Why are people so quick to bandy around the term "cheat"?

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by Grumbold
There are probably fewer bugs per line of code and there's no such thing as a standard PC any more. Unfortunately each software title has got about a hundred thousand times bigger since I first started playing games and learning how to write programs.

I would say there are few bugs per line of code than stupid user (yes, I know there is no such thing as stupid user, only stupid program, right?). For example, just when I thought I have taught the program to detect all stupid user errors and display appropriate messages to guide them to enlightenment....guess what they did? They inserted the floopy disk into the crack between the front cover of the two openning bays, then complained why the program couldn't auto-detect the floopy and worst, they couldn't even reject the floopy either.

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by Thrawn05
I quite two of my jobs because my stupid bosses didn't want a clean cut and good program... they want a program that was done in the speed of "I want it yesterday!".

I know what you mean. If you want a clean cut and good program, you probably need to spend extra time (going beyond the line of duties and working night and weekend) to make it better. The life of the programmer is a tough one. No matter how much time, heart and soul. you put into it, it's never going to be enough. Moreover, the end users often see bugs; that's it! Very few of them would notice that they are looking right into some poor programmer heart and soul.

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by Thrawn05
Of course, Chess AIs have done pretty good, and perhaps the best ones I've read.

Oh yes, the Chess AIs...I have heard about them. How do the AIs in Chess work? The smarter Chess AI means the further its calculate all future moves. It's pretty much trying to play out all the moves to see if it wins or not. If you try that same technique on Civ3, you would be waiting for eternity for the AI to make a move. Even with only 32 units on a Chess board, at the most difficult level, it would take the AI forever to make its move. In a game like Civilization, there are a couple hundred units for each players, if each of these units or stack of units calculate their moves according to Chess, eternity would be too soon.

[vmxa1]

Re: Why are people so quick to bandy around the term "cheat"?

Originally posted by Demerzel
It always amazes me that people can take a game so seriously that they'll accuse others of being lame or cheating for not playing it "fair". For instance, I saw someone accuse another of cheating because they restarted the game for having a bad starting position.

Surely, if individual A has bought the game then that individual has every right to do what they want with the game as long as no-one else if affected? For multi-player, a fair playing field must be maintained I agree but why does individual B feel (s/)he has the right to criticise another for playing/altering the game they want to ensure they have the most fun possible?

I suspect the answer is that it is fine to do any form of cheating as long as you do not come into public forums and taut your accomplishments. This is of no value to others who are not doing that and can not make a valid comparison. People that edit games and then discuss their findings without revealing those ploys are made to look better than they are. You are correct, if you do these things and do not come to theses boards and exclaim your exploits without acknowleding those cheats...

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Coracle
Why does the AI when on the defensive just build defensive units?? I once attacked China with tanks. They should have had enough cavalry and marines, and some tanks, to offer a nasty counterattack. But there was no counterattack as the stupid AI JUST BUILT DEFENSIVE units. All this proves is Soren knows nothing about strategy and planning.

Actually that is not a logical conclusion. It does not prove that Soren does or does not understand. You may be right, one can not say with that data. It is likely he does understand it as well as the next person and has opt to do this for any number of reasons.

[Lee Johnson]

Coracle says:

Take away stupid, sloppy programming, you will, ipso facto, have a "smarter" AI.

You're making some big assumptions about code you've never seen. It's always such an easy, matter-of-fact thing to do--when you're not the one who has to do it.

Qilue says:

Considering the bug-riddled state of software these days, I would think anyone would be too ashamed to actually admit to being a 'professional programmer'.

Like giving the job to amateurs is going to make the situation better.

I am a professional programmer with 19 years of on-the-job experience. There is a broad continuum of skill in this profession and yes, some people aren't very good at putting software together. However, we're not all lackwits, thank you very much.

[vmxa1]

I have to expose myself, but I have been in systems programming for a long time, does not mean anything, but there it is (started in 1963 for the record).
Making a better game AI is not always about programming skills. Sometimes it is about money and time. Sometimes it is about where to draw the line. I mean by that, how good should one make the AI, even if one can make it better? Say you have the skills and time to remove any "helps the ai now uses and make the game smarter, do you really want to? Will it help sales? What about the impact on the boxes required to run the game.

[Lee Johnson]

Well, vmxa1, now you're trying to be practical. You make a good point: In the Real World, it's always about business realities and tradeoffs. Software is never finished, only released.

(vmxa1... Hey, does that mean you've worked with VM/XA? I was a VM operator one co-op term, a loooong time ago.)

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Making a better game AI is not always about programming skills.

Absolutely! Even if we know how to program Commander Data (in Star Trek - Next Generation), we would not have the appropriate hardware for his software. Regardless of the cost of the game, nobody would want to wait for eternity (figure of speaking) for the AI to make a move. Therefore, hardware requirement is also a big part of the equation.

[vmxa1]

Yup, that was my main field for a long time and I even taught it to other sysprogs for Candle.

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by Moonsinger

I know what you mean. If you want a clean cut and good program, you probably need to spend extra time (going beyond the line of duties and working night and weekend) to make it better. The life of the programmer is a tough one. No matter how much time, heart and soul. you put into it, it's never going to be enough. Moreover, the end users often see bugs; that's it! Very few of them would notice that they are looking right into some poor programmer heart and soul.

That's why I'm considering going into another field.

My first boss wanted me to take a DOS tax program, and ADD to it. I told him I found a bug in the calculations that could suddenly make total taxes owe to 0, even though no one has ever had that happened yet. I told him about this potential bug, he told me just to add stuff to it.... I quite. I guess being a programmer means giving up your morals.

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by Moonsinger


Oh yes, the Chess AIs...I have heard about them. How do the AIs in Chess work? The smarter Chess AI means the further its calculate all future moves. It's pretty much trying to play out all the moves to see if it wins or not. If you try that same technique on Civ3, you would be waiting for eternity for the AI to make a move. Even with only 32 units on a Chess board, at the most difficult level, it would take the AI forever to make its move. In a game like Civilization, there are a couple hundred units for each players, if each of these units or stack of units calculate their moves according to Chess, eternity would be too soon.

I have to wait an hour for a chess move anyway. Bring it on! This would give me a good reason to get a new 2GHz computer. BUt until then all this "extra horse power" is being used only for flashy graphics. I would of been happy if Civ3 was a DOS text screen... seeing that most of the wait time is just graphical.

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by DeepO


Hehe, I used to be an AI programmer (well, technically software engineer), I moved on. But I have yet to hear of any bugs in my products... and I can call them mine because I did more then half of the code on them. The reason why you're seeing bugs is that applications get so big, they become incontrollable. And the rush to market is also quite strong... Plus, there are millions of professional programmers at work, surely you don't imply that I have to feel responsible for some of the mess others are making? I'm still proud of what I did, and until someone tells me that I was wrong somewhere (and proofs it with bugreports an inch thick) I won't change my mind

Thramn05, chess AIs are indeed well done, but you can't compare these to the Civ III AI. (I'm repeating here, but what the heck). Big Blue was an engineering feat, and a big accomplishment in parrallel computing. The algorithms used for decision making, however, were very slim. It simply computed far more possibilities than Kasparov could, without taking any shortcuts or pattern recoginition that most of the times defines the I in AI. On a purely game level, it was worse then some of the available commercial packages (ChessMaster x000, for instance), as these are indeed relatively intelligent.

But even then, you can't compare ChessMaster to Civ. It is a series, which is centered around the AI, not around graphics. As such, it has a long standing evolution of its code (over 10 years), which progressively got improved. Civ III doesn't have this, the programming is far less focused on the AI, and it is a completely new system from both Civ II and SMAC.

Further, the level of complexity in Civ is far greater then a 'simple' chess board with limited moves. Chess is made for humans: the best (Kasparov) can foresee about 17 turns deep what is going to happen, and plan according to that. DeepBlue, through shear CPU power could see 23 turns... in Civ, I can plan ahead some 50-100 turns (inaccurately, of course), while my computer has trouble with 3 of them. So other algorithms are needed, as it is not a simple matter of doing all the possible moves, and judging what the results are. That's whay we need such 'stupid' algorithms that aim for some goal when certain conditions are met. Aiming for empty cities is obvious, but as the humans quickly see through these 'tactics', it becomes an exploit. If you want better strategies and tactics on the AI part, you either need cheats, or a development time of lets say 20 years... which in turn means you don't pay $50 for CivIII, but more like $500.
DeepO

Paragraph 1: Yes, I totaly agree. Look at AvP, it took over a year, then look at AvP2, which only took about 8 months.

Paragraph 2: Mmm, both Chess and Civ are TBS. Both have units with certain abilities, both can capture/kill a unit. Basicly, Civ is just an advanced form of chess. In fact, all war games are an advanced form of chess. I wouldn't be surprised if the basic underlining AI code in Civ3 is similar to most chess software.

Paragraph 3: No deniging that.

Paragraph 4: I would pay $500 for a smart AI. Besides, I have had more fun against computers then other people in MPs games, why? Well, isn't there a thread about ICS in the general forum? Check that one out.

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by Thrawn05
I have to wait an hour for a chess move anyway. Bring it on! This would give me a good reason to get a new 2GHz computer. BUt until then all this "extra horse power" is being used only for flashy graphics. I would of been happy if Civ3 was a DOS text screen... seeing that most of the wait time is just graphical.

Yeah, but if Firaxis do that, they would be in bankruptcy soon. Since most people don't have a 2GHz machine anyway, few copies of civ3 would be sold. Even though the AIs aren't tough in this game, it already gave most of us a good run for our money.

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by Thrawn05
That's why I'm considering going into another field.

My first boss wanted me to take a DOS tax program, and ADD to it. I told him I found a bug in the calculations that could suddenly make total taxes owe to 0, even though no one has ever had that happened yet. I told him about this potential bug, he told me just to add stuff to it.... I quite. I guess being a programmer means giving up your morals.

You don't have to go into another field, you know. Have you considerred starting your own software company? This way, you don't have to give up your morals.