On the issue of Metagaming

FischyJones · July 2022

ESO is facing the same issue every form of game has - Metagaming and its effect on how players partake in the ludic experience of the gameplay.
I’ll quickly recap what I come to understand as Metagaming, how it affects ESO (in my opinion as a player and as an "academic") and how to alleviate its influence on the player base and further development of ESOs gameplay and features
1 On the nature of Metagaming
1.1 What is Metagaming?
For my post I’ll define metagaming as the most efficient way to accomplish a specific or multiple specific goals defined by the game and by its players.
This can be accomplished by following certain strategies, using certain moves or by utilizing flaws in the systems of the game itself. Metagaming can be part of the ludic experience of playing the game, though the kind of experience depends on the effort necessary to partake in metagaming.

1.2 Soft-Metagaming or Metagaming by game design
The gameplay of ESO consists of serval smaller gameplay aspects like the combat, movement and questing subsystems. In my post I will focus mainly on the combat subsystem – its divide between class skills, weapon skills and additional skill-lines – and the interaction between different skill archetypes and how the design of ESOs combat system already dictates a form of Metagaming via its design. As I haven’t played all available classes and haven’t used all available skill lines – I’ll try to take a broad approach. Skills in ESO can be put in archetypes, which respond to the way they can be utilised the players. Those archetypes are flexible and can overlap.

• Interupts: Interupt and stun enemy caster
• Shields: Shield the user or party members
• Buffs: Skills that add buffs to the player or restore resources like health or magicka and Stamina
• Debuffs: Skills that add Debuffs or Remove buffs from enemies; Skills that add damage effects that trigger over time
• Direct Damage: Skills that inflict direct damage, either to a single or multiple target
• Damage over Time: Skills that inflict damage over a certain amount of time, to a single or multiple targets.
• Heals: Skills that heal the player or party members, applicable to a single or multiple targets.
• Spamables: Skills with low costs that can be spammed.
• Executes: Skills that inflict greater damage to low health targets

Those archetypes already dictate a form of metagaming by design, through their possible interactions during fights. The player buffs themselves, apply debuffs and DoT to their target and use spamable skills during the duration of the DoTs. If the target falls below certain health percentage execution skills finish the job.
This form of Metagaming is something I would describe as a soft form of metagaming. It’s not strictly enforced in regular content by the game and content can be done with no regards to the skill interaction. Content just will take considerably longer to be done with. Veteran Content and harder trials require the players to use the different combination of skill archetypes to finish encounters – by design of said encounters.

1.3 Peer driven Metagaming or Metagaming by the player community
As stated in the previous section the more advanced difficulties of ESOs content require the players to partake in the designed Metagame of combining skill archetypes to fight and finish harder content and its monsters. The designed Metagame can be further improved by combining the gameplay subsystems of player gear, gear sets and their effects on skills and performance, potions, mundus stones and champion points. Those combinations don’t relay on suggestion from the game itself, instead they are shaped by the player base and the kind of content the player is trying to finish. With clever combinations the player becomes able to ignore certain gameplay mechanics put in place to make advanced content difficult.

Following the peer driven Metagaming is much more difficult, than following the Metagame by design, as it is highly depended on the individual players peers and the requirements those peers have set up. Thus, it can divide the player base and influence the ludic experience negatively. The negative impact can increase if the peer driven Metagame relies on the ab(use) of certain gameplay mechanics which might relay on high hand eye coordination or other very specific sets of action.

On the opposite it can also greatly improve the ludic experience for some players, able to follow the peer driven Metagaming, as it is part of the ludic enjoyment of gaming to be able to push the rules and boundaries set up by the game.

2 Fixing the (peer driven) Meta
2.1 Why do we need to address and fix the peer driven Metagaming?
ESO is enjoyed by many players with different and diverse backgrounds. This should be considered at all times, while talking and thinking about possible fixes for the current state of affair. The difference in the backgrounds of the players influences their ability to finish certain forms of content in ESO.
This is something that will be hard to alleviate and will relay on player feedback. This feedback requires an atmosphere that is currently lacking in ESOs community – and it’s the job of the Community managers, moderators and ZOS itself to foster and nurture a atmosphere in which players with different abilities aren’t afraid to come forth with their experiences. Because if we ignore those players, we are going to lose them.
I personally wish for a better communication between the people who work on the game and the community. Because I personally find the already existing ways the players get informed about changes to lack substance and transparency. Again, those discussions can’t really work right now, because the atmosphere - be it in game and the forums - isn’t good and nourishing.

2.2 To unite, we need to divide
ESOs PvE and PvP content don’t play well together, and quite frankly never have. That is sadly one of the biggest oversights in the design of ESO. In the past, changes made to address PvE issues affected PvP negatively and vice versa. But this can be fixed – id love to say easily. To unite the player base of ESO we need a complete division between PvE and PvP content – a massive Overhaul of PvP content that affects all forms of skills, gear and other gameplay subsystems.

I personally would let skills keep their current skill archetypes, but adjust the values percentages and ways they affect others – solely in PvP areas and duels. That way it’s possible to make adjustments to skills in PvP or PvE without it affecting the other side of the player base.
The same divide will have to be made for gear, gear sets and potions/bufffood and maybe buffs to balance the different ways of playing PvE and PvP.

These changes will take a long time to be made, which is understandable, but it’s a necessary step to take, if the player base is to be pacified.

tsaescishoeshiner · July 2022

Contrary to what you suggest, I've come across a lot of welcoming and inclusive environments in ESO. A lot of guilds run content on normal that they explain to players who are newer/more casual/have different needs.

Not everyone needs to be able to complete a veteran DLC dungeon—the "veteran" part is a combat challenge for those interested in difficult combat. That said, many vet DLC dungeons are hard to finish with a build that isn't at least somewhat metagamed, and I wouldn't wanna run a hard one with a stranger playing a theme build.

That said, I was talking with some friends last night about how there's such a huge jump from normal to veteran, and that something in between would help a lot of players.

I think some more examples and specific suggestions would help strengthen your call for change.

blktauna · July 2022

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

That said, I was talking with some friends last night about how there's such a huge jump from normal to veteran, and that something in between would help a lot of players.

This right here is the needed change.

VaranisArano · July 2022

You can't "fix" player desire to find the most efficient methods for an organized PVE group to complete new content or to compete in PVP. That's just human nature.

FischyJones · July 2022

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

Contrary to what you suggest, I've come across a lot of welcoming and inclusive environments in ESO. A lot of guilds run content on normal that they explain to players who are newer/more casual/have different needs.

Not everyone needs to be able to complete a veteran DLC dungeon—the "veteran" part is a combat challenge for those interested in difficult combat. That said, many vet DLC dungeons are hard to finish with a build that isn't at least somewhat metagamed, and I wouldn't wanna run a hard one with a stranger playing a theme build.

That said, I was talking with some friends last night about how there's such a huge jump from normal to veteran, and that something in between would help a lot of players.

I think some more examples and specific suggestions would help strengthen your call for change.

blktauna wrote: »

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

That said, I was talking with some friends last night about how there's such a huge jump from normal to veteran, and that something in between would help a lot of players.

This right here is the needed change.

VaranisArano wrote: »

You can't "fix" player desire to find the most efficient methods for an organized PVE group to complete new content or to compete in PVP. That's just human nature.

Did any of you guys read what I have written?

Because it doesnt seems to be that way.

MEBengalsFan2001 · July 2022

I see way more metagaming on PVE side than PVP. In PVP you almost have to have a meta build just to survive but PVE IMO is more toxic when you don't run the latest meta build for PVE group content.

I really dis like metagaming in general and prefer to walk my own path and find what gear works for me for the roles I play.

I also avoid cheese whenever I see it; its why I avoided DC and currently Oakensoul. I am using PlagueBreaker currently on my Warden but I was using since launch on my Warden and probably will continue to use it after it is adjusted.

Devs need to tweak gear to make it so all gear can be considered equally but we can't do that presently because of the meta mindset.

Stamicka · July 2022

FischyJones wrote: »

2 Fixing the (peer driven) Meta
2.1 Why do we need to address and fix the peer driven Metagaming?
ESO is enjoyed by many players with different and diverse backgrounds. This should be considered at all times, while talking and thinking about possible fixes for the current state of affair. The difference in the backgrounds of the players influences their ability to finish certain forms of content in ESO.
This is something that will be hard to alleviate and will relay on player feedback. This feedback requires an atmosphere that is currently lacking in ESOs community – and it’s the job of the Community managers, moderators and ZOS itself to foster and nurture a atmosphere in which players with different abilities aren’t afraid to come forth with their experiences. Because if we ignore those players, we are going to lose them.
I personally wish for a better communication between the people who work on the game and the community. Because I personally find the already existing ways the players get informed about changes to lack substance and transparency. Again, those discussions can’t really work right now, because the atmosphere - be it in game and the forums - isn’t good and nourishing.

These changes will take a long time to be made, which is understandable, but it’s a necessary step to take, if the player base is to be pacified.

Honestly, this is a difficult post to read. I'm not completely sure what your point is in many of the sections. I want to focus on this quoted section though. You say that background differences influence the ability of players to finish content. What do you mean exactly? Additionally, I can't find the answer to the "why do we need to address metagaming" question anywhere in this paragraph. So can you clearly answer why metagaming is a problem?

PrimusTiberius · July 2022

VaranisArano wrote: »

You can't "fix" player desire to find the most efficient methods for an organized PVE group to complete new content or to compete in PVP. That's just human nature.

This is true, but ZOS seems to think (based from what they're telling us) they can level the paying field by making these changes, it won't "fix" players to do X or Y.... and everyone knows it. I don't buy into what ZOS is telling us a 100%, there's more to this than what they're telling us.

VaranisArano · July 2022

FischyJones wrote: »

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

Contrary to what you suggest, I've come across a lot of welcoming and inclusive environments in ESO. A lot of guilds run content on normal that they explain to players who are newer/more casual/have different needs.

Not everyone needs to be able to complete a veteran DLC dungeon—the "veteran" part is a combat challenge for those interested in difficult combat. That said, many vet DLC dungeons are hard to finish with a build that isn't at least somewhat metagamed, and I wouldn't wanna run a hard one with a stranger playing a theme build.

That said, I was talking with some friends last night about how there's such a huge jump from normal to veteran, and that something in between would help a lot of players.

I think some more examples and specific suggestions would help strengthen your call for change.

blktauna wrote: »

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

That said, I was talking with some friends last night about how there's such a huge jump from normal to veteran, and that something in between would help a lot of players.

This right here is the needed change.

VaranisArano wrote: »

You can't "fix" player desire to find the most efficient methods for an organized PVE group to complete new content or to compete in PVP. That's just human nature.

Did any of you guys read what I have written? Because it doesnt seems to be that way.

Yes, I did. You suggested working with players to fix the peer-driven Meta and balancing PVE and PVP separately.

ZOS is pretty resistant to balancing PVE and PVP separately for their own reasons, so I'm going to ignore that whole argument unless you really want a wall of text.

However, the "peer-driven meta" is basically the idea that players are going to figure out the most ideal/effective/efficient way to complete PVE content or compete in PVP. And that when they are in an organized group, they're going to expect that their group members also put in the time, effort, and builds to play in a similar manner so as to respect the time and effort of the whole group.

There's nothing to "fix" there. You can't tell a PVPer to not figure out the best way to win. You can't tell a PVE guild leader to not organize their group for success. If you play competitive or cooperative group content, there's always going to be a meta.

So if a PVE trial group is saying, "With the players we have and the content we want to progress to, you need to do X DPS to pass the DPS checks or you need to wear these specific sets," then there's nothing to "fix." They don't have to bring someone who can't meet that peer-driven meta along.

tsaescishoeshiner · July 2022

FischyJones wrote: »

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

Contrary to what you suggest, I've come across a lot of welcoming and inclusive environments in ESO. A lot of guilds run content on normal that they explain to players who are newer/more casual/have different needs.

Not everyone needs to be able to complete a veteran DLC dungeon—the "veteran" part is a combat challenge for those interested in difficult combat. That said, many vet DLC dungeons are hard to finish with a build that isn't at least somewhat metagamed, and I wouldn't wanna run a hard one with a stranger playing a theme build.

That said, I was talking with some friends last night about how there's such a huge jump from normal to veteran, and that something in between would help a lot of players.

I think some more examples and specific suggestions would help strengthen your call for change.

blktauna wrote: »

tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »

That said, I was talking with some friends last night about how there's such a huge jump from normal to veteran, and that something in between would help a lot of players.

This right here is the needed change.

VaranisArano wrote: »

You can't "fix" player desire to find the most efficient methods for an organized PVE group to complete new content or to compete in PVP. That's just human nature.

Did any of you guys read what I have written? Because it doesnt seems to be that way.

I can't speak for others, but I read it multiple times, and put thought into my answer. We're here to discuss, so feel free to respond. I'm not going to give a point-by-point, presentation-style response.

Some of what you said seems to be based on assumptions or experiences that others (like myself) might not share. And some of it is pretty common and relatable. That's why examples and specifics would help us talk about it if you feel we don't understand.

Other points, like about splitting PvP and PvE balance, have already been discussed to death on the forums, so you'd have to offer a new perspective or a new implementation if you want to contribute to it.

Kahnak · July 2022

First of all,

"For my post I’ll define metagaming as the most efficient way to accomplish a specific or multiple specific goals defined by the game and by its players."

This is optimization, not metagaming. That's like saying that taking the shortest route from one place to another is metagaming.

You also keep using this word- ludic, which I'm pretty sure doesn't mean what you think it means.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/ludic

adjective
playful in an aimless way:

"This can be accomplished by following certain strategies, using certain moves or by utilizing flaws in the systems of the game itself..."

You go on to state that metagaming can also include "utilizing flaws in the systems of the game itself", which is not only absent from your initial definition but also carries a negative connotation, as if metagaming(optimization) is also somehow exploitative, but you don't provide any examples of what that even means.

"Those archetypes already dictate a form of metagaming by design, through their possible interactions during fights."

You mean the game mechanics dictate the archetypes employed. Considering the game mechanics are meant to be interacted with in a specific way, the archetypes you refer to lack any form of metagaming. There is nothing meta about interrupting an ability or buffing an ally. Are you somehow inferring that people shouldn't have to interact with mechanics, and that interacting with mechanics is a hyper-optimized way of approaching the game? I don't understand what gave you the impression that anyone is interested in playing a game where none of the mechanics matter.

"The player buffs themselves, apply debuffs and DoT to their target and use spamable skills during the duration of the DoTs. If the target falls below certain health percentage execution skills finish the job."

Again, this is optimized gameplay - the character is rewarded for interacting with the game mechanics in the correct way or conversely punished for failing to interact with the game mechanics. This comes with a fundamental understanding of the game. It has nothing to do with the hyper-optimization that is generally associated with the meta, especially considering that all of the actions listed can be done regardless of your stats, your gear or even your level.

"As stated in the previous section the more advanced difficulties of ESOs content require the players to partake in the designed Metagame of combining skill archetypes to fight and finish harder content and its monsters."

Wrong. The vast majority of difficult content in ESO can be overcome by simply understanding and executing the mechanics correctly and have nothing whatsoever to do with some underlying design meta. There is nothing more insulting to casual players than making the assumption that these basic mechanics are too difficult for them to understand or complete without getting sweaty, as it were.

"Following the peer driven Metagaming is much more difficult, than following the Metagame by design, as it is highly depended on the individual players peers and the requirements those peers have set up. Thus, it can divide the player base and influence the ludic experience negatively."

Actually, following the peer driven metagame is as easy as taking 30 seconds to look up popular ESO content creators on YOUTUBE. You will find out very quickly the current state of the meta with basically no effort, because it' not dependent on individual players - the meta is dependent, as previously stated, on hyper-optimization of current gear, abilities and generally includes a great deal of math on the back end. If the math works - it works. It doesn't matter if Joe Blow thinks his way is better, because the math says it doesn't. The only division in this case are between people who ascribe to the meta and people who either aren't aware (which is most people) or people who reject the meta on principle (to which there are degrees of rejection).

"The negative impact can increase if the peer driven Metagame relies on the ab(use) of certain gameplay mechanics which might relay on high hand eye coordination or other very specific sets of action."

This is obviously referring to 'weaving', and inferring that weaving is in any way the abuse of gameplay mechanics comes off more like sour grapes than anything else and displays a lack of understanding about the game. Success in ESO is primarily dependent on player skill, which includes the ability to weave, to the extent that people wearing top tier gear can easily be outperformed by an individual who is simply better at the game. If this offends your sensibilities, I suggest avoiding competitive sports.

"2.1 Why do we need to address and fix the peer driven Metagaming?"

We don't. A player driven meta will always exist. This idealized version of the game where everything is viable and gear is just whatever will never exist simply because there will always be a better, more optimized, more efficient way of playing the game that the more hardcore portion of the playerbase will ascribe to.

"ESO is enjoyed by many players with different and diverse backgrounds. This should be considered at all times, while talking and thinking about possible fixes for the current state of affair. The difference in the backgrounds of the players influences their ability to finish certain forms of content in ESO."

Why should it be considered at all times? Why should it even be a factor? There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for someone's background outside of the game having any bearing whatsoever on their competence at playing the game or their ability complete content. It comes down to your attitude and your willingness to put in effort to get better. The idea that someone with a different personal background outside of the game having more difficulty completing content than anyone else as a result is borderline insulting.

"This feedback requires an atmosphere that is currently lacking in ESOs community – and it’s the job of the Community managers, moderators and ZOS itself to foster and nurture a atmosphere in which players with different abilities aren’t afraid to come forth with their experiences."

This just tells me that you've hardly spent any time in this forum. Who is this timid group of differently abled players that are too scared to come forth with their experiences? From RPers, to casual players, to players with disabilities - I've seen all of them represented here. You're alleging there is a problem where a problem doesn't exist.

"I personally wish for a better communication between the people who work on the game and the community. Because I personally find the already existing ways the players get informed about changes to lack substance and transparency."

This is the only part of this post that makes any sense or isn't dripping with personal bias. Yes, you and everyone else.

What a word salad.

FischyJones · July 2022

Kahnak wrote: »

This is optimization, not metagaming. That's like saying that taking the shortest route from one place to another is metagaming.

No, and I've illustrated what I define as Metagaming.

Kahnak wrote: »

You also keep using this word- ludic, which I'm pretty sure doesn't mean what you think it means.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/ludic
adjective
playful in an aimless way:

If that is some sort of personal attack I am afraid that you're using blanks. If you haven't notice during your lecture of my post, my term of "ludic" experience is a reference to the academic field of Ludology, better known as Game studies. I have a masters degree in said field.

Kahnak wrote: »

You go on to state that metagaming can also include "utilizing flaws in the systems of the game itself", which is not only absent from your initial definition but also carries a negative connotation, as if metagaming(optimization) is also somehow exploitative, but you don't provide any examples of what that even means.

Again I am inclined to ask if you have actually read my post. I make a pretty clear destinction between Metagaming by design and peer driven Metagaming, which has the possibilty to exploit unintended flaws in the games systems. Im talking about weaving, if thats not clear by now.

Kahnak wrote: »

You mean the game mechanics dictate the archetypes employed. Considering the game mechanics are meant to be interacted with in a specific way, the archetypes you refer to lack any form of metagaming. There is nothing meta about interrupting an ability or buffing an ally. Are you somehow inferring that people shouldn't have to interact with mechanics, and that interacting with mechanics is a hyper-optimized way of approaching the game? I don't understand what gave you the impression that anyone is interested in playing a game where none of the mechanics matter.

You're basicly describing Metagaming right now.
Is the knowledge to do all those things explicity thought by the game or is it something the player knows how to do because he has experiance with other similar games?
Its the later, thus making it Metagaming. My approach to this topic follows the principes of Ludology.

Kahnak wrote: »

Again, this is optimized gameplay - the character is rewarded for interacting with the game mechanics in the correct way or conversely punished for failing to interact with the game mechanics. This comes with a fundamental understanding of the game. It has nothing to do with the hyper-optimization that is generally associated with the meta, especially considering that all of the actions listed can be done regardless of your stats, your gear or even your level.

Fundamental understanding of the game is Metagaming. Its the combination of the ludic experience of ESO and other similar games which the player has played priviously.

Kahnak wrote: »

Wrong. The vast majority of difficult content in ESO can be overcome by simply understanding and executing the mechanics correctly and have nothing whatsoever to do with some underlying design meta. There is nothing more insulting to casual players than making the assumption that these basic mechanics are too difficult for them to understand or complete without getting sweaty, as it were.

Again Ill point out that understanding and following those mechanics is Metagaming in itself. Also, its kind of funny that you feel the need to protect "causuls" from "insults" while you end your response to my post with an insult yourself. That feels like projection.

Kahnak wrote: »

Actually, following the peer driven metagame is as easy as taking 30 seconds to look up popular ESO content creators on YOUTUBE. You will find out very quickly the current state of the meta with basically no effort, because it' not dependent on individual players - the meta is dependent, as previously stated, on hyper-optimization of current gear, abilities and generally includes a great deal of math on the back end. If the math works - it works. It doesn't matter if Joe Blow thinks his way is better, because the math says it doesn't. The only division in this case are between people who ascribe to the meta and people who either aren't aware (which is most people) or people who reject the meta on principle (to which there are degrees of rejection).

In a later quote of your response you have already voiced a disregard for the diffrent abilities and skills of ESOs players, which I do consider in finding a solution to the problem of peer driven Metagaming. For you it might be easy to "quickly" look something up, to read up on something and to optimise/follow the peer driven Metagaming. Thats awesome - good for you. But this is not the reality for everybody.

Kahnak wrote: »

This is obviously referring to 'weaving', and inferring that weaving is in any way the abuse of gameplay mechanics comes off more like sour grapes than anything else and displays a lack of understanding about the game. Success in ESO is primarily dependent on player skill, which includes the ability to weave, to the extent that people wearing top tier gear can easily be outperformed by an individual who is simply better at the game. If this offends your sensibilities, I suggest avoiding competitive sports.

I'd really like to know, why you feel the need to throw around all those attacks on me as a person, while you could and should focus on the points I have made.
People with disabilities play Video Games, thats a fact no one can deny. Weaving is a big part of the peer driven Metagaming. Weaving requries good coordination. Not everyone is able to do that. This make it an issue.

Kahnak wrote: »

We don't. A player driven meta will always exist. This idealized version of the game where everything is viable and gear is just whatever will never exist simply because there will always be a better, more optimized, more efficient way of playing the game that the more hardcore portion of the playerbase will ascribe to.

Fixing something is not the same as removing something. No one buys a new car, when they have to replace a mirror. Balancing of skills and gear exists for a reason: To keep things fair and in balance - short to fix a problem that has become aparent.

Kahnak wrote: »

Why should it be considered at all times? Why should it even be a factor?

Yes, we should always try to be inclusive. Because its not only a moral thing to do, but because it also means a broader range of possible players - thus keeping the game alive.

Kahnak wrote: »

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for someone's background outside of the game having any bearing whatsoever on their competence at playing the game or their ability complete content.

There is quite literally evidence for that. The field of Ludology exists in part to research this correlation of previous gaming experience and playing a new yet similar game.

Kahnak wrote: »

It comes down to your attitude and your willingness to put in effort to get better. The idea that someone with a different personal background outside of the game having more difficulty completing content than anyone else as a result is borderline insulting.

That is oversimplifing as I have clearly illustrated.
Do you wish to see what is insulting?

Kahnak wrote: »

What a word salad.

This is.

VaranisArano · July 2022

If we're going to talk about Weaving as exploiting an unintended flaw in the game design, I think it's very important to note that while light attack weaving started that way, it has since been incorporated into ESO's combat system in a very intentional way.

ZOS has rebalanced combat around weaving. ZOS has taught players to weave. ZOS has designed new sets around weaving.

To speak of players (ab)using weaving NOW as some sort of unintended flaw in the game design is simply ill-informed.

And I will note that even in the original Dev comment saying weaving was unintended, she made it clear it wasn't an exploit. See this discussion on the source: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/610495/is-la-weaving-really-a-bug/p1

Stamicka · July 2022

Sorry, but your degree doesn't make your opinion any more valid than anyone else's opinion on this matter. You've put lots of pretentious fluff in your post, but there's hardly any substance. If you keep having to ask people "if they read your post", it's probably because the whole thing is poorly argued.

pklemming · July 2022

I read the original post and as an old, disabled person with a chronic illness(3 groups right there), you are pretty much wrong on everything barring the lack of response from ZoS.

What you describe is why we now have 'press button, get loot' games lacking any real challenge. People will people at different levels, let them.

TaSheen · July 2022

Generally, I encourage people like the OP to code games of their own. Once they have done so, they may have a more level point of view.

Cadbury · July 2022

Stamicka wrote: »

Sorry, but your degree doesn't make your opinion any more valid than anyone else's opinion on this matter. You've put lots of pretentious fluff in your post, but there's hardly any substance. If you keep having to ask people "if they read your post", it's probably because the whole thing is poorly argued.

wolfie1.0. · July 2022

FischyJones wrote: »

Kahnak wrote: »

This is optimization, not metagaming. That's like saying that taking the shortest route from one place to another is metagaming.

No, and I've illustrated what I define as Metagaming.

Kahnak wrote: »

You also keep using this word- ludic, which I'm pretty sure doesn't mean what you think it means.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/ludic
adjective
playful in an aimless way:

If that is some sort of personal attack I am afraid that you're using blanks. If you haven't notice during your lecture of my post, my term of "ludic" experience is a reference to the academic field of Ludology, better known as Game studies. I have a masters degree in said field.

Kahnak wrote: »

You go on to state that metagaming can also include "utilizing flaws in the systems of the game itself", which is not only absent from your initial definition but also carries a negative connotation, as if metagaming(optimization) is also somehow exploitative, but you don't provide any examples of what that even means.

Again I am inclined to ask if you have actually read my post. I make a pretty clear destinction between Metagaming by design and peer driven Metagaming, which has the possibilty to exploit unintended flaws in the games systems. Im talking about weaving, if thats not clear by now.

Kahnak wrote: »

You mean the game mechanics dictate the archetypes employed. Considering the game mechanics are meant to be interacted with in a specific way, the archetypes you refer to lack any form of metagaming. There is nothing meta about interrupting an ability or buffing an ally. Are you somehow inferring that people shouldn't have to interact with mechanics, and that interacting with mechanics is a hyper-optimized way of approaching the game? I don't understand what gave you the impression that anyone is interested in playing a game where none of the mechanics matter.

You're basicly describing Metagaming right now.
Is the knowledge to do all those things explicity thought by the game or is it something the player knows how to do because he has experiance with other similar games?
Its the later, thus making it Metagaming. My approach to this topic follows the principes of Ludology.

Kahnak wrote: »

Again, this is optimized gameplay - the character is rewarded for interacting with the game mechanics in the correct way or conversely punished for failing to interact with the game mechanics. This comes with a fundamental understanding of the game. It has nothing to do with the hyper-optimization that is generally associated with the meta, especially considering that all of the actions listed can be done regardless of your stats, your gear or even your level.

Fundamental understanding of the game is Metagaming. Its the combination of the ludic experience of ESO and other similar games which the player has played priviously.

Kahnak wrote: »

Wrong. The vast majority of difficult content in ESO can be overcome by simply understanding and executing the mechanics correctly and have nothing whatsoever to do with some underlying design meta. There is nothing more insulting to casual players than making the assumption that these basic mechanics are too difficult for them to understand or complete without getting sweaty, as it were.

Again Ill point out that understanding and following those mechanics is Metagaming in itself. Also, its kind of funny that you feel the need to protect "causuls" from "insults" while you end your response to my post with an insult yourself. That feels like projection.

Kahnak wrote: »

Actually, following the peer driven metagame is as easy as taking 30 seconds to look up popular ESO content creators on YOUTUBE. You will find out very quickly the current state of the meta with basically no effort, because it' not dependent on individual players - the meta is dependent, as previously stated, on hyper-optimization of current gear, abilities and generally includes a great deal of math on the back end. If the math works - it works. It doesn't matter if Joe Blow thinks his way is better, because the math says it doesn't. The only division in this case are between people who ascribe to the meta and people who either aren't aware (which is most people) or people who reject the meta on principle (to which there are degrees of rejection).

In a later quote of your response you have already voiced a disregard for the diffrent abilities and skills of ESOs players, which I do consider in finding a solution to the problem of peer driven Metagaming. For you it might be easy to "quickly" look something up, to read up on something and to optimise/follow the peer driven Metagaming. Thats awesome - good for you. But this is not the reality for everybody.

Kahnak wrote: »

This is obviously referring to 'weaving', and inferring that weaving is in any way the abuse of gameplay mechanics comes off more like sour grapes than anything else and displays a lack of understanding about the game. Success in ESO is primarily dependent on player skill, which includes the ability to weave, to the extent that people wearing top tier gear can easily be outperformed by an individual who is simply better at the game. If this offends your sensibilities, I suggest avoiding competitive sports.

I'd really like to know, why you feel the need to throw around all those attacks on me as a person, while you could and should focus on the points I have made.
People with disabilities play Video Games, thats a fact no one can deny. Weaving is a big part of the peer driven Metagaming. Weaving requries good coordination. Not everyone is able to do that. This make it an issue.

Kahnak wrote: »

We don't. A player driven meta will always exist. This idealized version of the game where everything is viable and gear is just whatever will never exist simply because there will always be a better, more optimized, more efficient way of playing the game that the more hardcore portion of the playerbase will ascribe to.

Fixing something is not the same as removing something. No one buys a new car, when they have to replace a mirror. Balancing of skills and gear exists for a reason: To keep things fair and in balance - short to fix a problem that has become aparent.

Kahnak wrote: »

Why should it be considered at all times? Why should it even be a factor?

Yes, we should always try to be inclusive. Because its not only a moral thing to do, but because it also means a broader range of possible players - thus keeping the game alive.

Kahnak wrote: »

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for someone's background outside of the game having any bearing whatsoever on their competence at playing the game or their ability complete content.

There is quite literally evidence for that. The field of Ludology exists in part to research this correlation of previous gaming experience and playing a new yet similar game.

Kahnak wrote: »

It comes down to your attitude and your willingness to put in effort to get better. The idea that someone with a different personal background outside of the game having more difficulty completing content than anyone else as a result is borderline insulting.

That is oversimplifing as I have clearly illustrated.
Do you wish to see what is insulting?

Kahnak wrote: »

What a word salad.

This is.

A game master. Can you make us a game to replace ESO?

Aislinna · July 2022

Most
Effective
Tactic
Available

It is just human nature.

FischyJones · July 2022

Stamicka wrote: »

Sorry, but your degree doesn't make your opinion any more valid than anyone else's opinion on this matter.

No where has that been claimed. Thats a assumption that you've made.

FischyJones · July 2022

pklemming wrote: »

What you describe is why we now have 'press button, get loot' games lacking any real challenge. People will people at different levels, let them.

That's a incredible dishonest take on the things that I have written. Do you have something else to offer in this discussion?

Psiion · July 2022

Greetings,

After review of this thread, we have decided to go ahead and close it down as it has mostly become Baiting and Insults. The atmosphere of an MMO is competitive in nature, and the team welcomes healthy and constructive debate as it provides wonderful feedback for the developers to review. However, discussions should always stay on the topic at hand. Resorting to personal insulting, baiting, or otherwise provoking conflict is not only against the Forum's Community Rules, but against the spirit of ESO and it's community.

Please remember to be respectful and constructive at all times on our forums, and help us maintain a friendly and welcoming environment for all.