Blog Entry 2- Cheating in Online Multiplayer

If you are among the millions of gamers who picked up a copy of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 at the end of last year, chances are you have hopped into the multiplayer at least a million times.  I would also be willing to guess that in your multiplayer shenanigans, you have come across those in the MW2 community that have felt the need to distinguish themselves by either modding their account or buying modded controllers.  While the first case does not effect the gameplay of other players per-say, the act of using a modded control in online multiplayer is against the Xbox Live code of conduct.  I will explain what a modded controller is to those who are not familiar with them.  The typical modded controller has several modes which alter the rate of fire for the user.  In the case of MW2, guns that were designed to be single shot weapons are now able to be fired automatically.  This can pose a problem based on the game design principle of balance.  Weapons that were designed for semi-automatic fire were balanced with other(automatic) weapons by having a their damage output increased.  When this balance is thrown off, the quality of gameplay decreases due to certain players having any unfair advantage.

http://on10.net/Link/ce7932ba-ca20-416e-b5a0-3ae5f6f62589/?default=content

As I was browsing content on cheating, I came across a TED talk by Dan Ariely.  I couldn't figure out how to upload it into this blog so I will post the link in the citations.  Dan Ariely focused on the seemingly "buggy" moral code of today's society.  He tested his ideas with a sample group by having them take an overly difficult math quiz.  For each question the quiz takers got correct, they were awarded a certain amount of money.  In his talk he came upon several main points.  First, he found that many people feel that it is alright to cheat.  He called this the "personal fudge factor".  Second, he found that people who do cheat will usually only cheat a little.  Ariely found that there is a certain level of cheating that we all would like to stay below.  Third, when people are reminded of the morality of cheating the level of cheating decreases.  Fourth, when there is a larger distance between the person and the prize, cheating increases.  In this case, Ariely paid the quiz takers in tokens that could be traded in for money instead of the actual cash.  Last,  people are more likely to cheat when other people in their environment are doing the same.

With this information in mind, I came upon a few realizations:

1.  As far as online multiplayer, there is a great distance between the player and what they are doing.  This aligns perfectly with the fourth point Dan Ariely made.

2.  Online players are able to stomach cheating because of it's seemingly small impact.  However, this provides a paradox.  The players may be winning, but they realize that they really didn't.  What is the point?

3.  What is the difference between modding a controller and having a automatic win mod?  There is none if there is a disadvantage for other players.

Citations:

Ariely, D. (Producer).  (2009, February).  Dan Ariely on our buggy moral code.  TED talks.  Podcast retrieved from http://on10.net/Link/ce7932ba-ca20-416e-b5a0-3ae5f6f62589/?default=content