I've seen people do a lot of things in Mario Kart. Rage, trolling, min-maxing, but nothing quite like Shake and Bake: when my friends teamed up in Mario Kart to roleplay a Will Ferrell racing movie.
The strategy was simple. One of them would always take the lead, and the other would camp second place without throwing any items. If a blue shell was launched, they would quickly switch places so the bodyguard could tank the bomb. It was honestly sort of unbeatable, but I think what really peaked my interest is how invested they got in their characters.
They shouted the movie quotes with every turn. Each game they won by a mile and did the Shake and Bake first bump. The goal was no longer to race their friend. One of them obviously wasn't even trying to win. It was more of a way to role play their favorite film.
This is an extreme level of metagaming, but I truly believe people characterize themselves in multiplayer games. When someone loses a race of Mario Kart, or any multiplayer game, they frequently start taking the role of a "prankster" that was always trying to lose. In Mario Kart 8 they might refuse to finish the race and hold their friends hostage, and in the next few races will stop trying their best. Or if somebody wins, they assign themselves the character of "Mario Kart God" and will stop at nothing to keep that persona (we all know that person).
I think Mario Kart is so interesting because the goal is clearly not winning. I've played with so many different people and only a fraction seemed to care about their placements. In fact, I would argue the ones who cared about their placement were more interested in the conversation around them winning.
Although Shake and Bake is an extreme example, I think even casual multiplayer games can clearly find roots in the metagaming aspects of a game like DnD.