Guild Wars 2

People always think videos that happen to agree with them are OH SO CLEVER!

Hint: It’s because you agree with them :p

@Spoj;

Yes it’s everyone else, not the people who describe the delicious tears and make snarky youtube videos aren’t the people poisoning the well, it’s the people they like to make fun of :p

Edit: Man maybe Dave was right, it really is a group identity thing. I feel like I’m facetanking a whole culture in here

You are just seeing it as destructive because you are on the other side. You should be a bit more open minded. There are a lot of positives to the meta. You are just refusing to acknowledge them because you cant accept the negatives. Although the negatives can be worked around as has been demonstrated. :P

Spoj The Second.7680:

You are just seeing it as destructive because you are on the other side. You should be a bit more open minded. There are a lot of positives to the meta. You are just refusing to acknowledge them because you cant accept the negatives. Although the negatives can be worked around as has been demonstrated. :P

Honestly, a lot of it is just the semantics, that’s why I forked the thread.

In actual practice I think Anet is doing the absolute best things they can to resolve the meta problem, and I have no complaints, but every time I see somebody advert a ‘meta’ thread my inner word-nerd cries out in anguish.

Meta problem … Seriously how many thread you want to open and troll 20 pages long until you finally admit it’s a player issue which is generated by the ignorance of the PHIW crowd?

Dalanor.5387:

Meta problem … Seriously how many thread you want to open and troll 20 pages long until you finally admit it’s a player issue which is generated by the ignorance of the PHIW crowd?

Well posts like this keep me going:

Let’s break it down.

1) A viewpoint you don’t like is of course trolling
2) It’s all the other group’s fault, and they’re wrong because they’re ignorant.
3) It is very specifically kitten vs. them thing.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that needs to be fought.

Windsagio.1340:

Dalanor.5387:

Meta problem … Seriously how many thread you want to open and troll 20 pages long until you finally admit it’s a player issue which is generated by the ignorance of the PHIW crowd?

Well posts like this keep me going:

Let’s break it down.

1) A viewpoint you don’t like is of course trolling
2) It’s all the other group’s fault, and they’re wrong because they’re ignorant.
3) It is very specifically kitten vs. them thing.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that needs to be fought.

Is it gonna help anything tho?

Nobody is going to convince either side to change their point of view, they will continue to look down upon each other. Fighting each other’s ideology or viewpoint is only going to escalate things and worsen attitude of both sides, not help it.

The solution to this issue has always being in front of the players, and no it isn’t to force them to believe what you want them to believe, the solution is to separate the group since because they all have different goals in mind.

Lifestealer.4910:

Windsagio.1340:

Dalanor.5387:

Meta problem … Seriously how many thread you want to open and troll 20 pages long until you finally admit it’s a player issue which is generated by the ignorance of the PHIW crowd?

Well posts like this keep me going:

Let’s break it down.

1) A viewpoint you don’t like is of course trolling
2) It’s all the other group’s fault, and they’re wrong because they’re ignorant.
3) It is very specifically kitten vs. them thing.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that needs to be fought.

Is it gonna help anything tho?

Nobody is going to convince either side to change their point of view, they will continue to look down upon each other. Fighting each other’s ideology or viewpoint is only going to escalate things and worsen attitude of both sides, not help it.

The solution to this issue has always being in front of the players, and no it isn’t to force them to believe what you want them to believe, the solution is to separate the group since because they all have different goals in mind.

I’m a hopeless dreamer, but the ‘sides’ aren’t the only people that read these (at least early in a thread). So if I can get some people to read my OP and say ‘hey, that kind of makes sense!’ and I can avoid being too provocative myself, there’s a chance to change how people see things a little.

Just not the people who are invested in the idea of a ‘meta’ :p

Ok so now my real input.

So while there are groups on the LFG that are asking for “zerk only”, or those in the PvP lobby who broadcast they are looking for specific builds/classes, in general it doesnt seem to matter to a large portion of players what is or isnt meta, or what it even means. Ive only encountered a few people in all my time pugging that actually care what gear/build i have in game. I haven’t been kicked for having a valk axe/axe build on my warrior, havent been raged at for bringing a necro to a dungeon, or a staff ele to pvp. Its only a certain type of player, commonly called elitists on the forums, that actually care. Most everyone else in game just wants to play and have fun and dont care one way or another.

Windsagio.1340:

Harper.4173:

Windsagio.1340:

In the ongoing discussion of the “PVE Meta” in GW2 there’s some confusion on this, so I figured I’d do a public service and lay it all out.

In the widest sense, ‘metaplay’ is everything you do that isn’t your actual second-to-second or minute-to-minute gameplay.

Games have a wide variety in the prevalence of their metaplay. CCG’s and LCG’s are mostly metaplay, to take the extreme example of hearthstone, your deck construction is the primary thing, the actual gameplay is fairly mechanical.

In comparison, FPS’ have very very little metaplay, they rarely get past some very basic class and loadout.

In the case of GW2, metaplay is general class/build/gear/skill loadouts, and can substantially change the nature of your active play.

Now here’s the tricky part; metaplay and a ‘Metagame’ are actually pretty different.

A Meta*game* is an additional level to competitive gameplay where you’re using metaplay considerations to significantly alter your chances of success.

A classic example of playing the Metagame is counterpicking in a Fighting game. You’re using a non-gameplay consideration to increase your chance of success.

GW2 PvP is full of Metagame considerations, in order to be successful you’re greatly helped by doing a specific build, and if you don’t do that build you need to be aware of how that build works.

GW2 PvE doesn’t really have a Metagame, no build or setup is even remotely required for success and there isn’t any real competitive element to drive the meta. It does have a style that the community prefers (due to speed), but that really can’t raise to the dignity of ‘the Meta’, it’s entirely optional for completing all content.

~~~~
~~~~

TL;DR:
The Metagame is driven by success requirements or competition.
For the Metagame to be a consideration it needs to be just about required for success.
GW2 simply does not have the difficulty or competition in PvE to support a true Metagame.

“The Community’s preferred playstyle” isn’t ‘meta’, it’s a preference.

“The Metagame is driven by success requirements or competition.”

Me and a good portion of the community consider obtaining good rewards fast success.
No – not completing the dungeon or content. Completing it within a time frame that makes this highly profitable.

Since this is what we consider success the term applies here since without this “meta” we cannot achieve the desired objective and thus fail.

Finishing content is not every person’s idea of succeeding.

But the meta has to be pretty solid. "Some people feel this is a goal and some people think that is a goal, and this is required for this groups goals but not for other groups goals’ is kind of wishywashy. In PVP if you take a non-meta team vs a meta team, there’s no way to say ‘I didn’t lose the game!’ at least not a valid one that won’t get you mocked as a sore loser. That is simply not the case in PvE, where there’s a wide range of expectations beyond the baseline of ‘did I complete the content?’

In fact, I’m trying to keep it that way because I don’t want to belittle you guys’ style of playing or call it invalid.

Trust me.
If you tell people that play like me that it took you 18 minutes to do a CM path you will get either mocked or felt sorry for depending on the situation.

Good analysis.

I personally treat Meta in Gw2 as a newbieguide.
Still, I believe that everyone should anyway experiment and set their own builds with which they feel the most comfortable.

Windsagio.1340:

Veydar.5017:

Okay, so this entire thread is more about semantics than anything else? I mean we just had a thread with what feels like 1000 pages revolving around “the meta”, it feels a bit pointless to criticize the choice of wording after 2 years of Guild Wars 2.
The issues within the community will always be there, whether you call it “meta” or “zerk way” or “fluffy puffs” isn’t really relevant. I am sure 95% of the people only have a very vague idea of the word “meta” and only care about what it actually means in the GW2 lingo.

Essentially yeah it’s about semantics

You know how it is, semantics are important to more people than just me, and they do have a meaningful effect. Nobody took part in the discussion unwillingly :p

DaveGan.8065:

Windsagio.1340:

DaveGan.8065:

Windsagio.1340:

The entire thing is that we’re left with partially informed people thinking you have to play in reference to ‘meta’ because in just about every real use of the word that’s how it works.

Ignorance is not an excuse. It’s not our fault that some people are misinformed.

‘Our’. What does group identity have to do with anything? ><

Meaning, the non-uninformed people will not take responsibility or accountability for the failures of the uninformed people for being uninformed.

Please address my first post.

• How is it (objectively) destructive?

• How are players limited other than how they choose to feel limited?

1) It discourages people from playing the content. This is pretty straightforward, I think. In the past when the ‘meta’ was demanded more than it is now this was more of a problem, but the core cause is still there. If you make people think they have to play a particular way to do content (and to people that play other styles of game, the ‘meta’ has a lot of force), some of them just won’t do it.

This does hurt serious dungeon people too, if more people did 5m content, Anet would still be developing for it.

2) Some dungeons it takes a long time to get a group for anyways, and because people filter via meta, it makes them self-exclude from the other side. This actually ties into point 1. A fragmented, mutually-exclusive community isn’t a healthy one.

1) that is their choice and their problem. If they actually cared about doing the content they would find people with similar goals and requirements and party up.
Just like the “meta” players are doing.

“This does hurt serious dungeon people too, if more people did 5m content, Anet would still be developing for it.”

They gave up on 5 man almost immediately after launch. So no – I doubt that’s the case. The community back then and the way they were being done were very different.
I think they made dungeons in this game just to say they have them, and then focused on their Open World as a strategy.

2)This again is player choice.
I would rather wait for a long time or even not do the dungeon at all than go in with bad or inexperienced players and have to witness their abilities and carry them along and explain and all that.
I just don’t care for it. Getting a person from “the other side” is not a viable option.

-Also to mention GW1 – GW1 didn’t really use the term meta – you just had “ping build” and if the build wasn’t the required one you got a kick.
That’s how it was even without this “meta” talk. People would just ask for the “right build”.

Windsagio.1340:

Dalanor.5387:

Meta problem … Seriously how many thread you want to open and troll 20 pages long until you finally admit it’s a player issue which is generated by the ignorance of the PHIW crowd?

Well posts like this keep me going:

Let’s break it down.

1) A viewpoint you don’t like is of course trolling
2) It’s all the other group’s fault, and they’re wrong because they’re ignorant.
3) It is very specifically kitten vs. them thing.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that needs to be fought.

Precisely; us vs “idiots them”, we the great vs they the ignorant, hostility towards that which doesn’t meet one’s personal norms, and being condescending jerks will never end similar threads but always perpetuate and exacerbate the problem. “I am so good, it must be your problem.”

Though I just boil it down to the silly ego of human kind. I hate how people will go at great lengths to belittle each other in order to “win arguments” or prove their “superiority” over others not only over a petty game, but also regarding real life issues.

(Further, it’s drawing your intellect to the mud when one claims to be against “play how I want” players and is doing just the darn same thing, as EVERYBODY PLAYS HOW THEY WANT. It’s an utterly silly but still insulting “pejorative” term, based on a false sense of superiority-once again and again.)

“All things have a right to grow.”

So everyone has the right to play how they want is totally acceptable until it’s based on the meta? Thats what you Windsagio and Star Ace wants to suggest?

Star Ace.5207:

Windsagio.1340:

Dalanor.5387:

Meta problem … Seriously how many thread you want to open and troll 20 pages long until you finally admit it’s a player issue which is generated by the ignorance of the PHIW crowd?

Well posts like this keep me going:

Let’s break it down.

1) A viewpoint you don’t like is of course trolling
2) It’s all the other group’s fault, and they’re wrong because they’re ignorant.
3) It is very specifically kitten vs. them thing.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that needs to be fought.

Precisely; us vs “idiots them”, we the great vs they the ignorant, hostility towards that which doesn’t meet one’s personal norms, and being condescending jerks will never end similar threads but always perpetuate and exacerbate the problem. “I am so good, it must be your problem.”

Though I just boil it down to the silly ego of human kind. I hate how people will go at great lengths to belittle each other in order to “win arguments” or prove their “superiority” over others not only over a petty game, but also regarding real life issues.

(Further, it’s drawing your intellect to the mud when one claims to be against “play how I want” players and is doing just the darn same thing, as EVERYBODY PLAYS HOW THEY WANT. It’s an utterly silly but still insulting “pejorative” term, based on a false sense of superiority-once again and again.)

“All things have a right to grow.”

Ironically this post is doing the exact same thing. If you have a problem with someone being condescending just ignore it. Pointing it out and making it seem as if they are a bad person is doing the exact same thing.

Besides sometimes its difficult not to be condescending towards people who repeatedly spew the same crap over and over without listening to the other side and being intentionally stubborn and passive aggressive. In those cases its kind of their own fault for attracting such hostility.

Quoting Trahearne as an authority figure on ethics is about as silly as the guy who quoted Sword Art Online a few days ago.

Sorry Star, but all you did was object that some of us do not consider being uninformed or underinformed as being a valid excuse. None of us here has been a “condescending jerk”, and we’re only here to offer the opposing viewpoint (as a two-way discussion is more healthy than a one-way one).

Dalanor.5387:

So everyone has the right to play how they want is totally acceptable until it’s based on the meta? Thats what you Windsagio and Star Ace wants to suggest?

I never said you couldn’t play zerker. Just don’t treat it as required play or call it a “Meta” (at least if you want to be accurate). Really, Ace didn’t either from what I read, his pont was ‘dont’ be a jerk about being meta, and don’t tie your ego up with the game.’

I admit the position you attributed to us is more easily argued against though :p

That’s another reason to spit off this thread, the OP in the thread that got me into the discussion wanted to change the game rules dramatically so that zerker was no longer ‘meta’. S/he was wrong on several points, and it muddies the actual discussion that can be had.

Harper.4173:

Trust me.
If you tell people that play like me that it took you 18 minutes to do a CM path you will get either mocked or felt sorry for depending on the situation.

I don’t want to be harsh but, why would I think much of the opinions of people who use how fast they can do a dungeon clear (and how much faster they are than others) as personal validation?

The difference in pvp is that you lose, you lose. You can make excuses for losing, but you can’t change the part that you lost. Non-meta fighting meta in Pvp, given even remotely reasonable skill differentials, non-meta will almost always lose, and lose hard.

In PVE, non meta will win at the base level. Some guy with an ego stake might tell us that we didn’t win amazingly enough, but we still won. Completing the content is the only realistic baseline to use, because it’s the only one that’s universal.

Windsagio.1340:

Dalanor.5387:

So everyone has the right to play how they want is totally acceptable until it’s based on the meta? Thats what you Windsagio and Star Ace wants to suggest?

I never said you couldn’t play zerker. Just don’t treat it as required play or call it a “Meta” (at least if you want to be accurate). Really, Ace didn’t either from what I read, his pont was ‘dont’ be a jerk about being meta, and don’t tie your ego up with the game.’

I admit the position you attributed to us is more easily argued against though :p

That’s another reason to spit off this thread, the OP in the thread that got me into the discussion wanted to change the game rules dramatically so that zerker was no longer ‘meta’. S/he was wrong on several points, and it muddies the actual discussion that can be had.

Not i’m the one who treat it. You and many other anti-zerkers claim this and insult our community for a non-existent problem. Or let me rephrase it. It’s an existent problem created by the anti-crowd which refuse to create their own community (happened in the other meta thread and in many other, no response to create a “PHIW guild”) or simply ignore other players (let’s call them elitist for sake of differences) requirements for certain playstyles.
Meta means what it means, if you misinterpret it its your problem but don’t treat it as a fault of others.

There are numerous instances where “zerker” isn’t the best option, but that got pointed out enough times already and ignored by all of you. As also pointed out many other options are viable and can be played in many gamemode, including PvE and instanced dungeon content. Again, we arrived to the point where the abusing PHIW crowd comes with the pitchforks and demand nerfs on a certain playstyle and ruining others experience for the sake of whatever instead of minding their own business with their likeminded people within their own rules.

tl;dr:
1. Meta means the best available option to achieve something, no matter how you misinterpret it.
2. Jerks are on both side.
3. Create the PHIW community and leave as alone finally with your insulting toxic attutide.

/drops the mic

Dalanor; I know I just said this, but you’re not actually responding to this thread. You’re responding to any of the previous discussions/arguments on the subject.

I barely want to answer your tl;dr, but some of it is amazingly relevant,

1) No, you’re wrong, that’s the whole point of the thread. Reread the OP, it explains pretty well (imo)
2) No kidding? This isn’t relevant to what I’m saying though, and nobody’s denying it.
3) Utterly, utterly irrelevant. I can’t speak for others, I have absolutely no problem getting groups, because most people don’t care. I don’t need a community to be able to play, maybe because I’m pleasant to play with and don’t kitten up.

… Actually I’ll give a bit more on this; The “PHIW Community” as you would call it is simply most of the people that just enjoy playing the game and doing the content. It doesn’t need to be a ‘community’, it’s the community o players, except those who exclude themselves.

Nobody wins a Rap battle by saying ’I know you are but what am I?"

Windsagio.1340:

Dalanor.5387:

So everyone has the right to play how they want is totally acceptable until it’s based on the meta? Thats what you Windsagio and Star Ace wants to suggest?

I never said you couldn’t play zerker. Just don’t treat it as required play or call it a “Meta” (at least if you want to be accurate). Really, Ace didn’t either from what I read, his pont was ‘dont’ be a jerk about being meta, and don’t tie your ego up with the game.’

I admit the position you attributed to us is more easily argued against though :p

That’s another reason to spit off this thread, the OP in the thread that got me into the discussion wanted to change the game rules dramatically so that zerker was no longer ‘meta’. S/he was wrong on several points, and it muddies the actual discussion that can be had.

It is required play for parties that care about it and who require it in their LFG.
We treat it as such because for us it is required – and it is also required to run with us ( by us i mean those who care about efficiency).

Again – for people who do content for fast rewards ( the goal) it is meta since the term refers to the optimal strategy to obtain victory. For us victory is speeding through the content.

Also even if the term meta would be incorrect why would we bother changing it? The majority of the community instantly knows what you mean when you say “zerker meta” and ultimately the reason for communication is the exchange of information.
If that exchange can take place even if the term is wrongly used do we really care?

Windsagio.1340:

Harper.4173:

Trust me.
If you tell people that play like me that it took you 18 minutes to do a CM path you will get either mocked or felt sorry for depending on the situation.

I don’t want to be harsh but, why would I think much of the opinions of people who use how fast they can do a dungeon clear (and how much faster they are than others) as personal validation?

The difference in pvp is that you lose, you lose. You can make excuses for losing, but you can’t change the part that you lost. Non-meta fighting meta in Pvp, given even remotely reasonable skill differentials, non-meta will almost always lose, and lose hard.

In PVE, non meta will win at the base level. Some guy with an ego stake might tell us that we didn’t win amazingly enough, but we still won. Completing the content is the only realistic baseline to use, because it’s the only one that’s universal.

Again I am telling you :

The way you see it is not how people who run speed groups see it.

If I go into AC P1 and take more than 10 minutes I have lost. Period.
I’ve lost my time, my motivation and my enjoyment.

For people who care about speed and efficiency completing under certain conditions ( fast) is equivalent to winning in your pvp scenario.
Simply completing is just like in your example I said " yeah but at least you still played the game".

Just completing is not the goal. Completing within a set time frame is. Failure to complete in said time frame = losing.

You’re so stubborn Harper :p

I’ve said this, but I’ll repeat: I care for a few reasons

1) I really do feel that the improper usage has a chilling effect and turns people off.
2) I’m a ‘words have meanings’ nerd, and the misusage annoys me in general
3) I feel that people are using it to define an ‘other’ that they can be hostile to and look down on, and I think that’s bad for the game. (Some folks are calling it the “PHIW Crowd”)

Now I could be mistaken about point 1, but I think basic psychology supports the idea.
On point 2, there’s really nothing to be done, it will still annoy me if you’re using it wrong.
On point 3, I think this is what star ace was referring to. Do what you want and play what you want, but it’s more than that for some folks, it’s some kind of ego thing. Admittedly that also applies to the “YOU CAN’T TELL ME WHAT TO DO, I’M JOINING ANYWAYS” people, but let’s also be frank, they’re not taking part in this discussion.

~~~~

The thread was really started on point 2 though, it really irks the hell out of me to see the term so consistently misused :p

Harper.4173:

Again I am telling you :

The way you see it is not how people who run speed groups see it.

If I go into AC P1 and take more than 10 minutes I have lost. Period.
I’ve lost my time, my motivation and my enjoyment.

For people who care about speed and efficiency completing under certain conditions ( fast) is equivalent to winning in your pvp scenario.
Simply completing is just like in your example I said " yeah but at least you still played the game".

Just completing is not the goal. Completing within a set time frame is. Failure to complete in said time frame = losing.

Gah you and your double posts :p

There are levels of goals, sure, but there’s also a baseline.

Your personal goals only apply to you, you can call whatever you want a failure. You Cannot apply that meaning to other players and expect them to respect it.

In comparison, failing to complete the dungeon is about as good of a baseline failure as we can get. It’s pretty universally a failure, akin to losing a PvP match.

This is an essential problem. You have to get out of your own head and understand the difference between your, or a small groups goals and the likely goals of the other players. You have to try to find a common ground if you can, and the best common ground I can come up with is dungeon completion.

I can apply my goals to the parties I start.2 Back To Top
Harper.4173

Parties that I clearly state the goals for. People who have the same goals as me or who want to take up the same goals can join. People who don’t have the same goals should not join.
So for me and people like me the goals are clear and depending on those goals we define what is “meta” for us and what we consider success or not.

You don’t get it. I don’t have to get out of anywhere.
I play with people who play like me. We like the way we do our things. Why should I have to find common ground with people I don’t want to play with and will never play with?

2) I’m a ‘words have meanings’ nerd, and the misusage annoys me in general

Words do have meaning. “Meta” has the meaning of being whatever is currently the most efficient. It has been that way in every game.

Words also do not have to have the same meaning to everyone. Case in point: “optimal”, “elitist”, “jerk”. Just because you disagree with the usage of one word does not invalidate its meaning and usage to others.

Take FFXIV. People used to run Titan Hard Mode with 3 tanks or 3 healers (party of 8 ) for safety, but the meta will always try to use 1-2 tanks/healers because having more DPS makes things go faster. Even your standard that “meta” needs to be required to succeed is one that does not hold in other games.

Your personal goals only apply to you, you can call whatever you want a failure. You Cannot apply that meaning to other players and expect them to respect it.

There is already a community of other players that accepts this meaning. They not only respect it, but follow it themselves. The word “meta” is an invitation for those other players to come and run according to that standard. In fact, the word “meta” is an invitation for the entire community to follow the standard.

We will stop using this word “meta” on one condition: you (or whoever) are able to get the community to adapt another word and get us to use it on the same level that we use the word “meta” now.

Harper.4173:

I can apply my goals to the parties I start.2 Back To Top
Harper.4173

Parties that I clearly state the goals for. People who have the same goals as me or who want to take up the same goals can join. People who don’t have the same goals should not join.
So for me and people like me the goals are clear and depending on those goals we define what is “meta” for us and what we consider success or not.

You don’t get it. I don’t have to get out of anywhere.
I play with people who play like me. We like the way we do our things. Why should I have to find common ground with people I don’t want to play with and will never play with?

“Get out of your own head” is pretty useful advice for life though, empathy is a good thing, and life is a lot less painful once you get that your desires and personal likes don’t define everyone elses desires and personal likes.

life is a lot less painful once you get that your desires and personal likes don’t define everyone elses desires and personal likes.

You would do well to follow this advice yourself.

DaveGan.8065:

life is a lot less painful once you get that your desires and personal likes don’t define everyone elses desires and personal likes.

You would do well to follow this advice yourself.

Lol was just thinking this myself.

Windsagio.1340:

Harper.4173:

I can apply my goals to the parties I start.2 Back To Top
Harper.4173

Parties that I clearly state the goals for. People who have the same goals as me or who want to take up the same goals can join. People who don’t have the same goals should not join.
So for me and people like me the goals are clear and depending on those goals we define what is “meta” for us and what we consider success or not.

You don’t get it. I don’t have to get out of anywhere.
I play with people who play like me. We like the way we do our things. Why should I have to find common ground with people I don’t want to play with and will never play with?

“Get out of your own head” is pretty useful advice for life though, empathy is a good thing, and life is a lot less painful once you get that your desires and personal likes don’t define everyone elses desires and personal likes.

I only have enough empathy to go around for RL issues. And sometimes not even then.

Honestly – just because I choose to be selfish in a game and not carry people around doesn’t make me the bad guy.
I don’t have a ton of time to sink in games anymore. I don’t have the same conditions for gaming I had 5 years ago.
That aside – I try to make the most of my time as it is – and that means that I have to follow a strict schedule and play hard.

A while ago I compared my time spent in game to a friend. At that time he had accumulated roughly ( give or take a hundred or two of gold) the same amount of gold in game that I had. We compared this and then we compared play time.

I had played ( at that time – a month or two ago) 40% less GW2 than he had. He doesn’t afk in game and neither do I.

That’s what being efficient gets you. You get to have nice stuff and don’t take forever getting it.

I would like to stress out once again : This is a game. I can play however I want.
I can play with whomever I want.
I can select the people I choose to play with and associate myself with using any criteria I see fit.

You’re constantly telling me “you can’t tell others what to do or how to play”. Great.
But I can dictate the terms on which I play and can ask for requirements of those who would join me.

I have never gone into a “play how you want” party to interfere, make fun, call them bad or suboptimal.
The same cannot be said for many people who joined my parties not fulfilling the posted requirements and spamming me with hate after their swift kick.

Oh you guys ><

Your essential misunderstanding is your insistence that I’m telling you how you must play the game. I’m not at all, I’m telling you that you’re describing it in the wrong way.

Why do you keep saying that I’m insisting you change the way you want to play? At worst I’m arguing that some of the attitudes associated with it are destructive, but even that is not a demand, maybe unsolicited advice.

~~

To my specific, I can totally understand why you love playing the way you do, and really, I’m not sure how many ways I have to say this, I wouldn’t want to deny you that.

I’m honestly at a loss, I really don’t get the constant reframing to that single point, given all the different ways I’ve tried to show it’s not what I’m after.

Windsagio.1340:

Oh you guys ><

Your essential misunderstanding is your insistence that I’m telling you how you must play the game. I’m not at all, I’m telling you that you’re describing it in the wrong way.

Why do you keep saying that I’m insisting you change the way you want to play? At worst I’m arguing that some of the attitudes associated with it are destructive, but even that is not a demand, maybe unsolicited advice.

This is the manner in which the PHIW crowd becomes villainous. One misunderstands, another comes to his misunderstood defence, more pile in to get a shot in at you, The Evil One who wants to manipulate play, and eventually you’re standing in front of a wrong-direction hydra of an argument you didn’t want to start in the first place. They feel vindicated in the confusion, your point is lost in the muck.

Windsagio.1340:

At worst I’m arguing that some of the attitudes associated with it are destructive, but even that is not a demand, maybe unsolicited advice.

Most of us consider that a rather serious accusation, rather than some afterthought. At least that you seem to hold “us” accountable for this “destructive” nature is something “we” cringe at.

Your arguments about the “destructive” nature of the direction of meta seem similar to ones offered by ones who were bitter about theorycrafting and DPS meters in WoW long ago. As people learn how to master the content in efficient ways, diversity gets discouraged in favor of cookiecutter, future content difficulty is focused around these theorycrafters, and people who didn’t keep up fall behind as former “achievements” are now “prerequisites” and “requirements”.

And to that we say…most of it does not apply to this game.

Using the very same argument you use (that “meta” is not a requirement for completing the content) is proof that nobody has become left behind as a result of the “meta”.

Especially under GW2’s more casual philosophy, we can say that no player shall be excluded from being able to complete content. But that is all that any player is entitled to, if even that. If they want to get there faster, if they want to be able to join higher level groups, then they need to do some things in exchange (join a guild, put on zerker gear, learn their class better, etc).

Please come back and talk about a destructive meta when it actually results in new content being so hard that players are actually excluded from being able to complete it. Because I don’t think we’ll see that any time soon.

Your essential misunderstanding

I believe the essential misunderstanding may lie with you…

I’m telling you that you’re describing it in the wrong way.

…starting with you describing it differently than you imagine the situation

Windsagio.1340:

TL;DR:
The Metagame is driven by success requirements or competition.
For the Metagame to be a consideration it needs to be just about required for success.

This is inaccurate. Metagaming can and does occur regardless of success requirements or competition.

Just because I’m not native english speaker,could someone explain me the goal of this thread?

I’ve read the OP, which doesn’t raise any discussion, only helps the poster to have his name on front page. But the most hilarious is the discussion after, basically there is no problem and OP agree with all people contradicting him, just there is a misunderstanding …

At some point discussion for the sake of it shouldn’t be worth to stay on the forum more than 2 hours…..

NonToxic.9185:

Like DanGan here, who once again completely misses the point and spouts 5 paragraphs of nonsense.

Will this person who has made no actual attempt at discussion (bandwagoning doesn’t count) either show himself out or make an actual attempt?

The point is that OP way overstepped in the point he was trying to make, and that this is a two-way discussion.

PS: bandwagoning a post that fails to refute (deliberate avoidance?) any points brought up in the previous round of discussion may not be the best move either.

Ashen.2907:

Windsagio.1340:

TL;DR:
The Metagame is driven by success requirements or competition.
For the Metagame to be a consideration it needs to be just about required for success.

This is inaccurate. Metagaming can and does occur regardless of success requirements or competition.

That distinction is covered in the non tl;dr version of the thread. The purpose is to establish the distinction between metaplay (which you’re describing) and the ‘Metagame’ (which I’m arguing is something different).

Windsagio.1340:

The purpose is to establish the distinction between metaplay (which you’re describing) and the ‘Metagame’ (which I’m arguing is something different).

The problem is, the only basis you have for that argument is the definition you created by yourself and that most people do not seem to share. Those words simply do not mean the things you think they mean.

Spoj The Second.7680:

The last point is just your opinion. There is a competative element. Its just not direct.

It also depends on the definition of success. Although I do not do speedruns (hence no real competitive element), I don’t feel very successful after a 2+hour fractal run.

Generally, it matters significantly more how a community uses a word in practice than how a dictionary defines it theory. When you are in a hobby or trade, those communities will define terms for themselves that might not match the dictionary definition of the term. To be hung up on the fact that plumbers use a different word to mean torsion wrench than the dictionary would recommend is the sign of a small mind.

DaveGan.8065:

NonToxic.9185:

Like DanGan here, who once again completely misses the point and spouts 5 paragraphs of nonsense.

Will this person who has made no actual attempt at discussion (bandwagoning doesn’t count) either show himself out or make an actual attempt?

The point is that OP way overstepped in the point he was trying to make, and that this is a two-way discussion.

PS: bandwagoning a post that fails to refute (deliberate avoidance?) any points brought up in the previous round of discussion may not be the best move either.

Sure! You are talking about something nobody has raised as an issue, you continually convolute the point that is being made otherwise by ignoring it to steer towards your morass of agenda text. No more than you can argue with a dictionary can you debate the meaning of a term that was given meaning by something other than yourself with an authority different than your own.

Meta doesn’t mean what you want it to, it means what it means. And the incorrect application of the term and related terms is what the thread is about, not your definition of success or destruction or how you think the players feel, all of that is completely irrelevant.

He didn’t overstep anything, you and most of the other posters just sniped 3 or 4 words from the original post and are now so far from the real intention of the OP that you can’t see it for the thick fog of misdirection. Evidence: every post poor Wind makes has a clear purpose, and every response is off on a different tangent like a skritt after a shiny.

Feel free to reply, I won’t. If I could no-bump this thread I would, but my old post was infracted and now sits in your quote without context so I thought I should make myself clear. You can feel however you want, you are missing the point over and over.

NonToxic.9185:

Sure! You are talking about something nobody has raised as an issue, you continually convolute the point that is being made otherwise by ignoring it to steer towards your morass of agenda text. No more than you can argue with a dictionary can you debate the meaning of a term that was given meaning by something other than yourself with an authority different than your own.

Meta doesn’t mean what you want it to, it means what it means. And the incorrect application of the term and related terms is what the thread is about, not your definition of success or destruction or how you think the players feel, all of that is completely irrelevant.

He didn’t overstep anything, you and most of the other posters just sniped 3 or 4 words from the original post and are now so far from the real intention of the OP that you can’t see it for the thick fog of misdirection. Evidence: every post poor Wind makes has a clear purpose, and every response is off on a different tangent like a skritt after a shiny.

Feel free to reply, I won’t. If I could no-bump this thread I would, but my old post was infracted and now sits in your quote without context so I thought I should make myself clear. You can feel however you want, you are missing the point over and over.

How can you possibly say any less with any more words, yet ironically accuse me of missing the point?

My point was that “meta” means whatever the group using it wills it to mean. OP overstepped himself by proclaiming his personal definition superior, based on being a “words nerd” and an assertion that the commonly accepted meaning is toxic/destructive.

Sorry that you’ve chosen to remove yourself from the conversation (not that you’ve contributed anything with substance yet), but don’t expect to throw that many weak subtle jabs with nothing behind them and expect not to get called out.