IGN's Wii Game of the Year award goes to....a wiiware title.

[The_vagabond7]

Comrade Tovya said:

Torillian said:

Who cares what attracted more playtime, a gem that noone has ever played is still a gem. If I was the only person in the world who had played SotC I would still call it an amazing game and the same goes for WoG. Popularity has very little correlation with quality, and trying to use that as a way to disparage a great game is just disappointing.

@Comrade
Sure they shouldn't pick a Wii GotY with the intention of giving bad press to the Wii, but are you suggesting that they should base it off of what would give good press to the Wii?  Because in my mind that is just as wrong.

@everyone
This is a very cool decision by IGN to give the title to a independently made game. You guys have one of the best games available to you through Wiiware, now quit your bitching and silly conspiracy theories. It's not like an awful game won. A great game won, just not the one you wanted to win. Oh well, deal with it.

 

No, I am not saying that they should give a blockbuster game the GOTY title simply to give the game good press.  But they chose blockbuster games for both the PS3 & 360, but for the "casual" Wii, they pick a little played or known game.  I'm sorry, but the LARGE majority of Wii owners wouldn't call their declared "winner" the Game of the Year.

I think it's just the writer saying that the Wii sucks so bad, they have to give the award to a little known or played game... it's the industries' dislike for the Wii because of poor 3rd party support and in all reality, the best games are 1st party.  I think IGN is a little to closely aligned with 3rd party software companies that maybe have a bias against the Wii because of this.

Who really knows...?  It's just speculation.

But, if IGN were to give XBOX 360 Game of the Year honors to Bomberman: Act Zero, you'd hear 360 fans crying fowl as well... I don't care if IGN thought that it was the best game of the year for that console.  The people, the fans who play the games, don't agree.  It just seems like arrogance when a site declares a game a winner of an award despite the fact that they are in the small minority of people who think so.  It really looks as if they are saying, "F' you readers, we are in charge, and we'll declare whomever we want to be the winner whether you like it or not... we are the mighty IGN".

I really hate that site, their reviews and game ratings suck anyway.

 You know they have reader voted awards too, right? Why would they give out awards based on their perception of what the readers expect, and then a second set of awards for what the readers actually voted for? The oscars don't go based on who they think people like the most, or what movie got the most hype/coverage/movie ticket sales. Being a blockbuster doesn't mean much in the eyes of a critic, and that's what they are being asked to do for an awards show, or article or whatever. It's not fan service, they aren't there to give the majority what they want.