>Video games are systems you must conquer.
You didn't conquer shit if you just read what someone else told you to do. Actually conquering the systems requires exploring and figuring things out for yourself.
t. bottom of the scoreboard >"Y-y-yeah, you may have killed me 3 times, but you didn't EARN it! I'M LEARNING!" >Gets bodied next game five games until he learns that standing in the middle of an open field is a bad idea, but couldn't "know" it for sure until he tested it
this
it's rare that intentionally deriving from the meta and experimenting will yield something better than what's already established to be the meta, it really just depends on the game
Yes and No
Using a known strategy or build that an opponent has seen before and is familiar with will be worse, but experimentation and doing something unpredictable can lead to upset victories. Like using low-tier characters in fighting game tournaments that people aren't familiar with the match-up of, or using an orthodox mix of skills that don't obviously synergize well.
My favorite example is that pokemon tournament where a guy used Pachirisu to taunt the hard-hitting pokemon from the other team to attack it instead and then blew out the opponent's team with their own hard hitters.
The point is that what is 'meta' can only last for so long (unless the game is hilariously broken) until someone comes up with a counter.
Another great example of this is how Morrigan and Phoenix are considered really broken in UMVC3 but people in that scene have taken to creating dedicated anti-Phoenix or anti-Morrigan tactics that aren't meta themselves but are the result of experimentation of creating hard-counters
It is the end point of experimentation and theory crafting and trial and error of builds and strats if no better thing was invented or some patch doesnt change things.
Meta changes when something new appears that beats it or is more efficient.
Fatality was cobsidered the best at quake 3 until zero4 and cooler started destroying him and his meta with the Russian meta. That new meta became established as the meta and was never dethroned.
In a healthy game, "meta builds" are the result and end point of experimentation, and are often in a constant yet subtle state of flux. People inevitably aim to solve games in their own way, and it's from this that meta emerges as what is effective for something will be found by several people and agreed upon in discussion. The key is in making sure that meta is varied enough to stay rewarding, and for the players themselves to be willing to evolve and build on what they know with said discussions, and while experimenting plays a part that comes down to the game itself.
most games are balanced to the meta builds.
you can go to path of exile and do whatever build as a new player but if you do not repesc into something decent your ass is not leaving white maps
>Normalgays
For them gaming is just consuming and you need to consume faster. >Kids
They just like to cheat and easy wins. >Competitive players.
Tryharding. You're facing same competitive tryhards so if you want to win you're tryharding yourself.
People are focused with fast results. When theres armies of nerds out there doing all the experimenting for us and finding out whats the best with their autism who am i to waste my own time doing inefficient stuff. With youtube, discord, twitch communites all sharing information rapidly we find shit out quick now.
Because I'm an adult with a job and responsibilities. Who has time to experiment with builds, gathering materials for hours, even days in some cases, just to end up not liking the character you've built?
how is it bait
some people simply don't feel like spending the time fricking around aimlessly and discovering things for themselves when it's already been done for them, it's like going out to kill a bear with a knife when there's a carcass right next to you
sure it isn't the romantic ideal of gaming but it's realistic
I go to parties to enjoy the food and hang out with a few select people that I know. I'm not obligated to talk to every single person in the room and take part in every activity.
If you ever look up any information outside of a game, you are playing the game wrong. Everything should be learned by playing the game. >but-
You may have reasons for your compromise, but it is still a compromise and not the ideal.
>experiment >end up with a shit build that makes your experience worse
better to have something tried and tested and be sure to get a good experience, especially if you don't plan on replaying the game
None of us know really what truly makes a game fun, or what hands will craft it next.
An oil prince might pre-order a game, access to all sorts of exclusive gear and early day access.
A father who works 9-5 might look up all the things worth doing on youtube to have the best build in the brief time afforded to him.
A man may choose to do neither, only he can choose and when he does choose only then can he decide how truly he wants to have fun with a game
Remember how so you choose to play a game, your enjoyment with the game is your keeping alone
Even though those playing the same game be shills, whales, hardcore players, casuals.
When you stand before Ganker you cannot say
">i was told by reddit and Ganker this was the best strat"
">the game has no challenge to it because i looked up where the best gear was hidden"
or that
">i didn't have the time to experiment and needed the best build so i had to optimize the fun out of the game to get it asap"
this as criticism, will not suffice, remember that
>When you stand before God you cannot say: "I was told by others to thus, or that virtue was not convenient at the time." This will not suffice. Remember that.
>TotK is fun, with undeniable innovation but we are simple beings, you cannot blame the common man being unimpressed and dismissing it at a glance for nothing more than DLC >Armored Core, a soulful series finally being given the attention and budget it deserves, but i fear today's age may require more depth than the solid simplicity fromsoft offers
>Baldurs Gate 3, an ambitious creation made with love undeniably, but sometimes love is blindness, as ambition can be arrogance, this can lead to an undoing at the seams, be wary of the game not being able to hold the weight of it's ambitions in the final act.
>Starfield, space, the bastion that puts us that much close to the heavens though we are ever unworthy of reaching it physically no matter how close it is within our grasp, much like Todd Howard. A creator of fine products, and an even finer tongue, you'd be wise to know which you are really purchasing.
He speaks the truth! Many people on Ganker are in denial that they can ruin a game for themselves, and that their own actions are to blame, not the game.
>Remember how so you choose to play a game, your enjoyment with the game is your keeping alone
To me, King Baldwin, it's running an unoptimal cool build I came up with and beating metaslaves.
Basically, he's saying that if you're absurdly rich then who cares if you spend stupid money on video games, but if you're poor, then save your money and just hack/pirate them and play whatever way is most fun for you.
People do experiment, that's how they find the meta stuff in the first place.
It's just that most people only care about winning so if you are doing experimental stuff for fun then you just get stomped into the dirt and that feels worse than whatever joy you'd get out of playing off-meta.
it's worth a watch
it's got lots of good individual scenes but as a whole there's something off about it
i used to think it was orlando bloom being a shit main character but if you think about it his role as the straight man is almost exactly the same as his role in the first pirates of the carribean film (even down to being a blacksmith while ignoring his true calling) and it works really well there so idk
How many games actually do? From my recently played games I can only think of two games that scratched that tinkering itch:
Starsector and Shadows of Forbidden Gods.
in multiplayer games, it's to have the greatest advantage over the other players, or at least be playing on the same footing as them. it's not creatively interesting, but it is competitively appealing
in singleplayer games, it's to complete the challenges as quickly as possible, or to preserve the most resources through a section of the game
an argument can be made that multiplayer games "require" adherence to the meta, though I don't entirely agree with this sentiment and think that there should be a way for people who just want to dick around in the game to play together without being grouped with the super competitive
singleplayer games, it entirely comes down to personal choice
tl;dr people are going to play how they want
These meta people want quick victories, they play the meta to ultimately make things easier for themselves taking advantage of values that only ever Increase and rarely ever decrease. People may tell you the meta exists to be abused and others may say the meta is the maximum height one can go within the confides of whatever game it's used in. The meta is for people who don't want to experiment who don't want to harvest loss before gaining a single victory it simply exists as a crutch for them to take with them and lean on. They are easy to spot, easy to confuse & never a challenge to conquer
Because most games are set up to basically punish you for trying to play in any way other than the approved manner. You can play X or Y way but why would you do that when it's more of a pain in the ass than just playing it like Z?
"Ivory Tower" game design
Developers purposefully put options in the game that are traps, and some that are optimal
When a player learns what the trap options are and avoids them to pick the "right" choices, the player feels like they have mastered the system
>Using SSG in Doom 2 was the meta strat >Choice is to be a hipster and have less fun or have fun with the most fun weapon in the game
hmm wonder which i will do as someone who plays for fun and not to impress 4chinned people
>doom2 ssg strat is meta >no other weapon is viable
It isn't that you are having fun or not. PVP doom is literally dogshit balance outside of d2m1. All CTF games are SSG orientated and hardly involves other weapons because projectiles are always slower than hitscan and weapon draw+potential 300 damage one shot.
PvP is always just meta builds. Not much fun. I like PvP but I don't make a build for it, in any game, I play a character in the way that is most fun for me. These guys who optimize fighting low level players...I just don't get it. If they came into these worlds and just dropped 10 pounds of dung, then some silly emote, I get it. But cheating to be stronger? Just silly.
PvP is really fun until somebody gets too serious with it, and that becomes the meta.
There is no meta builds in Doom 2 PVP because you do not build your doom marine. It's an old style weapon placement FPS.. Are you even the guy I was responding to?
Also what is wrong with meta and beating people in PVP? What did you expect to happen? What kind of people did you expect to face? No one who does or enjoys PVP is a dispassionate single player viber. The enjoyment is to beat people.
So I assume you are an ESL or not very good/high level in doom. I'm no super duper guy myself, but I was there long enough with a good amount of success to say this and have in the past (which gets scrutiny thrown my way): PVP in Doom isn't boring because it's meta orientated. The meta is shallow. There is NO meta. You either do Chewy/Hatred alias dancing to avoid ssg fire or become Stallion/DrNoob/Chewy ssg max, and there's only really one weapon. The meta is only centered around pure mechanical ability with seldom ever any strategic ability outside of camping or heavy spawn frag power.
CTF nowadays is more centered around coordinated 2v1 runs or 3 up chains which is a lot faster than 2010 strats, but ultimately it's just 1 gun. The entire game is centered around movement and your ability with one weapon. I and a lot of friends I know dropped that for other games in Doom that offered far deeper complexity than the time we got from competitive Doom 2 whether zandronum or zdaemon.
You are playing a stagnate game with a very narrow skillset for PVP, so of course it's plain. Go play an actual game. Doom 2 was never built for PVP. Ever.
9 months ago
Anonymous
PvP drains the soul from most games. Most players are happy to have a simple competition with each other, but there are always those lone souls, who have known no other recognition, who play all means to gain an advantage.
9 months ago
Anonymous
That's your perspective. The most fun I've ever had was pitting myself up against other capable players even if it's for the fight itself, especially if I and my opponent(s) are at the top of the class at the current time. Not everyone is this imagined bully/depraved loony who needs validation through video games though those do exist in Doom, but some of the best players there aren't.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah. That's why modern games really fricked up with their matchmaking public lobbies. If some guys wanna be tryhards, that's fine, let em play against each other. if some guys wanna be goofy and do silly things, that's fine, let them play against each other. If some people are low-skill and want to play, cool, let em fight each other.
The problem comes when you mix up all these people who want different things from the same game.
9 months ago
Anonymous
I agree with this, but the problem is: your mixed groups are going to intermingle at some point. The low skill guy will eventually encounter the try hard and there is NOTHING you can do to stop it. The image you are referring to doesn't account for that. I was around before matchmaking was even a term to discuss. Tryhards always existed in casual games, because even they have down times. There exist guys whose natural abilities are better than most, and you'll have to face them eventually. There is nothing wrong with trying hard to win even in the most casual of setting, but I wouldn't be exactly proud of beating casual players unless there was legitimate challenges behind it.. but that's me speaking for myself.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Well sure. Some of my favorite vidya memories are invading in various "souls" games, and I never used any cheap build, just my thematic, RP, PvE build. And it makes it that much better when you win.
Coop gays....ugh. But I appreciate them because I've never gotten a better feeling from a video game than when I've defeated them, their summons, and whoever else they pulled from the bonfire while I dealt with the rest of their garbage.
Can you imagine such bliss? An enemy...so afraid, they retreat to the place of their birth, hiding behind various guardians, only to see you cut your way through them and corner them there. They roll, and roll again. It makes no difference in the end.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah, but I play all sorts of PVP games including Dark Souls.. wouldn't really count that as a true pvp but invading one another is funner than being in some gay forest doing duels.
Those games weren't design around pvp exclusively which is what you thinking about.
>method 1 sucks >method 2 sucks >method 3 works but isn't fun >method 4 is fun and works >why didn't you try experimenting with method 5-18? what are you some kind of meta gay?
Imagine a game where the only customization you could do to your character was choosing between sword 1 and sword 2, and the only difference between the swords is that one does 100 damage per hit and the other does 50 damage per hit.
Can you give any possible reason, besides being a contrarian, to have pick sword 2?
Easy, instead of actually playing games, just SAY that you totally always win every game you play all the time because you're just so good and you use the worst possible strategy to and still win every time because you're just that amazing. Then accuse anyone who doesn't believe you of being a meta slave while posting one of your dozens of gigachad images.
At the top levels of play, you mean? Players are able to go so deep into preparation and analysis that strategies are tailored to individual opponents, and so it's not about what's on the board but the tools and methods used by players and their support teams behind the scenes.
For single player games, it's because it's the path of least resistance. However, you're free to do whatever, so you don't have to play the meta if you don't want to.
For multiplayer games, it's because you're griefing your teammates if you use some stupid meme build that forces them to carry your dead weight.
because experimenting and having fun costs you time and pissess of the rest of the time when you lose to people who actually bother to play to win.
devs putting in million combinations to "experiment" with are moronic wasting time themselves on a shitty design instead of polishing up or including a variety of game modes and other systems that a simpler and leveled combat experience can work in. They also shit themselves additional work with future balancing. There is a thril in upgrading and working your character but those should be flat power upgrades depending on the gear you obtain through overcoming challenges with abilities everyone else has at their immediate disposal without minmaxing bullshit or "ability bloat" where you a have skills that don't even make it to the rotation / Hotbar.
>go into elden ring blind >play a knight character with one handed sword and board >do barely any damage and shields ain't blocking shit >struggle with game like crazy but try to soldier through >tell friend >he says just equipt this talisman, 2 huge swords and just jump attack >respec and upgrade some big weapons >try it and one jump attack literally deletes 30% of the next boss hp >fly through the game and don't die to another boss up until radagon
If devs don't want a meta just play your own fricking game and balance it.
Meta builds are a result of experimentation, what you're thinking of is all the room temperature IQ morons picking it up after someone with a brain actually did the legwork. If you expect those people to do anything for themselves, you're naive and I like you, but someone's gonna frick you in the ass for it eventually.
>what you're thinking of is all the room temperature IQ morons picking it up after someone with a brain actually did the legwork
And that's a bad thing how exactly? Not everyone has the time to frick around and figure out what works. Some people play to have fun, not to prove something to themselves. It's a game, not a college degree.
It's like struggling with a rubik's cube, so you get someone else to figure it out, then you take the now solved rubik's cube and show it to all your friends because a solved rubik's cube is cool. It's okay though, you don't have anything to prove by solving the rubik's cube yourself, you bought to rubik's cube and now you have a solved rubik's cube. Fun!
That's a bad analogy because unlike a rubik's cube, games are designed for a variety of purposes. Some wan to plow through challenges on their own and conquer the game without any help because of gamer pride, while some just want to experience the story and the world without bothering with all the mechanics. There's no right or wrong way to play a game as along as you're having fun.
You know what? It IS a bad analogy, so let me fix it.
It's like struggling with a rubik's cube, and you see someone who figured theirs out. You know what a solved rubik's cube looks like now, so you pull the stickers off of yours and rearrange them until it looks like the other guy's rubik's cube. You still don't have anything to prove, as long as you can brag to your friends about having a solved rubik's cube.
That's an even worse analogy because it ignores the point completely — that most people who follow meta don't do so to brag, because finishing a game with a meta build is nothing special, but to make the game less tedious for themselves and to enjoy the game. Believe it or not, not everyone plays games on the basis of proving themselves to others.
9 months ago
Anonymous
You're right of course, there's technically speaking no 'wrong' way to play the game. However, playing the game by copying the meta like some fricking trained chimp at a zoo objectively makes you a low IQ moron, and since you have nothing to prove and don't care about bragging, being called that shouldn't worry you.
I have more respect for gays who play off meta because they can't or don't bother to figure the meta out, and just slug their way through the game like that. At least they're in it to play the game their way and understand how their way works, metaslaves don't even understand how the meta works 99% of the time, they only care that it does work.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Respect? You’re a random loser on Ganker, not Todd Howard or Hidetaka Miyazaki. Your respect means as much as any other random losers here — nil.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Since you didn't deny anything I said, I'll consider that your concession. Have a banana, chimp.
why would you intentionally gimp yourself just to be a snowflake? im going to try to be as efficient and good at the game as i can and its the job of the developer to balance their game not me
>The hardcore players say that this difficulty spike is the dev's vengeance against the staleness of our playstyle. As skilled as i am, these tryhards believe that the challenge that awaits me in Hard mode is far more severe and lasting. If that's true...i call it artificial.
Better to win the match no matter what, than be told "gg." Only the winners enjoy anything. I saw an "experimenting" gamer's LED keyboard, but it was split in half, and he lay sobbing at the foot of his gamer chair.
what's the point when the mega-autists on the internet have already tried every single thing and debated everything to death before you finish downloading the update
Because experimentation is boring, just like "free roaming" in a sandbox game. Video games are systems you must conquer.
fpwp
>Video games are systems you must conquer.
You didn't conquer shit if you just read what someone else told you to do. Actually conquering the systems requires exploring and figuring things out for yourself.
t. bottom of the scoreboard
>"Y-y-yeah, you may have killed me 3 times, but you didn't EARN it! I'M LEARNING!"
>Gets bodied next game five games until he learns that standing in the middle of an open field is a bad idea, but couldn't "know" it for sure until he tested it
You not only cheated the game, you cheated yourself
>t. fat loser
Yeah, and you experiment to conquer it yourself. That's the whole fun. Looking up guides is cheating.
>playing FPS game
>in firefight
>NOOO YOU CANT USE A FULL AUTO, YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WIN WITH A BOW AND A SLING
well you see it's simple, moron
experimenting leads to better stuff, and meta is the end result, moron.
this
it's rare that intentionally deriving from the meta and experimenting will yield something better than what's already established to be the meta, it really just depends on the game
Yes and No
Using a known strategy or build that an opponent has seen before and is familiar with will be worse, but experimentation and doing something unpredictable can lead to upset victories. Like using low-tier characters in fighting game tournaments that people aren't familiar with the match-up of, or using an orthodox mix of skills that don't obviously synergize well.
My favorite example is that pokemon tournament where a guy used Pachirisu to taunt the hard-hitting pokemon from the other team to attack it instead and then blew out the opponent's team with their own hard hitters.
The point is that what is 'meta' can only last for so long (unless the game is hilariously broken) until someone comes up with a counter.
Another great example of this is how Morrigan and Phoenix are considered really broken in UMVC3 but people in that scene have taken to creating dedicated anti-Phoenix or anti-Morrigan tactics that aren't meta themselves but are the result of experimentation of creating hard-counters
what about that guy who perfect parried that Asian girl with the thighs
It is the end point of experimentation and theory crafting and trial and error of builds and strats if no better thing was invented or some patch doesnt change things.
Meta changes when something new appears that beats it or is more efficient.
Fatality was cobsidered the best at quake 3 until zero4 and cooler started destroying him and his meta with the Russian meta. That new meta became established as the meta and was never dethroned.
This but more politely
'tism
Casuals need hand holding. There must be someone to do the thinking for them.
In a healthy game, "meta builds" are the result and end point of experimentation, and are often in a constant yet subtle state of flux. People inevitably aim to solve games in their own way, and it's from this that meta emerges as what is effective for something will be found by several people and agreed upon in discussion. The key is in making sure that meta is varied enough to stay rewarding, and for the players themselves to be willing to evolve and build on what they know with said discussions, and while experimenting plays a part that comes down to the game itself.
most games are balanced to the meta builds.
you can go to path of exile and do whatever build as a new player but if you do not repesc into something decent your ass is not leaving white maps
>Normalgays
For them gaming is just consuming and you need to consume faster.
>Kids
They just like to cheat and easy wins.
>Competitive players.
Tryharding. You're facing same competitive tryhards so if you want to win you're tryharding yourself.
People are focused with fast results. When theres armies of nerds out there doing all the experimenting for us and finding out whats the best with their autism who am i to waste my own time doing inefficient stuff. With youtube, discord, twitch communites all sharing information rapidly we find shit out quick now.
what the frick do you think happens when people experiment for long enough you goddamn moron?
Because I'm an adult with a job and responsibilities. Who has time to experiment with builds, gathering materials for hours, even days in some cases, just to end up not liking the character you've built?
I hate this bait
how is it bait
some people simply don't feel like spending the time fricking around aimlessly and discovering things for themselves when it's already been done for them, it's like going out to kill a bear with a knife when there's a carcass right next to you
sure it isn't the romantic ideal of gaming but it's realistic
Why even play, then? Just watch a let's play if you don't want to interact with the game.
I go to parties to enjoy the food and hang out with a few select people that I know. I'm not obligated to talk to every single person in the room and take part in every activity.
>how is it bait
It's pure bait. Listen to
you are a loser. Also video games aren't for you
kino scene tbh
yeah. i also really like masks. like really like them
Are we talking floor tile levels of like here?
In theatrical version you never knew it's edward norton
If you ever look up any information outside of a game, you are playing the game wrong. Everything should be learned by playing the game.
>but-
You may have reasons for your compromise, but it is still a compromise and not the ideal.
>just like stop playing wrong!!!1!
>he didn't bruteforce Meryl's codec
ngmi
Zoomer. I asked the nerd at RadioShack and he told me how to do it. Same with Final Fantasy: Tactics.
>he needs outside help
You're beyond hope.
We probably spent the same amount of time on the answer. Me, travelling and asking, you, trial and error.
>experiment
>end up with a shit build that makes your experience worse
better to have something tried and tested and be sure to get a good experience, especially if you don't plan on replaying the game
None of us know really what truly makes a game fun, or what hands will craft it next.
An oil prince might pre-order a game, access to all sorts of exclusive gear and early day access.
A father who works 9-5 might look up all the things worth doing on youtube to have the best build in the brief time afforded to him.
A man may choose to do neither, only he can choose and when he does choose only then can he decide how truly he wants to have fun with a game
Remember how so you choose to play a game, your enjoyment with the game is your keeping alone
Even though those playing the same game be shills, whales, hardcore players, casuals.
When you stand before Ganker you cannot say
">i was told by reddit and Ganker this was the best strat"
">the game has no challenge to it because i looked up where the best gear was hidden"
or that
">i didn't have the time to experiment and needed the best build so i had to optimize the fun out of the game to get it asap"
this as criticism, will not suffice, remember that
>When you stand before God you cannot say: "I was told by others to thus, or that virtue was not convenient at the time." This will not suffice. Remember that.
ah i remember the scene like i saw it for the first time
>">i didn't have the time to experiment and needed the best build so i had to optimize the fun out of the game to get it asap"
fricking true
for a low effort film to game shitpost, alot of this rings surprisingly true
changing the words doesn't change the underlying principle at all
Baldwin was so based, bet he would have the sanest takes on releases today
>TotK is fun, with undeniable innovation but we are simple beings, you cannot blame the common man being unimpressed and dismissing it at a glance for nothing more than DLC
>Armored Core, a soulful series finally being given the attention and budget it deserves, but i fear today's age may require more depth than the solid simplicity fromsoft offers
>Baldurs Gate 3, an ambitious creation made with love undeniably, but sometimes love is blindness, as ambition can be arrogance, this can lead to an undoing at the seams, be wary of the game not being able to hold the weight of it's ambitions in the final act.
>Starfield, space, the bastion that puts us that much close to the heavens though we are ever unworthy of reaching it physically no matter how close it is within our grasp, much like Todd Howard. A creator of fine products, and an even finer tongue, you'd be wise to know which you are really purchasing.
these are pretty fair takes
fricking hell now I have to rewatch it
Win, Black person.
I want to have fun winning, the end, stop typing so much.
winners don't post on Ganker
Self defeating fantasy.
He speaks the truth! Many people on Ganker are in denial that they can ruin a game for themselves, and that their own actions are to blame, not the game.
/thread
sometimes it's not the game, it's us
i can hear norton's voice
>Remember how so you choose to play a game, your enjoyment with the game is your keeping alone
To me, King Baldwin, it's running an unoptimal cool build I came up with and beating metaslaves.
kino
I don't play multiplayer trash but this basically applies to min-maxing in singleplayer games as well.
his wisdom was taken from us too soon
We must buy all the boosts
GOD WILLS IT
Baldwin
should i buy starfield
do i need to watch the movie to get the meme
Kys underage.
Go back to discord or tik tok.
ludokino
I will DM you my stability mods.
what games does Saladin play
When they captured Osama bin Laden's computer, he was playing Counterstrike and Viva Pinata.
an honest man
What are Starfield's reviews worth?
Nothing... everything
>Remember how so you choose to play a game, your enjoyment with the game is your keeping alone
Yup yup watching the extended blue ray TONIGHT
there is truth here, don't let people decide how you should enjoy your game
don't be a piece played, move yourself, when you don't enjoy a game don't let it be because of outside influences
kek
i don't get it
A toast to the king
Nice
can someone put this in laymans terms for a homie
>i am very submissive and breedable please plap me until i carry your bastard children
I hope this helps.
Basically, he's saying that if you're absurdly rich then who cares if you spend stupid money on video games, but if you're poor, then save your money and just hack/pirate them and play whatever way is most fun for you.
how you choose to enjoy a game is non you, not the game, whether its burning money on it or looking up guides or neither
post like this are why i still come around for a chuckle
wise words
a message all of Ganker should hear
kino
Less than 200 words, adhd-kun, not even 1K.
You can shrink it down to less than 10. I believe in you.
he's quoting a movie scene you dumb prick
you must be at least 18 to post here
what movie
kino post
It sucks that he is not in the movie more
What makes vidya fun?
The sense of struggle and accomplishment
just try not to think too hard about it
about how all your struggles and accomplishments were designed for you
>tldr; CONSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM
You must be over 18 to post here.
/vGanker crossover episodes are always fun
Why use a hammer? Why not experiment with random tools and objects to see what can be best used to pound nails?
Wrong fricking analogy.
and that's how we ended up with this piece of shit
The true players experiment. They're the ones who come up with the builds that everyone else copies.
>game has gone through a decade of nerfs
>now almost everything is unplayable except for the toppest of meta and the obscurest of builds
experimentation is also meta
>he's a metaslave
>he doesn't experiment to advance the meta
People do experiment, that's how they find the meta stuff in the first place.
It's just that most people only care about winning so if you are doing experimental stuff for fun then you just get stomped into the dirt and that feels worse than whatever joy you'd get out of playing off-meta.
If given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game.
Was Kingdom of Heaven a good movie? Same with Troy and many other historical movies?
it's worth a watch
it's got lots of good individual scenes but as a whole there's something off about it
i used to think it was orlando bloom being a shit main character but if you think about it his role as the straight man is almost exactly the same as his role in the first pirates of the carribean film (even down to being a blacksmith while ignoring his true calling) and it works really well there so idk
I don't rewatch movies.
I rewatched Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut 5 times.
It's a profound film. Acting was great. Lots of great cinematography and memorable scenes.
Path of Exile is the only popular(ish) game that rewards experimentation.
How many games actually do? From my recently played games I can only think of two games that scratched that tinkering itch:
Starsector and Shadows of Forbidden Gods.
in multiplayer games, it's to have the greatest advantage over the other players, or at least be playing on the same footing as them. it's not creatively interesting, but it is competitively appealing
in singleplayer games, it's to complete the challenges as quickly as possible, or to preserve the most resources through a section of the game
an argument can be made that multiplayer games "require" adherence to the meta, though I don't entirely agree with this sentiment and think that there should be a way for people who just want to dick around in the game to play together without being grouped with the super competitive
singleplayer games, it entirely comes down to personal choice
tl;dr people are going to play how they want
Games are power fantasies, meta builds are typically the most powerful builds.
These meta people want quick victories, they play the meta to ultimately make things easier for themselves taking advantage of values that only ever Increase and rarely ever decrease. People may tell you the meta exists to be abused and others may say the meta is the maximum height one can go within the confides of whatever game it's used in. The meta is for people who don't want to experiment who don't want to harvest loss before gaining a single victory it simply exists as a crutch for them to take with them and lean on. They are easy to spot, easy to confuse & never a challenge to conquer
Because most games are set up to basically punish you for trying to play in any way other than the approved manner. You can play X or Y way but why would you do that when it's more of a pain in the ass than just playing it like Z?
"Ivory Tower" game design
Developers purposefully put options in the game that are traps, and some that are optimal
When a player learns what the trap options are and avoids them to pick the "right" choices, the player feels like they have mastered the system
Experimentation leads to meta builds when you are trying to win.
Playin a 1x RO Private Server bro, aint got time for figurin shit out.
Ya'll 'member back in the early 2000s how buttmad people in the MTG community would get over "netdeckers" ?
Funny how things never really change.
It did change.. it got worst. Infinitely worst.
>Using SSG in Doom 2 was the meta strat
>Choice is to be a hipster and have less fun or have fun with the most fun weapon in the game
hmm wonder which i will do as someone who plays for fun and not to impress 4chinned people
>doom2 ssg strat is meta
>no other weapon is viable
It isn't that you are having fun or not. PVP doom is literally dogshit balance outside of d2m1. All CTF games are SSG orientated and hardly involves other weapons because projectiles are always slower than hitscan and weapon draw+potential 300 damage one shot.
PvP is always just meta builds. Not much fun. I like PvP but I don't make a build for it, in any game, I play a character in the way that is most fun for me. These guys who optimize fighting low level players...I just don't get it. If they came into these worlds and just dropped 10 pounds of dung, then some silly emote, I get it. But cheating to be stronger? Just silly.
PvP is really fun until somebody gets too serious with it, and that becomes the meta.
There is no meta builds in Doom 2 PVP because you do not build your doom marine. It's an old style weapon placement FPS.. Are you even the guy I was responding to?
Also what is wrong with meta and beating people in PVP? What did you expect to happen? What kind of people did you expect to face? No one who does or enjoys PVP is a dispassionate single player viber. The enjoyment is to beat people.
But it just becomes too plain, over time. Outskilled, pleasant and memorable. Better map knowledge....
So I assume you are an ESL or not very good/high level in doom. I'm no super duper guy myself, but I was there long enough with a good amount of success to say this and have in the past (which gets scrutiny thrown my way): PVP in Doom isn't boring because it's meta orientated. The meta is shallow. There is NO meta. You either do Chewy/Hatred alias dancing to avoid ssg fire or become Stallion/DrNoob/Chewy ssg max, and there's only really one weapon. The meta is only centered around pure mechanical ability with seldom ever any strategic ability outside of camping or heavy spawn frag power.
CTF nowadays is more centered around coordinated 2v1 runs or 3 up chains which is a lot faster than 2010 strats, but ultimately it's just 1 gun. The entire game is centered around movement and your ability with one weapon. I and a lot of friends I know dropped that for other games in Doom that offered far deeper complexity than the time we got from competitive Doom 2 whether zandronum or zdaemon.
You are playing a stagnate game with a very narrow skillset for PVP, so of course it's plain. Go play an actual game. Doom 2 was never built for PVP. Ever.
PvP drains the soul from most games. Most players are happy to have a simple competition with each other, but there are always those lone souls, who have known no other recognition, who play all means to gain an advantage.
That's your perspective. The most fun I've ever had was pitting myself up against other capable players even if it's for the fight itself, especially if I and my opponent(s) are at the top of the class at the current time. Not everyone is this imagined bully/depraved loony who needs validation through video games though those do exist in Doom, but some of the best players there aren't.
Yeah. That's why modern games really fricked up with their matchmaking public lobbies. If some guys wanna be tryhards, that's fine, let em play against each other. if some guys wanna be goofy and do silly things, that's fine, let them play against each other. If some people are low-skill and want to play, cool, let em fight each other.
The problem comes when you mix up all these people who want different things from the same game.
I agree with this, but the problem is: your mixed groups are going to intermingle at some point. The low skill guy will eventually encounter the try hard and there is NOTHING you can do to stop it. The image you are referring to doesn't account for that. I was around before matchmaking was even a term to discuss. Tryhards always existed in casual games, because even they have down times. There exist guys whose natural abilities are better than most, and you'll have to face them eventually. There is nothing wrong with trying hard to win even in the most casual of setting, but I wouldn't be exactly proud of beating casual players unless there was legitimate challenges behind it.. but that's me speaking for myself.
Well sure. Some of my favorite vidya memories are invading in various "souls" games, and I never used any cheap build, just my thematic, RP, PvE build. And it makes it that much better when you win.
Coop gays....ugh. But I appreciate them because I've never gotten a better feeling from a video game than when I've defeated them, their summons, and whoever else they pulled from the bonfire while I dealt with the rest of their garbage.
Can you imagine such bliss? An enemy...so afraid, they retreat to the place of their birth, hiding behind various guardians, only to see you cut your way through them and corner them there. They roll, and roll again. It makes no difference in the end.
Yeah, but I play all sorts of PVP games including Dark Souls.. wouldn't really count that as a true pvp but invading one another is funner than being in some gay forest doing duels.
Those games weren't design around pvp exclusively which is what you thinking about.
you type like you're getting fricked in both ears simultaneously and enjoying it
I have the wisdom of 2.5 men
you would be wise to trust my word
>method 1 sucks
>method 2 sucks
>method 3 works but isn't fun
>method 4 is fun and works
>why didn't you try experimenting with method 5-18? what are you some kind of meta gay?
I tend to experiment and try strange builds for the novelty, but sometimes it feels good to use something that just works.
Imagine a game where the only customization you could do to your character was choosing between sword 1 and sword 2, and the only difference between the swords is that one does 100 damage per hit and the other does 50 damage per hit.
Can you give any possible reason, besides being a contrarian, to have pick sword 2?
If it was shaped like a giant wiener, then yes, 100% sword 2.
I said the only difference between the swords was the damage.
since sword 2 deals 50% damage, you end up spending more time playing the game and getting more value for your dollar
Yes. Sometimes Sword 2 is more fun because it allows the battlefield to be more dynamic.
To expand your argument ad absurdum, why not just use a weapon that instantly kills all of your enemies?
>Sword 1 is slower but does more damage
>Sword 2 is weaker but is more faster
They aren't different speeds, what part of "only difference" didn't you get.
He's just experimenting with a high reading speed/low comprehension build
Sword one ends gameplay, sword two continues gameplay.
thinking hard
copying easy
I'm a contrarian who always goes with the unpopular weapon/build/character to beat the meta one
I tend to do that too, but it gets so tiring to struggle in pvp sometimes. What do you do too keep you going?
Easy, instead of actually playing games, just SAY that you totally always win every game you play all the time because you're just so good and you use the worst possible strategy to and still win every time because you're just that amazing. Then accuse anyone who doesn't believe you of being a meta slave while posting one of your dozens of gigachad images.
YWNBAW
Simple. Keep trying, but if you're obscure build is ultimately unplayable, you'll have switch to the next obscure thing.
The existence of a dominant strategy isn't dependent on your awareness of it. You're just naming a transitive state between awareness and unwareness.
What's the current meta of chess?
Vibrator up the butt with a person outside feeding moves from a computer
At the top levels of play, you mean? Players are able to go so deep into preparation and analysis that strategies are tailored to individual opponents, and so it's not about what's on the board but the tools and methods used by players and their support teams behind the scenes.
Uh, no. Knights are shit. Rooks are the meta. Simple as.
Experimentation leads to Meta
Meta leads to Experimentation
meta builds are made by people that already experimented
Why experiment when you can build a carbon copy of what the #1 autist on the leaderboards uses?
In some game the experimentation is boring and frustrating
For single player games, it's because it's the path of least resistance. However, you're free to do whatever, so you don't have to play the meta if you don't want to.
For multiplayer games, it's because you're griefing your teammates if you use some stupid meme build that forces them to carry your dead weight.
>YOU HAVE TO PLAY THE WAY THE FOTM CANCER GUIDE SAYS OR YOURE GRIEFING
kys
because experimenting and having fun costs you time and pissess of the rest of the time when you lose to people who actually bother to play to win.
devs putting in million combinations to "experiment" with are moronic wasting time themselves on a shitty design instead of polishing up or including a variety of game modes and other systems that a simpler and leveled combat experience can work in. They also shit themselves additional work with future balancing. There is a thril in upgrading and working your character but those should be flat power upgrades depending on the gear you obtain through overcoming challenges with abilities everyone else has at their immediate disposal without minmaxing bullshit or "ability bloat" where you a have skills that don't even make it to the rotation / Hotbar.
When my character hit level 16 I won a great battle, in that moment I felt that my toon would get to lvl 100. Now I know it will not even get to 30.
>go into elden ring blind
>play a knight character with one handed sword and board
>do barely any damage and shields ain't blocking shit
>struggle with game like crazy but try to soldier through
>tell friend
>he says just equipt this talisman, 2 huge swords and just jump attack
>respec and upgrade some big weapons >try it and one jump attack literally deletes 30% of the next boss hp
>fly through the game and don't die to another boss up until radagon
If devs don't want a meta just play your own fricking game and balance it.
Meta builds are a result of experimentation, what you're thinking of is all the room temperature IQ morons picking it up after someone with a brain actually did the legwork. If you expect those people to do anything for themselves, you're naive and I like you, but someone's gonna frick you in the ass for it eventually.
>what you're thinking of is all the room temperature IQ morons picking it up after someone with a brain actually did the legwork
And that's a bad thing how exactly? Not everyone has the time to frick around and figure out what works. Some people play to have fun, not to prove something to themselves. It's a game, not a college degree.
It's like struggling with a rubik's cube, so you get someone else to figure it out, then you take the now solved rubik's cube and show it to all your friends because a solved rubik's cube is cool. It's okay though, you don't have anything to prove by solving the rubik's cube yourself, you bought to rubik's cube and now you have a solved rubik's cube. Fun!
That's a bad analogy because unlike a rubik's cube, games are designed for a variety of purposes. Some wan to plow through challenges on their own and conquer the game without any help because of gamer pride, while some just want to experience the story and the world without bothering with all the mechanics. There's no right or wrong way to play a game as along as you're having fun.
You know what? It IS a bad analogy, so let me fix it.
It's like struggling with a rubik's cube, and you see someone who figured theirs out. You know what a solved rubik's cube looks like now, so you pull the stickers off of yours and rearrange them until it looks like the other guy's rubik's cube. You still don't have anything to prove, as long as you can brag to your friends about having a solved rubik's cube.
That's an even worse analogy because it ignores the point completely — that most people who follow meta don't do so to brag, because finishing a game with a meta build is nothing special, but to make the game less tedious for themselves and to enjoy the game. Believe it or not, not everyone plays games on the basis of proving themselves to others.
You're right of course, there's technically speaking no 'wrong' way to play the game. However, playing the game by copying the meta like some fricking trained chimp at a zoo objectively makes you a low IQ moron, and since you have nothing to prove and don't care about bragging, being called that shouldn't worry you.
I have more respect for gays who play off meta because they can't or don't bother to figure the meta out, and just slug their way through the game like that. At least they're in it to play the game their way and understand how their way works, metaslaves don't even understand how the meta works 99% of the time, they only care that it does work.
Respect? You’re a random loser on Ganker, not Todd Howard or Hidetaka Miyazaki. Your respect means as much as any other random losers here — nil.
Since you didn't deny anything I said, I'll consider that your concession. Have a banana, chimp.
>I'll consider that your concession
How clichéd.
Clichés exist for a reason.
why would you intentionally gimp yourself just to be a snowflake? im going to try to be as efficient and good at the game as i can and its the job of the developer to balance their game not me
but meta comes from experiment
what a moronic post
what a moronic post
No seriously, you are a fricking moron.
Are you serious right now?
>The hardcore players say that this difficulty spike is the dev's vengeance against the staleness of our playstyle. As skilled as i am, these tryhards believe that the challenge that awaits me in Hard mode is far more severe and lasting. If that's true...i call it artificial.
Better to win the match no matter what, than be told "gg." Only the winners enjoy anything. I saw an "experimenting" gamer's LED keyboard, but it was split in half, and he lay sobbing at the foot of his gamer chair.
Meta builds were derived from experimentation you doofus
what's the point when the mega-autists on the internet have already tried every single thing and debated everything to death before you finish downloading the update
for fun
>Why not experiment?
SHITBUILDS RUINING MY ENJOYMENT OF A GAME. PRETENDING TO BE moronic IS NOT BUILD VARIETY.
bump
Rip
aw