Talk:Metagaming

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think this article is kinda metarded. If you dunno what I mean, maybe I should write an opaque and awkward article for "metarded." Lemme know. --Nick 22:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

This _really_ could do with a simpler definition for people. At the moment, its just very difficult to comprehend, and could do with being explained better. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CalPaterson (talkcontribs) 16:16, 27 May 2005 (UTC).

Agreed. While the history behind the term is fascinating, it is unclear. Some dates might clear it up. Also it lacks a concise definition like "playing with the rules instead of playing the game." I'd take a whack at it, but from the existing entry it looks like this is a deeper topic than I was aware of. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.165.249.186 (talk • contribs) 05:26, 11 September 2005 (UTC).

I've added some additional information to the general explanation, though I don't have the historical knowledge to add any dates. I also added a definition for "metagaming" as it's used in CCG/CMG tournaments. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Parakkum (talkcontribs) 20:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC).

Hm...I was under the impression that in competitive gaming, "metagame" can also refer to the highest level at which the game is currently played? For example, let's say in a fighting game, there are two characters, A and B. A is easier to learn, but B has more potential. So for beginners, A is better than B, but in the metagame, B is better than A.

In response to the above edit -- yes, that is true. Its a definition commonly used in reference to SSBM. -- The M.P. 03:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move. -- Kjkolb 05:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

As I said on RM, the parenthesised section in title is unnecessary and against WP:MOS. Move Percy Snoodle 12:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Move per nom; this is the primary topic so no disambiguation is necessary. --Muchness 12:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per above plus faulty capitaliz/sation. David Kernow 15:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.