Current Events > Do meta players ruin their own fun?

(+) Yeah! (+)

It can't actually be fun to play a game if all you care about are arbitrary numbers over how the gameplay feels. The exception of course, are tourney players. This ranges from mmo's, RPGs, TCGs, fighting games, team games, and even Pokemon.

sometimes people think winning is the most fun thing so probably not

No. Typically meta players want to play meta, I'm not seeing the issue.

People enjoy stuff in different ways. Sometimes we don't understand them, but that doesn't make them bad.

We tend to be less consumed by irritation when we accept this.

Some do but plenty genuinely enjoy the act of being as efficient as possible for whatever game theyre hooked on.

I dunno what they do to their own fun, but they ruin my fun.

I just don't even do multiplayer anymore.

Murphiroth posted...

No. Typically meta players want to play meta, I'm not seeing the issue.

In single player games, no issue. In multiplayer games, meta players can be very toxic if you aren't playing the flavor of the month with the best specs.

If they bothered to look up all that stuff, they prob enjoy the game more than you.

Squall28 posted...

If they bothered to look up all that stuff, they prob enjoy the game more than you.

Only if their dopamine rush isn't coming from being the best.

Marvel Rivals is the only game I play and yeah, there's a pretty annoying group of players in the community who care way too much about the meta around team composition. I'm a flex player and don't mind switching but it makes me not want to do that when someone is crying from the start or trying to tell others what to do because it's not "the meta." I only play quick match fwiw.

The community is pretty fucking terrible in general though, so maybe it's just that and not the meta aspect itself.

EDIT: Misread the title but yeah, I think they do get in their own way because clearly they're not having a good time, in my experience.

they probably enjoy things in their own tryhard way

I used to be that way anytime I played any online multiplayer game when I was super competitive in my early Highschool and college years. My issue with it was that it kind of made me a toxic person, to the point where I end up hating the game I was playing because I could see the flaws. I would get into unnecessary fights online whether certain builds are superior, why certain balance patches were good or bad, etc. It also added stress to my life that I didn't need now that I had a full time job. It took me awhile to learn to just have "fun" and stop playing a game when it stopped being fun.

nocturnal_traveler posted...

In single player games, no issue. In multiplayer games, meta players can be very toxic if you aren't playing the flavor of the month with the best specs.

And? Just ignore them.

nocturnal_traveler posted...

Only if their dopamine rush isn't coming from being the best.

Why else would someone play a multi-player game?

TheLiarParadox posted...

Marvel Rivals is the only game I play and yeah, there's a pretty annoying group of players in the community who care way too much about the meta around team composition. I'm a flex player and don't mind switching but it makes me not want to do that when someone is crying from the start or trying to tell others what to do because it's not "the meta." I only play quick match fwiw.

The community is pretty fucking terrible in general though, so maybe it's just that and not the meta aspect itself.

EDIT: Misread the title but yeah, I think they do get in their own way because clearly they're not having a good time, in my experience.

To be fair on Marvel Rivals, this type of thing was bound to happen in any online multiplayer game that gets super popular in general. I saw the exact same thing in CS:GO and League of Legends...because I used to be that way as well.

nocturnal_traveler posted...

Only if their dopamine rush isn't coming from being the best.

Very few of them are remotely close to being the best. If you care enough about the game to learn about meta and technical shit, you have passion for the game. It's different than what you get when you're just fucking around with friends in Overcooked. You had fun that random night, but you prob don't think about that game at all.

nocturnal_traveler posted...

In single player games, no issue. In multiplayer games, meta players can be very toxic if you aren't playing the flavor of the month with the best specs.

From my experience of TCGs, the toxicity can go both ways, with some people thinking they are superior and more creative because they play 'rogue' decks.

As a fighting game aficionado: lol, lmao

git gud

I don't really think this, no. I also think it's sort of weird how this question only seems to show up around video games

"do people who learn proper shooting form in basketball ruin their own fun?"

"do people practice different types of pitches ruin their own fun?"

these both sound obviously absurd

kirbymuncher posted...

I don't really think this, no. I also think it's sort of weird how this question only seems to show up around video games

"do people who learn proper shooting form in basketball ruin their own fun?"

"do people practice different types of pitches ruin their own fun?"

these both sound obviously absurd

it shows up around video games because some meta players are very loud, and bully others for not picking or playing in line with meta

I stopped playing lol and will not play it again because of the meta. Depends on the meta a suppose.

majority of people who go crazy for meta gear doesn't even know how to fucking use it

Murphiroth posted...

And? Just ignore them.

Depends on the game. Sometimes you can be waiting a long time just to be kicked from the group because the party leader didn't like your build or character.

A_Good_Boy posted...

Why else would someone play a multi-player game?

I don't get my rush from wanting to be the very best, like no one ever was.

A_Good_Boy posted...

Why else would someone play a multi-player game?

To enjoy playing the game, presumably

nocturnal_traveler posted...

In single player games, no issue. In multiplayer games, meta players can be very toxic if you aren't playing the flavor of the month with the best specs.

It sounds like the issue isn't people who like to play meta, but those of them who are rude to people about it. So, basically, if you asked if I disliked rude players, I'd say "yes".

nocturnal_traveler posted...

I don't get my rush from wanting to be the very best, like no one ever was

You don't have to be the very best but surely you're playing competitive games with victory in mind?

I mean, it's generally casual players complaining about meta players than the other way around. Most people don't have fun getting trounced by someone significantly better than them. It's a bit different when it's a team game and you think one of your teammates is throwing, but generally meta people probably are having more fun overall since they're more invested. It definitely varies from game to game though.

A_Good_Boy posted...

You don't have to be the very best but surely you're playing competitive games with victory in mind?

Yes, but if I lose? No biggie. Some players take defeat very seriously.

MorganTJ posted...

I mean, it's generally casual players complaining about meta players than the other way around. Most people don't have fun getting trounced by someone significantly better than them. It's a bit different when it's a team game and you think one of your teammates is throwing, but generally meta people probably are having more fun overall since they're more invested. It definitely varies from game to game though.

It's like working a customer service job. The toxic players are the minority, but they're so loud and obnoxious, that they leave a lasting impression that ruins the game.

A_Good_Boy posted...

You don't have to be the very best but surely you're playing competitive games with victory in mind?

The balance imo is you need to play something that is at least realistically viable. You ruin the experience for the whole team if you pick something that's a complete up hill battle.

nocturnal_traveler posted...

Yes, but if I lose? No biggie. Some players take defeat very seriously.

Yeah but the point is you're still trying. The people that play meta are also just trying, they're just trying harder than you are.

Everyone is entitled to their own idea of fun. I'm a "Rules of the road GTA driver" for example and the type of person that will pick what looks / feels the best and I could give an absolute damn about what is statistically better.

kirbymuncher posted...

I don't really think this, no. I also think it's sort of weird how this question only seems to show up around video games

"do people who learn proper shooting form in basketball ruin their own fun?"

"do people practice different types of pitches ruin their own fun?"

these both sound obviously absurd

That's an interesting observation. I think it actually works both ways, though. Especially since there are only so many slots on a baseball team. I wouldn't know how to even get a game together if I didn't make the cut. I'm sure it's possible, but it sounds like an undertaking.

MyMainAccount posted...

It sounds like the issue isn't people who like to play meta, but those of them who are rude to people about it. So, basically, if you asked if I disliked rude players, I'd say "yes".

I don't really care if they're rude about it. I just get tired of losing every single time and have no intention of reading/watching whatever dumb thing I'm supposed to read/watch to change that. I'll just go play something where the opponents are designed to be defeated instead.

I'm not a fan of metas tbh

Even armor core 6 had it for a while, and people would get hella pissy if you had anything that resembled a kite...

But you know, that's all I know... it's how I always played armored core 1-5 >__>

kirbymuncher posted...

I don't really think this, no. I also think it's sort of weird how this question only seems to show up around video games

"do people who learn proper shooting form in basketball ruin their own fun?"

"do people practice different types of pitches ruin their own fun?"

these both sound obviously absurd

Yeah idk if that correlates to the way gamers think.

It would be more like "I only play the thimble in Monopoly because it has a 0.000128167% advantage of winning."

SwayM posted...

Yeah idk if that correlates to the way gamers think.

It would be more like "I only play the thimble in Monopoly because it has a 0.000128167% advantage of winning."

You're exaggerating too much. The equivalent is like how basketball is about shooting 3s now, and your team picks up a point guard that can't shoot. It's not an exact percentage but you know you're going to be playing with a handicap.

kirbymuncher posted...

I don't really think this, no. I also think it's sort of weird how this question only seems to show up around video games

"do people who learn proper shooting form in basketball ruin their own fun?"

"do people practice different types of pitches ruin their own fun?"

these both sound obviously absurd

And if you show up to a pick-up basketball game and start screaming slurs at some dude because his shooting form isn't 100% flawless, you'd be a weird asshole.

SwayM posted...

Yeah idk if that correlates to the way gamers think.

It would be more like "I only play the thimble in Monopoly because it has a 0.000128167% advantage of winning."

Success in elite sport is built on marginal gains.

Why throw away even a 0.000128167% advantage?

Nah. I play fighting games and tend to play a wide variety of the cast. Some are meta, others not. Like in BBTAG I play over half the cast of 50+ characters, and among them are Naoto Kurogane and Kanji Tatsumi. Naoto is one of the best while Kanji is one of the worst. In Persona 4 Arena I play Shadow Mitsuru, Shadow Labrys, and Shadow Kanji, with the first two being top tier and the last being extremely shitty (poor Kanji, bottom tier in every game).

I tend to gravitate towards top tier characters not because theyre good, but because they have more potential and therefore more opportunity for swaggish combos.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/8/8956d09f.jpg

SwayM posted...

Yeah idk if that correlates to the way gamers think.

It would be more like "I only play the thimble in Monopoly because it has a 0.000128167% advantage of winning."

Well, this definitely isn't how TCG or FGC players think.

AsucaHayashi posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/8/8956d09f.jpg

Gonna use this whenever someone sends me lovemail for having having low hp during pvp at elden ring

No they ruin everyone else's usually

The only game where I am genuinely good enough for meta to matter is Fire Emblem and that's a single player franchise so who gives a shit if you are playing meta.

I do think that knowledge of the meta actually helps you do non-meta things, so I do roll me eyes when people complain about meta focuses players optimizing the fun out of the game.

Surprised no one's called out the first post question.

Most meta players aren't the ones crunching numbers or figuring things out. They just look up what the best thing is based on what pros use or what the current chatter online of the current OP thing is and use that.

The people actually crunching numbers, theorycrafting, or testing the things that become the meta aren't those players. Typically they're the people where that 0.01% advantage matters, the "elite sports" mentioned in a previous post.

And unless you're gonna get good enough you're actually making money off playing? You're not going to see the full gains from bandwagoning onto the meta.

Though there's also nothing wrong or inherently unfun about that either. "The meta" is a shortcut to getting into the game. League has over 100 champs and you don't get a test drive mode (unless that changed). You gonna research every one to find one you maybe like but might be balanced poorly? You gonna go off vibes and spend your currency sight unseen? Grabbing a meta choice to shortcut those kinds of decision processes or risks is perfectly viable. Just don't expect to win only because you picked the meta, that's how you piss yourself off over it.

Compsognathus posted...

The only game where I am genuinely good enough for meta to matter is Fire Emblem and that's a single player franchise so who gives a shit if you are playing meta.

I do think that knowledge of the meta actually helps you do non-meta things, so I do roll me eyes when people complain about meta focuses players optimizing the fun out of the game.

When I first made this topic, I had World of Warcraft and Pokemon in mind. The former always drove away new players, and the latter is incredibly boring from what I've tried (EV/IV training).

nocturnal_traveler posted...

When I first made this topic, I had World of Warcraft and Pokemon in mind. The former always drove away new players, and the latter is incredibly boring from what I've tried (EV/IV training).

Ehh, pokemon stuff you're getting at there I feel is a different question entirely. Not EV training isn't just "not following the meta", that's just not properly preparing yourself. Rocking up to a WoW dungeon with a weapon 20 levels old is a bad look that actively hurts the team, for example.

Pokemon meta is more about which pokemon to use, team composition, etc.

I'm also a weirdo that just liked training pokemon though. I made a roster of hundreds of 5 IV, EV trained, moveset ready pokemon back in Gen7 just because I was enjoying it.