Does "the meta" ruin gaming for you?

Current Events

Page of 2
Current Events » Does "the meta" ruin gaming for you?
Or do you enjoy digging into the optimization of what you play?
Someday AI will be so ingrained in your computer that it will reflexively prevent you from using your PC to be rude to someone else.
Opening with rock twice is the meta
"Salt cures Everything!"
My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/Nirakolov/videos
Nah, I make my own meta. I like seeing how my strats stand up against everyone else's
I wouldn't say ruin. But it is annoying when the character or playstyle I like turns out to be so bad that there's no way you can progress through the game.
Allmind exists for all mercenaries.
Trying experimental builds will usually hinder you gameplay experience. As an example, when MapleStory was new and in beta, I knew nothing about the stats, so I just point points wherever. Turns out that's a real shit idea and made my attacks much much weaker than they should have been and I had to start over. Mind you, at the time, getting to level 30 took over a month.
Without truth, there is nothing.
Eh, I'll play it how I want, and if there's something I want to do that I can't manage with my own strategies, then a strong meta community increases the chances of me being able to find a strategy that does work. But I also pretty much only play games single player, and even the occasional multiplayer game is often co-op, and for that the meta is much more optional than competitive stuff where you generally need to follow the meta to be competitive.
Meta is just the way the world is. There is usually a set way of doing things that is agreed upon as the best, and until someone proves otherwise - or the variables change (updates) - that is just the way it is.

I've actually always enjoyed playing "just" outside the meta, with viable strategies and characters that are not necessarily "the best".
TheShadowViper posted...
Meta is just the way the world is. There is usually a set way of doing things that is agreed upon as the best, and until someone proves otherwise - or the variables change (updates) - that is just the way it is.

I've actually always enjoyed playing "just" outside the meta, with viable strategies and characters that are not necessarily "the best".

The intentional flaw included so the work doesn't offend God...
Someday AI will be so ingrained in your computer that it will reflexively prevent you from using your PC to be rude to someone else.
no. i play how i want, idc if its good or viable
My fate was the grandest, most brilliant of them all.
He/Him
I'm into learning it if I find the methods enjoyable. But often times I really don't tbh.

On that note I enjoy the dmc games cuz there is a big anti-meta aspect of it. Sacrificing dps (and sometimes even the style meter tbh) for stylish gameplay . At least this was the case for dmc 3 which had a few sequences that looked stylish and was hard to replicate but wasn't varied enough to increase style meter passed like an S or SS
I'm a Taurus. Currently playing: Oldschool Runescape & DMC 3 Ubisoft Port. He/Him
Generally yes. Especially in Hearthstone it used to be a huge problem (mainly when certain decks were overpowered while the devs were too reluctant to properly nerf them). The good thing is in some cases when the meta is too oppressive you can stop for a while and hope things will be changed in the next few months.
No, I am perfectly fine becoming good at whatever game I'm playing.
"A shouted order to do something of dubious morality with an unpredictable outcome? Thweeet! "
My FC is in my profile.
No, and I don't think that's a good mentality to have. If your character or deck or whatever this is about isn't considered meta it's on you to figure out to make your jank work.

Realistically the meta doesn't actually affect most of the people that complain about it all that much - it usually only applies at higher levels of play.
Ruin is the wrong word but it is less fun for me if my preferred play style is just not as good as other play styles
Depends on the game. I play mostly single player, so no.

Playing online, really depends on how the devs balance everything. You don't want a situation like Tekken 7 and Leeroy.

If it's still competitive with people doing their own thing, then who cares. But when it's mandatory to play a certain way/character to even keep up. Then yes, it's a problem.
Stand out, fit in
depends on the game and how much the devs cater to it

3 things 1. i am female 2. i havea msucle probelm its hard for me to typ well 3.*does her janpuu dance*
MorganTJ posted...
Realistically the meta doesn't actually affect most of the people that complain about it all that much - it usually only applies at higher levels of play.

I meant this topic more like "does caring about the meta diminish your ability to actually enjoy the game".

I.e. does putting your time into the meta cause you to no longer see the forest through the trees when it comes to seeing the game as a complete package and embracing it as a total experience?
Someday AI will be so ingrained in your computer that it will reflexively prevent you from using your PC to be rude to someone else.
Wow...I see I think of the metal of a game as something completely different than you all do. Huh.....good to know.
Fry-Nothing is impossible, you would know that if you took after the professor like me
Clone-Your his uncle he takes after you (05-29-2009 Victim of NSC)
Only if people act elitist about it. Makes it even more fun to point out the sheep that they are.
I'm more bothered by the absolutely incorrect use of the word "meta"
he/him/his
Depends, sometimes the meta picks can be real fun. But if it's boring then yeah.
http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/7051/image141f.jpg
Kinda, if there isn't a way to delineate from one mode of competitive play.
https://i.imgur.com/GWG5c3r.gif
Nope. Ive always loved to min/max and Im 38 wi5 little time, so being able to just look up a good build is invaluable.
https://store.steampowered.com/wishlist/profiles/76561198052113750
Euripides posted...
I'm more bothered by the absolutely incorrect use of the word "meta"
I was considering making the "meta refers to the game outside the game" -rant, but I think everyone understands what is meant in the OP and why it's used.

That said, if the actual meta is boring in a card game, autobattler, deck builder, or Pokemon - it's going to impact your enjoyment whether you care about it or not. OTOH, certain dominant strategies, like camping with a sniper in a FPS, can be rough, too. In fighting games, I generally just play whatever I like and hope the game itself is fun.
He/Them
"Am I a butterfly dreaming I'm a man... Or a bowling ball dreaming I'm a plate of sashimi? Never assume that what you see and feel is real!"
Solid_Sonic posted...
I meant this topic more like "does caring about the meta diminish your ability to actually enjoy the game".

I.e. does putting your time into the meta cause you to no longer see the forest through the trees when it comes to seeing the game as a complete package and embracing it as a total experience?
Answer's more or less still the same. For the most part I'll usually enjoy a game the more in-depth I get into it. Can't think of a time where that wasn't true. I won't get far into something and suddenly dislike how people are playing it. That should be evident as soon as I start getting into it.
Baphometa posted...
I was considering making the "meta refers to the game outside the game" -rant, but I think everyone understands what is meant in the OP and why it's used.

That said, if the actual meta is boring in a card game, autobattler, deck builder, or Pokemon - it's going to impact your enjoyment whether you care about it or not. OTOH, certain dominant strategies, like camping with a sniper in a FPS, can be rough, too. In fighting games, I generally just play whatever I like and hope the game itself is fun.

In games like Call of Duty, "meta" simply means "currently recognized best gun build", which is in no way what "meta" means
he/him/his
i rarely ever play games where a meta is even a thing. i don't generally play many online competitive games, and when i do, usually i don't really care about what the meta is, cuz i'm just playing for fun, i know i'm not gonna do very good anyway.

the only notable exception i can think of is Magic: The Gathering, both the online competitive offerings which i used to play quite frequently, and paper Magic which i played on and off for most of my life before that. i was OBSESSED with the meta whenever i would play it. i would look up what the current best control deck was and buy the cards and build it, and look at what the rest of the meta looked like, then playtest it with a friend and take it to Friday Night Magic, and get a feel for the local meta was like and then fine tune it based on that. i loved having an answer for everything and getting so familiar with the players i played and their decks that i knew exactly what they were likely to play on the curve and what would be the best answer out of what i had to each one.
R.I.P. America, 1776-2024
he/him
it's ruined online games for me because I'm paranoid I'm going to be fucking everything up for everyone else.
RS3: UltimaSuende - CE Thread Zone
https://letterboxd.com/BMovieBro/
I think it's more annoying when people get mad at you for not following secret rules and complain about "meta".

"You're made of spare parts, aren't ya, bud?"
Only when the meta is so effective that you almost have to use it to be competitive.

It's not a war crime the first time.
Without meta, there is no rogue.
'Vinyl is the poor man's art collection'.
Let in the refugees, deport the racists.
I wouldnt say ruin, but it definitely makes PvP repetitive. Like in Epic Seven, you basically ALWAYS see some combination of the same 4 characters: Mort, Afternoon Soak Flan, Ruele of Light, and Harsetti. Occasionally one is swapped out for Ambitious Tywin or Blood Blade Karin.

Arena is made up of those first 4 like 80% of the time :<

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/12cbe9db.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/7c87d26d.jpg

( ^_^)/\(^_^ ) Maya High-Five!
Nah, I often find it interesting. I play mostly single player games and sometimes just ignore it as well.
Many Bothans died to bring you this post.
Not really. I tend to follow it at first but make personal tweaks when I become more familiar with gameplay mechanics.
Donald J. Trump--proof against government intelligence.
It's rare to "perfectly" balance a game, but the worse the balance the more you hear people talk about a "meta" because the concept of a meta really only comes up when the balance in a game is such that you don't really have a lot of options in how it's played.

I stopped playing lol when their meta starting getting enforced with the strict role/lane combinations. Once people started screaming at me and reporting me because I didn't want to be their jungle or support I was done. I'm not going to play a game where other people dictate what I do in my free time.

I don't really play online games anymore, and with single player games very rarely is balance so poor there is a unplayably bad option to really care much about unless you're playing like some sort of high difficulty challenge run.
Not really. I tend to go into games blind and play by feel. Only when I'm trying to beat a super boss do I care about optimization.

Online gaming is a different story though. Some games have a meta that's hard to ignore.
https://warpzone.me/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/GRANDIA_-696x509.jpg
No. The thing that causes the meta though...

Outside of literal world class playing, this is only an issue with poorly balanced games. There will naturally be a most optimal way to play, but it's only a problem when it's the only effective way to play. If you can play "suboptimally" and still have a good game, there is no issue.

For example, in classic WoW through to at least WotLK, certain classes just weren't ever brought to raids. Some were needed for their buffs, while others lacked utility and we just significantly inferior to some of the better classes. This basically meant you were screwed at endgame if you chose the "wrong" classes.

Switching to FFXIV, the jobs all perform close enough outside of world firsts. You again want some diversity to get exclusive buffs and less competition over loot, but every job brings something to the table. There are "stronger" jobs, but you're not gonna be excluded for not playing them.
Fan of metal? Don't mind covers? Check out my youtube and give me some feedback
http://www.youtube.com/sircaballero
YugiNoob posted...
I wouldnt say ruin, but it definitely makes PvP repetitive.
This is basically how I fell out of fighting games. People who challenged me simply wouldn't pick anyone other than guys like Ryu/Ken/Akuma or Kyo/Iori or whatever regardless of which character I was using. Like I would feel better about losing to someone showboating using Orochi Yashiro than the above (and the guy was truly showboating) than some guy playing Iori that starts every offensive with a Jump Strong Kick regardless of how many times I countered it.

(I realize that Orochi Yashiro probably was high tier in that game, but that guy was the only guy I ever saw use him)
I will rule the world, and find that truly good cup of coffee.
depends on what the meta is and how much you can deviate from it. people generally accept mvc2 's meta because they say the gods are the most interesting to play as and against but i think they're all dreadful speedsters with obnoxious zoning

some rpgs can be boring when played optimally. etrian odyssey can be a complete bore where nothing is a threat because you're either effectively immortal (the first game) or you have such ridiculous ailments and damage that ever fight is short and plays the same (the rest). sometimes i actively pick underlooked options and see how far they can go
Unless a meta is so stale or rote that it kills most other options in the game, I tend to like it. Pretty much if I can go rogue, I will.
evening main 2.4356848e+91
https://youtu.be/Acn5IptKWQU
It really depends on the game for me.

I really liked tager's concept in blazblue calamity trigger. (First version of blazblue). A grappler that can magnetize your opponent was a neat idea.

Of course this version of the game was absolutely dominated by the zoner nu13, and the tager vs nu13 match up is one of the most impossible/hopeless in fighting game history. With more than half of the small player base using nu13 in competitive play it was not a fun experience.

I would say out of all video game genres where a meta can effect enjoyment the most it is fighting games.

I also played a lot of capcom vs snk 2 EO back on the original xbox. With this game being my first ever online fighting game experience to see the game so thoroughly dominated by blanka, with sagat and m.bison not too far behind/or in sagat's case slightly ahead of him depending...that was like my first taste of "as much as I like playing this game with friends and family since we just use our favorite characters and try to make the team work, finding out this game has a small handful of undisputed best characters and that online players will always pick this small group of players to boost their chances of winning makes playing this online kind of feel like ass".

When that new capcom fighting game collection comes out I'm probably not even going to bother playing something like power stone 2 online, because in this game's case the game is actually dominated by that robot/doll kid character. Seeing him being spammed is guaranteed to ruin nostalgic memories for those who had fun years ago playing offline with friends and family.
GTag:MadDogg730 PSN:lMadDogg NNID:xMadDoggx NS friend code:5313-0564-0819 Go buy cyber shadow like right now.
the wider the meta is, the better (by "wider" I mean "more viable options in high-level gameplay")
...or something like that
Watch this space...
I don't get paid to play games so I just do whatever I feel like. Don't really care what the meta is in any game I've played.
wanderingshade posted...
I think it's more annoying when people get mad at you for not following secret rules and complain about "meta".

Bugmeat posted...
Only when the meta is so effective that you almost have to use it to be competitive.

It's literally the same thing
it really can sometimes
https://i.imgur.com/TGkNCva.gif https://i.imgur.com/8mWCvA4.gif
Post #46 was unavailable or deleted.
I'm of the belief that unless you're playing at the absolute top skill level, you shouldn't even be concerned about what is or isn't meta.
It's always funny when someone in, say, a fighting game is in the mid-ranks and they're concerned about character tier lists. Buddy, at your skill rank, the tier list really doesn't matter.
What is up, my sister!?
https://m.imgur.com/pmc9XsI https://m.imgur.com/hfzvdPe
Kitt posted...
I'm of the belief that unless you're playing at the absolute top skill level, you shouldn't even be concerned about what is or isn't meta.
It's always funny when someone in, say, a fighting game is in the mid-ranks and they're concerned about character tier lists. Buddy, at your skill rank, the tier list really doesn't matter.
Oh boy do I love that in fighters, as someone who usually ends up loving the low tier gimmick characters in them. Nobody from low to the beginning of high ranks ever knows how to deal with them because they're "bad," then you get hatemail for your "busted ass OP character."
Ehhh, case by case. In some games it's irrelevant, in other games it's fun, in other games it ruins the experience. No real generalised answer
Dokkan ID: 2365415872
IceCreamOnStero posted...
Ehhh, case by case. In some games it's irrelevant, in other games it's fun, in other games it ruins the experience. No real generalised answer

Yeah, overall it is kinda this. I appreciate devs that are actively trying to create a more robust meta, like with Marvel Snap. Like they make changes based off 3 weeks of data sometimes rather than waiting months and they are very open with like, "This card/mechanic is being used far more often than we like to see from the Meta, so we are making this change to try and correct it". Therefore, Snap has a very robust Meta. In comparison, Pokemon TCG Pocket currently has like... 4 deck types you might run competitively? MAYBE? And nobody has come out from the devs to discuss any changes to any of those archetypes at all.
https://i.imgur.com/GWG5c3r.gif
Current Events » Does "the meta" ruin gaming for you?
Page of 2