Explain 'meta' to me.....

[Replacement]

8 hours ago, Heraclea said:

So, while the characters I tend to enjoy most are melees like tankers, brutes, and scrappers - but I don't usually bring them to Hami raids because I see them as being less useful there.  Especially compared to the ice/plants blaster I usually bring - a character I started to claim a punny name -  because I thought that character would have useful skills for the event? 

 

Likewise, I am reluctant to bring a tanker or brute to the BAF, because trying to tank the AVs means not getting to participate, and tanking is irrelevant on the prisoners segment?  I do have one tanker I will bring: the one with Quicksand.  That at least gets to play at one point of the raid.  But the rest of the time I feel like I am just being carried? 

 

And I just tend to avoid the Apex TF, because I don't like that feeling?  This is 'meta', then? 

While correct to the idea of "Gaming the game," I don't feel like this really hits the way gaming culture has appropriated this term.  

 

"The meta" refers less to what you think of your choices, and more about what you know others will think of your choices.

 

The most idealized anti-meta power we could have would be like... an inconsistently-applied, high mag Knockback that always sends enemies flying in different directions (as opposed to all getting blown in the same direction).  

 

You deciding it is/isn't helpful for you is irrelevant; you know at the moment of power selection that using it in a party will get you dirty looks.  And your understanding of why everyone else hates this power is your understanding of the metagame.

[Sovera]

The answers have been exhaustive and to the point so not much more can be added (edit. I ended up adding a lot more as I rambled on!). Depending on the game meta simply means the best way to do something.

 

In GW2 the meta is everyone in their DPS spec and wearing full DPS gear. New players may faff around trying to pick survival oriented gear but they will soon either be herded to the the max damage mentality or form their groups. There really is no point in doing less damage by trading damage stats for survival stats when a boss will two shot anyone who did not move out of the telegraphed move, and the longer the boss moves the more moves it will do, so full DPS makes the fight last much less.

 

In League of Legends it's a lot more complex since rock scissors paper but the same principle. My brother is an aficionado and plays at a really high level (he reached challenger which apparently is a big deal in terms of total player population) and he'll tell me stuff without entering in too much detail. Like chess whomever picks their champion first is already a step behind.

 

In CoH it's so easy and with such a high power creep ceiling that there really isn't a meta as the previous examples. Anything will do and just throw incarnated warm bodies at content and content will melt (granite tank for Lord recluse? Why? Just have a Blaster flying around and taking potshots at him or whatever). At most we could say that the 'meta for Scrappers' (fictional example) is 45% defense and to be endurance positive and as close to perma Hasten as possible.

 

On a semantic level I don't agree TW/Bio being meta in this context. TW/Bio is the best/strongest character but that's a different thing.

 

Fortunately CoH does not suffer from the petty elitism prevalent in GW2 where people are literally berated for their choice picks (not speaking as a victim, just what I saw while playing it). We are a pretty loose happy community where even if the meta is six Blasters, one Tanker and one Kinetic Defender we will throw ourselves with whatever rag tag bunch of random people of various levels and slotting and power picks at whatever content we are aimed that.

 

Though in part also because there is precious little chance of failing. If we had more risk, and, as it rarely rarely happened (twice in all my time since starting on Homecoming) of disbanding because unable to complete a TF then the meta grip would tighten.

[Ukase]

I confess. I have no idea what it means in just about any context. When I see people use it, even though I'm the ignorant one, they just sound stupid, so I tend to ignore them. 

[Sovera]

44 minutes ago, Ukase said:

I confess. I have no idea what it means in just about any context. When I see people use it, even though I'm the ignorant one, they just sound stupid, so I tend to ignore them. 

Well, you've just had several posts explaining it, so no reason to still have no idea about what it means.

[Sir Myshkin]

This thread needs an "ELI5":

 

Meta is a Sandwich. No, really. Imagine a sandwich.

 

I bet it's not the same sandwich I'm thinking about, because there are hundreds of options there, right? The core of sandwich is often the same though, some kind of top and bottom encasement (typically a bread) and then condiments of a variety (lettuce, tomato, pickles, etc), a topical sauce in some cases (mustard, mayo, etc), and a primary protein content. The entirety of the sandwich is any one given idea/topic/content (in this case: game, specifically "City of"). We can break that sandwich down to its individual layers, lets take something simple: A "BLT".

 

• Bacon
  • Typically pork based, other varieties of protein-influenced bacon exist, those individual choices make an additional subsection
  • Type of Bacon: Applewood, Pepper, Plain, etc
  • Cook: Crisp, Fatty, Charred
• Lettuce
  • Romaine, Iceberg, this list is ridiculously long
  • Maybe no lettuce at all! Is it still a BLT?! Oh No!
• Tomato
  • Massive variety of tomato based options, typical choices of Roma or a good Hothouse round one
  • Maybe no tomato at all?! Panic! Fiends, who eats just a bacon sandwich!
• Bread
  • Toasted, not toasted?
  • White, wheat, pumpernickel? (you monster)
• Mayo (for some)
  • Maybe you like mayo, whatever, a sauce condiment, but some don't even like that!
    • Don't you dare say Miracle Whip. That is. not. mayo.

 

This is a data set about what a "BLT" and the varieties of data under each subsection (types of protein, cook, seasoning) is called metadata, data about the data (and forgive me as I'm going to use the term a little loosely going forward to keep it simple*). This is what is "meta" the understanding the ideas within the entirety of the idea. How that relates to gaming, in our context, is when I say something like this:

• The best BLT is a Pepper Pork Bacon cooked to a nice crisp with iceberg lettuce on whole grain white sandwich bread that's been toasted with two fat slices of a hothouse tomato with a heaping slathering of mayonnaise on each inner-side of the bread.

Now if I can prove that this flavor profile of "my" version of a BLT "build" is the best profile, more people will talk about it and it becomes many people's preferred flavor profile, or "build" for their BLT. This becomes the (more or less) slang-like adaptation of the term Meta, because now this particular type of BLT is seen as the optimal choice, it has now become "Meta" or "The Meta", which is kind of a crown to being "the best option to have, when having a BLT." So the BLT is my Sandwich (Meta), and each layer in the sandwich has different options (Metadata) and my choices within that metadata (bacon type, lettuce type, etc) as a singular whole version of a BLT, are A/The "Meta" of that which is a BLT.

 

Like someone mentioned earlier, the idea of "game within the game", the breakdown of key important concepts about/within the game as a whole that change the dynamic of everything else around it.

 

Or, in the extreme simplification: (of a creative work) referring to itself or to the conventions of its genre; self-referential.

 

A "Meta" becomes diversified when multiple strong concepts rise and are equal to a small number of others, and clearly far 'better' than many others below them. In relation to City of Heroes, the game can be broken down by each AT as its own Sandwich type, with each type of sandwich having an optimal (or meta) "build" in their category, and in some cases two or three that the majority of players prefer. Like fire farming with SS/FA Brutes, there's literally over a thousand of them on Homecoming, all built pretty much identical to each other, that build is the "meta choice" for farming, and specifically for Brutes. They are the BLT in our sandwich meta, simple construction, target-specific purpose, limited build options, consistent expectation of taste.

 

Side Edit: Further basic break down as the term loosely gets used here on Homecoming is the idea that when someone says "That build is the Meta" they're referring to "a lot of people are playing it (often/for X reason)" and that is a simplification of a current terminology based on the old term "FOTM" that used to exist in the early 2000's (Flavor of the Month) which was in principle the same exact thing, but far less confusing because it didn't have any esoteric idioms stacked on top of itself. As brought up within a few other posts, hopefully this makes more sense with the above.

 

Second Side Edit: Meta is technically a self-reflective term, and when used in something like a forum or social media setting with commentary, when a comment is made on a post that refers to another comment under the same topic (but not in relation to the current comment tree), in response to a comment within that topic, is Meta.

 

• Example: How Sovera replied to Ukase's comment about the topic by referring to the other posts within the topic as reference material to Ukase's comment.
• And that's how we end up with a confusing term form an outside perspective.
• I promise this is my last edit.
  • Okay, really, I hit a button on my mouse as I hit save and it added a 3 randomly, I couldn't leave it. Okay, now I'm done. Really.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Sir Myshkin
* more specifically, metadata in context would be something like taking the varying types of protein types and getting sales data on the volumes of those different options to see which is more popular from a purchase perspective. Data on the Data.

[Heraclea]

12 hours ago, Replacement said:

"The meta" refers less to what you think of your choices, and more about what you know others will think of your choices.

 

The most idealized anti-meta power we could have would be like... an inconsistently-applied, high mag Knockback that always sends enemies flying in different directions (as opposed to all getting blown in the same direction).  

 

You deciding it is/isn't helpful for you is irrelevant; you know at the moment of power selection that using it in a party will get you dirty looks.  And your understanding of why everyone else hates this power is your understanding of the metagame.

So meta is more like --

 

-- "I think I know why people who do Hamidon raids frequently would understand why I would prefer to bring my ice/plants blaster.  Three fast recharging ranged holds that do blaster tier damage are handy to have there.  I expect the other raiders to understand this.   And I am somewhat pleased with myself that I figured this out.'

 

Am I getting closer? 

[Replacement]

5 hours ago, Heraclea said:

So meta is more like --

 

-- "I think I know why people who do Hamidon raids frequently would understand why I would prefer to bring my ice/plants blaster.  Three fast recharging ranged holds that do blaster tier damage are handy to have there.  I expect the other raiders to understand this.   And I am somewhat pleased with myself that I figured this out.'

 

Am I getting closer? 

Absolutely, minus the being pleased about it part, heh. I don't think most people are happy to be constrained, or take joy in constraining others (no one ever says their highlight of the day was /kicking an AR blaster because they didn't see any KD converters). 

 

I do also want to stress again that your original definitions and understandings are technically correct. Much like the word "meme", there's a definition fit for the laboratory, and a use that belongs to Internet Culture.

 

It's hard not to write an essay on the topic, but your example is also perfect for showing how the metagame shapes the actual game  (This is representative of a concept only. Do not take the specifics seriously) :

 

Say the value of ice/plant is that it makes zero compromises in its role (damage) while casually picking up a secondary role (control).

Say everyone starts picking up on this fact, and this casual bit of game knowledge propagates through the culture in the form of expectation.

Some players won't even know or care why they invite ice/plants. They just know they're "godly". The culture will begin to magnify this advantage.

 

Given these suppositions, what is a game dev to do? Eventually, no one wants other Blasters**. They can design to the meta and give other builds more hard CC. They can design against the meta by trying to give other builds certain equivalent tactics, though this is often ineffective because it runs afoul of the method the players have already mastered.  They can also just "nope" the meta by nerfing ice/plant Holds, and there's often a good argument for doing so (if Controllers end up in the corner playing crap-fenders).

 

The important point is, no matter which direction they go, it was the metagame that "forced" their hand.  

 

**This is unlikely to happen in CoH to such a blatant degree, but it still occurs. Elitism (which CoH blessedly lacks) acts as a catalyzing force, but it's not a necessary component. This is the root of every brute vs tanker debate, or the value of Force Fields in end-game. Our "don't give a shit" cultural values are basically in an arms race with the meta.