df

I am, both happy and sad to hear it's 2-hour-ish long: Happy to be able to finish a game, sad to know it's a short trip.

To match the behavior of /videos/, /forums/ page

I don't think trying to order GOTY are bad inherently, it can be a catalyst for entertaining discussion. I enjoy takedowns just like anyone :)

I take no issue with the GOTY list, but I would rather the discussion to focus a bit more on games that were cut. However I understand it require enough crews to have played them to enable such discussions.

Please be calm, this is just my personal feeling about this years' debates.

(I have been a subscriber since 2008-07-21, and was a Gamespot subscriber, so hopefully I have decent perspectives on this.)

WHAT I LIKED:

- Abby arguing for games that will otherwise have no place at GB GOTY.

- Alex and Ben explaining Nier: Automata's narrative strength.

- Vinny giving Pyre's characters a chance.

- Brad's takedown of Mass Effect: Andromeda.

- Jeff being critical not only on games, but also on category's definition.

- Dan being calm and eloquent during most debates.

- Jason and Jan doing such great jobs making camera cuts during lengthy debates.

- And Matt Rorie, the savior of Horizon Zero Dawn at GB.

WHAT COULD BE IMPROVED:

- GOTY debate: for a great year in gaming, I was left thinking the debate could have been better. I personally would have like a better takedown/appraisal of various games. In short, I care less about "which games made the list" or "what orders they are in", as long as the crews give them a fair shakedown. (I think some of the 5 hours could be better spent.)

- Category definition: I think a good rule of thumb would be, "You can summarize the category in a sentence." The lack of an agreed upon goal, is a sign of messy (and exhausting) debate.

- Placement debate: it's something people care (often deeply) about, but also something can easily detract the course of discussion. "This game should not be at X" is a bad way to start a discussion. I would rather start with "I see your point but Y feature is not designed quite as nicely as Z, and in the context of this debate it matters because...".

- Game comparison: since most rankings are subjective and personal, I would avoid argument like "But X has done this before", unless you are well-prepared and researched on this topic. It is just not a convincing argument, and it certainly didn't stop PUBG from taking Best Debut (sorry, but argh).

OK that's it from me. Do share your thought and feedbacks!

Happy New Year to everyone!

PUBG as the best debut and I am just left with 1 feeling: LOL.

If PUBG's impact is the reason it won: Lootbox should have killed this category.

@acidbrandon18 said:

That would be my bet too.

Anyway, my original rant was really about the importance of "broken-ness" or "messy-ness" of games.

Sure, "early access" sets the tone much better than a retail disc-based release. But what I am getting at was: no matter how "broken, messy, janky" a game is, as long as it entertains people, then people won't use "broken-ness" against the game. The Polygon 10/10 review illustrates this point well.

Furthermore, both Simcity and No Man's Sky were eventually better, but they weren't given PUBG kind of passes. Not because the lack of "early access" tags, but their inability to hold game reviewers for months afterwards.

There is a saying:

"Every startup has reasons both to invest and not to invest. If investors think you're a winner they focus on the former, and if not they focus on the latter."

Turn that into game reviews:

"Every game has reasons both to play and not to play. If reviewers think the game's a winner they focus on the former, and if not they focus on the latter."

That was my point.

Hi all,

I just don't get it.

It seems like a year ago we were all: remember Simcity 2013? remember No Man's Sky? Those were some broken ass games.

But now we are all: who cares if they are broken? PUBG is magic!

So let's be honest: do people actually care about broken games? or do they just don't have much fun with said games, so "broken" is a way to argue against these games?

First of all, this is likely a spam account digging old posts.

----

Secondly, boy oh boy @galadan from 3 years ago, have I got some hot games for your Macbook Air! (All of them available on macOS)

If they can't find 10 games better than PUBG this year, they have a f*cking problem.

I will defend Wolfenstein narrative in 2 ways:

1. No AAA title have managed to put nazism in its place eloquently: it normalises fascism and integrates tightly with whatever culture you have got. The latter part is seldom explored, most of the time you got Bioshock, where you have a city built from ground up following an ideology and turned into hell; not a normal city being actively changed by an external force, and maintain a shell of law and order.

2. Few AAA series have managed to "remake" a bland protagonist: BJ really was all about killing nazi and not much else before recent releases.