19 replies to this topic

[Sable Dove]

Sable Dove, on 26 April 2013 - 06:25 PM, said:

So some of us know what 'metagame' means. But until we see a pinned post saying what this forum is actually for, I don't think it's right to assume that PGI knows what it means. As such, until they say what this forum is meant for, I don't expect to see much here.

Quote

Welcome to the Metagame sub-forum.

The metagame of MWO includes aspects of the game not directly including the central combat shooter/simulator. Whether it's to discuss the CBill/MC economy and the factors and features surrounding them such as consumables, premium time, rewards, decor, etc...

When posting, please check to ensure whether there is a topic already open on the article or content you wish to discuss.

When creating new threads, please attempt to focus the discussion on a particular aspect of the metagame and keep your title as clear, specific and simple as possible.

Told you not to assume PGI knows what a metagame is.
Jettisoned communications, here I come!

[Strisk]

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Metagaming

Quote

Metagaming[color=#000000] is a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game. Another definition refers to the game universe outside of the game itself.[/color]

http://www.urbandict...p?term=metagame

Quote

                                        3.                            Metagame                 
                
Share on twitter Share on facebook Share on more                
                                                        11 up, 31 down                                                                         
Sub components of modern games that increase gameplay value without actually adding gameplay.                        

It is possible to have more than one definition for a word, although it might not be the first thing you think of when you hear it, it doesn't necessarily mean that everyone at PGI is clueless....

Edited by Strisk, 03 May 2013 - 11:40 PM.

[Sable Dove]

Strisk, on 03 May 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Metagaming


http://www.urbandict...p?term=metagame


It is possible to have more than one definition for a word, although it might not be the first thing you think of when you hear it, it doesn't necessarily mean that everyone at PGI is clueless....

Neither of those definitions fits with PGI's examples of what to discuss. None of which are part of any sort of metagame. Except maybe consumables, but that's more core gameplay than metagame. Maybe if they called it 'Mechlab Discussion'? Maybe 'Non-gameplay Content.'

[Strisk]

I'll break it down for you, the "actual" game in this example is the combat simulation whereas you get the first person view and betty talks to you....

That makes the "metagame" of the example anything you do in the mechlab screen, economy, consumables, etc....PGI listed them for you.

It fits both definitions that I posted,
Another definition refers to the game universe (MECHLAB) outside of the game itself ("THE CENTRAL COMBAT SHOOTER/SIMULATOR).

Sub components of modern games (MECHLAB, CONSUMABLES, ETC.) that increase gameplay value without actually adding gameplay (THE COMBAT SIMULATOR).

*edit* dropped some bad color tags, sorry

Edited by Strisk, 04 May 2013 - 12:05 AM.

[Sable Dove]

All of this stuff is in-game, so it's not the universe outside the game. It's not part of the gameplay, but it is in the game. If you wanted to use that definition, you could talk about the canon BT stuff that's not in the game. Essentially, that definition is referring to fluff. And again, that's not the typical definition by any stretch.

The only things listed that add any real gameplay value are the consumables, and they do add gameplay, so not meta; just game.

Yes, if you cherry-pick unusual and unpopular definitions (especially ones that can be added by anyone), you're going to find that you can make anything fit any definition if you try hard enough. So yeah, you managed to find a definition that kinda works if you look at it from just the right angle.

All that aside, even if you find a definition that works, it doesn't change the fact that what PGI apparently intends this forum for is not even worth discussing. Not enough to warrant its own subforum. Now, if they managed to give MWO a real, evolving metagame, then that would definitely be worthy of a sub-forum.

[Strisk]

"Sub components of modern games"
Stuff in the game that is not the main focus of the game. In MWO the main focus of the game is the actual combat part, not all the stuff that happens in the mechlab. The stuff that happens in the mechlab is a sub component of the battle simulation.

From the "GAME" link at the top of this page, the first line reads "A tactical BattleMech simulation set in 3049 AD. As a pilot known as a "MechWarrior", you are about to take control of the most powerful mechanical battle units the universe has ever seen."

Notice it says nothing about the mechalab or any consumables or anything like that, because they are part of the metagame

This definition is not obscure, though it may be an older or less used definition.

The things you do in the mechlab, like add consumables, do affect the gameplay, but the act of adding the consumable is not considered to be gameplay itself.

Nobody tells their friends they spent 2 hours playing MWO if they never drop in to a battle, even if they were setting up mechs, etc. Because this is all part of the metagame.

Using a different definition of a word doesn't make it wrong. I was just trying to help everyone understand the meaning of the quote you posted for the operation of this forum.

[Sable Dove]

I think most people already understand the meaning of the quote, and most people understand that basically no one calls that a metagame. Especially not when it's in a game that should, by all rights, have a normal metagame.

Also, Mechlab, while not part of the metagame per se, is instrumental to the metagame. However, PGI did not mention Mechlab at all in regards to this forum. Essentially, this is the new General Discussion. You can talk about anything that doesn't fit somewhere else, and even stuff that should be somewhere else.

Consumables? Gameplay Balance or Mechs and Loadouts. Premium time, rewards, decor? Anything worth discussing is either going to end up in Mechs and Loadouts, or in Suggestions.

CBill/MC economy? There is none. MC is a fixed price; items are a fixed price; CBills and items are unlimited; players cannot trade, buy from, or sell to one another. There is no economy. Anything relating to CBills or MC is probably going to be better off in Suggestions.

[Rofl]

"The highest level of strategy in many complex games, metagame refers to any aspect of strategy that involves thinking about what your opponent is thinking you are thinking."

I like this definition. It's not the only definition but when I am referring to the metagame, usually this is what I am talking about.

​It's playing the game of strategy outside the game itself. It's deciphering the current flavor of the week build and making choices based on that. It's running tactics directly against what you think others will be doing before they do it.

You think assaults are superpopular now and just want to brawl in the center? Run a light mech and play capwarrior online. Soon the flavor of the week is running lights to defeat what used to be the assault FotW, so now you run a light-hunting mech. Soon there's more mechs designed to kill lights than to cap, so you run assaults to blow them up while staying alive. Then, lights come back to cap since there are so many assaults.

It's usually not a closed loop like this, especially with the game in question being in beta and therefore very malleable, but there is some semblance of understand what is popular and how to counter it, or even what is not popular and avoiding mechs built to kill that.

It's not the only definition, but it is a definition.

Edited by Rofl, 05 May 2013 - 05:29 PM.

[Victor Morson]

The word "meta" and "metagame" gets thrown around a lot incorrectly around here, in terms of not liking the flavor-of-the-month-weapons. I've even been guilty of using it, just because everyone has.

That said, it's not what the metagame actually is. That is, in fact, as PGI described.

[Jestun]

Victor Morson, on 04 May 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

The word "meta" and "metagame" gets thrown around a lot incorrectly around here

Not just meta and not just here.

P2W & immersion are two other terms which are regularly twisted to fit the posters argument despite not actually applying to the situation.

[Sable Dove]

Victor Morson, on 04 May 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

The word "meta" and "metagame" gets thrown around a lot incorrectly around here, in terms of not liking the flavor-of-the-month-weapons. I've even been guilty of using it, just because everyone has.

That said, it's not what the metagame actually is. That is, in fact, as PGI described.

"Metagame" gets tossed around correctly a lot. The commonly known, and most often used definition is the high-level strategy of countering tactics/builds/weapons. The counter becomes very popular, and a counter to it eventually replaces it, and so on. It's the game beyond the game, so to speak. Most popular games are not complex enough to have a deep metagame, which I suppose is why people aren't as familiar with the term as they should be.
The flavour-of-the-patch weapon/build/strategy is part of a metagame. However, due to a lack of balance, the metagame does not evolve on its own, as there is almost always something that is clearly overpowered, and has no counter other than more of it on the other team. If the game were balanced better, this forum would have a use, as it would be a discussion of popular builds/strategies, and ways to specifically counter them.


What PGI described is a bunch of stuff that either fits better in another subforum, or is not worth discussing.

[Dauphni]

Discussions like these are what happens when you don't give children a proper education. The word metagame is simply the English word game paired with the Greek prefix μετά, which in contemporary use has acquired the meaning of the recursive thing about the thing, so it is the game about the game. It's really not that hard.

[Teralitha]

Oh there is a meta... but it often changes with new features. Since it changes so often, its hard to define what MWO's meta is. A more defined meta will be established when the game is "released" and new features/content/balance changes become less and less drastic.

Edited by Teralitha, 07 May 2013 - 05:27 AM.

[Mechteric]

I hate the term 'meta' and want it to die. You're either playing the game for fun, playing the game to win, or not playing the game at all. There is no 'meta', only Zul.

[Multitallented]

That's pretty hilarious that IGP doesn't understand the word metagame.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

There is no metagame. There is Rock and Paper, Scissors got nerfed, and Spock and Lizard months (years) away.

[Straften]

Sable Dove, on 03 May 2013 - 11:53 PM, said:

Neither of those definitions fits with PGI's examples of what to discuss. None of which are part of any sort of metagame. Except maybe consumables, but that's more core gameplay than metagame. Maybe if they called it 'Mechlab Discussion'? Maybe 'Non-gameplay Content.'

I recommend making a postive suggestion thread about this, focusing on why a rename would help the player base know where to post. PM me a link and I'll support it if it isn't a PGI hate thread.

[Stormfury]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 08 May 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

There is no metagame. There is Rock and Paper, Scissors got nerfed, and Spock and Lizard months (years) away.

Here's something positive...

I love the Big Bang Reference

[jakucha]

Because they added a focused avenue of discussion doesn't necessarily mean they know nothing on the subject. People would be complaining if they didn't have somewhere to talk about it, and people still complain when they do have somewhere to talk about it, heh.

Now most people are just arguing semantics, a very common occurrence here.

Edited by jakucha, 10 May 2013 - 07:16 AM.

[Syrkres]

I personally like the Meta-game "Whack-a-mole" when trying to form a group.

Best game around...