Africa's Toto
Banned
Video by Brihard
Video got me thinking, so I tried to lay out a summary of his thoughts.
Basically, he argues that The Game Awards isn't a celebration of games, but "a popularity contest that aims to legitimize games towards not only the more casual fans of games, but more importantly, those that don't engage with them"
According to him, Oscarbait for games is high-budget, realistic-looking games with cinematic narrative focus, meanwhile the breadth of games is much larger and the nominations and awards should represent that.
His points are:
- The Game awards uses big-name celebrities who have zero relevancy towards the medium, while ignoring celebrities who are known "celebrity gamers" like Terry Crews, who have been included in games and streamed their own play sessions.
- The award categories are generalized;
he points out that TLOUII was placed under action/adventure while Half Life: Alyx and Doom Eternal were simply under 'action', with all three being linear shooters in his opinion.
Meanwhile other games in the adventure category had a greater focus on adventure than TLOUII (Ghost of Tsushima, Ori and the will of the wisps, AC: Valhalla, Jedi Fallen order).
Best shooter could be its own award, reducing the cluster in the action category.
Meanwhile other games in the adventure category had a greater focus on adventure than TLOUII (Ghost of Tsushima, Ori and the will of the wisps, AC: Valhalla, Jedi Fallen order).
Best shooter could be its own award, reducing the cluster in the action category.
- Timeframe of release is an inconsistent factor of the award category nominations, since
Best ongoing (since release) is its own category tracking games released pre-2020, yet games like Among Us and MK11 won best multiplayer and fighting when they were released pre-2020 yet weren't nominated for best ongoing.
If the definitions aren't fixed, why can't remasters of old games qualify for any of these categories?
If the definitions aren't fixed, why can't remasters of old games qualify for any of these categories?
- "Why are best VR and best mobile single awards when they aren't genres but platforms with ranges of game types and genres within them?"
- "Why do the awards clump best sim/strategy together if the nominations end up being 1 sim and 4 strategy titles?"
- Specific Genre and Technical awards are sidelined and presented in a few seconds with no fanfare or special host, giving smaller games less exposure
Best Music/score is one of these presented rapid-fire in the pre-show despite game music performances having their own section in the main show
- Actual developers and producers are not involved in the judging process. This prevents more nuanced categories like combat design and 3d animation being represented.
- The game awards are less focused than other awards shows, as those shows don't have reveals or trailers as appeals; The game awards is turning itself into a second E3 which distracts from developer accomplishments; Awards need more time and reverence.
Overall, he argues that the lack of consistency in categories and the other points mentioned create a narrow view of the industry, devaluing the games and awards presented and painting a weird image of the industry for those involved in making and playing these games.
He also points out that this funnels a celebration of all games into a celebration of games that are trying to be movies (
)
Towards the end he brings up some options for improving the show and showcasing games.
He also points out that this funnels a celebration of all games into a celebration of games that are trying to be movies (
Cinematic, narrative focused games are pushed to the forefront of the award show, sidelining indie games and more gameplay focused titles in an attempt to legitimize gaming
Towards the end he brings up some options for improving the show and showcasing games.
Last edited: