2013
is over and now we have time to reflect upon the year that was. This means that
a big topic of discussion is what should be the game of the year for 2013. All
across the internet gaming sites and individual gamers alike are making lists
and declaring winners of titles like “Best RPG” and “Best Shooter”. The biggest
public showcase for these titles/awards in videogames is Spike’s Video Game
Awards, now renamed VGX. It is rather common to bash Spike’s gaming award show,
in fact I’d argue that it is another one of the “cool” things for gamers to do
online thanks in large part to the groupthink mentality of the internet. I am
not a fan of the VGAs/VGX, but my intention here isn’t to produce a vile rant
about them nor is it to defend them. I want to use them as an example to
discuss the problems facing just about every major set of gaming awards out
there.
You
see, the way we organize our yearly awards for videogames is wrong and
ineffective. If you don’t believe me just look at the inconsistency of the
award winners. To highlight this we are going to briefly examine 5 of the
awards and their winners from this year’s VGX: Best PlayStation Game (The Last
of Us), Best Xbox Game (Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons), Best Action Adventure
Game (Assassin’s Creed 4), Studio of the Year (Naughty Dog) and of course Game
of the Year (Grand Theft Auto 5). Now try to follow what comes next. GTA5 was
Game of the Year meaning that it is the best game that came out this year,
sounds simple right? GTA5 was nominated for Best PlayStation Game, Best Xbox
Game, Best Action Adventure Game and Rockstar North (developers of GTA5) were
nominated for Studio of the Year. GTA5, which they claim is the best, lost in
all of these other categories that is was qualified for. How? Assassin’s Creed
4 beat GTA5 and The Last of Us to win Best Action Adventure, yet couldn’t make
the short list for Game of the Year when both of its competitors did. In fact
it wasn’t even considered one of the top four PlayStation, Xbox or PC games. There
is no continuity to the awards, the better game in one category is worse in
another for no reason. They just want to declare more than three or four games
winners so they intentionally give awards to games they don’t feel actually
earned the title. It is dishonest and asinine, even if it is well intended.
The
thing is, even if you were to try and give out the awards honestly problems
will still arise from the confining structure we have in place. Let’s look at a
typical award like “Best RPG”. Now let’s say that there are only two contenders
for the award and they are Skyrim and Borderlands. Now keep in mind that like
my problem illustrated above by the VGX awards, this has nothing to do with
which game I actually like more. So Skyrim is an RPG through and through and
Borderlands is a combination of an RPG and an FPS. If Skyrim is the better RPG
and Borderlands is the better game (with the elements of the second genre
making it a better overall experience), who should win the award? Do you give
it to the best RPG? Or do you give it to the best game that can be classified
as an RPG? Nowadays so many games take elements from multiple genres that these
ridged awards are outdated and ineffective. Think of Dues Ex: Human Revolution.
Is it an RPG, a Stealth-action game, an FPS? I think we need new awards that do
a better job of defining our gaming experiences.
The
reason we have these really basic awards is because gaming tries too hard to be
like movies. We compliment games now by saying that they felt so cinematic, or
that it was like playing a movie. To me that can be good, but it shouldn’t be
what gaming aims for. Gaming is its own rich and amazing medium and it needs to
come up with its own way of awarding excellence rather than trying to take the “Best
Drama”, “Best Comedy” approach that movies do. Rather than handing out pity
awards to the runners up that you want to highlight, just highlight them. Give
them their own unique award or just do a celebration of all the great games
without directly stating any one as superior to the other. A Best GAMES of the
Year Award rather than Best GAME.
I
want to see all the amazing games highlighted. I then want to be told exactly
what was so exceptional about each of them, not just if it was a really good
action adventure game. For instance I would highlight DMC and award it “Most
Replayable Game of the Year” for all the additional difficulty modes and its
awesome combat. Last year I’d have given “Best Game with a Laundry List of
Flaws” to Assassin’s Creed 3 because despite all the things wrong with it, when
I was in the zone of that game I loved it. The awards could be incredibly
tailored made for the game you want to highlight like: “The Doing Uncharted
better than Uncharted Award”, which I would give to this year’s Tomb Raider.
There could also be ones that are given out every year like “Best Surprise” or
“Best Moment”. By having these tailor made and diverse awards every award list would
be unique and exciting to see year after year. Not just for what games stood
out, but for what it was about them that resonated so deeply with those that
played them.
I
believe that the way we celebrate games now doesn’t work (or at least not as
well as it could and should), regardless of who is doing the celebrating or
which games are being celebrated. What we need is to find our own unique way to
celebrate the games that we love that isn’t restricting and allows us options
as diverse as the games that we play and love.
I originally posted this article on GeekMandem, which is a cool site that I hope I can help get going again, so if you have the time be sure to check it out. There isn't much in terms of new content (hopefully that changes soon), but there is some good stuff archived there.
