You make a fair point, mate. Thanks for posting in a mature and thoughtful manner. I actually deleted my post (in case some folks wonder where you have pulled my quote from) because it had inspired the sort of vitriolic fanboy BS that usually occurs whenever you voice an opinion that differs from theirs. I can't be bothered getting into a childish mud slinging fight with someone who professes to speak for the whole GB community.
The point I was trying to make wasn't just tied to TW3. How many of the staff finished not only The Witcher 3, but Bloodborne, Just Cause 3, Fallout 4, Undertale, or any number of other games on the list ?. To suggest that they should be diverting more time to other projects when they can't even finish the games that I am paying to hear about is just not something I am prepared to sponsor. Others can make their own choice, that's up to them. I can't say whether SMM should have won GOTY because I haven't played it. But professional games journalists should at least hold themselves to the same standards.
I'm not "harping" on about anyone, but I expect higher standards out of those two. After all, they are both senior editors on this site .I love all the folks on GB, the community included. But if the staff can't or wont hold themselves to the industry standards for dishing out awards, I'll just have to look somewhere else.
Not a problem. I've been caught in more than my fair share of forum debates where I feel like I have to watch my every word so the intent isn't lost because I'm posting something that is probably going to garner a negative reaction.
I guess the most I can respond on the point you mention is I get the feeling if other sites were as open about their Game of the Year award process, we'd probably find they ran their awards in an unideal fashion as well. I wouldn't be surprised if almost nobody finished all the games you mentioned. It doesn't help that Giant Bomb is a fairly small staff compared to say IGN or even Gamespot where guys like Drew, Jason, and Vinny are all double-dipping on roles. The thing is the more transparency you get, the more you find out how much of a disorganized mess some of these things can be. But at least here things are so out in the open you can always tell like, ah, so they like all these things about The Witcher 3, but hate the combat, so if I look at that combat and think it looks fine, then it's probably a game for me. Or oh hey, they didn't finish Life is Strange because they were using it for a video series so it got left off the top 10 possibly on a technicality.
Plus some of what you get with the Bomb crew not caring about expectations of how they're supposed to think/run this site is being willing to put out unpopular opinions. Like with Metal Gear Solid V, they didn't send someone to Konami's ridiculous closed review event so they could rush out a review on release day. Or you get the case of Jeff being willing to call out Fallout 4 whereas most review sites weren't willing. And I say that as someone who adores Fallout 4 and has it in his top 10. Also, most of the side podcasts they talk about doing don't take a super long amount of time and, as they've mentioned, they receive a lot of feedback from users saying they'd like to hear content of that type.
It's a good and correct point you make, mate. I've followed GB pretty much from the beginning, so I know the drill. I know they pride themselves on being a personality driven, "different" kind of gaming website. I also realise that there are a lot of people who want to hear their opinions and views on all kinds of subjects. That's fair enough, I'm just not one of them. I'm here for the games, son !.
I've loved this site and it's community for years, warts and all. But this years GOTY has just made the warts stand out a little more than it used to. Maybe that's just me. Or it could be that they are stretching themselves too thin, and that's what I'm concerned about.
It was definitely the attitudes of both Jeff and Dan towards TW3 and SMM that have made me so disconsolate about the whole GB GOTY discussions this year. I've paid for a premium membership for years, so that I can hear the finest and most unbiased video games coverage out there. But to hear Jeff talking about how he wants to do a music podcast (among other things) but can't even find the time to finish some of the years biggest titles, leaves me wondering about whether I should renew.r.
I guess I just don't understand what the potential gain is from that? Dan gave finishing Witcher 3 more than a fair shake, to the point I'm not sure why people keep giving him so much crap over it because no staff member was more fair towards it than him. There is no amount of interesting story that was going to overcome the game's bad combat for him. Jeff restarted the game at least once and gave it another shot after tweaks to the movement. The opinions of both of them have on the game are an opinion reflective of a lot of people. It's actually pretty similar to my own: TW3 has among the worst combat of any RPG put out this year. That doesn't change the more you play it. I mean you're harping on Jeff and Dan, but what about Witcher superfan Vinny? He voiced very similar frustrations about the game in his own top 10.
The site has never really made an active attempt to force staff members to play everything. I don't think that's any different than it has been in the past. TW3 asks for maybe more of a player's investment than any game put out in 2015 save one or two other RPGs. At some point it would be turning it into schoolwork for the crew.
You make a fair point, mate. Thanks for posting in a mature and thoughtful manner. I actually deleted my post (in case some folks wonder where you have pulled my quote from) because it had inspired the sort of vitriolic fanboy BS that usually occurs whenever you voice an opinion that differs from theirs. I can't be bothered getting into a childish mud slinging fight with someone who professes to speak for the whole GB community.
The point I was trying to make wasn't just tied to TW3. How many of the staff finished not only The Witcher 3, but Bloodborne, Just Cause 3, Fallout 4, Undertale, or any number of other games on the list ?. To suggest that they should be diverting more time to other projects when they can't even finish the games that I am paying to hear about is just not something I am prepared to sponsor. Others can make their own choice, that's up to them. I can't say whether SMM should have won GOTY because I haven't played it. But professional games journalists should at least hold themselves to the same standards.
I'm not "harping" on about anyone, but I expect higher standards out of those two. After all, they are both senior editors on this site .I love all the folks on GB, the community included. But if the staff can't or wont hold themselves to the industry standards for dishing out awards, I'll just have to look somewhere else.
DR34DN0UGHT's comments