CGI-Quality said:
colafitte said: Comparing absolute numbers based on relative situations is the most absurd thing i've seen..
You can't compare a number based on the total of GOTY's "X game" won in a year compared to the number "Y game" won in other year, because the success of the game is relative to competition.
In other words, RDR 2 could have won 350 goty's if the competion of the year was Watch Dogs, SW Battelfront 2 and The Order 1886. And then in another year, in that same year have The Witcher III winning 115 goty's, Zelda BOTW winning 114 goty's and GOW winning 113 goty's. That wouldn't mean RDR 2 is a better game than any of those. It would be absolutely unfair to these other games that had a way harder competition to be rewarded by a GOTY.
I have this same problem when in a sport a player is considered better than other from another age because he did "better" numbers or won more titles. You can't compare that because both are not competing in the same space against the same competiton. Rules change, competition change, rivals change, expectations change.....in conclusion it'absurd.
So winning more GOTY's or having a better %s doesn't mean anything if all the games that you want to compare are not evaluated in the exact same circumstances. |
The problem with the idea of of "fairness" is that it actually holds less weight than you're giving it. Just because a game may/may not have seen more competition for GOTY in a given year does not mean it wouldn't have still retained the number of GOTY totals that it did. Example: "If The Last Of Us hadn't gone up against GTA V, it may have won even more GOTY awards". Well, you just can't know that. What if the PS3 had launched at $399? Guaranteed victory over the Wii? You can "what if" till the sky turns pink, but that doesn't make this comparison any less valid.
Thus, unless you plan to have this view every time a game reaches this point, it is a pointless complaint to make. Games get counted relative to the time.
|
The Last of Us is my favorite game ever and GOW is my game of the gen, and i still think these comparisons are absurd. You receive an award based in a pool of candidates to receive that award. If i'm an athelete that runs 100m and my time is 10'50 segs, i'm going to win against anybody that is not a professional athlete, and i will win many races, but if a compete against professional olympic athletes i'm going to be dead last.
Game of the Year is an award that identify the best game from a selection of the games that launched in a specific year, so the game that wins can't be separted from the rest of games that don't win. GOW it's game of the year 2019 against RDR2, AC Odyssey, Spiderman, Smash Bros, etc.......but only against them, not against TW3 or BOTW. I'm not "what if" anything. What i'm saying is that the only thing that you can compare is the games that participated in the same circumstances for the GOTY in 2019. Saying GOW surpassed Zelda BOTW for the most GOTY of the gen is more entering in the "what if" scenario than my opinion, because what you're doing here is "what if we compare how many GOTY's won the game that won the most from 2019 against any other from this gen?". What i'm saying is....don't do that.
All of this only serve for curious coincidences, but this thread is called "GOW becomes the most critically awarded this gen" and that is the kind of half truth that i always rant against. In this case, even if it's against my favorite game of the year.
Edit: now i see your edit
Games get counted relative to the time. I see nothing wrong with that. Otherwise, Ocarina of Time's 99 Metascore should hold less weight than God of War's 94, right?
It just doesn't work like that.
Of course i agree on that, i'm not saying games don't get counted relative to the time. I'm not discussing this. I'm not arguing the metascore a game receives. I'm discussing the number of gotys. It's absurd to compare the, what, 15-20 GOTY? Ocarina of Time received back in 98 to any game that comes in 2019. But you don't have to go that far. The point is that you can't compare the value of an individual if is not compared to the colective. Anything is relative. So comparing to relative numbers don't give you an absolute or a fact, at least in the way this thread was created.
Last edited by colafitte - on 14 February 2019