Support NeoGAF

[cormack12]

Source: https://www.altchar.com/features/op...ably-ruin-your-gaming-experience-aOSgc3A6BVoa

While there is an absolute array of gaming genres out there, just ready to be experienced and loved (or hated), the undisputed fact that online multiplayer games are utterly dominating the market at the moment still very much stands, and it is here that all players have the one, same goal: winning.

No one likes taking the time out of their day to sit down in front of a screen and lose, right?

This is why most gamers resort to discovering the META (Most Effective Tactics Available) of their favourite game and sticking to it come fire, come rain - all with the sole purpose of snatching that glorious win.

I would be hard-pressed to say that following the unwritten rules of the META - most of which are plain boring beyond belief, more often than not - to secure a win equates to having actual fun with the game.

Let's take FIFA 21 as an example of what I am talking about. [..] The idea of it is that players get to experiment with virtually endless combinations of players to create their "ultimate" starting eleven. Sounds wonderful, doesn't it? In FUT, META means choosing players who will take most advantage of the game's arcadey mechanics which rely almost exclusively on the players' pace.

Now, choosing these players would be well and fine if you were really an actual supporter of these lads and they genuinely were part of your ultimate team fantasy, but I think I stand on very firm ground when I say that that's most likely not the case. These players are simply designed to give you the most bang for your buck at their respective positions - the very definition of the FUT META.

However, if, in your heart of hearts, you find yourself lowkey hating the game you play every day and start looking at it and treating it like a chore - I highly recommend you step out of the META circle, and go for whatever makes your adrenaline go haywire, even if it means taking a few Ls along the way.


I mean it's obviously true, any game like Destiny 2, The Division 2, RDR:O that aren't traditionally role or class based force you to play in a turgid way to get wins. What say you GAF?

 

[ThatGamingDude]

I don't think metas are the issue

I think the vast amount of information you can create/look at/release regarding metas ruin the fun of discovery for the most video games

Then again it does end up showing that a person can know their game well enough to compensate for their skills and not necessarily use the meta

Just depends I guess

 

[AV]

I wouldn't say meta "ruined" Classic WoW but it really sucked a lot of the fun out of it. Most people ran the exact same gear sets on the exact same talents on the exact same specs using the exact same consumables and stacking world buffs - all so that they could complete the raids as fast as possible and not have to raid again for another week. Created an incredibly bizarre min-max culture which you didn't have to adhere to, but because our guild didn't require world buffs and wasn't going for speedruns, while at the same time not being a casual "die again and again for no reason" team, we attracted way less attention that guilds on either end of that spectrum and eventually collapsed due to lack of new recruits.

 

[cormack12]

I wouldn't say meta "ruined" Classic WoW but it really sucked a lot of the fun out of it. Most people ran the exact same gear sets on the exact same talents on the exact same specs using the exact same consumables and stacking world buffs - all so that they could complete the raids as fast as possible and not have to raid again for another week. Created an incredibly bizarre min-max culture which you didn't have to adhere to, but because our guild didn't require world buffs and wasn't going for speedruns, while at the same time not being a casual "die again and again for no reason" team, we attracted way less attention that guilds on either end of that spectrum and eventually collapsed due to lack of new recruits.

I think my experience of WoW was slightly different, because I felt kind of class and race mattered (e.g. need a dwarf priest), but yeah the endgame was everyone waiting for their drops and hoping they got a lucky roll after 4 hours against everyone else in their class bracket. But I do think it defintiely ruins sports games for instance.

 

[manfestival]

I remember getting absolutely destroyed in Destiny 2 while doing pvp early in the game simply because I only had like 1 "meta" weapon/build. Sadly even then, I did not have the best roll for my only meta gun so it was a subpar version of the meta.

In COD I have some friends that will only play meta weapons. They refuse to experiment with other guns. That is their prerogative but I feel like experimentation is part of the fun. Yeah I will switch to meta if I am getting trounced or my friends ask me to switch but yeah... I find fun making other builds work.

 

[Gandih42]

Excuse me while I recover from my mind being exploded by the fact that the use of "meta" in gaming is an acronym. How the fork did I never know that.

As for the OP, I completely agree. The meta certainly has a place in gaming and in any competitive endeavor in general. It obviously depends on your own personality how much fun and enjoyment you get out of following the meta rather than doing your own thing.

I generally don't care at all about the meta. I will play what I like however I like and try to make it work. For me, the meta tends to reduce a game to its most basic form, numbers. And I don't enjoy that at all. In competitive games that is less of a problem, but in a single player game that really sucks the fun out of it for me. I want to discover the games mechanics on my own and do things in a way I find entertaining, even if it is not the most effective. Playing a game is not about min-maxing my time with a game but rather having fun.

I remember hearing about the data tracking stuff used in MMO and thinking it sounds horrible and incredible. People can upload stats of their performance based on their class/spec/build and whatever, which is then collected and is used to show which builds are and aren't efficient. In some instances, this can be used to exclude players from joining a group or raid because they don't have the most optimal build and will be 0.1% less effective than if they conformed to the meta build. The data collection, processing and implementation fascinates me as a scientist, but sounds incredibly boring in the context of a game.

As an example from my personal experience; In DotA 2 I always pick characters based on what I enjoy, with the added restriction that they don't completely ruin the team. But there are a bunch of heroes that are extremely common to see in almost every match, which I assume is due to the current meta of the game. Nothing wrong with that, it's just not for me.

Anywho, these are my immediate thoughts on the topic. Really interested to see what other people think.

 

[Zannegan]

No one likes taking the time out of their day to sit down in front of a screen and lose, right?

This is why most gamers resort to discovering the META (Most Effective Tactics Available) of their favourite game and sticking to it come fire, come rain - all with the sole purpose of snatching that glorious win.

This is more or less the opposite of what I do. Winning over and over again with exactly the same tactics is boring to me. I sit down in front of a screen to have fun, not to become an enemy NPC, so I make my own fun within the rules of the game. As long as I pull my own weight and avoid feeding, I figure I'm free to play how I like.

In games like CoD, for instance, I tend to build classes around character concepts (the Ninja, Rambo, Cowboy, etc.) or find the weirdest weapon in my inventory and make it surprisingly effective. If I can maintain an even slightly positive K/D in TDM with some wacky build, then I'm happy.

I don't want to wreck anyone else's fun though, so I avoid games like Overwatch where a wild card can kill a team's chances and stick to casual/fun lobbies in the games I do play.

So, yeah, I'm with you. Great topic. I hope it gets more love

PS-"turgid" might not be the right word there. Or maybe it is.

 

[AV]

I think my experience of WoW was slightly different, because I felt kind of class and race mattered (e.g. need a dwarf priest), but yeah the endgame was everyone waiting for their drops and hoping they got a lucky roll after 4 hours against everyone else in their class bracket. But I do think it defintiely ruins sports games for instance.

Yeah things like rolling a Dwarf Priest to get access to a great ability is cool and quite RPG-like, it's more stuff like stacking world buffs to be insanely overpowered and completely remove any and all challenge from raids that were already easy that felt weak. Some people left our guild because we were clearing raids too slowly and those people only ever logged in to raid anyway, and never said a word, it was baffling. Efficiency becomes the only thing certain people care about.

 

[cormack12]

This is more or less the opposite of what I do. Winning over and over again with exactly the same tactics is boring to me. I sit down in front of a screen to have fun, not to become an enemy NPC, so I make my own fun within the rules of the game. As long as I pull my own weight and avoid feeding, I figure I'm free to play how I like.

In games like CoD, for instance, I tend to build classes around character concepts (the Ninja, Rambo, Cowboy, etc.) or find the weirdest weapon in my inventory and make it surprisingly effective. If I can maintain an even slightly positive K/D in TDM with some wacky build, then I'm happy.

I don't want to wreck anyone else's fun though, so I avoid games like Overwatch where a wild card can kill a team's chances and stick to casual/fun lobbies in the games I do play.

So, yeah, I'm with you.

PS-"turgid" might not be the right word there. Or maybe it is.

I think this is key for me, I don't mind playing other teams etc. but it's disheartening fighting the meta and eventually being undone by it. Like you can overcome it with skill/determination for 95% of the game but because of the consistent and spam nature of meta eventually one will get through and it feels much worse seeing yourself undone by something which works so well and will guarantee at least one nailed on certainty advantage.

 

[Skifi28]

I quit chasing metals years ago. I just do my thing these days trying to have fun. There's no going back.

 

[Gandih42]

I don't think metas are the issue

I think the vast amount of information you can create/look at/release regarding metas ruin the fun of discovery for the most video games

Then again it does end up showing that a person can know their game well enough to compensate for their skills and not necessarily use the meta

Just depends I guess

This is probably one of the things I miss the most of playing videogames when I was younger. There are definitely advantages too, having all this information. But I just can't imagine a new game like WoW coming out feeling like a vast unknown world to be explored anymore. Although I'm sure part of this problem is also myself; having played many many games over the years, the collective experience makes me perceive new games differently. Which is both good and bad.

But man, do I sometimes dream of reliving the experience of going from 1 to 60 back in the day. I quite enjoyed the little bit of Classic I played, but no matter how hard it tries it can never bring back the context of playing it in 2004.

 

[DrJohnGalt]

While I don't entirely disagree, I think games done right have some balancing systems in place that prevent this type of thing. I don't play sports games so can't speak to the original examples given, but I do enjoy RPGs and absolutely despise the min/max culture. Where's the fun in that? I like to actually role play while playing role-playing games, creating characters with flaws and weaknesses. I thought that was the whole idea? Still. I do like to put together the most effective party thru trial and error. I think a lot of game publications that push "best builds" for characters or teams or whatever take a lot of the fun out of the game. But it's really up to the player. Some enjoy the experimenting. Some just want to take the easy way, using a build somebody else came up with and power-leveling to win. I guess the fun and challenge for players like this is more in the destination and less in the journey?

Since I'm a huge RTS player I see this a lot in Total War games when people start creating doomstacks and just steamroll the enemy. Where's the fun in that?

 

[ThatGamingDude]

This is probably one of the things I miss the most of playing videogames when I was younger. There are definitely advantages too, having all this information. But I just can't imagine a new game like WoW coming out feeling like a vast unknown world to be explored anymore. Although I'm sure part of this problem is also myself; having played many many games over the years, the collective experience makes me perceive new games differently. Which is both good and bad.

But man, do I sometimes dream of reliving the experience of going from 1 to 60 back in the day. I quite enjoyed the little bit of Classic I played, but no matter how hard it tries it can never bring back the context of playing it in 2004.

I share your exact sentiment on this; people should have access to the information, it helps support their hobbies (And sometimes even careers), just sucks that comes with some baggage, including having the experience to "See through the veil," so to speak

I'm not even speaking strictly to WoW either. There's many games where people put out the most optimal way to play the game
A guide to wall chickens in Castlevania, for instance

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Credit where credit is due, if a game has a meta like you're describing, it has enough of a hook for fans to enjoy it. It may be a simplistic meta, but truly boring games don't get a meta at all, they fade away and are forgotten.

The meta isn't unique only to online/competitive games. I think the habit of min/maxing every RPG aspect in a single-player game comes from the same root issue (which you point out in the OP): some people are playing games specifically because they want to feel like winning. I dont think there's anything wrong with that, but it does lead to certain problems and addictiveness. That's a separate conversation, perhaps.

 

[Griffon]

META isn't a problem when a game is well balanced.

Well balanced games are rare.
Tekken 7 is the only one that comes to mind (you can pick any character you like and do well).

 

[Moogle11]

That's just one of those things where all I can say is there's no reason for me to care as many people clearly have fun chasing the meta in games. Be it PVP games or doing whatever to find groups and do raids quickly in MMOs or looter shooter games etc. It's not my cup of tea, but not every game has to be for me and I've accepted I just like single player games and occasionally casually playing a coop game like Borderlands 3 with friends who aren't min-max types.

For single player RPGs or whatever I don't really get into min-maxing either. I mostly play for the story, characters, lore, atmosphere etc. so I may look up some build info etc. if a game is on the harder side as I don't want to have to grind. But most RPGs these days have difficulty options you can change on the fly so I'm more likely to just drop it to easy if I hit a wall and turn it back up if it gets too easy later. I don't care about any feeling of winning or whatever, I'm just there mostly to veg out, escape for a while and enjoy an interactive story in a world I can wander around in vs. passively watching a TV show or movie or reading a book (though I spend a fair amount of time on those hobbies as well). Gameplay and challenging myself isn't much of a draw anymore. I get plenty of challenge and sense of accomplishment from my career, the gym and other aspects of life to not want that from my hobbies. Those are chill and recharge time.

 

[Kenpachii]

Meta ruins mmo's.

Everybody and there mom made a mage in wow and warrior vanilla because they are the top of the charts for everything. U either play the meta or get left behind and that kills the game off. As people that do not follow the meta simple are ignored in everything until they reroll to the meta.

 

[Faithless83]

It's impossible to run from it in Magic Arena.
The thing is, that it changes a lot because of the nature of experimentation attached to Magic itself.

That said, it's the RNG BS that ruined MTGA for me I've poured hundreds of hours in it. But when the game artificially fucks up your hand, so the other player can have all it's tools time and time again, it took the joy out of it.

To the point where I could predict how fast I was going to lose based on my turn 2 hand.

 

[Mabdia]

Well...the only online fame that I play is Gran Turismo Sport. Yet, I just can't care if I'll win or loose. The only thing that matter is that I have a good race and have some good fights.

That's why I can understand that some people can try to learn how to be a little better at the games.

But when the only thing you want is to win, that might be a problem to the guy who want to be the most precise playing a game.

I think that can destroy all the fun that is possible in a game.

Damn! Some races that I lost was more enjoyable than some that I win. Some races that I finished at last place I really have a lot of fun. But some that I win was just a boredom to keep at first a few seconds ahead.

 

[Daeoc]

It does, I stopped playing Overwatch because of the Orisa meta. I got to GM and it just wasn't fun anymore. The meta usually isn't an issue for me, but when it is extremely boring because you put a shield down and shoot from behind it the whole game, it isn't fun.

I did start playing a little again recently, but just Quick Play on an alternate account. (Though I still run into the same GM and Top 500 players I would on my main account somehow in QP. . .)

 

[sxodan]

Agree and disagree. I always try to go with different builds, can't stand when everyone is running the same gun, armour, sword or whatever. However, no one likes to lose (and there's no fun in losing )so I guess people will always opt for META builds, rather than doing something that's different.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Excuse me while I recover from my mind being exploded by the fact that the use of "meta" in gaming is an acronym. How the fork did I never know that.

That's because it's a backronym. "Meta" was always shorthand for "metagame".

What is "the meta" and how does it affect gaming?

If you want to be competitive, you have to understand the metagame.

dotesports.com