The art of cheating

[lackblogger]

Disco Elysium is still mechanically deep, that's where it lays claim to the RPG sphere and pulls away from a Choose Your Own Adventure. It's also very well written, which is something that comes from a deep passion, hence it's unlikely you'll find similar should the concept go mainstream.

It also caught a particular zeitgeist, like many post kickstarter games, either from kickstarter or other funding, and there was quite a string of narrative inspired games linking gamers to other narrative games.

For example, the people who played DE are very likely to have also played games like Firewatch, The Stanley Parable, and that game about the schoolgirl who can reverse time to hopefully prevent a murder, not to mention the brief ascendency of TellTale games. A few years ago was quite the golden age for the narrative deep dive experience.

 

[Stingray]

I kind of got into an semi-argument with my daughter about this yesterday. She's away at college. She recently played Disco Elysium and loved it. RPGs, to me, are about the character builds and combat. I can't stand Disco Elysium. They didn't trick me into buying it so there's no reason for me to be angry. But I didn't look closely at the game's description and seeing some screenshots and people comparing it to Planescape, I assumed it would be right up my alley.

No combat. I can't get over it. Who would ever play an RPG with no combat? It's crazy. No one would ever want that. Except gazillions of people do. I don't get it. My mind can't accept it. I'm not mad at the game or that people enjoy the game, I just can't understand how it can be liked. I would never rate a game that I have no interest in at all poorly or anything insane like that, but I can't imagine how anyone finds it appealing in the least. Nevertheless, they certainly do. There's a huge audience for RPGs with no combat. My seed, my own offspring, is one member of that huge audience.

The older I get, the more I have no idea what is going on in the world. My son absolutely needed a topnotch PC and he only plays Terreria on it, a game that could run on a Commodore 64. Nothing makes sense any more. All I can do is appreciate the fact people enjoy things I don't, and be glad they can find some enjoyment in this world, and be happy for them (besides for my son since he completely wasted my money with that PC).

Ironically, I loved Disco Elysium even though I stand by my statement that combat is the core mechanic/gameplay in RPGs. I guess it's OK to have outliers occasionally. Either that, or maybe some different genre label should be applied to DE, which I'd be fine with.

 

[bkrueger]

I don't know what you are all talking about. Of course you can die in combat in Disco Elysium.

You can also die in Disco Elysium in the first few minutes by looking into a bright light, of course.

 

[Couchpotato]

I don't know what you are all talking about. Of course you can die in combat in Disco Elysium.

You can also die in Disco Elysium in the first few minutes by looking into a bright light, of course.

You can die or get positive/negative status buffs based on how you play. My favorite was getting a game over from stress or a heart attack based on your interactive choices.

No need to cheat in that game of course to remain on topic.

 

[bkrueger]

You can die or get positive/negative status buffs based on how you play. My favorite was getting a game over from stress or a heart attack based on your interactive choices.

Wouldn't it be a fun experience if they implemented that in a game like Elden Ring? There would be enough situations justifying a heart attack there...

 

[Tony]

Disco Elysium is still mechanically deep, that's where it lays claim to the RPG sphere and pulls away from a Choose Your Own Adventure. It's also very well written, which is something that comes from a deep passion,

So, in my opinion, that makes the point people can enjoy RPGs for the story, right? People like different things, and that's okay. I don't like Disco Elysium. Tons of people do. I won't play a game like Bard's Tale IV since there's no way to cheat. Some people will think I'm an idiot for that, and some people don't cheat at all. Some people can handle all the easy cheating ToyBox allows. I can't.

We all like RPGs, either for similar reasons or widely disparate reasons, but we still all like them. I don't see the reason to look down on someone for liking RPGs for the story when we can all agree a lot of RPGs have great stories to tell. In the last Colony Ship news post I admitted I dislike like tough and unclear decisions in RPGs. Some people love RPGs with tough and unclear decisions more than anything else. To each their own.

 

[purpleblob]

This thread has derailed quite a bit lol.

I think RPG is a special kind of game genre because it offers so much different aspects players can enjoy, all packed in one package. Its all there to help us roleplay. And if "cheating" (or ignoring the parts of the game individual's don't enjoy) allow them to immerse more into the character / world they are playing in, then why not?

 

[bkrueger]

I wrote in other threads that for me combat is the salt in the soup for RPGs. Without salt a dish may taste boring, but with too much salt it is also bad. And there are even dishes like sweets, where adding salt would not be helpful at all. The latter would be comparable to adventures without fighting.

Like everybody may have a different taste, regarding the adequate amount of salt in a dish, this also holds for the amount of fighting. So may be cheating can be a way to adjust the dish to ones taste, which is completely ok in my eyes.

For me personally cheating of that kind is not my cup of tea. As others said, "cheating" might be necessary for other reasons like overcoming game breaking bugs and the like.

In Spellforce 1, for example, I regularly use the "cheat", which doubles the game speed, since walking around is much too slow on normal speed.

 

[lackblogger]

So, in my opinion, that makes the point people can enjoy RPGs for the story, right? People like different things, and that's okay. I don't like Disco Elysium. Tons of people do. I won't play a game like Bard's Tale IV since there's no way to cheat. Some people will think I'm an idiot for that, and some people don't cheat at all. Some people can handle all the easy cheating ToyBox allows. I can't.

We all like RPGs, either for similar reasons or widely disparate reasons, but we still all like them. I don't see the reason to look down on someone for liking RPGs for the story when we can all agree a lot of RPGs have great stories to tell. In the last Colony Ship news post I admitted I dislike like tough and unclear decisions in RPGs. Some people love RPGs with tough and unclear decisions more than anything else. To each their own.

Well, once again, I make reference to mechanical depth and the reply comes back just about combat. But anyway, there's only so much any human can bare repetition, so I'll just remind you that DE even has difficulty levels:

Normal: Recommended for most players
Hardcore: Recommended for experienced players

Hardcore means skill checks are harder to beat, money is harder to come by, healing is more expensive and restores less morale/health, the Thought Cabinet modifiers are more significant, but you get more XP.

So the 'difficulty' is factored by the mechanical elements.

Interestingly, it doesn't have an Easy or Story Mode where all checks automatically pass - and, more interestingly, it gets a pass for this .

I've no doubt you'd face similar reactions if you went to a DE forum and asked for a mod to pass all skill checks, in that most people would say, but dude, that kinda ruins the point of it doesn't it?

And no doubt there'd be some that would laugh, but it's not something to have a personal or public crisis about, you know, it's a kinda normal response.

 

[lackblogger]

I wrote in other threads that for me combat is the salt in the soup for RPGs. Without salt a dish may taste boring, but with too much salt it is also bad. And there are even dishes like sweets, where adding salt would not be helpful at all. The latter would be comparable to adventures without fighting.

Like everybody may have a different taste, regarding the adequate amount of salt in a dish, this also holds for the amount of fighting. So may be cheating can be a way to adjust the dish to ones taste, which is completely ok in my eyes.

For me personally cheating of that kind is not my cup of tea. As others said, "cheating" might be necessary for other reasons like overcoming game breaking bugs and the like.

In Spellforce 1, for example, I regularly use the "cheat", which doubles the game speed, since walking around is much too slow on normal speed.

Not an RPG, but Medieval Total War had this 'feature' whereby your game would end if your noble house failed to produce any male heirs over 16 upon the death of your ruler (or instigate a major civil war if your realm covered the correct tipping point of territory).

But this was absurd because the player has pretty much zero agency on whether you get any heirs, or, if they do it's never really communicated by the game. Meaning your game can come to an end because of a minor mechanic that borders on the bureaucratic loophole of the type that finally fingered Al Capone.

To counter this, the game had cheat codes you could type to automatically generate an heir the next turn, and pretty much everyone who's an expert at the game highly recommends having this cheat code to hand. In this example you haven't gut gud if you don't know the heir cheat code.

 

[Couchpotato]

Wouldn't it be a fun experience if they implemented that in a game like Elden Ring? There would be enough situations justifying a heart attack there...

If they did it would be hilarious given most bosses would kill you right away.

Deathknight enters the fray, you grab your chest in fright, instant heart attack.

Might be an Intetresting mode to try and mod in the game.

 

[Tony]

Well, once again, I make reference to mechanical depth and the reply comes back just about combat.

I don't think all the mechanical depth in the world would be enough to carry a story-focused/narrative game, only the story could do that. If Disco Elysium didn't have a good story, I doubt it would be so popular. If it had half the mechanical depth, it would probably as, or almost as popular. And I disagree it was a deep game at all. Same with Outer Worlds, the itemization was switching outfits to pass checks. To me, that is the opposite of deep. I know my daughter said she would have enjoyed Disco Elysium without the RPG elements, just as she enjoyed The Last of Us. She plays games on the easy setting to get through the game parts and get to the story. She also plays those Walking Dead story games and those novel-type games. She doesn't care if the story's wrapped in an RPG, I don't see much of a difference if someone does prefer that such as Couchpotato. The only answer to that would be it's not okay for people to like what they like for whatever reason they like it.

 

[lackblogger]

I don't think all the mechanical depth in the world would be enough to carry a story-focused/narrative game, only the story could do that. If Disco Elysium didn't have a good story, I doubt it would be so popular. If it had half the mechanical depth, it would probably as, or almost as popular. And I disagree it was a deep game at all. Same with Outer Worlds, the itemization was switching outfits to pass checks. To me, that is the opposite of deep. I know my daughter said she would have enjoyed Disco Elysium without the RPG elements, just as she enjoyed The Last of Us. She plays games on the easy setting to get through the game parts and get to the story. She also plays those Walking Dead story games and those novel-type games. She doesn't care if the story's wrapped in an RPG, I don't see much of a difference if someone does prefer that such as Couchpotato. The only answer to that would be it's not okay for people to like what they like for whatever reason they like it.

I have no doubt story games can be good games. No-one has said otherwise. But without the mechanical depth it's highly likely it wouldn't be featured as much on specialist RPG sites and generally categorised as an RPG. You know, like how Last of Us isn't. Or Walking Dead, or whatever.

 

[Couchpotato]

Back on the topic of cheating here a few good sites I use but one requires a membership.

1. https://flingtrainer.com/
2. https://www.cheathappens.com/
3. https://www.cheatengine.org/
4. https://www.wemod.com/

Almost every game is covered and you can request a game that isn't.

There you have it my daily spam once again.

 

[Redglyph]

They're often on NexusMods too.

 

[Tony]

I just use fearless revolution if I can't figure it out myself with cheat engine. Like with Bard's Tale 4, you can cheat, but you can't cheat in the way I need to such as adding more skill points. Then I have to do a search. There was a way to add more and have them carry through saves, but the way to do it was crazy and required way too much effort. There was another game recently that required unpacking a part of the save, modifying it with a program, then repacking it back into the save. I'm not doing that. I'd rather just not play than get a degree in cheatiology. I don't know if developers do that on purpose but it is very frustrating.

Edit - Anyone remember Asheron's Call and Microsoft saying if people could cheat it was a failure on their part as programmers so cheating wasn't against the rules? Then so many people cheated they had to change their policy.

 

[blatantninja]

On a good day, I'm a terrible tactician, so I'm not above cheating. If I get stuck on something, I'll try it a few times, then look online for strategies. I'm totally ok with 'cheesing' too. If I just can't, even with that, I'll use a cheat code. As an example, I'm playing Pillars of Eternity. Totally stuck on the Alpine Dragon. I've tried different strategies that I've seen online (and I'm playing on normal settings) and even with my level 15 party, just keep dying. But I want to complete the quest. I haven't cheated yet on it, but I may.

I jsut don't enjoy trying something over and over and over, getting frustrated and then finally beating it. That turns me off of the game.

 

[JDR13]

Edit - Anyone remember Asheron's Call and Microsoft saying if people could cheat it was a failure on their part as programmers so cheating wasn't against the rules? Then so many people cheated they had to change their policy.

I don't remember that specifically, but it makes sense. Unfortunately, a lot of gamers don't have enough common sense to not cheat in multiplayer games. Then they complain when developers implement anti-cheat software.

 

[Carnifex]

Nod, I never played Asheron's Call yet heard about the debacle and saw a different side of it with the Everquest franchises. Yeah, a serious line must be drawn when cheating carries over to online platforms. It sullies the game for every player, whether they realize it or not.