HAMBoneProbably the best CommanderJoin Date: 2003-04-02Member: 15139Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
The game was created and balanced with the models in mind. You more or less said it yourself: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->they are more or less an artificial skill cap.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Exactly, and if you remove that skill cap and others dont, then that is unfair to everyone else. Since most people play the game the way it is supposed to be played, the way it was played when it was balanced, they play with models on, which means that if you dont you have an unfair advantage which the community shuns and you are using an exploit. And regardless of the clanbase ladder, I know for a fact that most or all euro clans are very much against rdrawviewmodel abuse.
But the point is, if everyone was using it, then youd all be on the same playing field and it wouldn't matter, but the masses have agreed not to use it, so if you use it you are exploiting. Not to mention the game devs have specifically spoken out against it and removed it from the game, meaning that youre using something that they didn't intend to include in the game, which is like the definition of "exploit."
yes of course if i remove models and someone else does not then i have an advantage, but thats mine and their choice, its a preference of mine to play with models off, and a preference of theirs to play with models on, but they are right and i am wrong because dvm is removed in 1.1? Well models are also changed considerably and are less obstructive in 1.1, so you can argue that point both ways.
I said dvm is not forced in clanbase because monse said the devs base their ideas of whats lame on CAL rules, or something to that effect, i was not saying in any way shape or form that dvm is accepted in europe, else why would i be posting this thread asking what the problem is. (its cos im sick of the abuse i get)
i saw people bhopping as marines in the recent EU vs US match, a practice that is stopped in 1.1, and therefore by ur definition an 'exploit' i find it interesting that no one seems to care about that though.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Why though should i have to play like you? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Plain and simple, the game was made and balanced with the models as they are. Removing them removes the balance the developers worked hard to create. If it were a different mod - as there have been a few mentioned where turning your models off is allowed - then it would be a different story, as these have no doubt been designed for people to play without them. People will call the use of it an exploit because the developers have said that it's being removed to make sure the game remains balanced.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Just going with the opinion of the masses isn't exactly a reason, everyone used to think the earth was flat, and when someone said it was round people used to call him crazy... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not going with the opinions of the masses on how to play the game, I'm going with the opinions of the people who designed the game. They've decided it gives people an unfair advantage and are thus giving it the axe. The whole forum could demand it, but the devs would still be in the right because it's their game.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Just because i would rather play with models off im suddenly a lame exploiter... thats what i find totally ridiculous. Just because you have chosen to play the game with the default settings, you have in turn taken the assumed moral high ground, my entire point in this thread is why do you (in general) assume you have a right to bash me for choosing to play with models off. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the reason some people will bash you with "OMG MODEL HAX0R!!!!one" is because they assume the games they play online to have some sort of unwritten rules of conduct. Regardless of what the game lets them do, they play the game as it's meant to be played- and will be played in the future. After the announcement that bunny-hopping would be removed for marines, many of the servers I played on now enforce a no bhopping policy. Can marines still physically do it? Of course. But they won't, because that's how the developers have decided their game will be played. Similarly I'd probably be arguing for your point if the dev's hadn't decided to remove this feature, seeing as then it would still be a legit way of playing - and they'd be balancing the game taking this style of play into account.
To end bad anologies for the evening, remember when you were little and you used to race other kids around the block? (probably not because I had weird friends) There was that one kid who got smart and decided to just jump through some old ladies back yard and cut the course in half. Of course there were no rules initially, so he gets points for being clever. After people realize that the race isn't balanced they have a choice, either people can go on using this, and those that hop fences will usually win - or they could make a rule that you have to stay on the road. If noone made such a rule it would be fine...
But we're now at race 1.1 and the devs want it gone, so I suppose we're all just going one step ahead of them and trying our best to keep it out of 1.04. Although I suppose (after further thought) you have a semi-valid point, and I'm sure there are servers that agree with you on the issue (you just came to the wrong place- there are threads about it being dishonorable to have your gamma turned too high) where you could play till the new 1.1 rules come out. That was a god awful anology, forgive me it's 5:30 in the am.
Pleasant discussion, I liked the part where there weren't any flames. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
SinSpawnHarbinger of SufferingJoin Date: 2002-11-12Member: 8359Members
edited July 2003
the only reason why I would keep it in is so low low low low end users can turn it off to save a couple of frames while squeezing out every frmaethey could...I know, I used to do these things until UPED my pc <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> but still i only get 50+frames on a decent server :/
I personally don't find any harm from r_drawviewmodel, you say that people see more than you, they see alittle more on the lower half - "WOW" and its a disadvantage to you..right, what were you doing looking up all the time and not sometimes moving your mouse to check every corner of your screen, if ya dont, your just lazy
edit: Also people that use custom models for evil are also lamers then, why not lock the customizable part of ns so everyone uses the same stuff - I.E some people make want to use a BRIGHT pink skin or some people make larger skulk models so they can see them popping out the wall from their hiding spot..see my point, this is more of a problem then the r_drawviewmodel command
It's just a Half-Life command, doesn't give you much of an advantage and needs getting used to anyway. The dev's intention do not really play a role... because if they did, then you shouldn't be using lerk-bite or jetpacks. You shouldn't adjust your gamma and set another max_fps. You shouldn't stick to def as first chamber and listen for hives and gorges... etc. etc.
And please, do not use the word "exploit" just because it's cool nowadays. Such buzzwords are just rediculous and make you look like a fool.
<!--QuoteBegin--N1ght+Jul 1 2003, 09:29 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (N1ght @ Jul 1 2003, 09:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> yes of course if i remove models and someone else does not then i have an advantage, but thats mine and their choice, its a preference of mine to play with models off, and a preference of theirs to play with models on, but they are right and i am wrong because dvm is removed in 1.1? Well models are also changed considerably and are less obstructive in 1.1, so you can argue that point both ways.
I said dvm is not forced in clanbase because monse said the devs base their ideas of whats lame on CAL rules, or something to that effect, i was not saying in any way shape or form that dvm is accepted in europe, else why would i be posting this thread asking what the problem is. (its cos im sick of the abuse i get)
i saw people bhopping as marines in the recent EU vs US match, a practice that is stopped in 1.1, and therefore by ur definition an 'exploit' i find it interesting that no one seems to care about that though. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually it was my impression that the CAL rules were created with dev imput, not the other way around. I could be wrong tough.
Totally on topic, I leave them on. Only thing I've done is change around my keys a bit and added a bind for med packs.
You know why people don't like it? It shouldn't be in the game in the first place. It's a left over command from regular Half-Life that was missed during the making and testing of the original game.
It is like a loophole in the justice system that lets some killer go free, some stupid option that they can use, but it pisses everyone off, everyone who uses it is frowned upon and considered lame, and is fixed as soon as possible. (1.1 NS). Sure, you can exploit it much as you want before it is fixed.
You keep saying it's just an option I can turn off, and what's wrong with options. It's not supposed to be an option, and it will be fixed. End of story, no matter how much you argue with everyone else in this thread <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
I play with r_Drawviewmodel 1 on, yet on my system with a good soundcard, smooth 60fps and expensive mouse I have 10x the advantage of killing skulks with my lmg then I do when I play on my friends 600mhz 12mb voodoo2. My computer (not to mention my low ping) gives me a HUGE advantage over someone who can afford a less powerful machine. I won't even go into the details of fps advantage, sound quality, smooth mouse and low ping. So I'm not bothered at all if this guy on his **** pc plays with drawviewmodel 0. I would be incredibly childish to whine at him that its an advantage when I have this beast of a computer and he has to try and aim with 20fps. In my experience the majority of drawviewmodel whiners have 60+ fps and high quality soundcards and broadband and you complain about unfair advantages? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
/me will never use 'but you had drawviewmodel 0' as an excuse if I lose to another player.
I've had a drawviewmodel toggle in my config since NS came out - it's in there for every mod I play because my old computer was/is terrible and I need every little performance tweak I can find. However, I discovered fairly quickly that it took away much more than just the model, and so almost never used it. In fact, the only time I use it is when there's a waypoint or some hivesight blips obscuring my view, and I want to get rid of it - kind of backwards when originally I didn't want to use it because it gets rid of sprites.
That_Annoying_KidSire of TitlesJoin Date: 2003-03-01Member: 14175Members, Constellation
some people regard it as a way to get a bit of extra performace, the team see's it as an exploit, it really matters on what your person morals and ethics are, and what the server you play on says about it
lemme quote the nano gridlock server [QUOTE=nano] r_drawviewmodel 0 is disabled on this server, feel free to spend all day trying it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->[/QUOTE]
I don't really have anything constructive to add because this topic has been discussed to death before. However, I am instead choosing to poike fun at a fellow Vet.
N1ght said this in his original post: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And please do not bring 1.1 into this, since models are being changed and dvm is no longer an option, its a redundant arguement, i want to focus on 1.04.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And then, in his first reply, he said this: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->and if you had wanted people to play with such obstructive models you would not have changed them in 1.1?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<3 N1ght, you silly sod <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->.
The arguement that Player X can have a better computer/connection than player Y is superficial and inaccurate simply because the use of a game command is something that the Dev Team can (and have) exerted control over. I came from a q2/q3 background and ALWAYS turned gun models off. As I was looking for the command to do it in NS I discovered the general opinion about it I stopped searching. For all the protesting from people that turn it off and claim that "it's no big deal to turn it off", just deal with it, it's not that big of a deal to have it on. Besides, it's better to get used to it now than on 1.1 release day.
well of course i asked people not to bring 1.1 into it, but everyone did, so i had to reply in context...
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You keep saying it's just an option I can turn off, and what's wrong with options. It's not supposed to be an option, and it will be fixed. End of story, no matter how much you argue with everyone else in this thread <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Surely then by the logic of your own arguement, people are not meant to be using the models currently in 1.04, because they are being changed in 1.1, so why shouldn't people be able to turn them off, if they are obviously not what the game developers had intended people to see on their screens?
<!--QuoteBegin--N1ght+Jul 1 2003, 05:19 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (N1ght @ Jul 1 2003, 05:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Surely then by the logic of your own arguement, people are not meant to be using the models currently in 1.04, because they are being changed in 1.1, so why shouldn't people be able to turn them off, if they are obviously not what the game developers had intended people to see on their screens? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Eh.
Your comparing the removal of a client side variable which with foresight wouldn't have been there in the first place with the improvement of a model ?
Pre-post Summary for people with short attention spans: visibility ar win, fire in teh disco, WTH h4x!
<Stupidly long essay post>
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Nice sidestep on the wallhack analogy by the way, I know that one was hard to get around. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually i've argued that point and the distinction between desirable and undesirable game changes several times before, applied to several other discussions. Its a question of skill limitations, random elements and consistancy.
Both the weapon/bite models and the walls of a map obstruct your view. However, one of these obstructions adds to the complexity and depth of the game by allowing players to consciously react to, or make use of the obstruction in a tactical way that can give them an edge over their opponent. The other doesn't. If you take 2 teams and pit them against eachother - Once with the weapon/bite obstruction, and once without - their ingame decisions and the actions they take will not change from one game to the next. All that changes is the outcome of combat situations, and not because the players react differently or make different decisions during combat. The player's ability to aim and track does not change from one game to the next, all that changes is how clearly they can interpret what is actually happening on the screen.
Practically all vision obstructing 'features' in 3d shooters, from general darkness, shadows or lense flares, to muzzle flashes and special effects, are horribly flawed. Horribly flawed in the sense that they can never give a consistant result from one system to the next, or from one situation to the next. All of these features become dependant on a thousand other elements which the game has no control over, from the monitor or video card used, to the lighting in the room the game is being played in, gamma settings, driver settings, framerate and refreshrate (how good your eyes are?). They deal with the player's ability to interpret something on the screen that is partially obscured in some way, and because of that they'll never have a consistant effect.
It is possible to create a consistant obstruction, but developers don't bother because they generally don't look very nice. Shadows that completely (not partially) obscure an object, while just outside the shadow everything is fully and clearly visible, for example. Try that in a modern first person shooter and it'll look horrible, which is why it isnt used. Devs value realisim and atmosphere, so you see gradient shadows that look nice, lighting effects or weapon effects that don't give consistant vision. This is how it's going to be from now on, because clear and visible images rarely make full use of the available features, and rarely look as nice as an all out disco of flashes and flares. This isnt a problem untill it is forced. To those who make 'level playing field' comments - the removal of all of these effects by all parties is more of a level playing field than you will ever get with the developer's intended eye candy.
The muzzle/bite effects (and imo - motion tracking rings, parasite and hivesight marks, the majority of the screen clutter) are an inconsistant element. That makes them a random factor. You cannot judge how any specific player in any specific situation will be effected by these obstructions. To make a point - when was the last time, as a marine, you thought to yourself: "if i move about 5cm to the left i'll be obscured by his teeth model and he wont be able to track me". You can't make this sort of observation because it is impossible to predict how the obstruction will effect you or your opponent at any particular time. That makes it a random element.
Along the same lines, in a match a couple of days ago i was killed by a skulk that was obscured by a bright blue motion tracking ring. The skulk was dark, the background was dark, a bright motion tracking ring which technically shouldn't have even been displayed at that point was directly infront of the skulk, and i died because i couldn't see him well enough. This wasn't a victory of cunning on the part of the skulk by hiding behind my motion tracking ring, it wasn't a fault of mine for not predicting that a motion ring would suddenly appear infront of me. It was a random event that caused my death that could not have been predicted. As well as being incredibly annoying, this type of random element isnt conductive to good competition.
Realise that i'm arguing the case of everybody removing the screen clutter versus everybody not removing the screen clutter - my point is the game as a whole plays better with it removed. The weapon/bite obstruction brings nothing to the gameplay other than superficial atmosphere. And infact harms the gameplay by adding an additional random factor. Walls on the other hand add obvious tactical depth. It isnt difficult to make the distinction between the removal of walls and the removal of a muzzle flash.
To argue the fairplay and intended options points - The only influence the developers have on the rules used by the community, comes through the settings they decide to lock or hard code. Beyond that, rules are the decided on a game by game basis by whoever has authority at the time. Server admins/league admins/individual clans in a scrimm decide the rules for the game. There is no community-wide set of rules that everybody adheres to, they don't exist. If you were to take a poll on this forum asking if bunnyhopping/silent bhopping was a 'legal' technique, you would almost certainly find the majority to be in opposition, with most forum readers considering it an exploit or similar. Despite this, bunnyhopping is still allowed and used in the vast majority of clan games. Just shows you that rules are subjective, there is no such thing as a universal rulebook for NS.
All you can do is argue for a set of rules that you believe leads to a more enjoyable game, this is what i have attempted to do in the above few paragraphs, and this is what this thread is concerned with. Night doesn't understand why he isnt even allowed to argue for a ruleset that he feels leads to a more enjoyable game. Certain groups of people dismiss the use of dvm0 not because they dissagree with his reasoning, or have even attempted to listen to arguments for that ruleset. They just automatically dismiss the idea.
The ruleset used in a scrimmage is decided on a game by game basis by the clans involved. Typically they might use a ruleset from a common league or competition. Alternatively they may set their own rules for a game based on what they feel will create the most enjoyable game setting. Regardless of what some people in this thread may think, there is no automatically implied ruleset for NS. I can guaruntee that rules half of this thread believe are standard, are not recognised by the other half of the thread. Bunnyhopping, config changes, rushing, marines in vents, gamma adjustments, JP/HMG - these are hot topics precisely because people can't agree on them.
Now if you go into a league match that already has a set of fixed league rules, and those rules allow the use of dvm0. No matter what your own personal feelings on the setting are, no matter what the devs intended when they made the patch, you cannot complain about another team using dvm0 in that league match. This isnt a difficult concept. It doesn't matter what changes are being made in 1.1, or what the devs 'intended', or what your personal favoured ruleset is. You're there playing a 1.04 match with a set of official rules - the only constraints that apply to either team are the constraints of the current game version, and the constraints of the official rules. If you think a set of league rules would be better if they were altered in some way, then your argument for that change better be based around creating a more enjoyable game experience. Not some random cry of 'omg exploits' or a comment on the way you think NS is supposed to be.
Night made the mistake of aiming a post like this at a forum community that has been known to complain about custom crosshairs :)
</Stupidly long essay post that i'm being payed to write thanks to an extremely silly employer and a day job that invovles me sitting at a PC for ungodly lengths of time>
Whilst I could argue with n1ght all day about this (actually I won't, i've had this arguement with TeoH before <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) on the <b>forums</b>, in <b>game</b> as long as the server message didn't say anything about it I wouldn't dream of harassing him and calling him a cheater.
Respecting the server rules goes both ways, if it doesn't mention something is prohibited, you can't complain about it.
For all the FwD: dvm 1 in 1.04 does "cap your skill" as you put it, but thats like complaining about recoil in other games, without recoil in NS you need something to stop you from simply pointing and clicking. although the 1.04 muzzleflash etc is to obtrusive, this is just a bug, and bypassing it does not make the game fair for those who do not.
<!--QuoteBegin--N1ght+Jul 1 2003, 04:29 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (N1ght @ Jul 1 2003, 04:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> yes of course if i remove models and someone else does not then i have an advantage, but thats mine and their choice, its a preference of mine to play with models off, and a preference of theirs to play with models on, but they are right and i am wrong because dvm is removed in 1.1? Well models are also changed considerably and are less obstructive in 1.1, so you can argue that point both ways. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You agree that removing models gives you an advantage therefore you can't "argue it both ways".
The game is released in a certain condition. You may not be happy with certain aspects of it but it is still the decision of the developers. Many people here are currently happy with the placement of the models but the question remains:
Why should someone who is happy with the game in its current form be forced to modify it into some watered down version just to keep up with you?
I saw my post edited, just to say it was not to encourage ppl to use it, it was to show it is possible. Sorry and thanks to whoever edited it <!--emo&::marine::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/marine.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='marine.gif'><!--endemo-->
I have read through the post. I'm sorry if I sounded a bit flamish, that was not my intention. But it doesn't quite address the issue of why it remains fair to alter your default configuration through the use of an overlooked variable. Its not as simple as the statement: "If it is in the game then it is fair to use". But rather a question of "It is in the game but should I use it".
My main problem is the variable is that it significantly alters the gameplay/atmosphere for other players if they choose to follow the same path as you to achieve the advantages you enjoy.
ShockehIf a packet drops on the web and nobody's near to see it...Join Date: 2002-11-19Member: 9336NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
edited July 2003
Interesting thread, and surprisingly not flamebait. Yet.
I think the distinction lies in the intent. Sure, what one person considers exploit will be anothers personal choice, but it all comes down to the distinction.
The idea of NS's 'Skill caps' is partially to promote each teams funtion (Marines are intended to work as a cohesive force, not use their 'teh win leet skills' to win for example) but it's also a case of intending the game to be played the way Flayra & the dev team intended it to be played.
A case in point was raised at a LAN I went to recently. Playing Q3, I play with it exactly as standard after install. Because I believe in playing games the way the developers intended. But another player there was using forced bright colour models, new sprites, and some of the wall textures edited as well (not changed alpha etc, but altered brightness/colour scales)
Now, to me, I'd believe that would meet the <b>gaming</b> definition of an exploit. He would have a marked advantage over me because of the changes he's made, and I personally believe I would have beat him in this case had we been on equal footing (I ended barely a frag or two behind him, with a marked gap after the 4th postion player)
This sums up the gaming definition of an exploit.
<span style='color:yellow'>"To alter and/or use an existing ability or feature in a game to give you an advantage over others, where those features were not intended by the creators."</span>
Because of drawviewmodel, you are given an advantage over those who don't. Am improved accuracy, resulting in a higher chance of survival in any given encounter.
So, as it's been previously stated that drawviewmodel being still allowed was an oversight by the development team that would mean it's an exploit, and should, if you intend to be playing evenly against an opponent and therefore fighting him based on your skill level, rather than what options you use, be unused.
Of course, the usual counter to this is 'well, there are other factors, such as PC, personal setup at home' etc. This cannot be avoided, just accepted, because frankly if nothing else it stinks of hypocricy to complain that one person is doing better due to their better PC/Internet Connection/Mouse/Whatever, seeing as <b>every single person</b> here is in the top 1% of the population of the planet just due to the fact you OWN a PC.
<!--QuoteBegin--Twex+Jul 1 2003, 03:43 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Twex @ Jul 1 2003, 03:43 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I consider view obstructions for gameplay reasons bad design style.
The wallhack analogy amuses me. An unobstructed view on the enemies you try to kill is a standard feature in every FPS for a good reason. Looking through walls is not. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> So, we should not have coded hivesite and motion-tracking because other games don't have them as standards? There you go looking through walls - but in a controlled, designed way. Much like our view models.
As for bad design, next time we'll make a game with no view models and see how atmospheric and immersive that looks. Whhhhaaaaaa???
I consider allowing the turning off of models due to a coding oversight on our side (which is fixed in 1.1) to be cheating. So there you go, we're even in our distaste for each other.
<!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Jul 1 2003, 03:05 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Jul 1 2003, 03:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I consider allowing the turning off of models due to a coding oversight on our side (which is fixed in 1.1) to be cheating. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not quite that black and white of an issue, MonsE. Its hardly on the same level as cheating. Calling dvm 0 cheating is like calling scripting cheating.
I get tired of all the whiners on these boards who call every %&@-*%#@ thing an exploit.
If its its part of the game, and you are competitive, you are a FOOL not to use it.
If you aren't playing the game competitively (pretty much all of you forum posters), don't try to tell the competitive players how to play.
I'm sorry, but those of you who are arguing for dev0 should just face facts before EVERY admin gets on the forums and tells you that it is in fact an exploit. The fact that you are arguing so hard for it only tells me that you do consider it cheating and are waiting for someone in authority to give you the green light.
If you need an advantage to play competitively, then you are obviously lacking in the skills needed to play this team oriented, fun past time. Unless you are in on some money games somewhere, looking for every advantage is taking the game too seriously. Play it the way it was meant to be played.
Do you need Flayra to come on and tell you its an exploit before you accept it? He must consider it so if he is taking it out of the game, huh?
Bah, sorry for the flame, but I got tired of this argument in page2 this time, and the rest of n1ght's arguing is just trying to justify what he knows to be wrong (from devs and admins telling him so)
<!--QuoteBegin--cri.tical+Jul 1 2003, 03:45 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (cri.tical @ Jul 1 2003, 03:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If you aren't playing the game competitively (pretty much all of you forum posters), don't try to tell the competitive players how to play. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Isn't it illegal to use dvm0 in competitive play in most leagues? This quote above seems to mean competitive play... against non-competitive pub players. Which sounds to me like, as the british would say, dirty pool.
Also, I might say that if you are not coding a game, don't tell the NS team how to code. Based on that argument. Which doesn't sound any nicer coming from me than from you. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Comments
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->they are more or less an artificial skill cap.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly, and if you remove that skill cap and others dont, then that is unfair to everyone else. Since most people play the game the way it is supposed to be played, the way it was played when it was balanced, they play with models on, which means that if you dont you have an unfair advantage which the community shuns and you are using an exploit. And regardless of the clanbase ladder, I know for a fact that most or all euro clans are very much against rdrawviewmodel abuse.
But the point is, if everyone was using it, then youd all be on the same playing field and it wouldn't matter, but the masses have agreed not to use it, so if you use it you are exploiting. Not to mention the game devs have specifically spoken out against it and removed it from the game, meaning that youre using something that they didn't intend to include in the game, which is like the definition of "exploit."
I said dvm is not forced in clanbase because monse said the devs base their ideas of whats lame on CAL rules, or something to that effect, i was not saying in any way shape or form that dvm is accepted in europe, else why would i be posting this thread asking what the problem is. (its cos im sick of the abuse i get)
i saw people bhopping as marines in the recent EU vs US match, a practice that is stopped in 1.1, and therefore by ur definition an 'exploit' i find it interesting that no one seems to care about that though.
Why though should i have to play like you?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Plain and simple, the game was made and balanced with the models as they are. Removing them removes the balance the developers worked hard to create. If it were a different mod - as there have been a few mentioned where turning your models off is allowed - then it would be a different story, as these have no doubt been designed for people to play without them. People will call the use of it an exploit because the developers have said that it's being removed to make sure the game remains balanced.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Just going with the opinion of the masses isn't exactly a reason, everyone used to think the earth was flat, and when someone said it was round people used to call him crazy...
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not going with the opinions of the masses on how to play the game, I'm going with the opinions of the people who designed the game. They've decided it gives people an unfair advantage and are thus giving it the axe. The whole forum could demand it, but the devs would still be in the right because it's their game.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Just because i would rather play with models off im suddenly a lame exploiter... thats what i find totally ridiculous. Just because you have chosen to play the game with the default settings, you have in turn taken the assumed moral high ground, my entire point in this thread is why do you (in general) assume you have a right to bash me for choosing to play with models off.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the reason some people will bash you with "OMG MODEL HAX0R!!!!one" is because they assume the games they play online to have some sort of unwritten rules of conduct. Regardless of what the game lets them do, they play the game as it's meant to be played- and will be played in the future. After the announcement that bunny-hopping would be removed for marines, many of the servers I played on now enforce a no bhopping policy. Can marines still physically do it? Of course. But they won't, because that's how the developers have decided their game will be played. Similarly I'd probably be arguing for your point if the dev's hadn't decided to remove this feature, seeing as then it would still be a legit way of playing - and they'd be balancing the game taking this style of play into account.
To end bad anologies for the evening, remember when you were little and you used to race other kids around the block? (probably not because I had weird friends) There was that one kid who got smart and decided to just jump through some old ladies back yard and cut the course in half. Of course there were no rules initially, so he gets points for being clever. After people realize that the race isn't balanced they have a choice, either people can go on using this, and those that hop fences will usually win - or they could make a rule that you have to stay on the road. If noone made such a rule it would be fine...
But we're now at race 1.1 and the devs want it gone, so I suppose we're all just going one step ahead of them and trying our best to keep it out of 1.04. Although I suppose (after further thought) you have a semi-valid point, and I'm sure there are servers that agree with you on the issue (you just came to the wrong place- there are threads about it being dishonorable to have your gamma turned too high) where you could play till the new 1.1 rules come out. That was a god awful anology, forgive me it's 5:30 in the am.
Pleasant discussion, I liked the part where there weren't any flames. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<3's Jesus.
I personally don't find any harm from r_drawviewmodel, you say that people see more than you, they see alittle more on the lower half - "WOW" and its a disadvantage to you..right, what were you doing looking up all the time and not sometimes moving your mouse to check every corner of your screen, if ya dont, your just lazy
edit: Also people that use custom models for evil are also lamers then, why not lock the customizable part of ns so everyone uses the same stuff - I.E some people make want to use a BRIGHT pink skin or some people make larger skulk models so they can see them popping out the wall from their hiding spot..see my point, this is more of a problem then the r_drawviewmodel command
The dev's intention do not really play a role... because if they did, then you shouldn't be using lerk-bite or jetpacks. You shouldn't adjust your gamma and set another max_fps. You shouldn't stick to def as first chamber and listen for hives and gorges... etc. etc.
And please, do not use the word "exploit" just because it's cool nowadays. Such buzzwords are just rediculous and make you look like a fool.
I said dvm is not forced in clanbase because monse said the devs base their ideas of whats lame on CAL rules, or something to that effect, i was not saying in any way shape or form that dvm is accepted in europe, else why would i be posting this thread asking what the problem is. (its cos im sick of the abuse i get)
i saw people bhopping as marines in the recent EU vs US match, a practice that is stopped in 1.1, and therefore by ur definition an 'exploit' i find it interesting that no one seems to care about that though. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually it was my impression that the CAL rules were created with dev imput, not the other way around. I could be wrong tough.
Totally on topic, I leave them on. Only thing I've done is change around my keys a bit and added a bind for med packs.
It is like a loophole in the justice system that lets some killer go free, some stupid option that they can use, but it pisses everyone off, everyone who uses it is frowned upon and considered lame, and is fixed as soon as possible. (1.1 NS). Sure, you can exploit it much as you want before it is fixed.
You keep saying it's just an option I can turn off, and what's wrong with options. It's not supposed to be an option, and it will be fixed. End of story, no matter how much you argue with everyone else in this thread <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
My computer (not to mention my low ping) gives me a HUGE advantage over someone who can afford a less powerful machine. I won't even go into the details of fps advantage, sound quality, smooth mouse and low ping. So I'm not bothered at all if this guy on his **** pc plays with drawviewmodel 0. I would be incredibly childish to whine at him that its an advantage when I have this beast of a computer and he has to try and aim with 20fps. In my experience the majority of drawviewmodel whiners have 60+ fps and high quality soundcards and broadband and you complain about unfair advantages? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
/me will never use 'but you had drawviewmodel 0' as an excuse if I lose to another player.
lemme quote the nano gridlock server [QUOTE=nano] r_drawviewmodel 0 is disabled on this server, feel free to spend all day trying it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->[/QUOTE]
N1ght said this in his original post:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And please do not bring 1.1 into this, since models are being changed and dvm is no longer an option, its a redundant arguement, i want to focus on 1.04.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And then, in his first reply, he said this:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->and if you had wanted people to play with such obstructive models you would not have changed them in 1.1?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<3 N1ght, you silly sod <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You keep saying it's just an option I can turn off, and what's wrong with options. It's not supposed to be an option, and it will be fixed. End of story, no matter how much you argue with everyone else in this thread <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Surely then by the logic of your own arguement, people are not meant to be using the models currently in 1.04, because they are being changed in 1.1, so why shouldn't people be able to turn them off, if they are obviously not what the game developers had intended people to see on their screens?
Eh.
Your comparing the removal of a client side variable which with foresight wouldn't have been there in the first place with the improvement of a model ?
if the models weren't obstructive i would not need to turn them off
<Stupidly long essay post>
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Nice sidestep on the wallhack analogy by the way, I know that one was hard
to get around.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually i've argued that point and the distinction between desirable and undesirable game changes several times before, applied to several other discussions. Its a question of skill limitations, random elements and consistancy.
Both the weapon/bite models and the walls of a map obstruct your view.
However, one of these obstructions adds to the complexity and depth of the game by allowing players to consciously react to, or make use of the
obstruction in a tactical way that can give them an edge over their
opponent. The other doesn't. If you take 2 teams and pit them against
eachother - Once with the weapon/bite obstruction, and once without - their ingame decisions and the actions they take will not change from one game to the next. All that changes is the outcome of combat situations, and not because the players react differently or make different decisions during combat. The player's ability to aim and track does not change from one game to the next, all that changes is how clearly they can interpret what is actually happening on the screen.
Practically all vision obstructing 'features' in 3d shooters, from general
darkness, shadows or lense flares, to muzzle flashes and special effects,
are horribly flawed. Horribly flawed in the sense that they can never give a
consistant result from one system to the next, or from one situation to the
next. All of these features become dependant on a thousand other elements which the game has no control over, from the monitor or video card used, to the lighting in the room the game is being played in, gamma settings, driver settings, framerate and refreshrate (how good your eyes are?). They deal with the player's ability to interpret something on the screen that is partially obscured in some way, and because of that they'll never have a consistant effect.
It is possible to create a consistant obstruction, but developers don't
bother because they generally don't look very nice. Shadows that completely (not partially) obscure an object, while just outside the shadow everything is fully and clearly visible, for example. Try that in a modern first person shooter and it'll look horrible, which is why it isnt used. Devs value realisim and atmosphere, so you see gradient shadows that look nice, lighting effects or weapon effects that don't give consistant vision. This is how it's going to be from now on, because clear and visible images rarely make full use of the available features, and rarely look as nice as an all out disco of flashes and flares. This isnt a problem untill it is forced. To those who make 'level playing field' comments - the removal of all of these effects by all parties is more of a level playing field than you will ever get with the developer's intended eye candy.
The muzzle/bite effects (and imo - motion tracking rings, parasite and
hivesight marks, the majority of the screen clutter) are an inconsistant
element. That makes them a random factor. You cannot judge how any specific player in any specific situation will be effected by these obstructions. To make a point - when was the last time, as a marine, you thought to yourself: "if i move about 5cm to the left i'll be obscured by his teeth model and he wont be able to track me". You can't make this sort of observation because it is impossible to predict how the obstruction will effect you or your opponent at any particular time. That makes it a random element.
Along the same lines, in a match a couple of days ago i was killed by a
skulk that was obscured by a bright blue motion tracking ring. The skulk was dark, the background was dark, a bright motion tracking ring which
technically shouldn't have even been displayed at that point was directly
infront of the skulk, and i died because i couldn't see him well enough.
This wasn't a victory of cunning on the part of the skulk by hiding behind
my motion tracking ring, it wasn't a fault of mine for not predicting that a
motion ring would suddenly appear infront of me. It was a random event that caused my death that could not have been predicted. As well as being incredibly annoying, this type of random element isnt conductive to good competition.
Realise that i'm arguing the case of everybody removing the screen clutter versus everybody not removing the screen clutter - my point is the game as a whole plays better with it removed. The weapon/bite obstruction brings nothing to the gameplay other than superficial atmosphere. And infact harms the gameplay by adding an additional random factor. Walls on the other hand add obvious tactical depth. It isnt difficult to make the distinction between the removal of walls and the removal of a muzzle flash.
To argue the fairplay and intended options points - The only influence the developers have on the rules used by the community, comes through the settings they decide to lock or hard code. Beyond that, rules are the decided on a game by game basis by whoever has authority at the time. Server admins/league admins/individual clans in a scrimm decide the rules for the game. There is no community-wide set of rules that everybody adheres to, they don't exist. If you were to take a poll on this forum asking if bunnyhopping/silent bhopping was a 'legal' technique, you would almost certainly find the majority to be in opposition, with most forum readers considering it an exploit or similar. Despite this, bunnyhopping is still allowed and used in the vast majority of clan games. Just shows you that rules are subjective, there is no such thing as a universal rulebook for NS.
All you can do is argue for a set of rules that you believe leads to a more enjoyable game, this is what i have attempted to do in the above few paragraphs, and this is what this thread is concerned with. Night doesn't understand why he isnt even allowed to argue for a ruleset that he feels leads to a more enjoyable game. Certain groups of people dismiss the use of dvm0 not because they dissagree with his reasoning, or have even attempted to listen to arguments for that ruleset. They just automatically dismiss the idea.
The ruleset used in a scrimmage is decided on a game by game basis by the clans involved. Typically they might use a ruleset from a common league or competition. Alternatively they may set their own rules for a game based on what they feel will create the most enjoyable game setting. Regardless of what some people in this thread may think, there is no automatically implied ruleset for NS. I can guaruntee that rules half of this thread believe are standard, are not recognised by the other half of the thread. Bunnyhopping, config changes, rushing, marines in vents, gamma adjustments, JP/HMG - these are hot topics precisely because people can't agree on them.
Now if you go into a league match that already has a set of fixed league rules, and those rules allow the use of dvm0. No matter what your own personal feelings on the setting are, no matter what the devs intended when they made the patch, you cannot complain about another team using dvm0 in that league match. This isnt a difficult concept. It doesn't matter what changes are being made in 1.1, or what the devs 'intended', or what your personal favoured ruleset is. You're there playing a 1.04 match with a set of official rules - the only constraints that apply to either team are the constraints of the current game version, and the constraints of the official rules. If you think a set of league rules would be better if they were altered in some way, then your argument for that change better be based around creating a more enjoyable game experience. Not some random cry of 'omg exploits' or a comment on the way you think NS is supposed to be.
Night made the mistake of aiming a post like this at a forum community that has been known to complain about custom crosshairs :)
</Stupidly long essay post that i'm being payed to write thanks to an extremely silly employer and a day job that invovles me sitting at a PC for ungodly lengths of time>
Post-post synopsis: Archhaven ar lews
Whilst I could argue with n1ght all day about this (actually I won't, i've had this arguement with TeoH before <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) on the <b>forums</b>, in <b>game</b> as long as the server message didn't say anything about it I wouldn't dream of harassing him and calling him a cheater.
Respecting the server rules goes both ways, if it doesn't mention something is prohibited, you can't complain about it.
dvm 1 in 1.04 does "cap your skill" as you put it, but thats like complaining about recoil in other games, without recoil in NS you need something to stop you from simply pointing and clicking. although the 1.04 muzzleflash etc is to obtrusive, this is just a bug, and bypassing it does not make the game fair for those who do not.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You agree that removing models gives you an advantage therefore you can't "argue it both ways".
The game is released in a certain condition. You may not be happy with certain aspects of it but it is still the decision of the developers. Many people here are currently happy with the placement of the models but the question remains:
Why should someone who is happy with the game in its current form be forced to modify it into some watered down version just to keep up with you?
Its not as simple as the statement: "If it is in the game then it is fair to use". But rather a question of "It is in the game but should I use it".
My main problem is the variable is that it significantly alters the gameplay/atmosphere for other players if they choose to follow the same path as you to achieve the advantages you enjoy.
I think the distinction lies in the intent. Sure, what one person considers exploit will be anothers personal choice, but it all comes down to the distinction.
The idea of NS's 'Skill caps' is partially to promote each teams funtion (Marines are intended to work as a cohesive force, not use their 'teh win leet skills' to win for example) but it's also a case of intending the game to be played the way Flayra & the dev team intended it to be played.
A case in point was raised at a LAN I went to recently. Playing Q3, I play with it exactly as standard after install. Because I believe in playing games the way the developers intended. But another player there was using forced bright colour models, new sprites, and some of the wall textures edited as well (not changed alpha etc, but altered brightness/colour scales)
Now, to me, I'd believe that would meet the <b>gaming</b> definition of an exploit. He would have a marked advantage over me because of the changes he's made, and I personally believe I would have beat him in this case had we been on equal footing (I ended barely a frag or two behind him, with a marked gap after the 4th postion player)
This sums up the gaming definition of an exploit.
<span style='color:yellow'>"To alter and/or use an existing ability or feature in a game to give you an advantage over others, where those features were not intended by the creators."</span>
Because of drawviewmodel, you are given an advantage over those who don't. Am improved accuracy, resulting in a higher chance of survival in any given encounter.
So, as it's been previously stated that drawviewmodel being still allowed was an oversight by the development team that would mean it's an exploit, and should, if you intend to be playing evenly against an opponent and therefore fighting him based on your skill level, rather than what options you use, be unused.
Of course, the usual counter to this is 'well, there are other factors, such as PC, personal setup at home' etc. This cannot be avoided, just accepted, because frankly if nothing else it stinks of hypocricy to complain that one person is doing better due to their better PC/Internet Connection/Mouse/Whatever, seeing as <b>every single person</b> here is in the top 1% of the population of the planet just due to the fact you OWN a PC.
P.S MonsE made me do it.
The wallhack analogy amuses me. An unobstructed view on the enemies you try to kill is a standard feature in every FPS for a good reason. Looking through walls is not. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So, we should not have coded hivesite and motion-tracking because other games don't have them as standards? There you go looking through walls - but in a controlled, designed way. Much like our view models.
As for bad design, next time we'll make a game with no view models and see how atmospheric and immersive that looks. Whhhhaaaaaa???
I consider allowing the turning off of models due to a coding oversight on our side (which is fixed in 1.1) to be cheating. So there you go, we're even in our distaste for each other.
It's not quite that black and white of an issue, MonsE.
Its hardly on the same level as cheating. Calling dvm 0 cheating is like calling scripting cheating.
I get tired of all the whiners on these boards who call every %&@-*%#@ thing an exploit.
If its its part of the game, and you are competitive, you are a FOOL not to use it.
If you aren't playing the game competitively (pretty much all of you forum posters), don't try to tell the competitive players how to play.
If you need an advantage to play competitively, then you are obviously lacking in the skills needed to play this team oriented, fun past time. Unless you are in on some money games somewhere, looking for every advantage is taking the game too seriously. Play it the way it was meant to be played.
Do you need Flayra to come on and tell you its an exploit before you accept it? He must consider it so if he is taking it out of the game, huh?
Bah, sorry for the flame, but I got tired of this argument in page2 this time, and the rest of n1ght's arguing is just trying to justify what he knows to be wrong (from devs and admins telling him so)
Isn't it illegal to use dvm0 in competitive play in most leagues? This quote above seems to mean competitive play... against non-competitive pub players. Which sounds to me like, as the british would say, dirty pool.
Also, I might say that if you are not coding a game, don't tell the NS team how to code. Based on that argument. Which doesn't sound any nicer coming from me than from you. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
(edited for clarity)