My single biggest complaint in game industry - META CHANGES

Chrisssj2 · Feb 28, 2017

I need to rant.
Well you have the cater to "movie" gamers and games are more cinematic rather then real intrinsic satisfying gamplay.

But the thing that has the last years destroyed my gaming is something else...
META CHANGES. I HATE IT.
Well there's 2 sides to everything ofcourse but ussually they go overboard with it over longer periods of time. Imo games with somewhat solid gameplay DONT EVER FEEL STALE. This is an argument i seem to keep finding that the meta changes to keep the feel of the game fresh. (load of bs imo) Hey yeah you kinda need to relearn the game.. sure that keeps fresh. "in a way you don't want to, trust me"

We have seen where balance changes lead over the year, esp with warcraft 3 and world of warcraft. With world of warcraft it is just became stale because of the balance changes.

Now i have several games i play
League of legends, couple of thousand hours into it. And the meta changes completly ruined the game for me. I prefer Pre-season 1 or Season 1. It only went downhill after that.

IMO ESPORT is killing games.

Hearthstone. it's grubby rehash expansions every 3-6 months. and remove old card packs from standard rank play.. is DISGUSTING. I don't even want to play the game anymore, it takes also way to much time because there are always new cards to gain, which you will NEED.

Starwars galaxy of heroes. It's a mobile turn based RPG game, where the meta revolves around farming charachters for months upon time, only to find by the time you get it to full strength it's redudant by pay to win charachters. Coupled with new balance changes.
(Now I must say they did release with the zeta champs and reworks some good things to make old charachters valid again, but the problem still remains for alot.)

Gameplay is a very specific balance of parameters in which you thrive and fall, change the parameters and mechanics too much, and it will feel like an entirely different game so to say.

This is what i hate about online gaming. I mean sure balance changes for the worst possible things, but it never ends there, and ussually nerfs etc. are huge not incremental like hey let's try 10%.

And i am going to say something that might irk some people. I actually like when things are over powered, Everything is supposed to be (more) overpowered in a sense. Or rather powerfull... That a charachter has a specific role attribute skill or playstyle that clearly stands above others. This is great! It depends on the game though.. but yeah.
If every charachter is just as powerfull, WHY THE HECK WOULD I WANT TO PLAY IT?

If you play warcraft 3 frozen throne custom maps. youll come across this lots of times

had the best times playing that for 6 years straight.

Silverthorn · Feb 28, 2017

I understand where you come from. Played quite a lot of Warcraft 3 back in the days. I played Hearthstone back in the closed beta and for a bit after launch, but it became stale to me. I didn't play League, but did play another MOBA (Smite) for 1000+ hours before I stopped.
The problem that I eventually faced with those games is that they face you with 2 choices: Grind the fuck out of the game, or pay a shitton of money to unlock the good stuff. Regardless what you do, those games make you invest in them, be it time or money. And this makes you afraid of leaving the game, because that learning time and the eventual money you spent would "go to waste".
And of course, if they make you play the game so much, it would become stale very quick if they didn't change it out a bit every so often.

Now in itself I didn't hate playing those games, and they truly have something addictive. The feeling of progress, both in skill and collection (heroes, cards, skins, whatever...) is almost always stimulating (just like in other type of games).
Add to that the thrill of competing against real people and it gets even better.

But as I've said, these games are made to pump out your time and money. And because of that, at least for me, I kinda stopped playing new games and looking for new experiences.
And with the constant changes brought to the "meta", several times I had to relearn quite a bit of what i knew about the game, and it came to a point where even though I spent most of my time playing those games they mostly brought me frustration.

So I ended up quitting those, and now I'm slowly clearing my backlog of singleplayer games, and enjoying it.

I read what I just wrote and I realize I sound like a repenting smoker/alcoholic lol. Good thing I was a poor fuck as a teen and never could afford to get into MMORPGs.

Taleweaver · Feb 28, 2017

Okay...nice rant. I get why you're hating it, but don't really feel the same way. And it's not because I don't play much online games anymore. So the example I'm going to use (vanilla starcraft 2) might be an exception or even a very outdated one, but it's the only one I'm familiar with.

The catering to "movie players"...I think you're referring to the audience who watches online matches between players, right? So rather than let everyone play the game as it was originally released, developers tweak the different factions to provide more of an even match for the viewers.
In that case...I can't speak much for others, but in the case of starcraft 2, blizzard certainly didn't so much do this for the viewers as for...well...everyone. In the early days (so about 5 years ago, now?) zerg was seriously underpowered compared to terran or protoss. Up to the point where the few zerg players managed to shine more because other players had less practice time against zerg. While more variety is certainly nicer to the audience (6 race combinations of 2-player matches instead of just 3), it's also better for the players as well. As a gamer, it's not fun to play as a weaker race, especially if the good players (and tournaments always contains good players) will push you towards the same strategies or even tactics that'll end up losing you the match. As the good players, it's not fun either: these matches are more boring, and can even end up in grief about the matchups ("why does HE gets an easy win against zerg while I have to fight for this first round?").

On ladders, things weren't that better either. As a bronze/silver player I got fed up with fighting people who just threw the same strategy I couldn't beat at me. And those other players did that because it was - you guessed it - effective.
Extra credits also makes a mention of this in one of their videos about the first starcraft: everyone was just zerg rushing. Blizzard could've left things as it was, but it would in the end just result in everyone doing it. While potentially fun in the short term, in the long term it would never have become the legendary esports game that it is today.

I agree that after, say, a year or so, I would figure that the races in SC2 were balanced enough, but blizzard still kept tweaking things. That can be annoying, yes, but I think it is more to avoid single win strategies from cropping up.

The thing extra credits warns about isn't so much that there's a problem with things being imbalanced (heck...I think they even named one of their vids 'perfect imbalance'), but that this imbalance shouldn't break the fun. Frankly: it should be fun to use it as well as being beaten by it. And that's pretty hard to achieve...

Chrisssj2 · Feb 28, 2017

Taleweaver said:
Okay...nice rant. I get why you're hating it, but don't really feel the same way. And it's not because I don't play much online games anymore. So the example I'm going to use (vanilla starcraft 2) might be an exception or even a very outdated one, but it's the only one I'm familiar with.

The catering to "movie players"...I think you're referring to the audience who watches online matches between players, right? So rather than let everyone play the game as it was originally released, developers tweak the different factions to provide more of an even match for the viewers.
In that case...I can't speak much for others, but in the case of starcraft 2, blizzard certainly didn't so much do this for the viewers as for...well...everyone. In the early days (so about 5 years ago, now?) zerg was seriously underpowered compared to terran or protoss. Up to the point where the few zerg players managed to shine more because other players had less practice time against zerg. While more variety is certainly nicer to the audience (6 race combinations of 2-player matches instead of just 3), it's also better for the players as well. As a gamer, it's not fun to play as a weaker race, especially if the good players (and tournaments always contains good players) will push you towards the same strategies or even tactics that'll end up losing you the match. As the good players, it's not fun either: these matches are more boring, and can even end up in grief about the matchups ("why does HE gets an easy win against zerg while I have to fight for this first round?").

On ladders, things weren't that better either. As a bronze/silver player I got fed up with fighting people who just threw the same strategy I couldn't beat at me. And those other players did that because it was - you guessed it - effective.
Extra credits also makes a mention of this in one of their videos about the first starcraft: everyone was just zerg rushing. Blizzard could've left things as it was, but it would in the end just result in everyone doing it. While potentially fun in the short term, in the long term it would never have become the legendary esports game that it is today.

I agree that after, say, a year or so, I would figure that the races in SC2 were balanced enough, but blizzard still kept tweaking things. That can be annoying, yes, but I think it is more to avoid single win strategies from cropping up.

The thing extra credits warns about isn't so much that there's a problem with things being imbalanced (heck...I think they even named one of their vids 'perfect imbalance'), but that this imbalance shouldn't break the fun. Frankly: it should be fun to use it as well as being beaten by it. And that's pretty hard to achieve...

I didnt mean viewers just there has been a trend of games that follow lots of custscenes/quick time events, and or just main story good flashy graphics finish in 10 hour because ppl have no attention span, not good lasting mechanics or innovativeness. Not to say all of them are like that, but it has been a trend for some time.
Well If something is severly underpowered tweak it, but imo this thing gets quickly out of hand the way they tweak it, because it is never one change, theyll keep changing etc. and almost never small increments.
For example in alot of warcraft 3 custom fan maps, often every single hero is feeling valued, excelling in some kind of a way. So in some ways they can be very underpowered, but aslong as the general picture fulfills a role, even if it somewhat requires more skill, then it is valid imo. (for example needing more requirments or hero being squishy)
Ive played so many versions of footman frenzy. And most of them were good, even if it was sometimes darn impossible to kill a certain champ. But hey that champ had other strengths.
It is your job to make sure the other one doesnt get as far ahead. For example.

I mean some balance changes sure, but it will never be that. In 6 months or a year you won't recognise the feel of the game entirely anymore... This is what saddens me.
Sure i am happy for some changes, which is the only somewhat brightpoint. but id trade them anyday, to get the unfilltered vanilla experience of heartstone, league of legends etc..
IMO most games are better vanilla.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Silverthorn said:
I understand where you come from. Played quite a lot of Warcraft 3 back in the days. I played Hearthstone back in the closed beta and for a bit after launch, but it became stale to me. I didn't play League, but did play another MOBA (Smite) for 1000+ hours before I stopped.
The problem that I eventually faced with those games is that they face you with 2 choices: Grind the fuck out of the game, or pay a shitton of money to unlock the good stuff. Regardless what you do, those games make you invest in them, be it time or money. And this makes you afraid of leaving the game, because that learning time and the eventual money you spent would "go to waste".
And of course, if they make you play the game so much, it would become stale very quick if they didn't change it out a bit every so often.

Now in itself I didn't hate playing those games, and they truly have something addictive. The feeling of progress, both in skill and collection (heroes, cards, skins, whatever...) is almost always stimulating (just like in other type of games).
Add to that the thrill of competing against real people and it gets even better.

But as I've said, these games are made to pump out your time and money. And because of that, at least for me, I kinda stopped playing new games and looking for new experiences.
And with the constant changes brought to the "meta", several times I had to relearn quite a bit of what i knew about the game, and it came to a point where even though I spent most of my time playing those games they mostly brought me frustration.

So I ended up quitting those, and now I'm slowly clearing my backlog of singleplayer games, and enjoying it.

I read what I just wrote and I realize I sound like a repenting smoker/alcoholic lol. Good thing I was a poor fuck as a teen and never could afford to get into MMORPGs.

I don't know. maybe im different. But things don't get stale for me quickly. If it is solid gameplay how can it get stale that quickly? Its like playing cards or poker, do you see meta changes there? NO it's solid.
SO KEEP YOUR DIRTY HANDS OF THE GAME.

just had to say this.
Yeah what you said for a good part plays into it aswell. the addictiveness marketing thing, always needing to hook the playerbase, by either changing meta bringing out new content and constant tasks.
It's the same in starwars force arena, new mobile game, new cards get quickly released after the game is just 1 month old. the meta shifted like 4 times now. Im so fed up with this shit.!!! Now they bring new daily quests etc. even more so. I can't keep up with all this shit.
And its aggrovating me, because i like to play at a certain level of gameplay which is a specific experience. These days you almost need to make a game exclusivly your focus to be able to do that, with lots of patience or or possibly money.

I like the idea of a game improving. but the philosphy that lives stronger in me because of what ive seen is, WHAT IS NOT BROKEN DONT FIX.

Which opens a new interesting topic. for example many AAA titles scoring good numbers metacritic. And then a new one in the serie comes and it is a 60 or 70 perhaps. Or even sometimes 80 but still what i mean to say with that new one is in many cases the old formula is thrown out of the window. Trying to be innovative? And in most cases imo. Failing miserbly. The level of polishing, testing etc. So different sometimes that you wonder if it's the same company making previous game.

I see it happen with tales games, perhaps because i started with the 3 arguebly strongest titles, tales of abyss, vesperia, symphonia.
I see it with ninja gaiden. Even metal gear solid, I did like the game though, but wtf no real story.. Like what in their good minds decided it was a good idea to change it like this, when you have a piece of a fucking gem in your hands that has been TESTED to work. (community and all)
For most games I just prefer new story and updated graphics, but GAMEPLAY stay almost identical.

Everything is also going open world, GTA V kind of a gameplay which is the 3rd point in which i feel to be destroying games. What happens to more linear and intimate settings? Imo they tend to be more creative as you get familiar with them. Rather then re-used assets in an open world where you are spending sometimes 5 minutes travelling to mission to mission. (dont get me wrong it can be impressive) But I feel in a sense going back to the roots or some combination of these 2 things would do better. like 70% linear 30% open world

Taleweaver · Feb 28, 2017

Chrisssj2 said:
Well If something is severly underpowered tweak it, but imo this thing gets quickly out of hand the way they tweak it, because it is never one change, theyll keep changing etc. and almost never small increments.

I still agree, but I've got to ask: why do you keep playing these games? At this point, there are so incredibly many games that I can't even start playing all the games that interest me. There are also plenty of multiplayer games that don't patch everything, and I'm sure quite some are still populated as well. Is this a personal gripe against games you used to like?

Chrisssj2 said:
I don't know. maybe im different. But things don't get stale for me quickly. If it is solid gameplay how can it get stale that quickly? Its like playing cards or poker, do you see meta changes there? NO it's solid.
SO KEEP YOUR DIRTY HANDS OF THE GAME.
just had to say this.

Sorry, but wrong use of words: the games stay the same but the metagame shifts constantly. I play cards with my family roughly every month, and exactly because we know each other's style, we adapt our own bidding and playing style.

Chrisssj2 · Feb 28, 2017

Taleweaver said:
I still agree, but I've got to ask: why do you keep playing these games? At this point, there are so incredibly many games that I can't even start playing all the games that interest me. There are also plenty of multiplayer games that don't patch everything, and I'm sure quite some are still populated as well. Is this a personal gripe against games you used to like?

Sorry, but wrong use of words: the games stay the same but the metagame shifts constantly. I play cards with my family roughly every month, and exactly because we know each other's style, we adapt our own bidding and playing style.

Because my love for these games runs deep, so I end up giving it a chance, bit mostly leaving it a sour taste at some point. I drew the line with latest expansions hearstone. I play these games because they fill a certain art or style that is unique and not easily found. So yes lots of games, but some are really unique, and when those gems are raped it hurts! because nowhere else this gem will be....

Well that's debatable.. im sure some people get that if a meta shift so much it can feel totally different.

Hells Malice · Feb 28, 2017

Sounds like you're just garbage. Metas can shift for multiple reasons. Usually it's additional content or balance changes, but it can also just be from people discovering new builds or combinations or things like that. Depending on the game.

In order for League of Legends to never have a meta shift, it would need to stop balancing champions (enjoy seeing literally the same 10-12 every match), and also stop adding any new champions. Because new champions almost always introduce new mechanics that may shake up the meta.
The game would stagnate and die within a year.

esports do nothing towards your everyday casual gaming. League doesn't update because it's an esport, it updates because that's what a moba/competitive game does to not die.

Hearthstone employs one of the most common trading card methods of keeping it fresh. There are only so many cards you can print before you have to start massively altering the game because you have no idea what to do now *cough Yugioh*. As such it shifts out old expansions to bring in new ones, to keep things fresh and interesting. I assume you're crying because you play once a week and quickly fall behind. The game does have a casual mode that lets you use all the cards (hint: it's complete shit because it has too many cards). Also if you're thinking about it from a competitive standpoint, if all expansions were in play it could potentially greatly increase the difficulty of newer players trying to make 'good' decks, because it might require good cards from 15 different expansions. Even veteran players might struggle because a new expansion could still end up making old cards that weren't relevant, relevant.

Mobile games are after the almighty $. They aren't "shifting the meta". They just want money. Obviously. Whales always rule those games.

Gameplay is a very specific balance of parameters in which you thrive and fall, change the parameters and mechanics too much, and it will feel like an entirely different game so to say.

This is what i hate about online gaming. I mean sure balance changes for the worst possible things, but it never ends there, and ussually nerfs etc. are huge not incremental like hey let's try 10%.

Sounds like you're just salty they nerfed your favorite champion. Cry more. No game with as many characters as league has will ever be balanced. It will forever be a game of buffs and nerfs. If you aren't complete shit, you learn to adapt.
If you want games that never get balanced or shifted (or barely, anyway) go play CS:GO

And i am going to say something that might irk some people. I actually like when things are over powered, Everything is supposed to be (more) overpowered in a sense. Or rather powerfull... That a charachter has a specific role attribute skill or playstyle that clearly stands above others. This is great! It depends on the game though.. but yeah.
If every charachter is just as powerfull, WHY THE HECK WOULD I WANT TO PLAY IT?

You seem completely confused. Characters can have roles without being overpowered. You sound like one of those kids who googles "best champion in league of legends" and then mains whatever people tell you to. Then gets salty when you can't exploit something broken for easier wins. The biggest reason characters get nerfed is if they're performing too well compared to others in the same role. Balance changes keep characters in line for their specific role. if you break down every champion in league of legends you'll see they all have set strengths and weaknesses. Balance happens because within a specific role, some characters become far, far better at doing what others in the role do, making the other characters completely worthless. Why pick a lesser character when you can simply pick the best one? That's unhealthy as fuck, and also boring and stagnant. That's not to say every character in a specific role is "the same". Just that they perform a similar function within the game, albeit probably in different ways through different skills and different mechanics.

To be honest your entire rant is just entitled bullshit. You cry because the meta shifts outside your favor and whine because you no longer have an unfair advantage. Get over it. The game would be dead with no content and no changes. That's just life. Most meta shifts aren't even intentional. They just happen when a character is brought back in line, some new ones pop out. It's an eternal cycle for games that get new content.

Chrisssj2 · Feb 28, 2017

Hells Malice said:
Sounds like you're just garbage. Metas can shift for multiple reasons. Usually it's additional content or balance changes, but it can also just be from people discovering new builds or combinations or things like that. Depending on the game.

In order for League of Legends to never have a meta shift, it would need to stop balancing champions (enjoy seeing literally the same 10-12 every match), and also stop adding any new champions. Because new champions almost always introduce new mechanics that may shake up the meta.
The game would stagnate and die within a year.

esports do nothing towards your everyday casual gaming. League doesn't update because it's an esport, it updates because that's what a moba/competitive game does to not die.

Hearthstone employs one of the most common trading card methods of keeping it fresh. There are only so many cards you can print before you have to start massively altering the game because you have no idea what to do now *cough Yugioh*. As such it shifts out old expansions to bring in new ones, to keep things fresh and interesting. I assume you're crying because you play once a week and quickly fall behind. The game does have a casual mode that lets you use all the cards (hint: it's complete shit because it has too many cards). Also if you're thinking about it from a competitive standpoint, if all expansions were in play it could potentially greatly increase the difficulty of newer players trying to make 'good' decks, because it might require good cards from 15 different expansions. Even veteran players might struggle because a new expansion could still end up making old cards that weren't relevant, relevant.

Mobile games are after the almighty $. They aren't "shifting the meta". They just want money. Obviously. Whales always rule those games.

Sounds like you're just salty they nerfed your favorite champion. Cry more. No game with as many characters as league has will ever be balanced. It will forever be a game of buffs and nerfs. If you aren't complete shit, you learn to adapt.
If you want games that never get balanced or shifted (or barely, anyway) go play CS:GO

You seem completely confused. Characters can have roles without being overpowered. You sound like one of those kids who googles "best champion in league of legends" and then mains whatever people tell you to. Then gets salty when you can't exploit something broken for easier wins. The biggest reason characters get nerfed is if they're performing too well compared to others in the same role. Balance changes keep characters in line for their specific role. if you break down every champion in league of legends you'll see they all have set strengths and weaknesses. Balance happens because within a specific role, some characters become far, far better at doing what others in the role do, making the other characters completely worthless. Why pick a lesser character when you can simply pick the best one? That's unhealthy as fuck, and also boring and stagnant. That's not to say every character in a specific role is "the same". Just that they perform a similar function within the game, albeit probably in different ways through different skills and different mechanics.

To be honest your entire rant is just entitled bullshit. You cry because the meta shifts outside your favor and whine because you no longer have an unfair advantage. Get over it. The game would be dead with no content and no changes. That's just life. Most meta shifts aren't even intentional. They just happen when a character is brought back in line, some new ones pop out. It's an eternal cycle for games that get new content.

lets say we highly disagree. Not gonna debunk your pile of shit. Cheers

My single biggest complaint in game industry - META CHANGES

Well-Known Member

Spiky!

Storywriter

Well-Known Member

Storywriter

Well-Known Member

Are you a bully?

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum