Are Game Awards Pointless?

[NoahRules]

Yes

[NuMetalManiak]

This year's cacowards were excellent as they put a LOT of representation on a lot of things. It felt as if even if something was snubbed from the official cacowards or runners-up it would at least get some representation in some way. 

 

As for other awards (so not just game awards, but stuff like Golden Globe or what not), I have noticed a decline in their quality and/or a lack of representation for things that go even slightly under the radar.

[scalliano]

When the accompanying trailers/announcements as weak as last night, then absolutely.

[Sunnyfruit]

1 hour ago, DSC said:

Are you refering to Hideo Kojima there?

 

yes

[Maes]

37 minutes ago, HavoX said:

Yes

 

We didn't have them back in the old days...

The very least, we had gaming magazines, and the very least there would be monthly rankings of the "best" games. If they really wanted to be fancy, they'd have a "best games of the year" article once a year. If any "award" was given, it would be purely virtual/symbolic e.g. "'Big Rigs: Over The Road Racing' wins 1st place this year because so and so". Such "awards" usually found their way in the back of actual game boxes.

Edited December 11, 2020 by Maes

[TenenteZashu]

To me GOTYs are useless, if I enjoy playing a game I don't need a jury of people telling that ''yup, that's the best game of this year'' to enjoy it, same goes for movies, just because a movie didn't win an Oscar it doesn't mean its not enjoyable.

[mrthejoshmon]

Fuck the game awards I'm fucking sloshed because we watched it together and played a drinking game where we took a shot every time Last of Us 2 came up fuck

[Redneckerz]

Are TSC threads pointless?

Spoiler

Often, they are.

Spoiler

Seriously TSC you aren't even trying anymore to make an actual thread huh?

Spoiler

What's the point of asking a question in the thread title and then answering it in your opening post with ''To me, they are''?

 

[frag enabler]

rename them to the movie awards because that's what these fucking hacks care about

walking simulators with contextual button presses every 5 minutes

[A Nobody]

6 hours ago, Redneckerz said:

Are TSC threads pointless?

  Reveal hidden contents

Often, they are.

  Reveal hidden contents

Seriously TSC you aren't even trying anymore to make an actual thread huh?

  Reveal hidden contents

What's the point of asking a question in the thread title and then answering it in your opening post with ''To me, they are''?

 

Why do you have to keep bothering my threads?

[Murdoch]

I can't imagine anything i care less about than whether a piece of art i enjoyed gets some kind of award. The people who get upset when the thing they liked didn't get an award are kind of funny with a side order of sad and in extreme cases disturbing. 

 

That said, a case could be made that they are good promotion. So eh. They dont bother me.

[Redneckerz]

6 hours ago, The Strife Commando said:

Why do you have to keep bothering my threads?

Because i so much wish for you to weave effort inside your threads. You clearly have a lot to ask and a lot to wonder, but there is very little improvement in how they are structured. Its purely form, and not so much depth.

 

To answer the question:

Game Awards can be a useful tool to measure quality, but more often enough, it is presented in the shape of a popularity contest - Vote for games that were high profile, and those are considered the best. This is similarly to the Oscars (which in recent years has seen a lot of scrutiny, mind you).

 

Its not much different from the awards public instances, states or even office spaces reward every year - Its just a way to give out the impression that what you did matters. And that would be the case if it was a tool to measure quality. But more often than not, its a popularity contest - Thus those that win aren't necessarily the best, but rather, the most popular.

 

That's the stick from which they measure everything. Popularity, not quality. Form, not depth.

[NoXion]

I can't honestly say I'm not at all bothered about Doom Eternal not winning a single damn thing, honestly could they make it any more obvious how rubbish the Game Awards are?

It just makes me we wish there was a big awards ceremony that wasn't biased towards glorified walking simulators and interactive movies, over titles which have more actual gameplay in their hearts. I think some people go too far and use the crapness of the Game Awards to go all sour grapes and dismiss the notion entirely. What id software did with Doom Eternal deserves recognition, and it sucks that it hasn't happened.

[hybridial]

I don't think having a participation trophy would change anything for Doom Eternal's status. It's done well with the audience that it caters to. It's obviously not aimed at the wannabe intellectuals who seem ashamed of what videogames are, but it's well recognised for what it is.

[Sunnyfruit]

It actually bothers me not because it's Doom Eternal, but because it shows how the safe+cliché walking simulator genre is trampling over everything else. Eternal took lots of risks and made a clear statement about game design by getting into a more arcadey genre. I don't want most games to become that, but I think the role of an award, if those should exist, should be to guide the industry towards renewal instead of safeguarding its fossilization and the checks and seats of the so-called "Greats".

 

But it's like every other human fad, structure, or even society model:

Make new -> make safe -> formalize it with medals, saints and mythology to fossilize it -> get elitist and moralist about your incestual product line -> Something new appears, gets punk and mops the floor with your so-called "classics" and your morals

Videogames won't crash, but the next fad will be a doomslayer-tier mopping.

[seed]

20 hours ago, NoXion said:

I can't honestly say I'm not at all bothered about Doom Eternal not winning a single damn thing, honestly could they make it any more obvious how rubbish the Game Awards are?

 

I agree.

 

I'm amazed how Eternal didn't win a single damn thing. Perhaps not a GOTY, although frankly I was sure it was going to get one, but with how the awards worked, they've made it blatantly obvious they're biased in their selection, which as humans is expected, we aren't machines to be 100% objective, but they could at least try to aim for that ideal and bring more variety in their selection.

 

That being said

 

20 hours ago, hybridial said:

I don't think having a participation trophy would change anything for Doom Eternal's status. It's done well with the audience that it caters to. It's obviously not aimed at the wannabe intellectuals who seem ashamed of what videogames are, but it's well recognised for what it is.

 

I also agree with this. Ultimately it doesn't matter. It's a good game which knows what it wanted to be, what its strengths are, and who its target audience is, so in the larger picture, who cares.

 

19 hours ago, Sunnyfruit said:

I don't want most games to become that, but I think the role of an award, if those should exist, should be to guide the industry towards renewal instead of safeguarding its fossilization and the checks and seats of the so-called "Greats".

 

It's a bit late for that though. The triple-A industry has become complacent and a stagnant beast afraid of being daring quite some time ago, because these games need to sell on top of everything. It's as big as the movie industry now.

 

Nothing innovative stays that way for too long either. It quickly loses its novelty factor and freshness, and becomes the next trend that others will try following and copying instead of pursuing their own ideas, leading to another inevitable uniformity and stagnation of the medium.

Edited December 13, 2020 by seed

[ENEMY!!!]

I suppose the way to test this would be to give 100 people 100 seconds to name as many official awards as they can.  If no-one says "Game Awards", then yes, they are indeed pointless.

[Vic Vos]

Initially I just wanted to post the Skyrim "you're finally awake" scene, but even I'm surprised at this year's event in particular.

[DNSKILL5]

11 hours ago, The Strife Commando said:

Why do you have to keep bothering my threads?

I’m pretty sure I get what he means. You write a lot of new threads, often ones that are questions, but your initial post is usually one or two sentences or you answer your own question. You don’t really add anything to your question to help steer the conversation one way or another, in this instance you just answered your own question. Adding more to your post can often bring in better conversations, and there’s less chance for people to misunderstand your viewpoint. 

[Mr. Freeze]

Eternal didn't (and shouldn't) win awards because these awards are synonymous with games that push the medium with both excellent gameplay and story. Eternal really only has good gameplay. Why should it win over other games that did more? 

 

 

[A Nobody]

11 minutes ago, Mr. Freeze said:

Eternal didn't (and shouldn't) win awards because these awards are synonymous with games that push the medium with both excellent gameplay and story. Eternal really only has good gameplay. Why should it win over other games that did more? 

 

 

Yep, I stand by my point. The awards are pointless. Eternal doesn't need a story. It's Doom, and a video game. The game is supposed to be a focus on the gameplay aspect, and it wants to show that to the world. It doesn't need a story to be great.

[AtticTelephone]

@Redneckerz do you really have to be like that? He didn't hurt you, and he's not even hurting the forum with short questions. He asked a question and gave his own opinion, allowing others to add theirs too. I don't see the problem.

[Redneckerz]

1 minute ago, AtticTelephone said:

@Redneckerz do you really have to be like that? He didn't hurt you, and he's not even hurting the forum with short questions. He asked a question and gave his own opinion, allowing others to add theirs too. I don't see the problem.

In case you missed it, I feel like i explained my stance adequately afterwards, along with an answer to the OP questionnaire, and Gerolf's post provides additional granularity.

[AtticTelephone]

17 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

In case you missed it, I feel like i explained my stance adequately afterwards, along with an answer to the OP questionnaire, and Gerolf's post provides additional granularity.

Doesn't mean anything, nobody asked if his questions were pointless. He's not doing anything wrong, alright?

[A Nobody]

2 minutes ago, AtticTelephone said:

Doesn't mean anything, nobody asked if my questions were pointless. He's not doing anything wrong, alright?

"My?" You mean "his?"

[hybridial]

21 minutes ago, Mr. Freeze said:

Eternal didn't (and shouldn't) win awards because these awards are synonymous with games that push the medium with both excellent gameplay and story. Eternal really only has good gameplay. Why should it win over other games that did more? 

 

And why should it go to games that did less, because from a gameplay standpoint most of these games play it absurdly safe. The Last of Us games, to pick on two examples, are just completely outwith any imagination from a gameplay standpoint. In fact I'd say their gameplay execution does not co-exist with their storytelling ambitions very well, it largely cheapens them in every way. 

 

Storytelling in this interactive medium is an experimental craft without a doubt, but I wouldn't recognise games for not really trying to provide anything unique to the medium and instead merely aping off of other mediums. Why should an award for a videogame be given pretty much solely on the basis of the work of the scriptwriter and the cut scene director?

 

And I wouldn't even say those are impressive works at all from a narrative point of view in the greater arena of writing. There have been impressive works of that nature in the past in videogames, but there hasn't been any great strides in the field for a long time. 

[Redneckerz]

1 minute ago, AtticTelephone said:

Doesn't mean anything, nobody asked if my questions were pointless.

If you are just going to flagrantly disregard points as "Does not mean anything" then we can stop right here.

 

Im also at odds why you redirect this back to you, as the initial address is and was not about you, but i digress.

1 minute ago, AtticTelephone said:

He's not doing anything wrong, alright?

Did you read the linked postings?

[AtticTelephone]

1 minute ago, The Strife Commando said:

"My?" You mean "his?"

Well, technically both, I started out asking short questions like you, but maybe "his" works better.

[AtticTelephone]

 

11 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

Did you read the linked postings?

Yeah, didn't help, it's just the way that you say it like "Are TSC threads pointless?", that didn't help at all, in fact, you probably managed to do the opposite and make TSC less willing to listen to you. I would do the same, really. Just next time be a little more polite, however, that feels a bit ironic since I'm saying that.

 

Edit: Couldn't edit posts to have more quotes, had to post another post.

[A Nobody]

Everyone makes mistakes.