Current Events > C/D: Metagames ruin online multiplayer games.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Given that you're functionally forced to conform to them outside of very specific private games (even then, good luck), it just completely kills the fun for me. I wanna be able to enjoy video games the way that I like, not something that was arbitrarily decided by a popular majority.

How does everyone else feel?

---

Players ruin multiplayer games.

---

vigorm0rtis posted...

Players ruin multiplayer games.

That too lol

---

Don't online multiplayer games usually have a separate casual and competitive mode?

D

It makes the game more fun tbh. Hell alot of times they're somewhat irrelevant since the metagame and the concept of tiers only applies to extremely high level play. Unless you're in the top 0.1% of that particular game then you're able to play whatever you want and have success tbh
---

It's not arbitrarily decided, it's what works to win in any given game. Don't blame people for wanting to win, blame the game for having a meta you don't like.

---

I mean, competition out there is too intense for me so I opt out of most multiplayer games and modes.

---

PowerOats posted...

Don't online multiplayer games usually have a separate casual and competitive mode?

yes but that's not enough for losers like TC

D

If there was no thought of different meta's, competitive Pokemon would literally be 3 Rayquaza's and 3 Mewtwo's. Maybe 2 Rayquaza and a Pokemon purposefully designed to deal with it.

---

this is literally impossible to get rid of. the best you can hope for is a meta that's diverse enough that most players can find a strategy they can win with that they also enjoy.

---

Ballinari posted...

Unless you're in the top 0.1% of that particular game then you're able to play whatever you want and have success tbh

This isn't my experience at all. If you aren't a top player, you still have to deal with people trying to climb their way to the top via a meta.

Evening_Dragon posted...

Don't blame people for wanting to win, blame the game for having a meta you don't like.

That can be done in other ways aside from a metagame. Like why do you have to pick specific characters or use generic strategies to win?

---

EngineerGamer posted...

yes but that's not enough for losers like TC

You seem pleasant. I wanna be your friend.

Also, no; not that I've seen. I'm not even sure what you mean. I've played several online multiplayer games and all I've ever seen is a generic multiplayer mode, which, if you lack friends to play with, you run into the meta again.

---

Online multiplayer was more fun before competitive matchmaking and over-engineered gameplay killed everything
---

D

The funny thing about the meta is that by encouraging people to use top tier characters and known strategies, it keeps them from learning how to fight low tier characters. You'd be surprised how many people get pissed off when they fall for Kanji/Tager shenanigans in BBTAG just because they're used to Ruby/Yang or Yumi/Adachi play all day long.

Also, what #6 said. Meta is generally only applicable to the highest level of play. Although a bunch of people mindlessly try to follow the meta without actually understanding it, which results in them getting their asses handed to them. Which leads them back to the first paragraph. They get tossed around for days by ol' Kanjo or Tager :3

Like with this idiot lol. He could've DP'd, supered, popped Resonance, or teched forward, but he didn't. I don't know what the hell he was doing, but he shouldn't have failed at it 4 times in a row. Hell, Hilda and Vatista should've WRECKED team manhug in the first place.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXwnbKxWR9M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXwnbKxWR9M

---

LinkFanatic posted...

That can be done in other ways aside from a metagame. Like why do you have to pick specific characters or use generic strategies to win?

Because they have the best odds of winning. It's real basic survival of the fittest, the free market, etc. You don't have to pick them, but for a lot of people, winning is fun.

That being said, ever consider getting into fighting games? Because online is so competitive by default, they tend to be balanced enough, at least nowadays, that you can play almost any character you want.

Only problem is that the initial skillgate is high. If you don't like the gitgud process, it's probably not for you.

---

Evening_Dragon posted...

Because they have the best odds of winning. It's real basic survival of the fittest, the free market, etc.

I think the uncertainty in winning probabilities with "lesser" characters is the entire fun of being casual, though.

I mean, don't metas ever get monotonous to people?

---

LinkFanatic posted...

I think the uncertainty in winning probabilities with "lesser" characters is the entire fun of being casual, though.

I mean, don't metas ever get monotonous to people?

Depends entirely on the meta. What you're asking is very game specific. I gave on Hearthstone because of this.

---

Ballinari posted...

Unless you're in the top 0.1% of that particular game then you're able to play whatever you want and have success tbh

Meta becomes meta because it has the greatest chance of success. And in some cases you just don't have a choice. For example, in World of Warcraft there was a dungeon called Gruul's Lair. There was a fight with some ogres before it.

You absolutely needed specific classes to beat it. It was literally impossible unless you brought at least 1 mage, among others, just as an example.

---

Depends on the meta and how balances the game is - if the meta happens because of balance issues, then its usually not great because playing something off-flavor puts you at a significant disadvantage. If the meta only exists because of popular perception, or by a very slight advantage in the balancing, then it isnt insurmountable and can make off-meta play fun while still being viable. Obviously some games do this better than others.

---

Ballinari posted...

D

It makes the game more fun tbh. Hell alot of times they're somewhat irrelevant since the metagame and the concept of tiers only applies to extremely high level play. Unless you're in the top 0.1% of that particular game then you're able to play whatever you want and have success tbh

This is a common fallacy, but it doesn't hold up. Tiers are a fluid concept, they change with skill level. The tiers we typically care about reflect the top players abilities, seeing as the top skill levels will trump lower levels.

For example, make a tournament out of complete newbies who never even heard of fighting games. Explain the basic concept, make them play for $5k round robin. You know which characters are gonna be strongest in that set of players? Honda, Chun, and Blanka, because they're the ones with mash specials, the only kind of moves any of them are gonna figure out.


---

Unless you are in the upper echelon of top players, the meta game is almost meaningless and what matters most is player skill.

take WoW for example. Sure, theres better classes than others, and in these classes theres better specs than others. But unless youre in a top 50 progression guild it doesnt matter because you arent good enough for it to matter, and at your skill rating all what matters is how well you play your game and class.

besides, the meta can be fun so long as no class is so absurdly worse than others, and it changes up every once in a while

also, as mentioned above, the meta changes with skill leve. Pharah is a great class in low PSR overwatch matches, does she need to be nerfed?

---

Currently this is effecting World of Warcraft Classic. Back in original vanilla WoW, nobody cared much about "world buffs", buffs that you can get by being in a certain area when the buff goes off to everyone in the zone. Now people who raid expect everyone in the raid to collect all the world buffs before raid. Some raid groups won't allow you to come if you dont do it. It has led to lots of controversy and drama and some wish world buffs didn't exist