Being more open minded about which games could/should win GOTY

So obviously it's that time of year again where GB is winding up for their GOTY deliberations, and it got me thinking about last year.

I still see a lot of people saying that the only reason Tetris Effect won last year was because it was the least offensive choice, and that really makes me sad. I'm not even saying that wasn't the reason it won (although that's more an issue with the process which is a whoooole other discussion!), I just think it's really disappointing if anybody has the attitude that only certain games should be in contention.

I really loved Tetris Effect, and I found the constant reductive "it's just another Tetris game" comments kind of baffling because you can be that reductive about most games ("it's just another FPS", "it's just another third-person action adventure game", etc.). There isn't exactly a lot of originality in video games, especially in "mainstream" games, so for that to be a bashing point for a particular game doesn't really make sense to me. If a game is good, and you enjoy it, and it really speaks to you and what you're looking for in a game, then who cares what kind of game it is? Doom Eternal got delayed to next year, otherwise I'm pretty sure it'd be in the conversation again for GOTY this year. Not only is that "just another FPS", but it's literally the sequel to a game that almost won GOTY 2016.

I saw numerous comments last year saying something to the effect of "I would rather they picked [insert name of game they personally disliked] than Tetris Effect". Like, what the hell is that? You're so against the idea of a Tetris game winning that you would rather they chose a game you didn't even like? Why??

I think there's a similar attitude from some (too many?) people towards indie games, that despite their quality they're somehow "too small" to be a valid choice for GOTY, even if they make it in to the top 10.

Of course everyone is entitled to like what they like, and if that means big budget AAA games, or sequels to games in long established genres or franchises, then good! Just don't discount all the other kinds of games as somehow not being able to compete or even be eligible for consideration. Every game deserves to be judged on its qualities regardless of budget/scope/genre/lineage.

tl;dr - ANY game can be a potential GOTY winner and people should be ok with that!

As long as ppl come to a consensus, I don't care what game wins. It's annoying when 2-3 ppl just bully a game to the top.

Another issue with the top spot for me has been that they just want the whole process to end by that point so it's often very anticlimactic. Idk if the solution is to record that part first but it's always weird they'll argue the bottom 4 to 10 for hours and then fart out the winner.

I don't have a problem with their choices in GOTY, it is their list and if that is what they want, super. I have been a member for a while and enjoy all the GOTY coverage, it is nice to hear passionate arguments for games, especially ones I have not played. The only thing I don't like from recent years is the occasional unfair shut downs of criticism and honest questions. The one that comes to mind the most is Yakuza 0 getting dumped and Dan basically being told to be quiet for asking questions that either could not be answered or would not be answered. Just left a bad taste in my mouth.

Looking forward to this years coverage all the same.

tl;dr - ANY game can be a potential GOTY winner and people should be ok with that!

It's a lovely thought that's probably never going to happen. Some people will always hate the staff's #1 pick, because...

a) It wasn't a game they liked, so how could it possibly be GOTY on Giant Bomb's personal list?!

b) It wasn't a game they liked and because GB didn't pick it as their GOTY, it's not going to sell a million more copies and the devs will go bankrupt, OH NOOOO! I mean, surely everyone remembers how CD Projekt Red went under in 2015, right?

c) I was going to write a third one, but I got a headache, so let's just make this the reason the OP already listed for Tetris Effect.

I don't know, maybe some day it won't be an issue anymore, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

I don't think the staff have ever picked a GOTY that was also mine. I don't really care what they pick since it's all subjective anyway. I just enjoy listening to the podcasts and watching the videos every year, it's become a Christmas tradition that I look forward too.

Tetris was a bizarre discussion 'cause everyone used up their energy arguing about Red Dead Instead. So the hourlong discussion wasn't about the top two contenders at all. It was about which deserved third or fourth place. For hours. Then Tetris just took it at the end with no argument lol

@redhotchilimist: similar thing happened with PUBG. They nitpicked all the games in the list except when they got to number 1.

People in agreement will be less energized to post than those that feel extremely strongly that a choice is rediculous. Something to keep in mind.

Literally any video game should be able to win if it has the chops.

The truth is, people should care a lot less about things like Game of the Year.

I love the staff lists as a way to see each person celebrating and recognizing the experiences that have some deeper personal importance.

I also love the behind-the-scenes peek the Game of the Year podcasts give us. The whole process is a deliberation that genuinely attempts to marry objective distance with each editor's and producer's respective viewpoints. And in that way the whole thing is a beautiful train wreck.

But readers/viewers/listeners demand two concurrent, often contradicting things:

• The impression of cold, machine-like objectivity
• For that impression of cold objectivity to reinforce their own biases and preferences.

Problem is, neither of those things are really possible, especially for a group like Giant Bomb, whose team is small and whose members often preoccupy themselves with games that sometimes appeal to overlapping interests and sometimes don't. Think about how many of the staff played The Witcher 3. Or, this year, how many played Sekiro, never mind something truly obscure. What's more—each person's individual tastes are going to bring to bear wildly diverse conclusions about the same material.

And that is the cool thing about Game of the Year. The rankings matter, albeit somewhat superficially. But it isn't an end-all, be-all.

What really counts is the platform to say, "You know what, Game X did something extremely unique. And it might not be the unanimous choice for Game-We'll-Talk-About-In-Ten-Years, but someone made this, and in the highest of high-profile opportunities to recognize the things that moved us, this game is on that list."

Earlier this year I re-listened to the 2016 GotY stuff. I really like the way Best Game wrapped up that year. A couple of games made their way onto the list even though only 1 person on staff liked each one. Vinny suggested axing Uncharted 4 to make room for Hyper Light Drifter, Thumper, and Stardew Valley. The virtue of this being that it's the site's list, and that members of the staff had a real passion for those games.

I'd like to think that mentality applies to the top of the list too. The hope is that no one on the editorial staff has a strong dislike or apathy toward the best game of the year. It's why Read Dead 2 and God of War weren't going to win, despite maybe seeming like more "wow" titles than Tetris Effect. It's a game that everyone on the staff could feel good about, and I'm okay with that.

In the end, the whole thing is silly and the process comes down to whatever that little roomful of people decide is best. It's site that's about the personalities as much as the games, so I can't mad at any of this.

I don't think i've played any of this years GOTY contenders, the most i hope for is that the games i like get some kind of recognition, but i can't remember any 2019 games i've played except Modern Warfare so... I'm probably going to be listening and thinking "Baaah it's probably not that good".

I don't really care about the order, i just want to hear the GBcrew discuss their faves.

I don't care what other people think about games. I just want them to pick something that will upset the most anime avatars on the internet.

I agree, it shouldn't matter so much to people, but a lot of folks like to have their opinions validated by personalities they follow. I've almost never agreed with GB's GOTY picks, and generally think they are pretty wack, but it doesn't and shouldn't matter what I think when it comes to their picks.

Hell, my top 3 this year is going to be Three Houses, DMC5 and Death Stranding. Only one I expect any positive discourse on is Three Houses from like Dan and Ben.

My main problem with GB's GOTY discussions is that they put too much emphasis on what the general public feel towards a particular game, as in "we shouldn't include this game in our GOTY discussions because it wasn't popular enough with the masses, even though I really liked it". What the masses think about a game should be excluded from their discussions, because their task is not to find the most popular game of the year, something a simple web-search can reveal, their task is to find the game they collectively enjoyed the most. I also think they yield too quickly when it comes to niche games, as in "well I really liked this unique strategy game, but this action game has broader appeal so let's go with that one instead". I want to see stronger argumentation for games that are comparatively more unique, because that is what the gaming media is telling us regular folks what they want to see more of: originality done well.

That said, the GOTY they pick doesn't really impact my own decisions, I enjoy it for what it is: a bunch of fun and cool gamers discussing games I may or may not have heard of or played. I watch it more for the dicussions themselves rather than what the actual games are, if that makes sense.

Giant Bomb's GOTY is where we're here for the sausage-making, not the sausage. People forget that.

I’m always very open to people picking the games I personally like and I hope others are equally open to sharing my point of view during deliberations.

For GB the consistent problem is that out of the entire crew most of them will not have finished any of the major games and you’ll have one or two people that actually beat the game and steer the opinion on it. That’s why in the end a game like Tetris wins - not because it’s bad but because it’s the one thing they can comfortable agree on. It has always been a disappointing cop out but it’s inevitably what keeps happening.

They had Extra Life and all these UPF’s to use in order to revisit games that are going to come up during GOTY and for the most part they don’t use these opportunities.

I think their choice always has a sound meaning behind it, I'm very curious about this year. I'm starting to think Outer Wilds is gonna take it, with Outer Worlds coming in very high as well. I think MW is the best COD I've ever played but don't expect much love, but I think this years top 3 for me are Control, Fire Emblem, and Outer Wods

Yes 100%. I'm not gonna get emotional at all about GOTY and honestly going forward there's no reason to feel that way for future GOTY deliberations. Its always fun to see the discussions for a year's catalogue of games and how the GB folks honestly feel about them. But so what if someone thinks differently about a game you might love/hate? People are entitled to have a different opinion on any form of entertainment media and nobody should get upset over a game that they love not getting as much love on GB and vice versa. I honestly don't expect many games that are gonna be on my top 10 to be mutual on GB's list and I'm not gonna get heartbroken over it. It would be nice to see a game I enjoy make it onto their list but its not this ultimate form of vindication to get worked up about. If GB's GOTY is different than mine, than awesome! It might be a game I haven't played and they might sway me to try it. It'll be up to me if I end up liking the game or not.

On the one hand, absolutely.

Also I still can't consider Tetris a contender.

Saying people shouldn't care about GB GOTY is such nonsense. Sure, at the end of the day it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but that could be said about everything related to games. The thing is it is fun to care. Hell, going by hours put in, the GOTY is the single most important thing on this site.

The staff puts in tons of work and passionate debate and the audience is just supposed to sit there like idgaf about your opinions? Nevermind that having your own horse in the race makes the deliberations more exciting to listen to.

It is perfectly fine to feel strongly about the staff making the wrong choice once again. I'm still upset about The Witcher 3, very much agree with PUBG and think RDR2 was rightly passed. It's a bit like watching sports or wrestling in that way: choosing to be deeply invested in something altogether meaningless for entertainment purposes.

I'm all for heated arguments, both within the staff and the audience. Just remember that having differing opinions doesn't make the other side horrible people and have at it!

I just want lots of arguments and bickering. I couldn't care less what wins what. Drama is the only thing I look forward to in their deliberations. Some say 2017's was a disaster, but it was legit some of my favourite GOTY content to have come out of this site in years. That said I'd trade it all for just one more minute of Mass Alex or Old Games Show.

They should make a non-ordered top 10 and move on. The discussions to create the lists are generously cordial and thoughtful. Numbering the lists from 10-1 is generally shitting on people and the games they like.

Two things that bother me about GOTY now.

1) Everyone gets a free slot for whatever pet game they want. With 8-9 members that accounts for half or more of the list.

2) And then that defender says they don't care what number it gets so long as it is there.

Basically every member of staff has done this at least once over the years. GOTY Top 10 is stuck in this weird no-man's land of caring about numbering a lot and not caring at all.

I hope they change the system (every game needs at least 2-3 cheerleaders, unordered top 10 with 1 winner), but they probably won't.

@humanity: I really doubt that playing a game once a week, multiple weeks for 20 minutes at a time, or during a massive sleepless binge is the ideal way to visit any game that might deserve a GotY nomination. Those are bizarre knocks against the process.

I agree with you for the most part, I think. I think there is a fine line between participating in the madness and being a petulant dick about it. That's where things get bad and when my mind goes toward "Hey, this really isn't that big of a deal, you know that, right?" I am all for people being like "WHAT THE HELL BRAD STOP TALKING ABOUT DESTINY YOU MONSTER!" but when it gets more into the comments like "This list is trash" or direct insults to people on the basis of how "good" or "bad" their arguments (or sometimes even things like the tone of their voice) are, the fun starts to get let out of the whole thing REALLY fast, and starts to get really gross.

It’s the journey, not the destination.

If they justify their placement in the deliberations, I’m cool with whatever.

There have been a few times when a game got bumped-up, or won, seemingly to shut someone up and move along. Those do annoy me.

At the same time, the crew has stated that the GOTY process is...something along the lines of “fucking stupid,” and that they’re just exposing the world to it, so whatever?

Going back to the journey, I enjoy the knives coming out and the debate. I’m not huge on stonewalling, but it comes with the turf, especially with so many bodies in the room, these days.

@the_nubster: during the charity stream they could have chosen a single game and just played through it like Drew and Alexis do. During UPF they can at least get a 40 minute taste of the game which is absolutely better than having no interaction with it at all. These are pretty weird knocks against a fairly reasonable suggestion.

I agree with your Topic post and general idea. However, when talking GOTY on Giant Bomb, the arguments from the staff shape it so actually it does matter a lot if a game can be non offensive or building on an old favorite like Tetris Effect vs going out on a limb more like a Red Dead 2, which some will really dislike by its nature. The arguments have gotten pretty wild (not the for the better) in the last few years as well so it really does matter. A real RPG will never win on Giant Bomb by its nature for example.

In the end, you should be able to accept a Tetris Effect as GOTY though, nothing wrong with that.

This year I'm bailing out at that point no matter what. It has gotten terrible to listen to. I also really miss them doing fun lists last year. It hasn't been so fun to listen to which is too bad because it's a huge focal point for the site. It's a thing the whole staff gets together for and it should be more fun.

@stephen_von_cloud:

I feel similar maybe it needs to be an un-ordered 3-10 but they figure what is the best overall game and the second best / runner up. I think this would give them a lot more energy to figure out the best two games as opposed to an hour of arguing over what is number 7-10 and then loosing steam and just going with whatever at the end.

@arcitee: That would be an improvement for sure. I am content to just bail out when annoyed after the last couple years but as I said I hope it is a bit more fun, weird, and silly this year like it was in the past.

@stephen_von_cloud: @arcitee:

I dunno, I do like the knives-out aspect of that whole top 10. I don’t like when people just yell the same shit into the void. I don’t like when someone gives their impassioned plea, it fails to sway anyone, and they still don’t relent. But I do like the conversation, the debating, arguing, criticizing, and praising that comes out of actual discourse.

The more of that discourse I can get, the happier I am.

I do think more than 4-5 bodies in the room makes that process uglier than it should be. I get that they want everyone to have a voice, but it means there’s always a sticking point and it’s a lesser listening experience.