Hacker News Reader

Comment by khedoros | Hacker News Reader

I don't see a problem with that. Different strokes for different folks. What I'm enjoying is available to you, but you've chosen to limit yourself to a constricted set of abilities, because you (apparently) enjoy the limitations.

Let's ignore the maps; pretend they never existed. I can drive wherever I want, but my time is limited. A child's time is less limited, but their location is more limited. A college student might be a mix of the two: mobile, with some significant free time. Another variable: location. In a rural location, there might not be a pokestop within several miles. In an urban location, there might be three within range of your home's family room.

From my perspective, people are already playing a bunch of different games, based on available time, mobility, location, and density of other nearby players.

View on HN

Cheatings cheating doesn't matter who, what, where or how you play it. All games are bound by rules set for ALL players.

No one gets to bend the rules of a game because of their circumstance for e.g. 'I work all day, so I should have access to tools that give me an advantage over others'. Games are not an equal opportunity endeavour where everyone gets to be a winner.

Those who play by the rules and practice (or grind) should be rewarded, those who cheat should be penalised, simple.

This is fascinating to me. Your assessment is entirely defendable, yet in this situation I end up with the opposite assessment:

"this is a make believe world with arbitrary rules - bend them as much as you can, because why not"

>No one gets to bend the rules of a game because of their circumstance

Again, I come to the opposite conclusion, that _because the rules are there_ they are fun to push, modify, bend, break.

If you and I were having a conversation in just about any other context, most likely we would find so many areas in which we agree, and might even really enjoy the time spent.

So, it's so funny to me that we might disagree so completely on something so foundational as rule-following behavior.

Cheers!

Its a matter of fair play. I can setup bots to create level 40 characters with high CP pokemon with just a few eggs, walking half as much as other users. Then I'll just take over gyms with my OP pokemon and say 'hey, bending the rules, all good'. In most people's eye that's just dirty play.

Same with maps, they are third-party tools used to shortcut success. Yes, the tracking sucks in game (im sure it will improve soon), but that doesn't justify having tools that say 'rare pokemon over here' without performing the actual hunting aspect of the game. That is no different to bots. What's the fun in everyone having rare pokemon without earning them.

I'm not dissing maps, Niantic might even make their own official version in the future. But when people cry foul when their preferred method of 'bending the rules' is removed, I don't have much pity for them.

But someone else could say the same to you:

"But when people cry foul when their preferred method of 'following the rules' is removed, I don't have much pity for them."

...via 10M players leaving the game and putting the entire ecosystem at risk.

The thing is, you're looking at this activity like 'success' is measurable within the game's rules rather than how satisfied people feel about playing the game in real life.

This is a big difference between adults and children, by the way. All that prefrontal cortex development tends to push people into taking the value of their time into consideration even when they are playing games. They are not wrong to do so.

I don't know where you got the idea that 10M players left because maps were removed. Do you have proof of this?

The most reasonable explanation for the drop in users is simply a tapering off after one of the most hyped game releases of all time. Correct me if im wrong, but i'm pretty sure there are still some 30M+ users active in the game.

The difference here is that most games aren't absolutely awful without the cheats.

There's also:

-no way to get banned for using the cheat.

-a very very low barrier to entry.

-the cheat is directly replacing a bugged out, missing game mechanic.

-the PvP advantage is minimal, only affecting a small portion of the game.

Basically none of the classic problems with cheating are present here.

> No one gets to bend the rules of a game because of their circumstance

Sure they do, and for any other reason that they want to.

> Games are not an equal opportunity endeavour where everyone gets to be a winner.

My point exactly. I still don't get to be a winner, because I don't have the time to put into it. But at least I get to enjoy the time that I have.

> Those who play by the rules and practice (or grind) should be rewarded, those who cheat should be penalised, simple.

"Should" perhaps being the operative word. "If wishes were fishes..." and all that. If it makes you feel better, there've been a lot of stories recently about those nasty, nasty GPS spoofers getting their accounts banned.

I don't think breaking down someone's reply into bite sized snippets and responding to each out of context is a great way to do a rebuttal. Anyway,

'No one gets to bend the rules of a game' is the basic principle of fair play and sportsmanship. You dont have time so you want to circumvent progress quicker because you enjoy it more is not within the bounds of fair play.

The GPS spoofing is certainly bending the rules, but the game allowed you to do that without penalty. Ask most players though and they will say it's unfair as it's a shortcut to success. Now that Niantic has come down on those GPS hacks, do I feel sorry for those people caught out, of course not.

The maps issue is no different. It's like an athlete complaining that his favourite performance enhancing drug has recently be banned, well forgive me if I don't leap to his defence.

Its not like the game is unforgiving to new players, it's very easy to level up in early stages and make good progress.

"No one gets to bend the rules" is the basic principle of fair play, which is what allows competitions to exist.

But what I'm hearing is the people who are bending the rules are playing a completely different game, a noncompetetive game which is enabled by cheating, but good in its own right. And as opposed to multiplayer cheats, it's not good by making it worse for the other players; the cheats straight up enable an alternate playstyle that does not compete with the regular gameplay. It's like Tour de France players calling people with E-Bikes cheaters, even if they don't actually ride in the Tour de France.

So all I can say is "well played, cheaters".

They're not cheating anymore obviously, thats why they are complaining.

What's this completely different other games within a game you are referring to. Is it the 'catch rare pokemon without hunting for them' game. Well yeah of course that's noncompetitive.

You are aware this is a multiplayer game though, right? There are gyms where you have battles and those with rare pokemons with higher CP will take over gyms that earn them stardust and coins.

> They're not cheating anymore obviously, thats why they are complaining.

Personally, I'm complaining because the game is broken and no fun, and a method of fixing it has been disabled. I don't particularly care about any of the multiplayer aspects, except that it's sometimes fun to meet friends and run around playing it.

Im lvl 22 and don't use a map tool. I go for walks and catch pokemon with my wife. There are items such as incense and lures in game that help you catch more pokemon if you want. Common pokemon are easy to catch and quickly evolve into powerful pokemon. The tracking is working again (although not 3 steps).

How did I get to lvl 22 if the game is broken? How do 30 million people play if it is broken? Its not that the games broken, it just not the way you want to play it. Like it or not the games about grinding, as evident by the RPG lite gameplay mechanics, the 100s of pokeballs given to the player and high XP awarded for evolving common pokemon. You might want it to be a game simply about 'finding rare pokemon easy', but that's not the intend way of playing it.

Multiplayer... yeah no. It isn't in my experience.

There is a type of player that grinds and min-maxes and generally does a bunch of stuff I DON'T CONSIDER FUN to win a zero-sum game. That's the only currently existing multi-player aspect, and it isn't why I started using Pokemon GO (I use it as an excuse, to my self, to get out and exercise).

There is absolutely zero other 'multi player' aspect to the game as it is officially built. Anything else is a happy co-incidence.

There isn't anything within the game to turn the crowd of players in the local downtown park from a bunch of strangers in to friends. We all just happen to share one singular interest.

Would you hold the same sentiment for GPS spoofers? Who jump around from gym to gym with their Dragonites and Snorlax that are far higher level than even a heavy map user would have?

Or people that use aim bots in fps? Maphacks?

Only to the degree that they don't damage other people's games. Jumping gym to gym isn't something I'd consider doing myself, but jumping to pokestops and avoiding gyms altogether? It's not my thing, but I don't see any harm.

I think it's a difference in perception. I consider the location-locked nature of the game to be a central feature that contributes to the entertainment value of the game. I don't consider the location of the Pokemon being hidden a central feature at all; it feels more like and unfair hobble that saps the entertainment.

> Or people that use aim bots in fps? Maphacks?

I'm not going to argue that cheating in competitive multiplayer games is a good thing any more than I'd argue that cheating in ways that don't affect other players is a bad thing.

Well sure, these people could technically play the game without affecting others. What's the point though? As a single player game Go is lacking and as a social game it's the hottest thing around. I'd be surprised to learn that there's people cheating and then not interacting with other players.

It's a competitive game, though. By "unlimiting" yourself you're changing the rules for competitive play for everyone. It's a very selfish way to play the game. It's a relief you've stopped.

> It's a competitive game, though.

Again, we're playing very different games ;-)

> By "unlimiting" yourself you're changing the rules for competitive play for everyone.

Again, what competitive play? I'm not competing against you or anyone else, by any reasonable metric.

> It's a very selfish way to play the game. It's a relief you've stopped.

No more selfish than being relieved that other people aren't having fun anymore.

> Again, what competitive play? I'm not competing against you or anyone else, by any reasonable metric.

You are competing for valuable pokemon, which IS the point of the game.

Why do you think there's a competition for valuable pokemon? When a pokemon spawns in an area, it spawns for everyone in that area and everyone who stops by can catch it. You're not competing with everyone else to get there first.

> When a pokemon spawns in an area, it spawns for everyone in that area and everyone who stops by can catch it.

Well, until someone catches it. Then it disappears.

Uh no. It doesn't disappear because it was caught.

Have you actually played the game? There is no competition for catching Pokemon. They spawn and disappears after a certain amount of time, which mapping apps by the way used to show you. Other people catching Pokemon has zero influence on your ability to catch the same Pokemon.

> You are competing for valuable pokemon, which IS the point of the game.

I'm not. The coworker next to me and I routinely catch the same Pokemon at the same time. Watching it on the map made it clear: if someone catches it, it doesn't just disappear. It's there for a set amount of time. When the time is up, that's when it can't be caught by someone else.

Too bad I can't coordinate with every single person in my city to catch the pokemon I want in the same 30 second timeframe. I've been so silly trying to spend my time hunting down the pokemon I want just to see it vanish!

If you've had fun, it's not silly. If you've just been aggravated by it, that would be silly. Personally, I'd just be aggravated...so I avoid trying to hunt down specific Pokemon, now.

Pokémon Go does have a competitive element to it (or you could say it's possible to play it competitively).

You can compete over who can fill up their Pokédex first (okay, just the 145 that are currently available). You can play the game for longer to catch more Pokémon. You can go out of your way to catch rare Pokémon. Even when you and a friend are in the same place catching the same Pokémon, you're not guaranteed to catch it — you can use Razz Berries and choose which Poké Ball to throw.

There's also Gyms. You can compete over who can control the most Gyms. If you're on opposing teams, you can compete over who will take control over a Gym. Or who will be Gym Leader.

There are many different aspects to this game. Whilst one particular aspect (Pokémon not disappearing when caught) may not be competitive, that doesn't mean the game as a whole can't be.

Fair points. I'll clarify: I don't play in a competitive way. I have no idea how many Pokemon any of my friends have caught. I don't know their levels. I've never tried to hold a gym. Honestly, I was never a heavy map user, either (I discovered them late, and my home apparently doesn't have many nests around it, so there wasn't anything interesting to see).

It seems like a philosophical debate: If I'm playing a game where players can optionally compete (but I don't), while using a tool that gives me a theoretical edge (even if I'm using it ineffectively), have I ruined someone else's game just by the perception that I could have?

> have I ruined someone else's game just by the perception that I could have?

You probably aren't ruining anyones game if you aren't competing, but you are still cheating.

...and? Sometimes the best part of a game is finding the most entertaining ways to break it, and if that doesn't directly harm someone else's enjoyment, then I frankly don't care what you wish to call it. Cheating without benefit against someone else just doesn't have the ethical zing that unfairly grinding someone into the mud would.

Oh, of course. Cheating at solitaire is not an ethical violation. But to say "I'm not cheating when I look at hidden cards in solitaire" is incorrect.

However, plenty of players that have cheated by using the map tools do place Pokemon in gyms. That is also unethical (even though I would consider it a pretty minor violation as far as ethics goes).

You realize that you're not actually fighting over a single Pokemon, right? If you catch one I can also catch it

> I don't see a problem with that. Different strokes for different folks. What I'm enjoying is available to you, but you've chosen to limit yourself to a constricted set of abilities, because you (apparently) enjoy the limitations.

It matters if you then go on to hold gyms with your super pokemon and you're now out of the league of the non-maps players.

It certainly does, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'd rather play the game as a "catch 'em all". I generally avoid gyms.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com