|
Does anyone else think this word is starting to get overused outside of TL?
Tasteless uses it quite a bit in his commentaries (and sometimes somewhat awkwardly in my opinion). Ever since then it's been fucking everywhere on video comments on youtube and GOM...which is pissing me off...especially as they're not fucking using the word correctly.
Metagame refers to sort of the core of the game's play dynamics. How whatever matchup plays out on a theoretical level is a part of the metagame. You're referring to the metagame of a TvZ when you say that zerg is weaker in the midgame until he techs to hive and defilers come out. You're somewhat referring to the metagame when you talk about how terran can't push out safely until his first vessel is out, or terran can't get map control until the muta harass threat is over.
That kind of thing is metagame...NOT "Mind's decision about the metagame was poor, he got his 3rd very late and that push was simply not an effective way to play against how Effort played."
So bad.
You compare what is considered as SC's "metagame" to what occurs in the actual game...the actual played game is what affirms and reaffirms what we accept as the "metagame". The metagame shifts as maps change and new timings/strategies/builds/etc are figured out to tackle one advantage/disadvantage or imbalance or another.
What're your thoughts? I've never really thought deeply about the meaning of the term, and am just applying to SC what is thought of as the "metaphysics" of something in philosophy. There's just something that's implicitly WRONG with how kids throw around that word.
  
|
United States11390 Posts
|
On June 06 2009 11:43 Harem wrote:
yomi
NO YOU
|
|
|
I've never actually paid attention to it. I've only ever used the word while roleplaying, referring to the use of out-of-game knowledge in game.
But you know which one really grinds my gears? The use of 'literally' to help exaggerate something... -_-
|
United States2186 Posts
Metagame is a standard term that goes beyond starcraft, but yeah it is misused a lot in SC for whatever reason.
Metagame is the current favored strategies in a matchup.
i,e in 2007 the TvP metagame was 1 fact fe -> 4 fact -> 3rd base.
After Flash tore up Bacchus, Gom S4, and GSI with his 'Flash build,' the tvp metagame slowly shifted towards his build and the 4 fact -> 3rd build died out.
That was a metagame shift. There really isn't anything more to it.
|
i've always thought of a metagame as "the game outside the game". for instance, mindgames are a metagame
|
Metagame is an existing term, you can't just randomly extrapolate from another word with the same prefix and decide your definition is correct. I haven't been watching any English commentaries so I can't really say whether it's being used incorrectly, but the quote you gave could very well be metagame.
If you could play a "blind" Starcraft match on a new map, in which your opponent's identity is unknown and is a randomly chosen player from a randomly chosen period of SC history, then all you can consider in your decisions are your knowledge of the game and whatever information you gather in-game.
Now, anything external sources of information that are added back into this scenario comprise the metagame. Builds you know are popular in certain matchups at a given time, knowledge of the history of strategies for certain maps, knowledge of your opponent's playstyle all are factors external to the game itself but that a good player will take into account. Hence, "meta"game.
|
its a made up word lol
whoever made it up can use it however they want
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
Sounds like when newfags started spamming memes everywhere
|
On June 06 2009 11:50 RoieTRS wrote:
i've always thought of a metagame as "the game outside the game". for instance, mindgames are a metagame
This is how I've always seen it.
+ Show Spoiler [What I think of when I hear metagame] +That game he had a build order advantage, going 13 core against JangBis 17 core. Faster core means faster range. Faster range means huge early game micro advantage which in turn means ramp contain if gate numbers are equal. That means that JangBi has to 2 gate, which he did, which in turn means that Bisu can get away with 1 gate pressure into exp into mass gate.
That small build order advantage can be extrapolated out as far as Bisu's much faster expo. Both players knew this, JangBi going mass goon and trying to break the exp before it had any chance to repay Bisu's investment in it. But Bisu's excellent micro to defend it won the game.
In short, the opening builds gave Bisu an economic advantage which could only be negated if JangBi outmicroed Bisu at a critical time. He couldn't. On November 22 2008 19:02 Kwark wrote:
Build order win.
The 99 proxy build gives short term unit advantage while the 1 gate 1 zee core build has a much stronger economy. So the defender has two priorities. Firstly, removing the unit deficit. A second gateway will do this but that takes time and if he loses too many units before it kicks in then it won't matter. That leads to the second priority. Survival. He has to put off battle for as long as he has a unit disadvantage because otherwise he'll only be able to do bad trades.
JangBi dealt with the situation perfectly, using a shield battery and probes for short term survival and a second gate for medium term survival. His superior economy should have told. However Bisu knows exactly how JangBi will deal with the situation, a shield battery, and counters it with his own. This means that JangBi loses control of his base and while he did a good job postponing battle and delaying his new zealots were always vulnerable and his gateway could be sniped if he backed off too far.
JangBi was again at a build order disadvantage. Again JangBi reacted perfectly to the situation. Unfortunately for him Bisu knew how he'd counter and countered that.
GG On November 22 2008 19:20 Kwark wrote:
Both open entirely standard and solid. Zealots to protect against any lameness on an open map like this and then a solid 2 gates then robo. If either try a mass gate allin build it'll get owned so hard. If either try a dark rush it'll get owned by obs and then reavergoon push. Solid mirror.
However JangBi wants an advantage and skips a shuttle in exchange for a faster nexus. Bisu doesn't bother with the nexus and moves in for the kill. JangBi took a stupid risk here because a reaver in a shuttle is worth far more than one without. The battle opens with Bisu getting a solid hit on JangBi's reaver forcing it to retreat, then wasting a load of goon shots and then hitting groups of goons over and over. In case anyone forgets just how much damage that reaver is doing, when it hits a pair of goons in splash it just did as much damage as 10 goon shots.
JangBi's build wasn't that risky, he had a shuttle coming, 2 reavers out and 3 gateways down compared to Bisu's 2 gateway, no exp and 1 reaver in shuttle. Had Bisu hesitated for a few seconds that would have been enough to win it for JangBi. Had Bisu lost his nerve and just tried to harass while counter expanding JangBi would have won. But Bisu read JangBi correctly and understood the situation perfectly. He knew that for 20 seconds he had a game winning advantage and he took it.
GG
|
yeah metagame is the theoretical way the game is played, and obviously therefore the mind games. I.e the meta game may slowly force tvz on a map to be more macro based, but theres stil the capacity for t to do a strong early push. So the current meta game is blah blah into macro, but the z has to be wary of the meta game and look out for any changing possibilities. So metagame= theoretical play/changing dynamics of play, and therefore the re usability of past meta game. Shifts. Not explaining myself well, doesn't matter. Threads to bitch about words are ultimately pointless.
|
It may be a made up word... but it's been used in chess for years. And I really have to disagree with the OP (just a little bit!) about what it means on one count: The standard builds, the way you know the game "should" work - that's part of the game. It's defined by the game rules and the ability of the players.
Metagame refers - or should - to things outside the bare facts of the game that nonetheless influence it.
The way favored styles gradually shift - often because new openings and continuations are discovered to be superior, but sometimes because a player is so successful with a given style that everybody wants to try it - that's the metagame.
The mindgames you play every time you open: some players will kill you with standard openings but die to variation, while others will punish you for the weaknesses in less common variations even if their standard play isn't as solid - that's the metagame.
The metagame is the collection of everything you know about how the game is played - not should be, but is - that will help you make the best decision, not for some abstract "perfect game" but for this particular game, against this player, under these conditions.
To finish off, here's an example: metagaming well is fantasy going 8rax against Flash in the WL playoffs.
EDIT: Oh yes, and PH is right, Tasteless was abusing the word. Mind's decision was simply a bad counter to EffOrt's strategy, it had nothing to do with any metagame.
|
On June 06 2009 11:52 rgfdxm wrote:
Metagame is an existing term, you can't just randomly extrapolate from another word with the same prefix and decide your definition is correct. I haven't been watching any English commentaries so I can't really say whether it's being used incorrectly, but the quote you gave could very well be metagame.
If you could play a "blind" Starcraft match on a new map, in which your opponent's identity is unknown and is a randomly chosen player from a randomly chosen period of SC history, then all you can consider in your decisions are your knowledge of the game and whatever information you gather in-game.
Now, anything external sources of information that are added back into this scenario comprise the metagame. Builds you know are popular in certain matchups at a given time, knowledge of the history of strategies for certain maps, knowledge of your opponent's playstyle all are factors external to the game itself but that a good player will take into account. Hence, "meta"game.
Just reinforcing this post. But yea people do take words with somewhat agreed meanings and give them new ones, just the way language works.
edit - pretty good too Musoeun
|
Seems like a rather pointless and confusing term to me. It's hard to know exactly what you're referring to by it since the "metagame" is usually in the process of shifting.
|
I think if every1 on TL were to tell you the definition of metagame you would most likely get different answer for each person.
The word becomes what is commonly refers to and that's just how English works in general.
|
Metagame is a word that exists long before starcraft. As with any word on any language, it's meaning is created by the people who used it. The way we use the word today is very different from it's origin. And many people use the word differently in different situations. Just like any other word....
In same games metagame means one thing. In another games it means another.
If you ever played GuildWars you know that there they use the word frequently and it has a very well defined meaning that every player knows: it simply means the current set of strategies that are being currently used a lot by the players. The metagame can change as people find better strategies or simply because some abilities were changed due to a patch.
Link to Guide to GW Metagame
In chess the metagame are the decisions and mind games outside of the board.
But in starcraft it seems like the meaning of the word is still unclear. There is no consensus like in guildwars or chess. So some people just use it for whatever they feel like it. Saying "this" or "that" is the correct meaning is bullshit. The correct meaning is whatever people use the word for.
Language is not made by the dictionary. Language is made by the people. The dictionary simply reflects what the people are saying.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metagame
|
I think you have it backwards, OP. The thing you say is metagame isn't and the thing you say isn't metagame is.
The metagame is the popular strategies being used. So you could say the TvZ metagame got shook up awhile ago when fantasy reinvigorated the use of mech.
When you say That kind of thing is metagame...NOT "Mind's decision about the metagame was poor, he got his 3rd very late and that push was simply not an effective way to play against how Effort played."
I think this is a metagame decision. Metagame is kind of... choosing your build/strategy. Like if a pro Korean player tried to use a build from 2000 and got stomped because of it we could say he lacked a good sense of the current metagame, and strategies that old aren't as good anymore.
|
On June 06 2009 15:14 Nadagast wrote:I think you have it backwards, OP. The thing you say is metagame isn't and the thing you say isn't metagame is. The metagame is the popular strategies being used. So you could say the TvZ metagame got shook up awhile ago when fantasy reinvigorated the use of mech. When you say Show nested quote +That kind of thing is metagame...NOT "Mind's decision about the metagame was poor, he got his 3rd very late and that push was simply not an effective way to play against how Effort played." I think this is a metagame decision. Metagame is kind of... choosing your build/strategy. Like if a pro Korean player tried to use a build from 2000 and got stomped because of it we could say he lacked a good sense of the current metagame, and strategies that old aren't as good anymore.
No, I don't think what constitutes the metagame of starcraft in the broader sense of the word (which is what I'm referring to here) can be used like that game by game. The metagame is constituted by trends in overall gameplay. There was a huge metagame shift when the archon/zealot timing push became popular in PvZ that was referred to as the "perfect build order" by some Koreans. That didn't last very long as zerg play changed to account for that. There was an even bigger shift with Boxer's and Fantasy's valk usage and Fantasy's mech usage that still is in effect today. Those are shifts in metagame.
You could apply "metagame" to a specific game in the way you're talking about, referring to the overarching dynamics of the individual game, but that's a bit confusing and in my opinion you'd be using an overly complicated word for no real reason and to no real effect.
|
I see what you're saying, I don't think the word is that confusing though once you understand it
|
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.
|
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 States42134 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.
|
I'm so confused. I thought I was the one complaining the prefix 'meta' was being used improperly.
Meta -Dictionary.com
A prefix appearing in loanwords from Greek, with the meanings “after,” “along with,” “beyond,” “among,” “behind,” and productive in English on the Greek model: metacarpus; metagenesis; metalinguistics.
--
One level of description up. A metasyntactic variable is a variable in notation used to describe syntax, and meta-language is language used to describe language.
How that means trends and typical build orders only, I have no idea. What's beyond the game but the player's thoughts?
|
First time I ever heard the term it was in reference to some MTG thing like 10 years ago.
|
The first time I heard it was from a chess tutor. He used it in the same way the defination states it should, things beyond the game affecting it.
I learned its 'implied' meaning in broodwar like a year or so ago.
|
On June 09 2009 11:28 CharlieMurphy wrote:
First time I ever heard the term it was in reference to some MTG thing like 10 years ago.
that's cuz the word originated from card games
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
