answer you question, since you've moralized the immoral, I will actualize the unreal. If you were a sniper in WWII and you found a Nazi whom you knew would(or through your own eyes, had seen) kill you or other innocents if given the chance, would you shoot them? And if they were standing still having a drink or smoking, not really doing anything at all, would you still shoot them? Translated to the field of battle, if you saw an enemy soldier just standing in a field doing nothing, would you let him live because he is just standing there?

The answer is: If you have picked a side and joined the battle, then no matter what, you are in that battle. If you don't want to die, don't go into battle.

PS. Just because they were not moving does not mean that they weren't playing. Snipers don't move much either. In this case, imagine that they didn't like their teamates and just wanted them to lose.

 

[Kollega]

I feel like it kind of detracts from the meaning of my own two hard-earned perfections, and any someone else may have gotten.

-snip-

OMG MISQUOTATION!

Would you kindly fix it?

 

[RicoADF]

err sorry could you eleaborate