Poll: Metagame or Aesthetic?

[Daystar Clarion]

I don't understand how taking set 1 would be metagaming. Suppose you are really in that world, struggling to survive, being attacked all the time. Would you care more about how you look, or how well you're protected? To be honest, I consider taking the second set to me more meta than the first, because only behind a monitor/tv in the safety of your own home would you care about how your outfit looks.

A similar distinction is often made between roleplaying and powergaming, as if the two are mutually exclusive. Can't I roleplay a smart character who actually cares about how practical his equipment is?

Anyway, sorry for the rant. I case you couldn't tell, I'm taking set 1.

Lets say, set 1 is a loin cloth. It offers no 'real' protection whatsoever, yet its stats are what make it a ridiculously powrful. It's not magic, so that's no excuse.


Picking that set because it has a bunch of high numbers is metagaming, because there's no conceivable way you can explain how that armour is as powerful as it is.

If it was some really bland platemail, then yes, practicality would be a perfectly reasonable excuse, for choosing it.

I think it all comes down to whether you think the in-game character knows about the "stats" (or has a feeling about the power) of an item.

What you're basically saying is that for the character it would make no sense to pick the loin cloth, because it doesn't really look very powerful (which is by the way different from not being aesthetically pleasing).
But I have a problem with that, because the character lives in his world and he should be able to observe the effects of items. Even if the loin cloth doesn't look like it would protect him, he would be able to notice that in fact it does as soon as it is tested. Of course, it's possible that the character would discard the item without noticing how powerful it is. Now I can see that happening in our world (especially with the loin cloth), but if you live in a world where (apparently) loin cloths can offer better protection than armor, that would be kind of stupid.
Note that in all of this I didn't once consider how aesthetically pleasing the armor is, and I would solely consider how powerful something looks.

You say that it is metagaming because the power of the loin cloth cannot be explained, but I don't really agree. It can be explained, simply because it is there. But the difference between us is that you use an out of game explanation ("because the developers wanted it"), whereas I'm looking for an explanation in-game, which I think is less meta. I'm thinking that because these kinds of items apparently exist in the game world, game characters would either have different laws of nature (so that the protection could be "real") or they would consider it to be something they can't explain AKA magic (maybe not the same type of Magic™ that the game might otherwise reference, but magic still).
Or maybe our difference of opinion can be explained by the fact that I consider that item (and items like it) to be fully a part of, and integrated in the game world, whereas maybe you consider the game world and the item(s) to be separate somehow.

What do you think?

You make a good a point, I suppose someone is a metagamer if the approach that situation with the mindset to fully optomise their characters stats, regardless of how stupid they look, not to own a powerful piece of equipment.

It's quite interesting actually, just to see how people interpret the way equipment is represented in game.

 

[veloper]

Nobody is going to see it, not even me, if the game is in first person view. Set 1 it is.
I try to play optimally and I prefer picking a higher difficulty setting to gimping my character during play.

 

[Jamash]

Set 2, because you can always overcome low armour stats with other items, character buffs and enchantments... or gameplay by not getting hit as much.

In Oblivion, I never had any reason to wear that Daedra armour because I could just enchant rings, medallions and clothing with properties to compensate for not having the highest armour stat.

 

[Nuuu]

Take the first set, then come back later and own all the enemies with your sweet stats and take the second set.

Set 1: looks like old platemail with many layers, you look extremely fat.

Set 2: Very colorful painted armor, it shines and sparkles in the sun... it's probably made of tissue....

 

[WanderingFool]

I would choose Set #1. Really, I always prefer aesthetics over stats, but when the cards are down, I always go with the stats. One of the reasons I hate Wow was the fact that the good armor always looked like shit.

One of the things I like about Global Agenda (when I was playing it), was that it had armor and apparel. Armor was the stats, and had no visual cues. Apparel was your characters look. So if I find a specific look that I like, and can stick with it and not have to loose it when I find new and better armor.

More games need to do this.

 

[The Wykydtron]

Set 2 naturally, i'm the guy who walked around wearing the cool suits in Fallout NV. It's literally worth as much as tissue in armour value but i looked damn cool

But i'd take the awesome armour just in case i get stuck in a dungeon full of Mirelurks.

 

[spartan231490]

I take whichever is worth more money, the armor I wear in those games is always stuff I've gotten custom to fit my play style better, crap I pick up never works as well.

Late game, it will be this. Early on I would pick Set 1, I don't really care that much about appearance in RPGs. I usually play in 1st person, where it doesn't really matter.

 

[CleverNickname]

Stats

I'm all for style over substance, but if something has overwhelmingly useful stats, I take it; Don't care if it's pink with a neon "Kick Me" sign on it

 

[darkfire613]

I'd probably go for set 1 because in Fallout 3 and Oblivion I'd never actually see the pretty armor again because I never use the 3rd person because of how crappy it is. However, if we're talking Skyrim with its improved 3rd person view, I'd be a bit more torn.

 

[TheLoneBeet]

Set 2. It bothers me more to have to look at some ugly ass armor than it does to die every once in a while. Most games you don't die often anyways so there's no consequences to wearing the nice looking stuff over the rigged-stats stuff.

I used to wear a mixed up bunch of armor in Morrowind just because it looked nice, and it really didn't bother me that some of my armor had no defense value at all. Sometimes I wear clothes instead of armor because I'd just rather look good.

 

[Jazzeki]

i'm the guy who plays the game so many times in so many difrent ways that sooner or later i come full circle and have tried everything.
the things that keep poping up though is that perfect or near perfect gear that looks good though. like the 1st recon beret in new vegas. i'm sorry but as long as nothing beats it in both looks and stats it stays on my head. but other than stuff like that i'll use anything as long as it isn't so pointless and ugly and unfunny to use that it serves no purpose.

 

[frehls]

hue