Line between exploit and using zed weakness?

[C.G.B. Spender]

The other day I was asked a question which got me thinking. What is a line in games between exploits and learning and using weakness of your enemy in your favor?
In KF 1, on easy, normal and hard, zerker could stun scrake with katana. Later, with axe. Firebug could do that with flares on any difficulty. Kill him with one headshot from crossbow. You could kite fleshpound and slowly kill him without raging him. Kill him with practically one pipe. Scrake, on the other hand, was resistant to explosives. Etc., etc.
In Kf2, until they changed that, you could slowly run around scrake and Hans and kill them that way.
My question is...are these considered to be exploits (as has been said to me, the "diaper wearing tactics which should be avoided at all cost"), or using game mechanics for becoming good in game?
I, personally, do not consider this exploiting. For me, using exploits, for example, was using bugged places on maps where zeds can't touch you in order to safely kill them all. For me, bullet sponges as enemies are not that interesting. Knowing each zed's weakness and strength is. I do not consider it "skill" if I just need to empty my clip in my enemy, hoping that I have enough time to reload for next one. But I never considered it that I might be wrong. What is general opinion on this?
(No flaming and fighting, please, as I'm sure we won't all agree on this one).

[BoromiR]

yes they're exploits. harder games almost require you to be hardcore by using borderline cheat tactics.
remember good old 90ies? everything was exploitable. everything had cheats, for good reason.

[SamEstine]

If you're using a bug or a glitch in the game to your favor in order to win, you're exploiting. Figuring out how your enemies tick and use that against them is not. Exploits are game breaking bugs that the players are usually aware of, but still use or abuse such bug in order to win a match (Just like the areas in farmhouse where zeds can't touch you, but you can still shoot'em). That is an exploit.

[「wew」]

A weakness that can be easily/moderately and frequently employed to great effect to a point it makes the game easy (broken) is an exploit


The line is completely open to interpretation, what we may call exploit/weakness the developers will deem a bug as they see it's made the game easy/broken

[HUSdvz™]

Originally posted by OK C.G.B. Spender:

The other day I was asked a question which got me thinking. What is a line in games between exploits and learning and using weakness of your enemy in your favor?
In KF 1, on easy, normal and hard, zerker could stun scrake with katana. Later, with axe. Firebug could do that with flares on any difficulty. Kill him with one headshot from crossbow. You could kite fleshpound and slowly kill him without raging him. Kill him with practically one pipe. Scrake, on the other hand, was resistant to explosives. Etc., etc.
In Kf2, until they changed that, you could slowly run around scrake and Hans and kill them that way.
My question is...are these considered to be exploits (as has been said to me, the "diaper wearing tactics which should be avoided at all cost"), or using game mechanics for becoming good in game?
I, personally, do not consider this exploiting. For me, using exploits, for example, was using bugged places on maps where zeds can't touch you in order to safely kill them all. For me, bullet sponges as enemies are not that interesting. Knowing each zed's weakness and strength is. I do not consider it "skill" if I just need to empty my clip in my enemy, hoping that I have enough time to reload for next one. But I never considered it that I might be wrong. What is general opinion on this?
(No flaming and fighting, please, as I'm sure we won't all agree on this one).

The game changes every 5-10 years......in KF1 the Katana-Lock-Headshot at SC is not an exploit since it is the only way that a zerker player dominant and feel. Now after more years the SC returns and before the last-last-last-last patch you can run around SC and without taking damage, if this was the old age this will be the SC's weakness since he is too bulky and hit body can fully rotate that fast.....but now they've fixed it because it is a EXPLOIT they said........So games intend to change over time.

[Casnoot]

Its not exploiting but at the same time when I am good enough to know how to deal with all of the monsters I don't see a reason to play anymore. It becomes a paint by numbers sort of game at a certain point. I am not sure how to really deal with this though. The "hardcore" gamers will be mad their leet strats don't work anymore if you change it up somehow.

[AROCK!!!]

Originally posted by Sarcastic Sam:

If you're using a bug or a glitch in the game to your favor in order to win, you're exploiting. Figuring out how your enemies tick and use that against them is not. Exploits are game breaking bugs that the players are usually aware of, but still use or abuse such bug in order to win a match (Just like the areas in farmhouse where zeds can't touch you, but you can still shoot'em). That is an exploit.

This.

If the developer intends for something to work a certain way, then it is not an exploit.

A zerker being able to stun a scrake with the katana or axe, depending on dificulty, is no different from the sharp shooter being able to do it with the LAR or xbow.

a camp team holding up in a room or hallway, forcing the zeds to funnel into a kill zone is no different from the zerker, (or any other class), from kiting them.

they designed the FP rage timer to reset whenever the LoS is broken, so therefore it is not an exploit, just as they designed it to reset everytime it would swing at you.

A long time ago there was a bug that enabled players to kill the FP with a single knife hit...that is an exploit as it was not intended by the developer...and it was fixed soon after being discovered.