34 réponses à ce sujet

[cephasjames]

This is not a knock on metagaming (since I do it to some extent), per se, just on metagaming in regards to story-telling. Story-telling is about one story that is being experienced. Metagaming is about comparing, contrasting and combining two or more stories being experienced. Story-telling is about experiencing a story point and accepting it for what it is. Metagaming is about experiencing that same story point with the knowledge of all the choices it could be and than deciding the outcome based on a purpose for choosing that outcome, such as "That's choice 3 of 4 and I haven't chosen that yet." 

One of the beauties of BioWar RPGs is the number of choices players are given. But the devil in that detail is that there are people who are "completionists" (to some degree or another) who want to see what happens with all of those choices. This creates multiple playthroughs, but it also can creates metagaming. BioWare RPGs first and foremost tell stories. When each playthrough and choice is done with the idea of experiencing a story then BWs story-telling stays intact. When each playthrough and choice is done with the idea of making sure every choice is chosen then BWs story-telling is ruined. 

So the reason I knock metagaming in regards to story-telling is because it ruins the whole point of the game: to experience a story. 

On a side note, achievements add to the idea of metagaming.

[JWvonGoethe]

Well, it could be an interesting challenge for Bioware to produce a storyline that still holds up even with excessive meta-gaming. If meta-gaming produces inconsistency in your characters decision-making, for instance by the PC deciding to help blood mages on one occasion, and not on another, then maybe one of the companions could ask your PC why you were inconsistent. Responses could be "I got paid more the first time," "I'm coming to sympathise with blood mages less and less as time goes by," or "The demands of the second group were unreasonable and would have caused more harm than good."

I'm sure the Bioware writers could come up with more convincing lines of dialogue, but the general principle remains. For meta-gaming issues to be alleviated, the narrative would have to form around your character's actions and words, rather than the player trying to fit their PC's behaviour to the emerging narrative and past development of the PC's character. Though I think the DA series already does the former to an extent, and doesn't have huge meta-gaming issues.

Modifié par JWvonGoethe, 29 novembre 2012 - 01:17 .

[Fredward]

And this has to do with DA3 how...?

[Plaintiff]

So?

[Fredward]

Plaintiff wrote...

So?

That was my second thought. xp

[Plaintiff]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

So?

That was my second thought. xp

Well, I also disagree with his position. A story is not 'ruined' if I know what is going to happen next. By that logic, there would be no enjoyment in re-reading books or re-watching movies, yet people buy books to keep so that they can read them over and over, they see movies multiple times in the cinema and buy them on DVD or Bluray later, so they can experience them at home.

And even if metagaming did ruin storytelling, how is this relevent not just to DA3, but to anything at all? People are going to play games the way they want to. And if some people (me) are completionists who like to metagame, then so what? I'm enjoying the story my way, he's enjoying the story his way. What's ruined? Nothing.

Meta-gaming is not a 'problem' that Bioware needs to fix. It's a valid, and completely optional style of play.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 29 novembre 2012 - 01:39 .

[Fredward]

Plaintiff wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

So?

That was my second thought. xp

Well, I also disagree with his position. A story is not 'ruined' if I know what is going to happen next. By that logic, there would be no enjoyment in re-reading books or re-watching movies, yet people buy books to keep so that they can read them over and over, they see movies multiple times in the cinema and buy them on DVD or Bluray later, so they can experience them at home.

And even if metagaming did ruin storytelling, how is this relevent not just to DA3, but to anything at all? People are going to play games the way they want to. And if some people (me) are completionists who like to metagame, then so what? I'm enjoying the story my way, he's enjoying the story his way. What's ruined? Nothing.

Meta-gaming is not a 'problem' that Bioware needs to fix. It's a valid, and completely optional style of play.

This was my THIRD thought! XD

Also games aren't purely storytelling, because the player has the ability to change what the results are going to be. This isn't the case with books and movies where having knowledge about what is going to happen is spoilers because it always WILL happen. Having "outside" knowledge of the game helps me to better create the story that I want.

So no, I don't think metagaming ruins storytelling at all.

[JWvonGoethe]

Well, it pertains to DA3 in that Bioware might want to find ways to make meta-gaming work better with the story in DA3. OK, I'm being generous to the OP here, but many of the threads on this forum have nothing to do with DA3 anyway. You often have to use your imagination a bit to figure out how they might relate to DA3.

[Wulfram]

I don't really agree. I think the sort of metagaming you can describe can enhance my enjoyment of the story.

Some of my more interesting and memorable characters have been the result of an attempt to make a character who would take a particular choice I haven't yet tried, while still remaining someone I can sympathise with.

edit:  Really, my non-metagamed game tend to be rather basic in story, with a more or less "mary sue" type protagonist.  Whereas metagaming allows me to tie their character to events in the game and construct some sort of arc of character development.

Modifié par Wulfram, 29 novembre 2012 - 02:38 .

[hexaligned]

The whole point of a game to me, is experiencing and playing with game mechanics that I consider to be fun. I read novels and to a lesser extent, watch movies, when all I want is a story. I'm not really sure what you are proposing here though, if you don't want to "metagame", you aren't forced to.

[ScarMK]

This is your attempt to subtly win your argument from the locked romance thread, isn't it?

[Fast Jimmy]

Choosing the best choice just to get the best choice because you know it will result in the better outcome ahead of time is plot-meta-gaming.

But going back through a Bioware game and trying out different options is just a demonstration of replay value. I didn't have the werewolves slaughter the Dalish my first playthrough... but I did in one of my subsequent ones to see what would happen.

You can only really meta-game to the detriment of the story if you get a walkthrough and use it on your first (and only) playthrough to make sure you get the happiest ending. But going through and replaying the game over to see different outcomes or to even get better ones I wouldn't consider negative meta-gaming. I would consider that enjoying one of the many features that make video game story-telling a truly unique experience.

[Jonata]

I think that trying all different outcomes strip the story of its charme, because you start to see the game mechanics under each and every character moment, romance or emotion the game gave you, so I try to not do too many walkthroughs, unless I really want to see everything and then just put the game to rest for good.

With a truly plot-driven game like Heavy Rain, for example, I just completed 1 single walkthrough, because I didn't want to ruin the "magic" of the story by seeing with my eyes all the game mechanics and the outcomes that were preparaed by the devs.

Modifié par Jonata, 29 novembre 2012 - 03:11 .

[AlanC9]

Sure. If I didn't metagame to some extent on my later playthroughs there are scenes that I'd never, ever see. Right now I'm trying to get Mordin to live through a ME trilogy run.

[cephasjames]

ScarMK wrote...

This is your attempt to subtly win your argument from the locked romance thread, isn't it?

Nope. That conversation was actually just a part of a bigger thought that I'd been wrestling with - which is what this thread is about. 

[LinksOcarina]

Metagaming has pros and cons, but it does harken back to the whole "character knowledge vs player knowledge" thing in table-tops. We may know whats ahead of us, but our character doesn't.

so the real question is how we, personally, handle it.

[Fast Jimmy]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Metagaming has pros and cons, but it does harken back to the whole "character knowledge vs player knowledge" thing in table-tops. We may know whats ahead of us, but our character doesn't.

so the real question is how we, personally, handle it.

You could always work hard to craft a character personality beforehand that WOULD make the decisions that wind up in different situations/making different choices.

Could make it more exciting than just doing another playthrough to see what happens if you click one option versus another. If you are just going to do that, I'd suggest scouring YouTube. It would be a lot faster.

[Urzon]

What are you recommending? That BW gives out free memory wipes, like the ones from MIB? So when someone finishes a play through, they can erase all that information on choice from their brain?

You can't stop people from meta gaming. It's human nature to learn and remember from past experiences, and then compare.

Modifié par Urzon, 29 novembre 2012 - 04:36 .

[ScotGaymer]

relhart wrote...

The whole point of a game to me, is experiencing and playing with game mechanics that I consider to be fun. I read novels and to a lesser extent, watch movies, when all I want is a story. I'm not really sure what you are proposing here though, if you don't want to "metagame", you aren't forced to.

The you have missed the point of an RPG and should go play games of genre's that do not put quite as much emphasis on story.

I don't say this to be insult, but as a bare fact.

One of the many things that makes an RPG what it is (and different from your standard action/adventure game), aside from the ability to choose as much as you possibly can within the confines of the game, is to experience the adventure. In other words the story.

If you play RPGs and do not appreciate story? Well, I can only say you have completely missed the point of an RPG.

You want an action adventure type game.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 29 novembre 2012 - 04:36 .

[Rawgrim]

Metagaming is only possible after the first playthrough, unless one uses a walkthrough or something to get through the game for the first time. Any playthrough after that, and metagaming is unavoidable.

Modifié par Rawgrim, 29 novembre 2012 - 04:54 .

[hexaligned]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

relhart wrote...

The whole point of a game to me, is experiencing and playing with game mechanics that I consider to be fun. I read novels and to a lesser extent, watch movies, when all I want is a story. I'm not really sure what you are proposing here though, if you don't want to "metagame", you aren't forced to.

The you have missed the point of an RPG and should go play games of genre's that do not put quite as much emphasis on story.

I don't say this to be insult, but as a bare fact.

One of the many things that makes an RPG what it is (and different from your standard action/adventure game), aside from the ability to choose as much as you possibly can within the confines of the game, is to experience the adventure. In other words the story.

If you play RPGs and do not appreciate story? Well, I can only say you have completely missed the point of an RPG.

You want an action adventure type game.

*checks* nope, I want a Western party based RPG.  The difference is I don't consider any game to have a good story, the better ones (Bioware) have at least more depth and complexity than your average Saturday morning cartoon, but not by much.  Not by enough for me to consider them worth my time anways, in that regard at least.  Which, as I said,  is why I read when I want that.  However some of them do have entertaining character/party building options and combat. 
In anycase no, I play mostly strategy games.

[cephasjames]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Metagaming has pros and cons, but it does harken back to the whole "character knowledge vs player knowledge" thing in table-tops. We may know whats ahead of us, but our character doesn't.

so the real question is how we, personally, handle it.

This. 

[Corker]

cephasjames wrote...
Story-telling is about one story that is being experienced. Metagaming is about comparing, contrasting and combining two or more stories being experienced. Story-telling is about experiencing a story point and accepting it for what it is. Metagaming is about experiencing that same story point with the knowledge of all the choices it could be and than deciding the outcome based on a purpose for choosing that outcome, such as "That's choice 3 of 4 and I haven't chosen that yet."

...what?

Story-telling is about developing an engaging and well-shaped narrative.  It may have character arcs, plot arcs, or both.  Typically, one or more protagonists seek a goal and must overcome obstacles (internal, external) to achieve it, or else fail in the attempt.

Role-playing can be about experiencing a story as a character within it.

Meta-gaming is using "out of character" knowledge inside the narrative of a role-playing game.

Meta-gaming can be used for superior story telling, as an external awareness of the consequences of choices can be used to set up foreshadowing, dramatic irony, thematic development and other features of good narrative. You can use it to select quests in an order that creates a coherent arc for a character, or for the plot.  You can use it as an author does, to shape and to frame.

Many do find meta-gaming to be detrimental to an 'immersive' role-playing experience.  Not the same as bad story-telling, and not even a universal experience for role-players.

[cephasjames]

Rawgrim wrote...

Metagaming is only possible after the first playthrough, unless one uses a walkthrough or something to get through the game for the first time. Any playthrough after that, and metagaming is unavoidable.

Yes and no. If people go into a playthrough with the idea that they are going to be such-in-such and act such-in-such then they can simply play through the story with that and only that in mind then the bold is incorrect. But if people go into a playthrough with the idea that they are going to make different choices simply because they haven't made certain other choices yet then the bold is correct.