It comes from the word metagame, i.e. the game beyond the game. I think it originally comes from game theory (the field of mathematics), later it began to be used in both game development and game playing (with slightly different meanings).
Not sure, but it has been around for a long time (20+ years).
I guess because the “ideal” way to play is usually found out by theorycrafters so they aren’t playing the actual game, but the “meta game” of finding out how to best play the game.
Been hearing this term for a long while. It’s specially prevalent in games where there’s a strong competitive scene or in games where you can practice min-maxxing. You won’t use the term (normally) in a game like The Sims or any other game where there is no “goal” to achieve; but if there is a goal (even just a boss fight) and there are multiple alternatives to tackle it, you will hear the term eventually.
Maybe that’s why I haven’t heard it… I do my best to avoid multiplayer games. Is it something one would only see/hear in multiplayer games? My interest is in the origin of the term.
I remember it from early StarCraft, where balance patches would often “shift the meta” making some build and strategies so good (or bad) that you basically had to use them (or couldn’t use them) if you wanted to be competitive.
So, it was actually in the game? The term “Meta” in this context?
It’s more like knowing that “people online will do that, so I have to do this”. The mind game between the players. But I think you already got some better answers.
I don’t think it originated from StarCraft, that’s just where I recall first hearing it.
The concept of “the meta” arises from the idea of players playing a metagame in which they’re picking strategies which work well against the strategies other players pick. The idea I think was that it wasn’t necessarily the best strategy, but it was one that reliably worked against those strategies others pick, so it highlights the possibility that there are unexplored strategies.
But because it identified popular strategies it became used just to mean that even in single player games where there is no metagame at all.
When I heard it used back in the days if collectible card games, it seemed like it was describing the abstract ‘game’ rather than a particular game between two players. So a particular card (or weapon or ship) can be good within a game, depending on your opponent or play style. But sometimes a card or strategy is found by the community to be highly effective so in the ‘metagame’ it comes to dominate.
New cards would come out and change the meta. Even if you don’t buy then or use them, knowing that they exist and are effective changes how other players build decks and so you might need to change your play style to adapt to the new metagame.
Ah yes, concise is not my strength. I avoided getting into the etymology of ‘meta’ and how it comes from an ancient librarian dealing with untitled manuscripts… So thought I was doing well!
i’m actually quite familiar with ancient Latin and Greek. So I understand the etymology of the term. There’s a fine line between descriptive and verbose.
And nonetheless, thank you very much for your answer. And, in no way, was I making a criticism.
Btw, “meta-“ is the Ancient Greek prefix meaning “after” or “beyond”
Just one more aspect to add to the other replies that I didn’t see mentioned: the most common use of this is with online multiplayer games like Mobas (lol, dota2) or ability/arena shooters (overwatch, valorant), where the developer will actually make changes to the balance, or add/remove items, heroes, … Here “the meta” will often shift with any major patch. As an example, they might adjust the items that give health and/or armor because front liners aren’t effective enough, and maybe they overtune it a bit, leading to a “tank meta” because now tanky characters can fulfill roles they weren’t even intended for (just as a random example).
But also things like tabletop games (Warhammer) have seasonal rulesets where this can apply.
It can even apply to Singleplayer games like Baldurs Gate 3 (as a recent example). In these cases the meta often refers to very efficient, good working character builds (class selection, level order and items) that have usually been figured out by the community over time. In that case the meta is generally more fixed or stable, as the game doesn’t receive maybe balance updates every few months.
Short for “meta gaming” or “meta game”, which is essentially the identification and application of the various playing style archetypes that work best in any given game.
As others have said, it functionally means picking the most optimal strategies and/or equips, but it’s now somewhat archaic use was more like a scholarly examination/application of archetypes, playstyles, use-cases, and vulnerabilities/bugs/eccentricities that could be taken advantage of and brought together to make consistent winning strategies. There is rarely ever (probaly never, really) a meta that stays unchanged throughout its games history because meta is, in a way, an ever-ongoing conversation between the game, its players and, in some ways, the wider audience that both bring in.
Well balanced games with deep design choices often have sleeper strategies that, while available at release, are not necessarily noticed or honed until later on because they require a measure of abstract thought and/or an understanding of various other elements and the interplay they create under specific circumstances. In that it takes into account both refined knowledge and practical, creative application, “meta” is kind of that sweet spot between science and art that so many people get drawn to in so many other ways.
Edit: should have read more of these comments before jumping the gun. I dont think I’ve added anything that hasn’t already been said in some way or another. Oops
The meta in any given game is “the most effective tactic available” or just information acquired outside of the game to be efficient.
Like you could pick a class like warrior in some game and hours into playing realise that its the most difficult class to play, meanwhile the sorcerer is easy and good out the gate, so people would look up the best class/gear/shortcuts/exploits even before starting a game to be the most efficient, instead of just playing what they like.
While Million’s explanation is good, I’d like to try my own phrasing:
In this context, setting up your character’s armor by ‘the meta’ would basically mean picking the armor with the best stats, that maybe synergize with each other and/or the playstyle/class build that is the most overpowered, most broken.
You could maybe call that ‘optimizing the fun out of the game’.
What this person, OP, is saying is… nah, I’m just gonna pick the armor/clothes I think look the best, knowing that will make things harder for me than just choosing the ‘optimal’ armor, and I’ll either git gud at the game, or die trying.
Its… kind of like how DBZ characters wear weighted clothes.
Its an intentional, chosen handicap, in a gameplay mechanics sense, that makes things more difficult, so training / playing the game is harder… but if you can handle it, you’re probably going to be better at the game.
OK, see, I understand that. I think the disconnect comes from the fact that I avoid multiplayer games, and even when I played them, I never talk to anyone else who’s playing.
I’m certainly familiar with this concept as a part of game design theory, and certainly in all of the games I’ve played. I’ve just never heard the term, and I think it’s just because I don’t talk to a lot of other gamers.
Its mostly a thing with multiplayer rpg type games, but, the term ‘the meta’ most broadly, at this point, basically just means ‘best strategy’.
You could have a meta in a shooter game, for gun/armor loadouts that go well with certain tactics, maybe fast ninja with smgs and flash bangs always beats tanky bomb diffusal armor with a mini gun, for some reason.
You could have it with dark souls type games, a single player (basically) game with a bunch of possible skill tree builds and classes and weapons and such.
But, linguistically, its also kind of weird because ‘the meta’ can also refer to… all of those possible strategies, at once, within one game… or even a similar class or family of games!
Or ‘a meta’ or ‘the XYZ meta’ could also refer to a singular strategy within a game, or maybe a family of related strategies within a game.
… It makes more sense if you just regularly hear people using the term outloud.
wtf is “the meta”?
Edit: thanks for all of the excellent replies!
The best/optimal items.
That’s pretty much what I thought from context, but where did the term come from?
Edit: thanks for all of the excellent replies!
It comes from the word metagame, i.e. the game beyond the game. I think it originally comes from game theory (the field of mathematics), later it began to be used in both game development and game playing (with slightly different meanings).
Eureka! Now I’m definitely familiar with that concept as a part of game design theory, I just haven’t heard that term before.
This is exactly the answer I was looking for. Thank you.
Not sure, but it has been around for a long time (20+ years).
I guess because the “ideal” way to play is usually found out by theorycrafters so they aren’t playing the actual game, but the “meta game” of finding out how to best play the game.
Not only have I been gaming for 40+ years, I’ve written a bunch of games. I’ve never heard this term.
But I’ll take your word for it ;)
Been hearing this term for a long while. It’s specially prevalent in games where there’s a strong competitive scene or in games where you can practice min-maxxing. You won’t use the term (normally) in a game like The Sims or any other game where there is no “goal” to achieve; but if there is a goal (even just a boss fight) and there are multiple alternatives to tackle it, you will hear the term eventually.
Maybe that’s why I haven’t heard it… I do my best to avoid multiplayer games. Is it something one would only see/hear in multiplayer games? My interest is in the origin of the term.
In relation to gaming it gained popularity in 1995 (Magic the Gathering).
That explains a lot. Thank you.
I remember it from early StarCraft, where balance patches would often “shift the meta” making some build and strategies so good (or bad) that you basically had to use them (or couldn’t use them) if you wanted to be competitive.
So, it was actually in the game? The term “Meta” in this context?
I’m curious about the origin of the term, so if it came from star craft, that would be the answer I’m looking for.
It’s more like knowing that “people online will do that, so I have to do this”. The mind game between the players. But I think you already got some better answers.
I don’t think it originated from StarCraft, that’s just where I recall first hearing it.
The concept of “the meta” arises from the idea of players playing a metagame in which they’re picking strategies which work well against the strategies other players pick. The idea I think was that it wasn’t necessarily the best strategy, but it was one that reliably worked against those strategies others pick, so it highlights the possibility that there are unexplored strategies.
But because it identified popular strategies it became used just to mean that even in single player games where there is no metagame at all.
When I heard it used back in the days if collectible card games, it seemed like it was describing the abstract ‘game’ rather than a particular game between two players. So a particular card (or weapon or ship) can be good within a game, depending on your opponent or play style. But sometimes a card or strategy is found by the community to be highly effective so in the ‘metagame’ it comes to dominate.
New cards would come out and change the meta. Even if you don’t buy then or use them, knowing that they exist and are effective changes how other players build decks and so you might need to change your play style to adapt to the new metagame.
In another comment, someone referred to it as “the game beyond the game” that the term was actually short for a “metagame”.
While their explanation was more concise, you both definitely answered my question. Thank you.
Ah yes, concise is not my strength. I avoided getting into the etymology of ‘meta’ and how it comes from an ancient librarian dealing with untitled manuscripts… So thought I was doing well!
i’m actually quite familiar with ancient Latin and Greek. So I understand the etymology of the term. There’s a fine line between descriptive and verbose.
And nonetheless, thank you very much for your answer. And, in no way, was I making a criticism.
Btw, “meta-“ is the Ancient Greek prefix meaning “after” or “beyond”
Just one more aspect to add to the other replies that I didn’t see mentioned: the most common use of this is with online multiplayer games like Mobas (lol, dota2) or ability/arena shooters (overwatch, valorant), where the developer will actually make changes to the balance, or add/remove items, heroes, … Here “the meta” will often shift with any major patch. As an example, they might adjust the items that give health and/or armor because front liners aren’t effective enough, and maybe they overtune it a bit, leading to a “tank meta” because now tanky characters can fulfill roles they weren’t even intended for (just as a random example).
But also things like tabletop games (Warhammer) have seasonal rulesets where this can apply.
It can even apply to Singleplayer games like Baldurs Gate 3 (as a recent example). In these cases the meta often refers to very efficient, good working character builds (class selection, level order and items) that have usually been figured out by the community over time. In that case the meta is generally more fixed or stable, as the game doesn’t receive maybe balance updates every few months.
Short for “meta gaming” or “meta game”, which is essentially the identification and application of the various playing style archetypes that work best in any given game.
As others have said, it functionally means picking the most optimal strategies and/or equips, but it’s now somewhat archaic use was more like a scholarly examination/application of archetypes, playstyles, use-cases, and vulnerabilities/bugs/eccentricities that could be taken advantage of and brought together to make consistent winning strategies. There is rarely ever (probaly never, really) a meta that stays unchanged throughout its games history because meta is, in a way, an ever-ongoing conversation between the game, its players and, in some ways, the wider audience that both bring in.
Well balanced games with deep design choices often have sleeper strategies that, while available at release, are not necessarily noticed or honed until later on because they require a measure of abstract thought and/or an understanding of various other elements and the interplay they create under specific circumstances. In that it takes into account both refined knowledge and practical, creative application, “meta” is kind of that sweet spot between science and art that so many people get drawn to in so many other ways.
Edit: should have read more of these comments before jumping the gun. I dont think I’ve added anything that hasn’t already been said in some way or another. Oops
I appreciate the effort anyway. Thanks!
The meta in any given game is “the most effective tactic available” or just information acquired outside of the game to be efficient.
Like you could pick a class like warrior in some game and hours into playing realise that its the most difficult class to play, meanwhile the sorcerer is easy and good out the gate, so people would look up the best class/gear/shortcuts/exploits even before starting a game to be the most efficient, instead of just playing what they like.
While Million’s explanation is good, I’d like to try my own phrasing:
In this context, setting up your character’s armor by ‘the meta’ would basically mean picking the armor with the best stats, that maybe synergize with each other and/or the playstyle/class build that is the most overpowered, most broken.
You could maybe call that ‘optimizing the fun out of the game’.
What this person, OP, is saying is… nah, I’m just gonna pick the armor/clothes I think look the best, knowing that will make things harder for me than just choosing the ‘optimal’ armor, and I’ll either git gud at the game, or die trying.
Its… kind of like how DBZ characters wear weighted clothes.
Its an intentional, chosen handicap, in a gameplay mechanics sense, that makes things more difficult, so training / playing the game is harder… but if you can handle it, you’re probably going to be better at the game.
OK, see, I understand that. I think the disconnect comes from the fact that I avoid multiplayer games, and even when I played them, I never talk to anyone else who’s playing.
I’m certainly familiar with this concept as a part of game design theory, and certainly in all of the games I’ve played. I’ve just never heard the term, and I think it’s just because I don’t talk to a lot of other gamers.
Thanks for the explanation!
Yep!
Its mostly a thing with multiplayer rpg type games, but, the term ‘the meta’ most broadly, at this point, basically just means ‘best strategy’.
You could have a meta in a shooter game, for gun/armor loadouts that go well with certain tactics, maybe fast ninja with smgs and flash bangs always beats tanky bomb diffusal armor with a mini gun, for some reason.
You could have it with dark souls type games, a single player (basically) game with a bunch of possible skill tree builds and classes and weapons and such.
But, linguistically, its also kind of weird because ‘the meta’ can also refer to… all of those possible strategies, at once, within one game… or even a similar class or family of games!
Or ‘a meta’ or ‘the XYZ meta’ could also refer to a singular strategy within a game, or maybe a family of related strategies within a game.
… It makes more sense if you just regularly hear people using the term outloud.
As a longtime gamer, I’m definitely familiar with the concept. I had just never heard it referred to as “the Meta” before
Thanks!