Should games be legally forced to make content 'fair'?

CM30

CM30

Gaming Latest Admin and Gaming Reinvented Owner
Full GL Member
Credits
1,506
As you should all know by now, video games have various age ratings saying stuff like whether violent or sexual content is present, whether the game involves illegal activities, etc. But should they actually go one step further and actually legislate 'fairness' in video games?

How about if games had to mark clearly whether they had rubber band AI, opponents with faster than human reaction times or unfair advantages (like those trainers in Pokemon with Pokemon you can't get fairly/illegal movesets/that evolved at a lower level)?

Or even that such things were banned? Would gaming be better if the likes of Mario Kart COULDN'T cheat in any way and it was declared illegal to program it in?

It's a controversial idea, I suspect a lot of people would hate any regulation that affects actual game design, but it could be the best thing for artificial intelligence and more entertaining games in years. Imagine how better AI would be if the designers couldn't just take shortcuts and make opponents speed up or play better based on how much you're winning, or if Ghetsis from Pokemon Black and White couldn't have a level 54 Hydreigon or whatever. We might even get decent Pokemon opponents if they couldn't have infinite PP or items, couldn't have underleveled Pokemon or illegal moves, couldn't have event only Pokemon and couldn't get critical hits and status effects more often.

What do you think? Should in game 'fairness' be a legal issue rather than game design one? Would that mean games like Pokemon, Mario Kart, Mario Party and Smash Bros would be more enjoyable?
 
The idea of a single player game is to waste time by yourself. If it's actually a legal concern whether or not AI can do something that you can't, somebody is missing the point.
 
no trainer has infinite pp or items. ghetsis would just use a different pokemon if he didn't have the hydreigon, which would make it easier. the critical hits and status effects are completely luck based, so there is no unfairness there. and no event only pokemon is stupid. all event only pokemon are either legends, shiny, or weak, meaning they are of no use in competitive battling meaning it stays fair. for illegal movesets, that would also make things kind of easy to beat the AI, as its already stupid and most movepools aren't great as the AI cant use them. the illegal pokemon the AI uses are just there to compensate for the AI's stupidity. as for the no rubber band AI thing, that would make games TOO easy.
 
We might even get decent Pokemon opponents if they couldn't have infinite PP or items,


As said above, opponents in Pokemon do not have infinite PP or items. They have usually one to three items, which is far fewer than you have. And the moves of all enemy pokemon have the base PP (they haven't even used PP Ups), and can be run down to using Struggle if the fight goes on long enough.

Please do your research properly next time.

As for your idea as a whole, it's a diabolically terrible idea and you ought to be ashamed of yourself. Most of the time you need to give AI an 'unfair' advantage, because AI is simply not as smart as a human, and it needs that advantage in order to actually pose a challenge to players.

And surely you must know better than to believe that anyone other than a raving lunatic would actually endorse the legal enforcement of anything like this? It would never come to pass.

It's up to the developer to program AI however they like, and if they player doesn't like it then they should vote with their wallets, thus encouraging the developer not to do it again. That's how things work in a free society, not the totalitarian, border-line dystopian world you seem to imagine is a good idea. Make 'fairness' legally enforceable!? I cannot tell you how abhorrent that idea is. You scare me sometimes, Nin, you really do...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top