By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - What deserves GoTY on VGA

 

Game of The Year

Assassin's Creed 3 21 11.23%
 
Dishonored 22 11.76%
 
Mass Effect 3 45 24.06%
 
Journey 66 35.29%
 
The Walking Dead 33 17.65%
 
Total:187
sundin13 on 06 December 2012

@Torillian: I personally believe that a 60$ game that only lasts 7hours is ridiculous :P Especially if that game is then nominated for GOTY awards. Essentially it all boils down to what I said earlier, is this the best the video game world has to offer? No, there are bigger, better, bolder, prettier, artsier etc games that have been released this year.

Also, length isn't a scale where it is longer=better. Its more like a bar. If a game surpasses a certain length then it can be seen as having enough heft to it to be considered a full game. Journey is an idea that was prettily executed and well choreographed but it isn't a grand orchestra of magnificent video game design. Its just not enough for me to consider it a full game and not enough for me to even consider it as being the best game of the year.



Around the Network
Jaywood2010 on 06 December 2012
Torillian said:
sundin13 said:
Torillian said:

Isn't Dishonored with it's 6-8 hours of gameplay


...wut. Ive been playing this game a lot lately (been playing a no kill run and a kill a lot of stuff run side by side) and in each of these playthroughs, I am likely at about 8 hours each and I'm barely into the game. according to How Long to Beat, it usually takes about 13 hours to beat

Theres a big difference between that and the two hours it takes to beat Journey. I am in the boat that a two hour game doesn't deserve to win GOTY. It can be a good game but there a better games that have more of a lasting effect. Thats why short films are nominated in a separate category than full movies. It just doesn't make sense to give a 5minute movie an award when it is competing with a 2hour movie. This in no way undermines the quality of the game but I just cant see it as the best the video game world has to offer.

Crud, knew I shoulda looked it up, that was just a stab in the dark based on how long the game had been taking me so far.  Luckily it's not the main point of my argument so meh.  

@Jay as well,

sure you got a lot of hours of fun out of those games, but others got more fun out of other games.  Why doesn't Disgaea win every goty since it gives people 100's of hours of shit to do?  It's because length hasn't been an issue before now.  God of War got nominated before and noone bats an eye, but if 7-8 hours is ok for 60 bucks why isn't 2 hours ok for 15?  Again, length of the game should not be the bulk of your consideration because that would be a different award like "best value of 2012" instead of best game.  If the reviewers loved Journey more than it should win, simple as that.

@Jay alone,

Journey wouldn't have that high of a meta if it were higher priced, but then again ME3 would be a lower meta if it weren't appropriately priced as well so what's it matter.  If what people pay for a game is the main consideration for goty then why are we even arguing about what should win?  Let's just take the game the most people paid the most for this year: World of Warcraft, and it shall be the winner until something else comes out with a similar pricing scheme.

It's not "best retail" or "best 60 dollar game", it's just best game.  And I'd be willing to bet you're wrong about it not showing up on other sites' goty nomination list.  I'd put down a month of avatar control assuming you can figure out terms that seem reasonable.  


This is my argument and why it shouldn't be nominated.  Thes games are not on equal ground.  People will buy borderlands 2, Halo 4, ME3, and Dishonored for $60 but Joruney no.  If you put them on equal ground and Journey is $60 then it's score would drop sigificently showing you that the other games I've mentioned are better.  This is why they have and arcade section because those games are on equal ground.  It would be like comparing angry birds to Mass Effect.  Angry birds at$60 nobody would care for it.  If you are going to defend it use a different argument than best $60 game because you know what I'm saying is true whether you admit it or not.




       

Torillian on 06 December 2012
sundin13 said:
@Torillian: I personally believe that a 60$ game that only lasts 7hours is ridiculous :P Especially if that game is then nominated for GOTY awards. Essentially it all boils down to what I said earlier, is this the best the video game world has to offer? No, there are bigger, better, bolder, prettier, artsier etc games that have been released this year.

Also, length isn't a scale where it is longer=better. Its more like a bar. If a game surpasses a certain length then it can be seen as having enough heft to it to be considered a full game. Journey is an idea that was prettily executed and well choreographed but it isn't a grand orchestra of magnificent video game design. Its just not enough for me to consider it a full game and not enough for me to even consider it as being the best game of the year.


I can't agree, all that should matter is what the panell loved the most this year.  And since their cutoff point for the length required to enjoy a game seems to be less than yours Journey will be nominated for this and other awards.  Just seems like an intractable disagreement at this point, but I think you'll have to get used to games you don't consider as full games being given awards, because that's the way things are going, and thank god for it.  



...

Torillian on 06 December 2012
JayWood2010 said:
Torillian said:

Crud, knew I shoulda looked it up, that was just a stab in the dark based on how long the game had been taking me so far.  Luckily it's not the main point of my argument so meh.  

@Jay as well,

sure you got a lot of hours of fun out of those games, but others got more fun out of other games.  Why doesn't Disgaea win every goty since it gives people 100's of hours of shit to do?  It's because length hasn't been an issue before now.  God of War got nominated before and noone bats an eye, but if 7-8 hours is ok for 60 bucks why isn't 2 hours ok for 15?  Again, length of the game should not be the bulk of your consideration because that would be a different award like "best value of 2012" instead of best game.  If the reviewers loved Journey more than it should win, simple as that.

@Jay alone,

Journey wouldn't have that high of a meta if it were higher priced, but then again ME3 would be a lower meta if it weren't appropriately priced as well so what's it matter.  If what people pay for a game is the main consideration for goty then why are we even arguing about what should win?  Let's just take the game the most people paid the most for this year: World of Warcraft, and it shall be the winner until something else comes out with a similar pricing scheme.

It's not "best retail" or "best 60 dollar game", it's just best game.  And I'd be willing to bet you're wrong about it not showing up on other sites' goty nomination list.  I'd put down a month of avatar control assuming you can figure out terms that seem reasonable.  


This is my argument and why it shouldn't be nominated.  Thes games are not on equal ground.  People will buy borderlands 2, Halo 4, ME3, and Dishonored for $60 but Joruney no.  If you put them on equal ground and Journey is $60 then it's score would drop sigificently showing you that the other games I've mentioned are better.  This is why they have and arcade section because those games are on equal ground.  It would be like comparing angry birds to Mass Effect.  Angry birds at$60 nobody would care for it.  If you are going to defend it use a different argument than best $60 game because you know what I'm saying is true whether you admit it or not.

Why am I forced to argue within the confines of your criteria even if it's stupid?  It has nothing to do with how GotY should be judged and it's a ridiculous criteria made because you're used to a certain pricepoint for titles.  If you were used to 30 dollar games that would be the requirement and I'd be extolling the virtues of some 60 dollar game and saying it's the best, and you'd talk about how if those 30 dollar games were 60 dollar titles that would mean they'd have higher development budgets and they'd be comparable to the 60 dollar game I'm championing.  Using your criteria makes no sense for judging "game of the year" so I don't see why I have to defend it with anything other than what I've already stated.  



...

sundin13 on 06 December 2012
Torillian said:
sundin13 said:
@Torillian: I personally believe that a 60$ game that only lasts 7hours is ridiculous :P Especially if that game is then nominated for GOTY awards. Essentially it all boils down to what I said earlier, is this the best the video game world has to offer? No, there are bigger, better, bolder, prettier, artsier etc games that have been released this year.

Also, length isn't a scale where it is longer=better. Its more like a bar. If a game surpasses a certain length then it can be seen as having enough heft to it to be considered a full game. Journey is an idea that was prettily executed and well choreographed but it isn't a grand orchestra of magnificent video game design. Its just not enough for me to consider it a full game and not enough for me to even consider it as being the best game of the year.


I can't agree, all that should matter is what the panell loved the most this year.  And since their cutoff point for the length required to enjoy a game seems to be less than yours Journey will be nominated for this and other awards.  Just seems like an intractable disagreement at this point, but I think you'll have to get used to games you don't consider as full games being given awards, because that's the way things are going, and thank god for it.  

nonono! Its not simply about enjoying the game, Im sure Journey is plenty enjoyable. But its not the best the industry has to offer. Like I said earlier, do you see short films judged alongside feature films? no, because that just doesnt make sense. Like Jay said, they just don't sit on equal ground.

Journey can continue to be considered a good game, maybe even best downloadable game of the year, but GOTY? no...

This is going nowhere though so if there is nothing else to add to this argument, I am fine with a stalemate :P



Around the Network
Jaywood2010 on 06 December 2012
Torillian said:
JayWood2010 said:
Torillian said:

Crud, knew I shoulda looked it up, that was just a stab in the dark based on how long the game had been taking me so far.  Luckily it's not the main point of my argument so meh.  

@Jay as well,

sure you got a lot of hours of fun out of those games, but others got more fun out of other games.  Why doesn't Disgaea win every goty since it gives people 100's of hours of shit to do?  It's because length hasn't been an issue before now.  God of War got nominated before and noone bats an eye, but if 7-8 hours is ok for 60 bucks why isn't 2 hours ok for 15?  Again, length of the game should not be the bulk of your consideration because that would be a different award like "best value of 2012" instead of best game.  If the reviewers loved Journey more than it should win, simple as that.

@Jay alone,

Journey wouldn't have that high of a meta if it were higher priced, but then again ME3 would be a lower meta if it weren't appropriately priced as well so what's it matter.  If what people pay for a game is the main consideration for goty then why are we even arguing about what should win?  Let's just take the game the most people paid the most for this year: World of Warcraft, and it shall be the winner until something else comes out with a similar pricing scheme.

It's not "best retail" or "best 60 dollar game", it's just best game.  And I'd be willing to bet you're wrong about it not showing up on other sites' goty nomination list.  I'd put down a month of avatar control assuming you can figure out terms that seem reasonable.  


This is my argument and why it shouldn't be nominated.  Thes games are not on equal ground.  People will buy borderlands 2, Halo 4, ME3, and Dishonored for $60 but Joruney no.  If you put them on equal ground and Journey is $60 then it's score would drop sigificently showing you that the other games I've mentioned are better.  This is why they have and arcade section because those games are on equal ground.  It would be like comparing angry birds to Mass Effect.  Angry birds at$60 nobody would care for it.  If you are going to defend it use a different argument than best $60 game because you know what I'm saying is true whether you admit it or not.

Why am I forced to argue within the confines of your criteria even if it's stupid?  It has nothing to do with how GotY should be judged and it's a ridiculous criteria made because you're used to a certain pricepoint for titles.  If you were used to 30 dollar games that would be the requirement and I'd be extolling the virtues of some 60 dollar game and saying it's the best, and you'd talk about how if those 30 dollar games were 60 dollar titles that would mean they'd have higher development budgets and they'd be comparable to the 60 dollar game I'm championing.  Using your criteria makes no sense for judging "game of the year" so I don't see why I have to defend it with anything other than what I've already stated.  

You agreed with me when I said that if Journey was $60 then it's metacritic would drop signifecently so you kind of already agreed with me that if these games were on equal ground then things would be different, that has been my only point.  




       

green_sky on 06 December 2012
JayWood2010 said:
Torillian said:
sundin13 said:
Torillian said:

Isn't Dishonored with it's 6-8 hours of gameplay


...wut. Ive been playing this game a lot lately (been playing a no kill run and a kill a lot of stuff run side by side) and in each of these playthroughs, I am likely at about 8 hours each and I'm barely into the game. according to How Long to Beat, it usually takes about 13 hours to beat

Theres a big difference between that and the two hours it takes to beat Journey. I am in the boat that a two hour game doesn't deserve to win GOTY. It can be a good game but there a better games that have more of a lasting effect. Thats why short films are nominated in a separate category than full movies. It just doesn't make sense to give a 5minute movie an award when it is competing with a 2hour movie. This in no way undermines the quality of the game but I just cant see it as the best the video game world has to offer.

Crud, knew I shoulda looked it up, that was just a stab in the dark based on how long the game had been taking me so far.  Luckily it's not the main point of my argument so meh.  

@Jay as well,

sure you got a lot of hours of fun out of those games, but others got more fun out of other games.  Why doesn't Disgaea win every goty since it gives people 100's of hours of shit to do?  It's because length hasn't been an issue before now.  God of War got nominated before and noone bats an eye, but if 7-8 hours is ok for 60 bucks why isn't 2 hours ok for 15?  Again, length of the game should not be the bulk of your consideration because that would be a different award like "best value of 2012" instead of best game.  If the reviewers loved Journey more than it should win, simple as that.

@Jay alone,

Journey wouldn't have that high of a meta if it were higher priced, but then again ME3 would be a lower meta if it weren't appropriately priced as well so what's it matter.  If what people pay for a game is the main consideration for goty then why are we even arguing about what should win?  Let's just take the game the most people paid the most for this year: World of Warcraft, and it shall be the winner until something else comes out with a similar pricing scheme.

It's not "best retail" or "best 60 dollar game", it's just best game.  And I'd be willing to bet you're wrong about it not showing up on other sites' goty nomination list.  I'd put down a month of avatar control assuming you can figure out terms that seem reasonable.  


This is my argument and why it shouldn't be nominated.  Thes games are not on equal ground.  People will buy borderlands 2, Halo 4, ME3, and Dishonored for $60 but Joruney no.  If you put them on equal ground and Journey is $60 then it's score would drop sigificently showing you that the other games I've mentioned are better.  This is why they have and arcade section because those games are on equal ground.  It would be like comparing angry birds to Mass Effect.  Angry birds at$60 nobody would care for it.  If you are going to defend it use a different argument than best $60 game because you know what I'm saying is true whether you admit it or not.

I respectfully disagree. I don't even know where you are getting that argument or comparison. This is same as if PS3 launched for $400 where would 360 sales be. No one can say. If they had extra funds to make the game longer without lowering the quality these small companies could do that. I know not the best way to put it but look at the Oscars. Most of the movies nominated during majority of years don't make 1/10 of the money compared to the summer blockbuster. Are they less of a movie as they don't offer same kind of enjoyment to the pop culture crowd. 

Also these awards are not nominated by some guy named VGA but by editor in chief's of major gaming publication on the web and print. So this is more of an opinion of over 50-100 different websites and magazines aggregated. Cheers. 



Torillian on 06 December 2012
JayWood2010 said:
Torillian said:

Why am I forced to argue within the confines of your criteria even if it's stupid?  It has nothing to do with how GotY should be judged and it's a ridiculous criteria made because you're used to a certain pricepoint for titles.  If you were used to 30 dollar games that would be the requirement and I'd be extolling the virtues of some 60 dollar game and saying it's the best, and you'd talk about how if those 30 dollar games were 60 dollar titles that would mean they'd have higher development budgets and they'd be comparable to the 60 dollar game I'm championing.  Using your criteria makes no sense for judging "game of the year" so I don't see why I have to defend it with anything other than what I've already stated.  

You agreed with me when I said that if Journey was $60 then it's metacritic would drop signifecently so you kind of already agreed with me that if these games were on equal ground then things would be different, that has been my only point.  


All things being equal you'd have to give ThatGameCompany the same budget as every other title and then see who makes the best game.  Why does equal ground only factor in on the back end?  

All I've agreed with you about is that Journey is at an appropriate pricepoint as it sits now.  If it were more expensive it'd be worse value, just like if ME3 was 120 dollars it'd be a worse value then it is now.  



...

Jaywood2010 on 06 December 2012
green_sky said:
JayWood2010 said:
Torillian said:
sundin13 said:
Torillian said:

Isn't Dishonored with it's 6-8 hours of gameplay


...wut. Ive been playing this game a lot lately (been playing a no kill run and a kill a lot of stuff run side by side) and in each of these playthroughs, I am likely at about 8 hours each and I'm barely into the game. according to How Long to Beat, it usually takes about 13 hours to beat

Theres a big difference between that and the two hours it takes to beat Journey. I am in the boat that a two hour game doesn't deserve to win GOTY. It can be a good game but there a better games that have more of a lasting effect. Thats why short films are nominated in a separate category than full movies. It just doesn't make sense to give a 5minute movie an award when it is competing with a 2hour movie. This in no way undermines the quality of the game but I just cant see it as the best the video game world has to offer.

Crud, knew I shoulda looked it up, that was just a stab in the dark based on how long the game had been taking me so far.  Luckily it's not the main point of my argument so meh.  

@Jay as well,

sure you got a lot of hours of fun out of those games, but others got more fun out of other games.  Why doesn't Disgaea win every goty since it gives people 100's of hours of shit to do?  It's because length hasn't been an issue before now.  God of War got nominated before and noone bats an eye, but if 7-8 hours is ok for 60 bucks why isn't 2 hours ok for 15?  Again, length of the game should not be the bulk of your consideration because that would be a different award like "best value of 2012" instead of best game.  If the reviewers loved Journey more than it should win, simple as that.

@Jay alone,

Journey wouldn't have that high of a meta if it were higher priced, but then again ME3 would be a lower meta if it weren't appropriately priced as well so what's it matter.  If what people pay for a game is the main consideration for goty then why are we even arguing about what should win?  Let's just take the game the most people paid the most for this year: World of Warcraft, and it shall be the winner until something else comes out with a similar pricing scheme.

It's not "best retail" or "best 60 dollar game", it's just best game.  And I'd be willing to bet you're wrong about it not showing up on other sites' goty nomination list.  I'd put down a month of avatar control assuming you can figure out terms that seem reasonable.  


This is my argument and why it shouldn't be nominated.  Thes games are not on equal ground.  People will buy borderlands 2, Halo 4, ME3, and Dishonored for $60 but Joruney no.  If you put them on equal ground and Journey is $60 then it's score would drop sigificently showing you that the other games I've mentioned are better.  This is why they have and arcade section because those games are on equal ground.  It would be like comparing angry birds to Mass Effect.  Angry birds at$60 nobody would care for it.  If you are going to defend it use a different argument than best $60 game because you know what I'm saying is true whether you admit it or not.

I respectfully disagree. I don't even know where you are getting that argument or comparison. This is same as if PS3 launched for $400 where would 360 sales be. No one can say. If they had extra funds to make the game longer without lowering the quality these small companies could do that. I know not the best way to put it but look at the Oscars. Most of the movies nominated during majority of years don't make 1/10 of the money compared to the summer blockbuster. Are they less of a movie as they don't offer same kind of enjoyment to the pop culture crowd. 

Also these awards are not nominated by some guy named VGA but by editor in chief's of major gaming publication on the web and print. So this is more of an opinion of over 50-100 different websites and magazines aggregated. Cheers. 


Your comaprison makes no sense what so ever.....  Consoles vs consoles and movies vs movies are very different. It is pointless debating with you though so yes, cheers.




       

sundin13 on 06 December 2012
Torillian said:


All things being equal you'd have to give ThatGameCompany the same budget as every other title and then see who makes the best game.  Why does equal ground only factor in on the back end? 

Because then we would be arguing hypotheticals and that makes even less sense. On the footing they are on now, they are not equal

 

@green_sky: Your argument doesn't make sense. It has nothing to do with how much the game sold or how much money it makes. using the movie analogy (that ive used a few times already) its like comparing short films to feature films. They arent in the same category because they are just not on even ground. It doesnt make sense to compare the two and it doesn't make sense to give a 10min film a movie of the year award when it is competing with 2 hour films.