 |
|
 |
|
| Does the concept of 'Meta-Gaming' suck the fun out of it? |
|
Forum Index - Hobbies - Gaming - Does the concept of 'Meta-Gaming' suck the fun out of it? |
|
Pages:  1  |
|
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-30 06:15:28 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
So in this modern day and age, a lot of games have online capabilities. This greatly broadens the horizons of multiplayer gaming to extents we could scarcely imagine 10 years ago. What I want to question is the concept of the 'meta-game'. Very often in games, you see people using features of the game that any regular playthrough would not use at all.
For example, we know about EVs and IVs of Pokémon and very often I can be battling with a non-competitive team online and have my ass handed to me by a team with perfect EVs and IVs. It's not limited to Pokémon or even online gaming either. Many single player games have the meta-game concept abused by 'hardcore' players to. But I suppose it's their choice for playing single player that way. It doesn't necessarily have any effect other players.
After getting this much out of multiplayer, does meta-game just spoil it? Has online gaming become a place where a victory for a normal player is supposed to be rare or never?
I'm not going to lie. As many people know, I'm raising a competitive Pokémon team now but I only really intend to use it for friend matches and very rarely in random matches. I like an evened out match. There's something more appealing to it. A match that could go either way makes victory more satisfying than something ridiculously easy.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-30 10:06:51 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by marioVSshadow and very often I can be battling with a non-competitive team online and have my ass handed to me by a team with perfect EVs and IVs.
Pfft, it was my sheer strategy that beat you.
Well, it depends on the game you're playing when it comes to the metagame. For Pokemon, really the metagame is what keeps the post-game alive other than catching all Pokemon. However, there's plenty of other games that do have a metagame that isn't shoved in your face. If you don't want to get involved in the metagame, play with friends you know don't play in it; that's my best theory.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-31 03:32:02 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
I've seen meta game all over the online community. It's found more often online than it is anywhere else. From my experience, it's usually on hacked Wii games, Half Life 2 Deathmatch and some freeware servers of Team Fortress 2. You're going to find it most often in Half Life 2 Deathmatch, though, and depending on who you play against and what weapons are selected for the match, Halo 3 can be such a freaking CHEAT to play online! I played Halo 3 against a friend of mine one day, and he was bragging he had tactics. So...I actually thought he used military tactics, applying actual skill and hard work to get what he wanted. Nope. His tactics included getting the energy sword and slicing the FAWK out of me. And here I was using actual strategy.
I almost had to rage quit because he pretty much pegged me off and told me my hard work and dedication to EARN my kill was useless. May as well had done that to begin with...
Anyway...ugh...metagaming is something that I personally butcher people on my site for. They don't use it, but when they do, I go nuts. It's. Not. FUN!
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-31 01:29:26 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
|
No one seems to have mentioned Mario Kart DS.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-31 01:36:47 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
There are several reasons to play video games, and meta gaming isn't incompatible with all of them.
It's incompatible with storytelling (spoils and/or breaks suspension of disbelief).
It's incompatible with exploration (takes discovery out of the equation). This includes exploring game mechanics, not just traditional exploration.
It's compatible with everything else I can think of. If you play games for challenge, the meta game IS the game, since your goal is to master the tactical, reflex, and muscle memory challenges.
|
| Last edited on 2012-03-31 01:37:18 PM by Kaijyuu. |
|
| Posted on 2012-03-31 02:42:50 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
|
Every single thing in the history of the last ever has had a trend or a stereotype to go along with it, Metagaming is just a trend that certain players follow... some scarily so. Personally, I don't care. That's not the kind of don't care when I detest it, just the don't care where I ignore it and often forget it exists. Granted, I don't play many online games at all, so perhaps there are some really obnoxious communities out there that make it impossible to ignore. But for me, a long-time Backburner Pyro on TF2 - and proud of it - I care not for trends, and I will continue to mock their existences loudly... when I remember they exist.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-04-14 04:52:56 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Much as I like to play games with other players, I find metagaming to be something that forces a certain playstyle a lot of the time. A lot of people consider having fun to be the primary intent of playing a game. Having fun usually implies being able to play in a way that can be considered fun, something the metagame often deters.
Pokemon, like you mentioned above, being a perfect example. EVs and natures are purely a min/max mechanic, and IVs (along with the damn Hidden Power move) should burn in hell. That's just the stats... do you know how many moves are actually used on a competitive level? A lot of moves that you might use in a single-player playthrough, such as Dig, Rollout, and Hyper Beam would have absolutely no place in a competitive environment due to all the things players can do that the AI won't. Don't even get me started on type balacing; Ice has the be the most horrendous defensive typing ever, Fire is countered by so much it isn't even funny, and Psychic still keeps getting worse long after the initial introduction of Shadow Ball and the Dark type (which removed it from that overpowered position it held in Gen I.
Super Smash Bros. Melee is another infamous one. When I played this game with my friends, none of us knew any of those ridiculous glitches that you heard about that completely altered the scape of the metagame, and we had a lot of fun being able to play well with whoever we liked. I just shudder to think of how much fun would've been taken out of my games if even one of us could abuse these glitches...
Someone mentioned Mario Kart DS... I stopped playing MKDS online the moment every other race I had gotten into had a snaker in it.
Games that exist exclusively online are usually the worst cases of metagaming though; I play League of Legends, and despite being Level 30 with a good amount of champions unlocked, I still do not touch Ranked Games simply because the players demand a metagame focus. Even in normal unranked matches this mentality persists, but at least I have an excuse to do whatever the hell I want there.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-04-14 10:06:25 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
|
The Super Smash Bros. series has a metagame that really irks me, especially after seeing the stage banlist and the lack of items. The whole damn point of the games was to be different than the standard 1-on-1 fighting games and just be a Nintendo sumo wrestling game. The items, assists, final smashes and whatnot are just the icing on the cake.
|
| Last edited on 2012-04-14 10:06:58 PM by Doopy Buckride. |
|
| Posted on 2012-04-15 01:12:08 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by GeminiRageSuper Smash Bros. Melee is another infamous one. When I played this game with my friends, none of us knew any of those ridiculous glitches that you heard about that completely altered the scape of the metagame, and we had a lot of fun being able to play well with whoever we liked. I just shudder to think of how much fun would've been taken out of my games if even one of us could abuse these glitches...
I've actually had a lot of fun with 64 and Melee, both before and after I learned those techniques, with all characters.
A common misconception is that people who play with a narrower set of rules aren't having fun doing so, summarized by the expression "we just play for fun." There's no right way to enjoy playing a game, and it irritates me on both sides when people have the audacity to implicitly claim their way is superior. I think people (and game designers) should follow a "live and let live" philosophy rather than shoehorn each other into experiencing a game a certain way.
Now, if the metagame actually breaks the game balancing beyond repair, that's another story. However, I don't think that's really the case in the first two Smash Bros. games (can't really comment on Brawl, which I haven't played much).
|
| Last edited on 2012-04-15 03:58:50 PM by AxemJinx. |
|
| Posted on 2012-04-16 03:24:01 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
Except the big difference is this.
If you don't play the way the metagamer likes to play, they'll say you're doing it wrong.
If you don't play the way the scrub likes to play, they'll say you're boring and lame.
The mentality between these two playergroups is different; the metagamers want to create an atmosphere that fosters fair competition and skill. Scrubs play games for fun, and will do whatever it is in the game they deem fun, regardless of whether it fits within the boundaries of skill and fairness or not. You can argue that a metagame can still be fun, but understand that a lot of the time, a metagame is competitive. A competitive atmosphere typically stresses winning more than having fun. Playing in a way that is not meta in a competitive atmosphere will likely make you a loser or a cheater among the scene (depending on how you were being non-meta).
In 1-on-1 games, it's entirely possible to still have fun even if you lose. Once you start looking into team-based games, however, it gets much worse. If your non-meta playstyle ends up dragging down your team, the blame is going to be directed at you if your team loses, and your teammates will probably argue that they didn't have fun even if you were. Team games are where I say metagaming is truly at its worst, and where it really ends up going against the spirit of fun.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-04-17 05:41:33 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Metagaming isn't bad. It's what people do when they play games competitively, and that's fine. I'd say it actually makes it more fun if you have to master the game and its controls/rules to get better at it. A meta level adds an extra layer of depth to the game, where the ones truly good at the game can be. Not that I'm a pro gamer; just a slightly above average casual gamer.
The main thing I don't like about metagaming is the terrible balancing of most games leading to the creation of tiers, followed by the overuse of certain characters and underuse of others at a competitive level. Seeing people use the same characters/Pokémon teams/Yu-Gi-Oh! decks/etc. because they're higher tier gets really boring after a while, especially for someone like me who doesn't follow the metagame or its strategies. I don't mind losing constantly to people who are obviously more skilled than me, but sometimes meta tactics like chaingrabs or infinite loops where you can't even do anything until the opponent screws up drain the fun out of the game. It's less a game for both players than it is an exercises in repeated movement for the opponent. Pokémon metagaming works pretty well due to the separation of tiers into different metas, but those metas still have their own overused Pokémon.
For things like Pokémon or card games, simulators work better so every one is on a level playing field with what they can do. But then actually going to a real tournament with a simulated team/deck isn't going to go well. MVS put it nicely; an evened out playing field is more fun for both parties.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-04-18 03:29:57 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by Jeuda CruxifisSo...I actually thought he used military tactics, applying actual skill and hard work to get what he wanted. Nope. His tactics included getting the energy sword and slicing the FAWK out of me. And here I was using actual strategy.
Yeah. Halo 3 is a bitch like that.  . I never run for it, and almost always just shoot the f0rk outta those who have it in their hands, and they never stood a chance against me ...until recently where my xbox had to be disconnected because of my new pc. :[.
On the subject of metagaming though, I use it whenever I have to. For example, an online game of Halo: Reach with a bunch of 'tactical pros' (I'm quoting them straight from what they said). Really though, it ruins most games. They're playing it all the time, camping, spotting the weaker ones to get. Later maps though, made this way harder on Reach. Though, I mostly play SWAT Team, and well. That's a bitch. I'm not the best at Reach anymore, so they keep going for me and that one other more unskilled person on my team. Really, metagaming ruins it. =/
Just my two cents.
|
|
|
| Pages: 1 |
|
|
|
|
Forum Index - Hobbies - Gaming - Does the concept of 'Meta-Gaming' suck the fun out of it? |
|
|
 |
|
 |
The purpose of this site is not to distribute copyrighted material, but to honor one of our favourite games.
Copyright © 2005 - 2013 - SMW Central
Legal Information - Link To UsTotal queries: 29
|
|
|
|
