|
from the liquipedia thread I posted this.
On June 06 2009 10:58 AttackZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2009 10:06 Kwark wrote:On June 06 2009 09:24 sixghost wrote:On June 06 2009 08:47 Kwark wrote:On June 06 2009 06:28 Chill wrote:On June 06 2009 04:05 Kwark wrote:
Personally a pet project of mine are the metagame topics. I love those but as a Protoss only player I can't write more than a one sided approach to how to exploit the metagame. I'm very much looking forward to seeing how they evolve when people with different experience to mine start editting. Do you understand what metagame means? If so, please expand this thought. A simple example would be mutalisk openings ZvT. I am aware that Zergs use mutalisks to influence the Terran's timing, when he pushes, when he expands etc all by moving them around to create threat and get in the Terran players head. But I'm not aware of how they know when to do what and why. That's not what metagame means. I think that's just more of a history of the matchup. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding you. My understanding of metagame is the part of the game played out in the heads of the players, rather than the tactics or strategy. Take July's 5 pool against BeSt in Game 1 of the OSL finals, establishing the psychological upper hand and throwing BeSt off balance. The 5 pool itself was an in-game strategy but the "I'm July and we're gonna play this my way and I'm going to win" mentality it created was a metagame strategy. Your understanding is wrong. The meta-game is referring to the cutting edge practices in pro gaming that alter the choice of the game. Example; terran is going 1factory/starport against zergs 12hat/11pool/10gas on destination. The meta-game on that map dictates that zerg must scout the sides of the map and behind his natural with overlords to avoid all of the possible proxies, along with making sure that an scv isn't mining out the patch. Now terran must also prepare against the current zerg vs wallin/fastgas on destination, which involves a den before lair and anywhere from 2 to 8 hydralisks with or without rang, which can potentially bust open the wall and delay any factory/starport timing harasses. So terran must be prepared to scout throughly enough so that he can potentially revert to fast tank/siege -> expo but at the same time he must make sure he has an ebay AND an armory up fast enough to not die to the all so common muta switch, which results in a deadly muta/hydra combo. This is meta-game because it is 'cutting edge' and is used at the highest level of play. Six months ago it didn't exist and in six months it will not longer exist. I didn't even go into all of the meta-game for zvt factory vs 2hat/gas, just a very simple one, but that entire metagame dynamically changes constantly as new early-earlymidgame trends emerge and then disperse. Another example is 8rax -> mech, that dynamically altered the metagame on all 2 player maps forever, since living threw the 8rax and keeping your expo doesn't mean that 1 vulture won't sneak by and ruin your economy un-alterably, the way this affects zergs metagame is that they no longer can say "ok I lived with drones and lings Ez no sunken" , now zerg must sunken regardless because of the threat, also zerg must now scout all corners of the map, while trying not to overextend too far and letting a vulture in. These things weren't a part of the meta-game zvt 1 year ago at all.
the meta game is simply the most common and cutting edge early-earlymidgame builds/scoutingpatterns/tactics. That is how it is meant in starcraft.
|
Awww AttackZerg beat me to it 
|
On June 06 2009 12:03 konadora wrote:
Sounds like when newfags started spamming memes everywhere
Let's keep the shitty 4chan garbage on 4chan. This site isn't quite as full of teenagers/uglies as 4chan is, so let's try to keep it that way. We may be nerds, but not nearly as bad as that shit awful site.
|
Oh dear it's the whole "what is cheese" discussion all over again.
|
United Kingdom643 Posts
On June 06 2009 18:43 RANDOMCL wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2009 12:03 konadora wrote:
Sounds like when newfags started spamming memes everywhere Let's keep the shitty 4chan garbage on 4chan. This site isn't quite as full of teenagers/uglies as 4chan is, so let's try to keep it that way. We may be nerds, but not nearly as bad as that shit awful site.
A guy with 11 post telling a guy with +8000 posts what this site is about o_O
|
Meta
A prefix meaning one level of description higher. If X is some concept then meta-X is data about, or processes operating on, X.
For example, a metasyntax is syntax for specifying syntax, metalanguage is a language used to discuss language, meta-data is data about data, and meta-reasoning is reasoning about reasoning.
This is difficult to explain briefly, but much hacker humour turns on deliberate confusion between meta-levels.
Metagame isn't actually a real word. Used in StarCraft, I've always taken it to mean what players are planning and the battle of ideas of what is best to do in a situation where your options are affected by your opponents options and mindset. Meta-game is when someone rightly predicts a greedy build, and so he does a 9pool to destroy it before even scouting. Luck is going the right way first, metagame is deciding the latest time you can send your scout.
If we use the philosophical definition of meta, it's the game that dictates the game. Which I think is consistent with what I thought it was. As far as being overused... early game, mid game, late game... Meta game is most often talked about before the early game, and thus it has a logical place. Get used to it.
|
On June 06 2009 19:03 exeprime wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2009 18:43 RANDOMCL wrote:On June 06 2009 12:03 konadora wrote:
Sounds like when newfags started spamming memes everywhere Let's keep the shitty 4chan garbage on 4chan. This site isn't quite as full of teenagers/uglies as 4chan is, so let's try to keep it that way. We may be nerds, but not nearly as bad as that shit awful site. A guy with 11 post telling a guy with +8000 posts what this site is about o_O
You know konadora has only been here a few months right? lol I mean, he's great and I love his translations, but FakeSteve (an actual veteran) is gonna have some words if he uses too many memes  Except of course that his post was obviously in a mocking tone.
|
On June 07 2009 00:29 Chef wrote:Show nested quote +
Meta
A prefix meaning one level of description higher. If X is some concept then meta-X is data about, or processes operating on, X.
For example, a metasyntax is syntax for specifying syntax, metalanguage is a language used to discuss language, meta-data is data about data, and meta-reasoning is reasoning about reasoning.
This is difficult to explain briefly, but much hacker humour turns on deliberate confusion between meta-levels.
Metagame isn't actually a real word. Used in StarCraft, I've always taken it to mean what players are planning and the battle of ideas of what is best to do in a situation where your options are affected by your opponents options and mindset. Meta-game is when someone rightly predicts a greedy build, and so he does a 9pool to destroy it before even scouting. Luck is going the right way first, metagame is deciding the latest time you can send your scout. If we use the philosophical definition of meta, it's the game that dictates the game. Which I think is consistent with what I thought it was. As far as being overused... early game, mid game, late game... Meta game is most often talked about before the early game, and thus it has a logical place. Get used to it.
I think you misinterpreted what you quoted. The game that dictates the game sounds right, but the example you used would be a result of game sense...understanding the metagame somewhat. The metagame itself is what allows for that player's 9 pool to work against his opponent's greedy build. That itself isn't metagame.
|
United States43352 Posts
On June 07 2009 00:29 Chef wrote:Show nested quote +
Meta
A prefix meaning one level of description higher. If X is some concept then meta-X is data about, or processes operating on, X.
For example, a metasyntax is syntax for specifying syntax, metalanguage is a language used to discuss language, meta-data is data about data, and meta-reasoning is reasoning about reasoning.
This is difficult to explain briefly, but much hacker humour turns on deliberate confusion between meta-levels.
Metagame isn't actually a real word. Used in StarCraft, I've always taken it to mean what players are planning and the battle of ideas of what is best to do in a situation where your options are affected by your opponents options and mindset. Meta-game is when someone rightly predicts a greedy build, and so he does a 9pool to destroy it before even scouting. Luck is going the right way first, metagame is deciding the latest time you can send your scout. If we use the philosophical definition of meta, it's the game that dictates the game. Which I think is consistent with what I thought it was. As far as being overused... early game, mid game, late game... Meta game is most often talked about before the early game, and thus it has a logical place. Get used to it.
This is what I thought it meant but according to AttackZerg and Chill and the majority it is something else.
|
On June 07 2009 01:43 PH wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2009 00:29 Chef wrote:
Meta
A prefix meaning one level of description higher. If X is some concept then meta-X is data about, or processes operating on, X.
For example, a metasyntax is syntax for specifying syntax, metalanguage is a language used to discuss language, meta-data is data about data, and meta-reasoning is reasoning about reasoning.
This is difficult to explain briefly, but much hacker humour turns on deliberate confusion between meta-levels.
Metagame isn't actually a real word. Used in StarCraft, I've always taken it to mean what players are planning and the battle of ideas of what is best to do in a situation where your options are affected by your opponents options and mindset. Meta-game is when someone rightly predicts a greedy build, and so he does a 9pool to destroy it before even scouting. Luck is going the right way first, metagame is deciding the latest time you can send your scout. If we use the philosophical definition of meta, it's the game that dictates the game. Which I think is consistent with what I thought it was. As far as being overused... early game, mid game, late game... Meta game is most often talked about before the early game, and thus it has a logical place. Get used to it. I think you misinterpreted what you quoted. The game that dictates the game sounds right, but the example you used would be a result of game sense...understanding the metagame somewhat. The metagame itself is what allows for that player's 9 pool to work against his opponent's greedy build. That itself isn't metagame.
I didn't think I said that... Of course the literal 9 pool isn't metagame... That's what I meant by describing the opponents mindset and options. What the opponent normally does on this map, what they think you will do, etc. It's the game beyond what's happening on the screen.
Game sense is more appropriate for things that look like a gut feeling. As if the player just instinctively knew something was up. You feel it sometimes in your own games, especially before you get obsessed with mechanics. Technically it's the same thing as metagame, but when someone says metagame they're meaning something of a more calculated connotation. Not a gut feeling, but a very intelligent 'this player is going to do this because he's predictable and I will punish him for it.'
|
Both of your definations are incorrect for how the term is applied to starcraft.
Metagame is kind of like saying 'current early game trends,tactics and styles' and their implications at the highest level and the ways they are currently responded too.
It isn't hard guys t.t
|
On June 07 2009 14:37 AttackZerg wrote:
Both of your definations are incorrect for how the term is applied to starcraft.
Metagame is kind of like saying 'current early game trends,tactics and styles' and their implications at the highest level and the ways they are currently responded too.
It isn't hard guys t.t
Right...it's the overarching play of the game...it tracks trends and sort of the "standard" or normative play of the time.
You can't say things like, "oh he read the metagame wrong" or something like that...
|
On June 07 2009 18:36 PH wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2009 14:37 AttackZerg wrote:
Both of your definations are incorrect for how the term is applied to starcraft.
Metagame is kind of like saying 'current early game trends,tactics and styles' and their implications at the highest level and the ways they are currently responded too.
It isn't hard guys t.t
Right...it's the overarching play of the game...it tracks trends and sort of the "standard" or normative play of the time. You can't say things like, "oh he read the metagame wrong" or something like that...
Actually you could say that if the game at hand was Magic: the Gathering =P
|
On June 07 2009 01:56 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2009 00:29 Chef wrote:
Meta
A prefix meaning one level of description higher. If X is some concept then meta-X is data about, or processes operating on, X.
For example, a metasyntax is syntax for specifying syntax, metalanguage is a language used to discuss language, meta-data is data about data, and meta-reasoning is reasoning about reasoning.
This is difficult to explain briefly, but much hacker humour turns on deliberate confusion between meta-levels.
Metagame isn't actually a real word. Used in StarCraft, I've always taken it to mean what players are planning and the battle of ideas of what is best to do in a situation where your options are affected by your opponents options and mindset. Meta-game is when someone rightly predicts a greedy build, and so he does a 9pool to destroy it before even scouting. Luck is going the right way first, metagame is deciding the latest time you can send your scout. If we use the philosophical definition of meta, it's the game that dictates the game. Which I think is consistent with what I thought it was. As far as being overused... early game, mid game, late game... Meta game is most often talked about before the early game, and thus it has a logical place. Get used to it. This is what I thought it meant but according to AttackZerg and Chill and the majority it is something else.
i agree with this direction overall, chill/attackzerg dont have ultimate rights on calling the definition lol!
|
On June 07 2009 14:37 AttackZerg wrote:
Both of your definations are incorrect for how the term is applied to starcraft.
Metagame is kind of like saying 'current early game trends,tactics and styles' and their implications at the highest level and the ways they are currently responded too.
It isn't hard guys t.t
Maybe it's not hard, but it doesn't follow the definition of the prefix, or the definition of metagame in other sports.
Wikipedia
Metagaming 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.
In simple terms, using out-of-game information, or resources, to affect one's in-game decisions.
That includes thinking about trends and standard gameplay, but it doesn't disclude thinking about the players current mindset, whether he's a macro player or a strategic player, whether he seems confident or nervous, whether his dog just died or he just won the lottery. That's what metagame is if you take the prefix as what it is.
I'm just not sure why metagame is suddenly something else, just for StarCraft, when if you listen to some like tasteless casting, he doesn't seem to be using your kind of redundant definition (it's another word for standard play, and ideal counters).
|
I know what the defination of metagame is lol.
I have been trying to inform all of you how it has been used in starcraft.
lol.
|
I dunno about metagame, but "baller" and "pandabearguy" (omg I hate this.. what is funny about it even? Yeah, it was funny the first time in Chief vs Savior or w/e game it was.. but now.. give it a rest, ok?) are definitely overused... I wish people would stop using that.
|
I think that the way the "majority" is trying to use the word doesn't properly use the prefix "meta", and is not a good way to utilize it.
Just because the majority uses it doesn't make it right.
Among English speakers in the world, the English language is drifting away from using the subjunctive mood of the verb "is", and is shifting towards only using the indicative.
The subjunctive mood is used counterfactually (or hypothetically/conditionally):
"If I were to eat now, I would spoil my appetite"
NOT
"If I was to have left then, I would have been late" or something like that.
The indicative mood refers to past tense:
"I was late because I missed the train"
or
"I lost my appetite because I ate too late".
Many, many, MANY people (even here on TL) make that grammatical error. It's a noticeable trend that is talked about in linguistics and linguistic and analytic philosophy. It also drive me up the fucking wall.
Just because there is a trend towards this, the trend doesn't make it right.
In a similar and somewhat parallel fashion, I don't think it's right to tack on your own usage of the prefix "meta". It, according to wikipedia (the fastest and most convenient resource I could find, "is a prefix used in English to indicate a concept which is an abstraction from another concept, used to complete or add to the latter."
Applying that, the "meta" of a game of starcraft upholds the ideal of that game. It is what you compare every starcraft game that is played against. It incorporates trends, build orders that work, strategies that work, mechanics developed/used at that time, etc. The metagame shifts as the maps used changes, and as the overall skill and potential of the player pool rises.
Don't make up your own definitions, and don't tag my definition as "redundant". I don't even see how that word applies...make sure you understand the definition of words before you use them.
I read up on that wikipedia article on metagaming, and I think you're missing its key point.
"Similarly, a specific political situation such as the passage of a law might be thought of as a game, with the metagame being the larger picture into which that law fits." That sentence is used to illustrate an example of how a specific event or situation fits into the larger metagame. The metagame isn't something so narrow as the mindset of the players at the time of the game, nor the external factors. Those are parts of the game. The METAgame is the larger picture. It is how the player would be affected by those conditions, it is how his mindset affects his game. It is not the immediate conditions at the moment, but how they apply in the bigger picture.
I disagree with the article's section in the "Computer Games" section. That's exactly the kind of shallow usage of the word that I dislike, and was outspoken against since the OP.
Technically you could argue for there being a metagame within a single game, but that's going to get you into a Russian Doll situation where everything is further reducible down to an unforeseeable end.
I suggest not destroying this word and making it some cheap slang. I would be so bold as to argue that people are throwing it around as much as they do because syntactically, it adds a connotation of depth to their discussions about video games...which I find incredibly stupid.
Use a word properly if you're going to use it.
|
On June 09 2009 07:11 PH wrote:
Applying that, the "meta" of a game of starcraft upholds the ideal of that game. It is what you compare every starcraft game that is played against. It incorporates trends, build orders that work, strategies that work, mechanics developed/used at that time, etc. The metagame shifts as the maps used changes, and as the overall skill and potential of the player pool rises.
I like this definition. It is easy and useful. This is also exactly the same definition used in Guildwars. On that game's community everyone understand the word and use it all the time. They use "metagame" us much as we use "macro" and "apm". And you don't see people saying "I think that word is overused" there only because people don't understand it.
I just didn't agree with what you said here:
On June 09 2009 07:11 PH wrote:
Just because the majority uses it doesn't make it right.
[...]
Just because there is a trend towards this, the trend doesn't make it right. Isn't that how languages evolve in the first place? It is the people who makes the language. If the majority is using word X to mean Y, then dictionary writers won't say "oh that is wrong", no, they will just include Y in X's definition on a newer version of the dictionary. It is the dictionary that adapts to what the people are saying, not the opposite.
I know dozens of examples of words that were added to the portuguese dictionary in the last 5 or so years, only because of the recent globalization caused by the internet. Words like "deletar" (to delete) can now be found on my language's dictionary only because the people were using it too much, it became part of it.
|
On June 09 2009 08:31 VIB wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2009 07:11 PH wrote:
Applying that, the "meta" of a game of starcraft upholds the ideal of that game. It is what you compare every starcraft game that is played against. It incorporates trends, build orders that work, strategies that work, mechanics developed/used at that time, etc. The metagame shifts as the maps used changes, and as the overall skill and potential of the player pool rises.
I like this definition. It is easy and useful. This is also exactly the same definition used in Guildwars. On that game's community everyone understand the word and use it all the time. They use "metagame" us much as we use "macro" and "apm". And you don't see people saying "I think that word is overused" there only because people don't understand it. I just didn't agree with what you said here: Show nested quote +On June 09 2009 07:11 PH wrote:
Just because the majority uses it doesn't make it right.
[...]
Just because there is a trend towards this, the trend doesn't make it right. Isn't that how languages evolve in the first place? It is the people who makes the language. If the majority is using word X to mean Y, then dictionary writers won't say "oh that is wrong", no, they will just include Y in X's definition on a newer version of the dictionary. It is the dictionary that adapts to what the people are saying, not the opposite. I know dozens of examples of words that were added to the portuguese dictionary in the last 5 or so years, only because of the recent globalization caused by the internet. Words like "deletar" (to delete) can now be found on my language's dictionary only because the people were using it too much, it became part of it.
I have no problem with words like "blog" or something of the sort coming into common usage. Those are new words to describe new things that flat out didn't exist before.
I don't like twisting or utterly destroying existing words/meanings to force them to fit into some convenient usage.
The definition the relative dissidents have been pushing here have been taking the word "metagame" and have been applying a usage and definition that makes absolutely no sense to me. They don't understand what the prefix means, how it should be used, and are simply tagging a relatively arbitrary meaning to it.
That's not right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
