Giant Bombcast Game of the Year 2017: Best Debut

40 minutes in. Don't tell me PUBG is going to win this category...

Edit : Oh jeez....Cuphead got robbed.

I love Alex

This whole category played out like one giant failing by the crew to do some basic research and not be hypocrites.

@moloxus: I agree. That's why its called PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds instead of just Battlegrounds. Another example would be giving best debut to Bioshock even though it is not direct sequel to System Shock.

Jeez

Thank you Jason for at least mentioning and going to bat for Absolver. It's the most refreshing game I've played in years, and stayed with since launch. It's got a very driven and passionate community, and the developers are very much dedicated and driven to updating, balancing, and expanding the game every month. Feel like that at least should be mentioned, now for the long form review/rant from a dude who loves the hell out of it (me). I applaud the efforts and support and communication with the fans that Sloclap and Devolver have provided, along with *free* content updates since launch. And not to mention, with their debut game (never been made before, original title, first IP.)

Absolver is misunderstood, and because of the confusing nature of just what the game is, it gets written off too easily. Not easily defined on first impression, with the picture only a tiny bit filled in by the time the credits roll, Absolver is described too often as a souls-like, when it really isn't. Nor is Absolver just a fighting game, either- It's a mix of the two, and more, taking elements from MMO's, fighting games, souls, and Journey-likes, and at it's root is a realistically paced PVP martial arts simulator with style. Self-described as an 'online melee action' game, Absolver's endlessly diversifying approach from player to player, each matchup is exhausting, and the combat is demanding of even the most seasoned 'souls' players, or the frame-counting combo-learning fighting game crowd. Absolver rewards patience and willingness to learn the systems at play, and adapt to their attributes on-the-fly, at the very least- which takes at least a hundred hours or more- and understandably that will lead to misconceptions about what the game exactly even IS, or a rushed judgement, based on only one style played, or a handful of hours spent in the deck editor, not having the full move list at the player's disposal for at least a few hundred more hours after the story mode concludes.

My criticism with the GB criticism of Absolver, is that they, to be fair could not spend enough time with the game to actually grasp the PVP and prestige-systems; as the wrongly labelled 'souls-like' single player is only the beginner-level of skill barriers. Simply put, confusing or not, 'beating the game' isn't possible, as the story mode- in entirety- IS the tutorial, meant really to give a new player their sea-legs and some grasp on the depth of the fighting systems, to take their Absolver into PVP, which is where the game's diversity and real challenge presents itself, and rewards a player in turn.

With 96+ hard-earned hand to hand moves to collect and four styles to master, and order in an infinite number of ways, even with 900+ hours in, it's a constant re-shuffling of every stat point, move ordering, number of moves per deck, and piece of gear going into the combat trials. The Combat Trials are the heart of the game, and are where you will get your butt kicked back into the deck editor to cover weak aspects of your moveset, or method of play. I haven't played a fighting game that asks you to fundamentally be flexible as there are trends of play that come and go, that require you to refine and redefine what you consider your 'best' deck, or approach to a win. There is no 'winning deck', no 'best style' or stat allocation, everything is a toss up from player to player, and for that it requires you to adapt every single match you play.

Again, I am just happy that Absolver got mentioned at all, for something, for as dense as it is, and misunderstood as it continues to be on a mainstream level, especially for people who almost badmouth it for being complex and so unique it's hard to describe without playing it. For a point of context, Brad keeps saying 'kung fu dark souls' which is really the wrong way to frame Absolver. Truly, it is not about that kind of challenge, and that's a failure to dig deep enough to understand the game's PVP-fighting-game-core, which it overwhelmingly succeeds with, and in a completely new way than anything else by combining several genres together, using the story as a tutorial to teach you long-form how to understand the complexity of the deck-builder and put you through the paces- so that when the credits roll, you're somewhat competent and ready for competitive Combat Trials, which is the real meat of the game, and I'm saddened that Jeff, Brad, and to some degree Jason simply didn't allow themselves to dig into it, because there's something there that isn't anywhere else. What becomes more and more clear about Absolver, is that it is about learning from failures in using your move sets, and your ability to react, predict, deceive and strategize- before, during, and after each fight, not simply the open world's simple enemy pattern memorization as one does in a souls game. Memorization only will get you so far, and in Combat Trials, you need to be able to work a little harder than learn how to throw a dragon-punch, which I think most of GB (no offense) may be capable of doing (number of games out this year aside)- the general 'give-up' attitude for anything asking for a high level of attention, skill accumulated over time, and because of that they in part are responsible for the misconception about what that game is with a false label as a 'souls-like' when it really isn't. That may be the most frustrating thing as an Absolver fan who really thinks that game is the most original premise, concept, execution and style out this year, because many major game reporting outlets gave it a similar uninformed fast-labelling, and this has in fact hurt the game's sales, and gone against what Sloclap tried fairly hard to clarify out the gate- that the game isn't a single player experience, it's not a COOP game either, that's about 3-6 hours of playtime that is meant to serve as a large, highly decorated and detailed tutorial. So in effect, Brad's description, and to some degree Jason's are both incredibly reductive to the core of the game, and leave with a misunderstanding that extends across the board with reviews that basically only got that far into the game.

Absolver won't win any mainstream awards, but is the most rewarding fighting game I've played to date, and almost 1000 hours logged, sharing several discord spaces with the top players, there's always room for improvement no matter how 'good' you think you are, and that is what makes Absolver at it's core so special. Failure is built into the fun of the game, and I can't say that formula is for everyone, but losses serving as a way to learn and adapt is what Absolver asks you to to do, and is more rewarding in each victory because of what it allows you to do, and is endlessly playable because of that. I can't think of any AAA game or any game this year that has asked that of their players, and for my own personal gripe they seem to have the same pool of games for each category, and while I understand it's the highlight big budget games that get the most attention it's surprising to hear the same games nominated for several categories when Absolver is a brand new IP, doing several things never done before and I vehemently disagree with Jason as far as Absolver being lacking, it IS a fighting game, one that rejects conventions in favor of digging your heels in and LEARNING how to play. Nothing is broken either as Jeff suggests, and I can see why he'd think that, but it's not a brawler, it's fairly easy to fight off multiple enemies once you start understanding your directional controls, your defensive abilities, and so on. Again, it's not Dark Souls. It's incredibly complicated, yes, it's set in an open world, yes, but it's ambitious in all the right ways that have to be appreciated by actually asking a little more out of yourself to see that it succeeds in spades, especially given all the additional content they've given the last three months, and the plans for expansions in the future.

Again, at least glad it got a mention, if the description and representation of what that game is, succeeds at and aims to be is misunderstood by most, including GB. I continue to enjoy it, so I suppose the nomination in this category is enough for me, even if it's my clear winner for GOTY.

Did DOTA2 even qualify? It's literally a sequel. Thus the 2 in DOTA2.

@delitist: I completely agree about the passion versus “controller in hand fun” thing. I think it’s unfair to discount a game from early in the year because you’re not going back to it or currently super invested in it. It flies in the face of the insistence that games from early in the year will not be forgotten. Remembering they exist isn’t really enough, they have to be held to the same standards. There’s no real way of knowing if, six months from now, games from the back half of the year they’re currently super into will still hold their attention like that, but Horizon is repeatedly being dinged for something other games aren’t having to contend with - a cooling off period. It’s not necessarily an easy problem to solve, but it sure is frustrating.

I'm excited for next year because we no longer have to hear about PUBG anymore. (except for old game of the year which I'm sure it'll win, let's keep throwing accolades at it every chance we get!)

Why did Rivals of Aether get dismissed for being a Smash clone but PUBG doesn't get dismissed for being a clone of H1Z1?

I don't think Horizon really was ever all that well liked by the staff aside from Jeff, so I'm not surprised it's not getting much traction in these discussions. It seems like for some who would have been on board with it, Zelda derailed their time with it, and for others they played it after Zelda and had fatigue for what they felt was a similar game. I haven't played either, but this is my impression of how that staff has felt about that game all year through podcast and video discussions.

I think this is a category that should be judged far more on the "spirit" rather than "letter of the law" regarding what is qualified. This should probably be a category that rewards genuine experimentation and risk-taking. That being said I don't have much issue with the winner here, i think the impact has been seismic.

Poor Hob.

I'm never upset with their choices for the GOTY lists, because the discussion itself has always been a pulling factor for me. The highlight of this particular discussion was Vinny's thoughts on the level of risks between Pyre and Night in the Woods. They're two games that take a weird backseat to gameplay in some way, and both provoke player engagement without traditional mechanics. It was a wonderful, intimate discussion on the success behind both games, and it's one of the big reasons why I love GOTY from Giant Bomb.

Also, really happy to see Abby improve over Day 1 & 2. She took a backseat in places where she wasn't informed this time around, and that is not a bad thing to do. Her comments on Best Music really soured me on the entire discussion, but I'm glad to see improvement, and hope to see her mature as she continues her career at Giant Bomb.

The PUBG thing is so weird, it would be like giving DOTA2 best debut and blowing off the original DOTA cause it was a mod. It's the same damn game!

I always wonder if this category wouldn't make more sense to celebrate the debut of new developers / teams instead of celebrating new IP's.

Like Supergiant seems to always create a new story with a new name, so it will always qualify for this category. But when Pyre appears, it's not out of nowhere. People look back on Bastion & Transistor. While a game like Cuphead is the first game made by brothers that never made a game before. And it turned out great. Truly a debut.

To be fair, deciding where the line is between a 'real game' and 'student games / mods /passion projects' can be quite tricky, so i understand why they restrict it to 'new IP'. But when a game wins that's a refinement of a process that has been done many times by the same guy, it doesn't really feel like a debut.

To me, this category feels like they're doing a 'best game' category where they exclude games with a 2 or 3 behind the name. And that's quite a weird thing to celebrate. As long as you make a new IP, you can still win best debut even if you made more than 3 Killzone's with your team in the past. But if your new game has the word Killzone in the title, you are not eligible.

Wouldn't this be a better category if we were praising Team Cherry for bursting on the scene with their first game Hollow Knight? Or be mindblown how a new team can make something like Cuphead as their first game?

I get that all the other games are also just new iterations of old genres but at least they all have unique design behind them. All PUBG presents is its gameplay battle royal format which is not new. There is nothing memorable about its world or characters ect.

Like many others here, I was surprised about the huge push for PUBG in this category. I understand that it's on the list since it isn't a direct sequel to a full release. But it is so close to being that. There is room for discussion here, and I was disappointed that Ben's arguments against PUBG were disregarded by most.

I'm also really surprised how much Horizon has fallen in favors since its release.

pubg original they been making it for years nothing original the guy who made it done it for years. pubg isnt even that good I was like everyone else and played it a bunch but after 40 hours man I am done with it. I have friends that are 300 hours in and I think they have problems seriously it is a buggy mess how! Why do people care so much about it I dont get it. But I get what vinny is saying other games are trying to do what they are trying to do. I am behind Bens point.

Brad: Cuphead is just well-made side-scrolling platformer with a cool art style.

Me: Have you seen PUBG? A tiny twist on CS:GO and hundreds of shooters out there Giantbomb crews totally ignore?

Battlegrounds winning this feels like a waste. Ths category has started to feel like "Best Game With The Sequels Disqualified"

Very much on board with some of the criticisms of eligibility here. I think the concept of 'best debut' should encapsulate a little more of the spirit of a debut - something original, from a new developer - because in this case it feels like the highest rated game on the final top ten that isn't a sequel. It's a filter of the top ten.

Games like Cuphead, from a new studio with an exceptionally original look and sound, or Night in the Woods, or even Hellblade or Horizon - big departures for established studios - seem deserving of acknowledgement for their newness and individuality. Far more than PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds, which is developed by and named after the guy who created the genre.

I haven't even played Nioh, yet, but how in the hell does Night in the Woods beat Nioh?

PUBG winning best debut is like Sonic Mania winning best debut lmao.

Double/triple lol for Jeff throwing shade on Aether because it's just smash and Ben's point about PUBG being ARMA is thrown aside. At least be consistent.

I think these 'awards' could really stand to have a concise written explanation of each 'award' so that everyone knows beforehand an iterated mod could qualify.

Oh wait, Brad and Jeff literally qualify the category with 'best thing not made before'. Playing a little loosey goosey with that description.

@pneumonicbook: PUBG isn't ARMA though. I'm only familiar with having watched them but I can tell there's only a few superficial/broad similarities.

I have to agree that this category might benefit from being redefined.

I always saw "Best Debut" as more of a "hey this is the first game this studio / person made, how cool is it that it's so good? can't wait to see more!" and not "here's the best new IP" which... we had that as well at some point. Like more of a "welcome to the industry!" and not "can't wait for Pyre 2!".

Personal picks: Studio MDHR with Cuphead as the winner and as runners-up Team Salvato with Doki Doki Literature Club and Stray Frawn Studio with Niche.

Yeah Ben kind of touches on some of my issues with PUBG being eligible here. Seemed like he could've done slightly better job articulating it though he was getting strong-armed by a group of dudes who are, let's face it, completely out of touch with that scene. Hell I barely know about the PUBG dev history, but what I do know is there were so many times during murder island that felt identical to times when I've randomly watched Russian and Czech streams of DayZ and H1Z1. It's a bit more exciting to watch with a time constraint, but that game is way too similar in my eyes.

And where exactly did that game debut? Steam? It debuted in early access which these deliberations insist don't count. Xbox? That seems to be in a predictably rough state last I heard. I'll tell you where PUBG actually did debut: TwitchTV. Once you realize that everything about the amount of acclaim that game gets makes sense. Ultimately I've long since accepted that site awards are a silly thing. That said I've always been of the mind that the games most deserving of awards are ones made with the most craft, and Battlegrounds is mostly crunch.

@mezmero: Have you ever eaten a Crunch Bar, its pretty good

I think y'all are crazy for going to bat for Night in the Woods. The dialogue for that game reads like stitched together Tumblr posts with May being the biggest offender. It's a world where I don't want to talk to any of the characters and I can't escape the character that annoys me the most.

Honestly read some of those lines out loud. Especially when she feeds the baby rats in that pinata or whatever are there. If you said that to your friends or, well, in public people would slowly turn their heads towards you.

Man, you guys really hate PUBG here, trying to discredit it because it Player Unknown had made mods similar to it. PUBG is a new game by a studio who has never made a game like this with a director who has made mods like it. If your reason to discredit PUBG is because Player Unknown made mods like it in the past, then I would discredit a game like Bioshock being a debut game despite it being a new game by a studio who has worked on a similar game System Shock. Of course Bioshock is irrelevant here but the point still stands, past works, especially mods, should not discredit a game being a debut. PUBG, as far as the mass is concerned, is an entirely new thing, and it technically is.

As for the Horizon Zero Dawn issue, I can understand why it didn't end up on their list. The game came out and was taken over by Zelda for most of the staff. When the game came out I remember the staff enjoying it, but as time went on the game did not resonate as well as other games for them, based on the way they'd talk about it on podcasts and such.

Remember guys, this is the Giant Bomb Staff list, not your own personal list. Don't get worked up on what should have won, just enjoy the discussions. All that being said, I think "Best Debut" as a category would probably be more interesting if it were debut for a new developer/team.

@brainling: well said

Stunned, absolutely stunned that Horizon isn't getting at least some recognition in one of these categories.

Best World? Nope, shot down with reason being it belongs in Best Story (which is bunk, but that's not even the worst injustice - that comes later...)

Best Debut? Nope, shot down. Criminally, considering in the past a release of a former mod as its own game has disqualified a game from this category (DOTA 2), yet somehow PUBG isn't held to the same standard?

Best Story? Nope, not even in contention. After what was said to DQ it from Best World. WTF?

The more these convos I've listened to the more I've strongly disagreed and become really annoyed. Horizon was absolutely amazing and I loved its weapon system and loved its story and loved fighting the big robots which do not at all look like bayformer robots. bah! So many awful choices this year.

PUBG is one of those games that never clicked with me. It's buggy, the shooting is at best serviceable and long stretches of nothing happening. I'm still amazed at how that game blew up, still there's no denying how much fun people (including the GB staff) are having with it.

I never expected to enjoy Rabbids so much that I did everything in it.

@hassun said:

The more I watch the deliberations this year, it feels like all of the categories could use a concise written definition/explanation - hell, a blurb of some kind - and even guidelines as to what arguments should be ruled out. Like others have said, they repeatedly used deep reverberating industry ramifications for PUBG's importance while in other years they'd throw out those arguments and stress "these are our awards. I don't give a fuck what people outside this room think about X game."

I think Ben's argument about PUBG is a sound one. He just didn't articulate it well enough that as soon as he brought it up the Jeff+Brad tsunami took him out. I feel like with most years they were still able to stay true to the spirit of an award.

I still enjoy listening to these but PUBG seems to be winning categories that don't seem all that appropriate if they were even barely following the hugely growing scene centered around these twitch and YouTube stream games. I agree with Ben, Abby and Jason.

I would like to know the scenario where "Best Debut" and "Best Game" isn't the same game in a year where "Best Game" isn't a sequel. Has that ever happened? If not, what is the point of this category? Assuming it's just for when the opposite is true, but this seems like a lame category that doesn't really fill a need this year.

@yukeake: It came out too early in the year, I think that's all. It's an amazing game.

Meh. Zeitgeist won over actually well-made games.

Listening to Abby was so frustrating on all of these, but wow it boiled over on this one.

@gyozilla: I am actually of the opinion that -outside of the GotY- they should make up awards each year to give them to games they want to highlight.

Ugh once again they're going to passover Hollow Knight like its some subpar turd, I think if different people liked it might stand a chance but the people that could fight for it just kinda "eh whatever" on it.

Despite being a much better game (I think it's easily the best game released this year), Cuphead doesn't hold a candle to PUBG in this category. PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds has sold more copies on PC alone than Call of Duty sells annually across PC, Xbox, and PlayStation. PUBG is a phenomenon in addition to a great game.

@schindigg: They never insinuated in the slightest that it was a "subpar turd". I get hoping they rep your game a bit, but I wouldn't take it too seriously and be offended if they unfortunately didn't take the time to try a personal favorite of yours. They have their own tastes and they picked their battles in a *very* crowded year.

If Abby is going to rally against PUBG any time it comes up, I wish she would come up with a better argument than "I didn't like it." or "I found it boring." There are plenty of things wrong with the game, but trying to get it disqualified from Best Multiplayer for not having in-game voice chat shows that Abby maybe didn't explore the game much outside of GB's features.