<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: The MetaGame: Are we allowed to brag? To be sore losers?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2007/03/09/the-metagame-are-we-allowed-to-brag-to-be-sore-losers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2007/03/09/the-metagame-are-we-allowed-to-brag-to-be-sore-losers/</link>
	<description>My name is Jesper Juul, and I am a Ludologist [researcher of the design, meaning, culture, and politics of games]. This is my blog on game research and other important things.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:37:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Scott Jon Siegel		</title>
		<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2007/03/09/the-metagame-are-we-allowed-to-brag-to-be-sore-losers/comment-page-1/#comment-32050</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Scott Jon Siegel]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:37:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/?p=325#comment-32050</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Arguably, the Metagame was not about mechanical familiarity, but about familiarity with the games and the discussion involving them.  As all the members of the teams seemed well-versed in arguing subjectively on the topic, it appeared to be a level playing-field.

The biggest influence in the game&#039;s progression, however, was clearly the audience, and the team that took home bragging rights (as well as that weird book) was the team which most often accurately assessed the temper of the crowd and based their movements on that assessment.  Then again, with such a heated topic of debate as video games, could anyone truly predict the passions of the audience?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Arguably, the Metagame was not about mechanical familiarity, but about familiarity with the games and the discussion involving them.  As all the members of the teams seemed well-versed in arguing subjectively on the topic, it appeared to be a level playing-field.</p>
<p>The biggest influence in the game&#8217;s progression, however, was clearly the audience, and the team that took home bragging rights (as well as that weird book) was the team which most often accurately assessed the temper of the crowd and based their movements on that assessment.  Then again, with such a heated topic of debate as video games, could anyone truly predict the passions of the audience?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
