[UPDATE] Microsoft Devastates Autistic Child By Labeling Him a Cheater
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That's just it, they don't have value. Not even the Oscars. "You're a great actor so here's a little golden man statue." What, the obvious praise alone wasn't enough for you? The young actor should believe it's important because a bunch of dead motherfuckers said so all those years ago? He couldn't take solace in the fact that he's improving his own craft and outshining his peers as well as making a hefty amount of money? No, here's a little naked golden guy on a pedestal for your hard work. How about give'em what that thing is worth in cash? He could fuckin' do something with that.Pyode said:
No, I'm not really serious, but I stand by my original point. Since commercial video games came to the living room in 1972, we didn't need arbitrary little icons attached to doing something in-game to reaffirm some kind of pride until this console generation.
Asperger's Syndrome is either on a minor or major scale. From reading what you wrote it seemed that you were making out that Asperger's Syndrome was only on the severe side of the autistic scale (i just wanted to clerify). I have Asperger's Syndrome but only on a minor scale, yet I find myself obsessing over games like pokemon and magic the gathering (both to a rediculas extent). If you watch the video he does struggle to talk but yes i agree that its very easy for a reporter to "bumped up" the level of his disability. This, is generally, what reporters do.littlewisp said:
I think I'd be more pissed off by the 'Cheater' permanently stamped on my gamertag.
Gamerscore is just a number, only made a commitment to 100% one or two games- theres no real enjoyment in it. Plus, would give me a flimsy excuse to play some old games again haha
Gamerscore is just a number, only made a commitment to 100% one or two games- theres no real enjoyment in it. Plus, would give me a flimsy excuse to play some old games again haha
*smirk* I'd been gaming for over a decade by the period you describe; depending upon how you define it, I could've been near the end of my second decade of gaming since I started hitting arcade consoles about the time that Star Wars came out. I will admit that the bulk of that gaming was either on arcade consoles or home computers (C-64 in the '80s, then various PCs) on titles that did not have "completion counters". (I gamed on a VAX smart-terminal a few times, too. Ph3ar my cyb3rgeezerness.) The first console I owned was the Xbox 1.Owyn_Merrilin said:
No, they don't; your clinging to that paradigm demonstrates clearly that you don't play Xbox games with any frequency. Many Achievements have nothing to do with direct game content. I'd argue that most Achievements can be accomplished without doing missions or sidequests... the Multiplayer ones in particular, as I've said before, as they measure individual feats played against other players. (Kill/Death ratios, heals on other players, flag captures, etc.) Even in single-player, though, many Achievements have nothing to do with finding content; Crackdown's "Car Juggler", for instance, was granted for using high explosives to loft a vehicle for 30(? something like that) seconds before allowing it to return to the ground. That's well outside the "completion meter" paradigm, rewarding players for emergent play.
They're not the same concepts, unless you broaden the term "completion meter" until the term is meaningless.
Hey, that's the way all '90s games were played. If you want to return to that play style, then go all the way.
If you want to play in the 21st century, though, you're going to have to take into account how gaming has changed in the intevening decades... and one such way is the social aspect of play granted by ubiquitous, persistant, networked gaming.
Xbox Live is a world-spanning arcade. That's how it was conceived, and that's how it works. You can always opt out... MS doesn't care if you don't subscribe, it only cares if your actions have bad repercussions on other subscribers; and whatever you think, the vast majority of players on Live do want their Achievements to have some sort of meaning over the network and don't appreciate someone claiming Achievements falsely.
-- Steve
Bold part mine.Anton P. Nym said:
You just proved that you haven't played the kind of game I was talking about. If the developers went to the trouble of creating an achievement for it, it's not "emergent gameplay," it's the player doing something that they had planned, but isn't necessary for completion. Just because the side quest is given in a non-standard way doesn't make it something completely thought up by the player. Oddly enough, you've been playing both too long and not long enough to really get what I'm talking about.
As for the whole "unhook your console from the internet if you want to cheat" thing, that's like saying "If you want to hack in a singleplayer game of GalCivII, you should be prepared to be banned from playing TF2. Nevermind the fact that one is singleplayer only, and the other is a completely different game, which you haven't cheated at." Just because something is hooked up to the internet shouldn't mean anything for a piece of software that doesn't need to connect to it.
As for the arcade thing, the world can't be an arcade, unless you broaden the term "arcade" until the term is meaningless. A local score board and a world wide one are two very different things.
Captcah: Cessibl (insert three Hebrew characters here)
Alright ReCaptcha, now you know my keyboard can't reproduce Hebrew.
I'm disappointed in the human species that stuff like this not only merits the attention of a company like Microsoft but the world at large. Somebody got paid to investigate this incident. Paid to investigate tampering of a score that means nothing. Don't put that money into game development or anything...
Wow, talk about clutching at straws - just let it go, you're defiantly in the wrong here. It's as Anton stated, achievements offer longer life to a game, to a wider audience. That emergent gameplay element is still there, and is entirely optional as always, more players are just likely to attempt these little feats due to an additional reward. Gaming has changed, developers don't want players to cheat anymore, thus they remove them from the game, or punish them through loss of achievements [ala GTA IV]. Lament that all you want, but you'll be part of a dwindling minority - to be honest it just seems like you're arguing this point for the sake of it, I really can't beleive anyone would care this strongly about cheating in single-player games...Owyn_Merrilin said:
Beats me. As I said, autism isn't a superpower in the slightest. It's far more likely to leave you intellectually impaired than with above-average intelligence.Generic Gamer said:
Many things have value only when people believe that they do. More things than often bears thinking about. Money, for example.
But it's an either-or proposition. Either it doesn't matter- in which it makes no difference whether the alleged cheater gets his precious achievements back, so there's no good reason to complain- or it does matter, in which case Microsoft is perfectly entitled to enforce their codes as they surely warned in their documentation that they would.
You don't get to participate in a money economy, then start making counterfeit money, and then when you're caught say "But it doesn't matter, I'm not into this whole 'money' thing anyway."
Achievements mean something to some people and nothing to others, but it's in no one's interest to devalue them for the people they do matter to.
But it's an either-or proposition. Either it doesn't matter- in which it makes no difference whether the alleged cheater gets his precious achievements back, so there's no good reason to complain- or it does matter, in which case Microsoft is perfectly entitled to enforce their codes as they surely warned in their documentation that they would.
You don't get to participate in a money economy, then start making counterfeit money, and then when you're caught say "But it doesn't matter, I'm not into this whole 'money' thing anyway."
Achievements mean something to some people and nothing to others, but it's in no one's interest to devalue them for the people they do matter to.
Ya know, there are some people who just have the time and the skill to excel at a game more so then others, I think they may have jumped at it rather quickly instead of stepping back and looking into it. Then again, Microsoft might just be too busy for full blown cheating investigation with as many players game a day, a month, a year; still its worth chewing on. People aren't right all the time.
I believe very strongly that gaming companies shouldn't be able to tell me what to do with hardware and software I've already paid for. This extends to cheating in single player games if I so desire, but that's a small aspect of a larger belief.D_987 said:
Wow way to slant the story. You guys have re-written that headline twice now and each time it sounds meaner and meaner. You might wanna throw some bleach in there, your journalism is looking a little yellow. It's entirely possible the kid was cheating. Autistic or not. For that matter, autistic does not mean retarded or in any way disabled. You're tying to make it sound like "this poor sick child" but he's 11 and perfectly capable of cheating.
