e4 or d4?
Nowhere in the rules of chess do we see any preference for either of these 2 openings. Nor do we see anything regarding this nomenclature. And still, people who follow the chess scene know what these symbols mean, and may even be familiar with the type of games that will emerge out of the 2 moves. And they also know that other openings are far less popular and would be unexpected in a serious tournament like the Candidates. Even if you don’t follow the chess scene you may have heard of the Queen’s Gambit or the Scholar’s Mate.
This is the power of the metagame. It allows people to talk about the game and extend their experience beyond the play session. It can make any game (even single player games) into collective activities, building a community around a shared exploration of the game.
Get Diego Cath’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Now, if the metagame is such an important part of what makes a game fun, an immediate question arises: to what extent can game designers design the metagame of their games? I believe the answer to this question is twofold.
The first part of the answer is: if you take it you can’t have it. Essentially, if your goal is to rationally design every aspect of the metagame, you will end up destroying the avenues for an organic development of ideas around your game. Just like the language Esperanto didn’t stick because it was alien to everyone, the community of your game will find it impossible to absorb your ideas if you impose them rigidly.
Second, observing allows for boosting. When external people begin to play your game, you may be able to spot patterns in how they talk about their experience. They will use words of their own to refer to actions, weapons, or sections of the game. If you pay attention you may also notice the aspects of the game they struggle to talk about. If they talk about “the yellow power-up” or “the boss that looks like a turtle,” maybe it’s time to think of a more well defined identity for those things. You can even distinguish the different kinds of strategies people go for: aggressive, control, combo, etc. There may be a way to iterate the game mechanics so as to reward each strategy in different ways, while still allowing the player to choose the ones they enjoy the most. Designing a metagame consists in observing all these regularities and finding ways to boost what people are already trying to do.
Let’s not forget that knowledge can only be created from within, never imposed from without. And the metagame, being a form of knowledge, can only resonate with the players if it’s created by them.
Stay tuned! We will shortly share more information about our new game.
