Support NeoGAF

[davidjaffe]

Awards don't mean jackshit in any pop-culture field.
Many deserving games don't get the credit they deserve due to the influence of a behemoth studio backing another game. Many times, juries don't even use all the product nominated.
Be it grammys, where TheWeeknd was snubbed this year so hard after making biggest song of the year-Blinding Lights and one of the top albums- After Hours. Even at the Oscars, rarely do deserving movies win, thankfully Parasite won this time.

Awards don't matter.

Agree 100%. End of the day, the idea of offering awards for the best creative, subjective THING is moronic.

But it's also silly fun, at least for many.

But it's not silly fun for those in the biz and media who put on the shows and take it seriously. And since they have such a big megaphone to express their views, I think it's important to call them out when they are incorrectly educating gamers about how games work. To actually think you have a pot to piss in by suggesting that story is as important as interactivity IN A GAME suggests such a misunderstanding of the medium (even if you ONLY love cinematic action/adventure games) as to be laughable.

 

[VolticArchangel]

Was there at the start of the Playstation, worked with them when discussions of PS5 launching were kicking off.

Would love to hear your input to the team at Sony, if it isn't under NDA or you don't mind sharing it.

Did you help them / give opinions / help design something in the hardware / architecture side of things? Maybe I/O?

 

[e0n]

I feel like it should be kind of obvious. IGN targets mainstream consumers and is popular because most people don't actually want to read complex takes on games. The Game Awards already have an award for best direction/design and so do the BAFTAs and GDC awards which are more distinguished.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Thoughtful post. I think at the moment the indie scene is where the most unique game designs are to be found. The AAA scene is slowly evolving into very smilar game experiences, the devs all look at what sold the best and make their own version of that causing the variety to decrease. Comes with the increased dev cost and dev time I guess. Spending 5+ years and 100 million dollars on something unique you actually don’t have a clue if gamers will even like is obviously scary.

Watching all of Ubisoft's games merge into one another has been fascinating. It's like the creature from Inside.

With all the resources and people they have, I'm surprised the big publishers don't have teams making unique $5 or $10 games like indie studios. It's not like a gamer buying an $8 game is going to suddenly avoid paying $70 for FIFA or Ass Creed. Then again, maybe their sales department thinks differently. Make too many awesome $10 games people spend time playing and nobody is going to buy Red Dead.

There's so many good indie games out there, and many that have sold a ton. And let's face it, none of them have the marketing budget of a big publisher but can still pull it off.

Maybe it has to do with branding and the halo effect. If big pubs suddenly start promoting lots of $10 games, it makes the publisher look like a flea market where $10 games = bad. So it tarnishes their AAA game's image.

 

[grfunkulus]

Agree 100%. End of the day, the idea of offering awards for the best creative, subjective THING is moronic.

But it's also silly fun, at least for many.

But it's not silly fun for those in the biz and media who put on the shows and take it seriously. And since they have such a big megaphone to express their views, I think it's important to call them out when they are incorrectly educating gamers about how games work. To actually think you have a pot to piss in by suggesting that story is as important as interactivity IN A GAME suggests such a misunderstanding of the medium (even if you ONLY love cinematic action/adventure games) as to be laughable.

?

 

[MagnesG]

I feel like it should be kind of obvious. IGN targets mainstream consumers and is popular because most people don't actually want to read complex takes on games. The Game Awards already have an award for best direction/design and so do the BAFTAs and GDC awards which are more distinguished.

I feel like to comprehend a good game design isn't that much harder than comprehending best sound or art direction, and I would certainly be more interested in a game awarded for its game design rather than anything else.

 

[SSfox]

In a side note, I've replayed MGS1 recently and it's insane how it's still by far the best game of all time. That make the best modern games looks "OK" games.

 

[Calverz]

We gonna create a thread every time a youtuber makes a new video?

 

[mikefrails]

We gonna create a thread every time a youtuber makes a new video?

Jaffe is a valuable voice.

 

[cormack12]

He's right ultimately. When we have best game direction. It's like we're turning the awards into where these people see themselves (i.e. movie industry). There's a reason why games was dropped from the WGA:

The WGA Awards have opted to drop the category honoring writing in video games. "There won't be a Videogame Writing Award in 2020," a WGA spokesperson said in a statement to The Hollywood Reporter.

And certain people were assmad about it - can't be bothered searching twitter but the comments were like this (there were plenty of non verified designers etc who also chimed in).

The thing is if you have a bad story in the cinema, it lasts a couple of hours. Games nowadays, if it's a bad story you're stuck with it for 40 odd hours. Which is where the gameplay and interactivity absolutely needs to carry the weight of the game, and as Jaffe said I just don't think that's the case. Even the games that do manage to do it, still have an abundance of filler content usually which eventually erodes the interest in that as well.

Games are ultimately loops. So games need to be designed so people return to that loop. Probably the best award that is indicative of how well a game is designed is by its replayability factor. Not necessarily 'let's finish and dive into NG+'. But 'does it make you want to continue to pick up that controller repeatedly?'

There probably needs to be smaller more focused awards on things like climbing mechanics, stealth implementations, flying controls. But we don't, which is why we still pretty much have the climbing mechanics that we saw in TR:Underworld, stealth is still pretty much stealth-lite etc.

 

[eyesabitdull]

A movie isn't a movie without compelling meat to it. That meat includes story and production. For a game, a game isn't a game without a compelling narrative and good gameplay. Idk why this guy is always so outraged over nothing. Game design includes all the moving parts of the puzzles these days, inlcuding story, soundtrack, combat mechanics, gameplay loop, etc..

Yeah, came here to bring up this comparison.

I work in tv and film, I dont think the general population would turn into any award show to see what production company had the best grip team that came up with the best solutions for the directors vision.

Award shows are a marketing tool to clap our hands for people who worked hard enough to earn a spot at the table, not some creative deconstruction of how it's made. Its fluff.

Idk about whether his opinions are invalid though because he no longer actively works in the gaming industry. Pretty sure if Scorsese retired for a decade I'd still hear him out and take his thoughts somewhat into consideration.

Point being, his argument has merits, I just thought that containing it into the context of an award is a little iffy if I'm making comparisons to other award shows.

 

[bender]

With all the resources and people they have, I'm surprised the big publishers don't have teams making unique $5 or $10 games like indie studios. It's not like a gamer buying an $8 game is going to suddenly avoid paying $70 for FIFA or Ass Creed. Then again, maybe their sales department thinks differently. Make too many awesome $10 games people spend time playing and nobody is going to buy Red Dead.

There's so many good indie games out there, and many that have sold a ton. And let's face it, none of them have the marketing budget of a big publisher but can still pull it off.

Maybe it has to do with branding and the halo effect. If big pubs suddenly start promoting lots of $10 games, it makes the publisher look like a flea market where $10 games = bad. So it tarnishes their AAA game's image.

To be fair, Ubisoft and EA have tried smaller games with Vandal Hearts, Child of Light and Unravel. The allure of MTX is just too much.

 

[Tomeru]

While I don't disagree, it's worth nothing: these Awards are used to drive engagement with the givers, not to represent some meaningful codification within the industry. They will always - always - go to the games that would generate the most publicity, the most clicks, the most engagement. The Game Awards exist because the industry feels the need to celebrate itself in front of an audience, not because informed people of knowledge decided to hand out their own awards to represent perceived milestones. If a panel of industry legends worked together to hand out awards independently, for example, that would mean something. IGN's "Technical innovation" award is a laughing stock because its handed out by the people who argued that the human eye couldn't perceive differences in resolutions higher than 1080p. The fuck do these people know about anything?

Even though there is technical knowledge and science behind making games, there can never be a "true" winner between games. The end result will always be subjective. One doesnt need to be a game dev to decide if one game is good or bad (well, obviously there are good and bad games) in a scientific sense. Also, giving awards to something/someone doesnt invalidate the validity or achievemnts of others.

You can have the same person getting an award all the time because they are the best.

Ign are lame anways...

 

[Fredrik]

In a side note, I've replayed MGS1 recently and it's insane how it's still by far the best game of all time. That make the best modern games looks "OK" games.

It’s not quite my best game of all time but it’s truly fantastic. And now I want to replay it! I wonder if it’s playable through Retroarch on XSX, hmmm
I think there was a simplicity in older games that many modern games lack, might be me getting old I guess but I still struggle with the button layout in most games, it’s just too many functions, double presses, holds, selection wheels etc etc.

 

[Hypereides]

davidjaffe

You can somewhat partially thank some of these wondeful journos who seem to neglect the importance of gameplay and game design, or out right call for it, and various core concepts, to be removed from games. I honestly think you have a valid point and I didn't realise that this award category was absent until you pointed it out. Quite frankly, game design has really kind of stagnated over the recent decade and is in dire need of a boost with some genuine innovation, which the suits probably won't like due to risk aversion.

Btw, take the "bad" review from IGN as a badge of honor and wear it with pride. It usually means the opposite. Especially, coming from them. I'm actually playing through an array of games that failed to gain critical acclaim and having a swell time.

 

[ZehDon]

Even though there is technical knowledge and science behind making games, there can never be a "true" winner between games. The end result will always be subjective. One doesnt need to be a game dev to decide if one game is good or bad (well, obviously there are good and bad games) in a scientific sense. Also, giving awards to something/someone doesnt invalidate the validity or achievemnts of others.

You can have the same person getting an award all the time because they are the best.

Ign are lame anways...

Subjectivity in awards isn’t what I meant; handing out meaningless awards is fine. “Best Hairdo” award, or whatever, is fine for some entertainment a good chuckle. “Angry Joe’s Top 10”. There’ll always be a place for that - it’s good, it’s fun, I encourage it.

But, when you present your awards as something more, as a real award to be taken seriously - “Technical Advancement”, “Best Performance” - the validity of the award enters the discussion. If IGN’s reporters don’t finish most of the games they play... what are their awards worth? If they’re not worth anything, why present them as anything warranting considering? Why shouldn’t we scoff at them?
When Roger Ebert handed out a film recommendation, it carried weight, because the man knew his stuff. When he scoffed at video games as a whole, it was worthless, because he knew nothing about games.
If IGN think 720p30 and 4k60 are indistinguishable, why shouldn’t we mock their “Technical Achievement” award for the joke it is? They clearly don’t know anything about what they’re awarding.

 

[Clear]

He's right, but fucking hell, the enthusiast press's utter ignorance about the technical aspects of game production has been apparent for years now. As has been their indifference to fixing this issue.

Game design is very technical, you do need some insight in order to properly judge it. Yes, there's a strong element of "taste" to it, but there are also mechanical and ludic rules that underpin successes and failures.

The saddest part for me is that although superficially groups like DF would appear to be championing technical expertise in (graphics) programming, the reality I find is that what they actually do is mostly celebrate the utilization of the technologies made available by modern GPU's. There's not enough emphasis on efficiency and illusion, and too much yakking about specific effects and techniques. In short they too often feel like hardware reviews, where its more about raw power and facility than what and how the available power has been used to create a pleasing or admirable effect.

 

[the_master]

Games have evolved since the 90s. There is more meat to them than quriky gameplay.

As far as "game design" goes whatever that means, fortnite would probably win that every year considering it basically revolutionized the multiplayer genre and has by far the most "interactive" gameplay from any game in recent memory. You guys can laugh at that but it's the truth. There's a reason why a multitude of developers tried copying the the fortnite formula and still do today. There's a reason why fortnite basically brought all these normies into gaming.

A movie isn't a movie without compelling meat to it. That meat includes story and production. For a game, a game isn't a game without a compelling narrative and good gameplay. Idk why this guy is always so outraged over nothing. Game design includes all the moving parts of the puzzles these days, inlcuding story, soundtrack, combat mechanics, gameplay loop, etc..

We should see awards for best gameplay and best game design. They can evaluate hundreds of elements of game design on each AAA game now a days.
And yes, game design and gameplay are still the most important aspects of a videogame. Even when companies play it safe, a AAA game needs hundreds of thousands of design work hours to make it all work together.

 

[davidjaffe]

Yeah, came here to bring up this comparison.

I work in tv and film, I dont think the general population would turn into any award show to see what production company had the best grip team that came up with the best solutions for the directors vision.

Award shows are a marketing tool to clap our hands for people who worked hard enough to earn a spot at the table, not some creative deconstruction of how it's made. Its fluff.

Idk about whether his opinions are invalid though because he no longer actively works in the gaming industry. Pretty sure if Scorsese retired for a decade I'd still hear him out and take his thoughts somewhat into consideration.

Point being, his argument has merits, I just thought that containing it into the context of an award is a little iffy if I'm making comparisons to other award shows.

Yeah but if you are comparing grips, electricians, and 1st ACs to GAME DESIGN then you are missing the point.

I am not suggesting game design needs a spotlight because 'hey, it's important too, gosh darnit!'

I am saying the entire industry is built on the bedrock of compelling interactivity. At the LEAST BEST GAME DESIGN=BEST SCREENPLAY from a movie standpoint.

No one is saying give out 'best climbing mechanics' but OVERALL GAMEPLAY? How can you not see that that is what everything is built on top of?

Also, to correct someone earlier: best game direction has little to do with game design. The director often DOES game design but they are two very different things.

 

[davidjaffe]

He's right, but fucking hell, the enthusiast press's utter ignorance about the technical aspects of game production has been apparent for years now. As has been their indifference to fixing this issue.

Game design is very technical, you do need some insight in order to properly judge it. Yes, there's a strong element of "taste" to it, but there are also mechanical and ludic rules that underpin successes and failures.

The saddest part for me is that although superficially groups like DF would appear to be championing technical expertise in (graphics) programming, the reality I find is that what they actually do is mostly celebrate the utilization of the technologies made available by modern GPU's. There's not enough emphasis on efficiency and illusion, and too much yakking about specific effects and techniques. In short they too often feel like hardware reviews, where its more about raw power and facility than what and how the available power has been used to create a pleasing or admirable effect.

I understand the market and the marketing aspect of this.

I have NO PROBLEM if they want to go 'it's GOTY, best game of the system, best action game,etc'. Things that are easy to understand. 100% I get it and know why certainly Keighly would do this.

BUT when THE GAME AWARDS and IGN offer awards for SOUND DESIGN and BEST MUSIC, they are getting pretty deep into game making nerdtown. It seems like a weird exclusion to not have game design if those other awards are given; especially cause game design is the core of the entire product.

 

[Inviusx]

Are we just gonna pretend that Jaffe doesn't just make these threads on an alt account so he can reply to people who disagree with him?

 

[Petaya Berry]

As if these '''''journalists''''' or that moron (Geoff) know how to avaliate game design.

For them, this is about their political message, agenda and ego.

 

[Clear]

I understand the market and the marketing aspect of this.

I have NO PROBLEM if they want to go 'it's GOTY, best game of the system, best action game,etc'. Things that are easy to understand. 100% I get it and know why certainly Keighly would do this.

BUT when THE GAME AWARDS and IGN offer awards for SOUND DESIGN and BEST MUSIC, they are getting pretty deep into game making nerdtown. It seems like a weird exclusion to not have game design if those other awards are given; especially cause game design is the core of the entire product.

Its all about "Taste" to them, because as you say its marketing focused.

The average gamer, forum-poster even, doesn't understand why things work, they just know what they like*. And the enthusiast press has long since given up doing anything other than telling this audience what they want to hear.

Awards just reflect this. The categories you mention are easy to judge because they are fundamentally based on what people like; is that a tune a banger, does it add atmosphere and mood? Does that shotgun sound effect sound like the wrath of God or a granny fart? Its superficial, subjective, and immediately understood.

Unfortunately appreciating game design isn't so simple; you first have to get past the filter of genre or theme and try to really dig how a certain balance of systems, pacing, and eventuation can create magical experiences.


*Which is absolutely fine. But you'd reasonably expect critics to know better, and try and pass on their appreciation to folks interested in this sort of granular detail.

PS. David, I was agreeing with you. Not sure if that came across with all the CAPS usage for emphasis.

 

[mejin]

It is his opinion, no problem at all.

Some devs want to do something more with the tech they have today and game design is as much a piece of the overall work just like story or fun.

And I actually don't think the problem are the awards, but the reviews scores nowadays. They are the real poison for the industry and community and worse, the devs. Here is where a lazy "journalist" can really hurt the people who make the damn games.

 

[brian0057]

What? You want a show called The Game Awards to have awards specifically for the medium in question?
Awards about game design? Recognition for gameplay and the mechanical aspects of games?
Surely, you jest.
/s

But, seriously, I agree.
Even the most mediocre story or the lousiest sound design can be saved by god-like gameplay.
The latter, ironically, being the least appreciated on these masturbatory ceremonies, if at all.

You'd think the stuff that makes games... uhm "games" would be more prominent on a show celebrating the medium.
Instead, all we have are Oscar and Emmy wannabes, still trying to attain the coveted "art" status because people are too embarrassed to enjoy them as the toys they truly are.

 

[Hudo]

Gotta say that he's right on this one. Who the fuck gives a shit about "best performance"? Like why would you give an award for that but not for best game direction/game design?

 

[JonkyDonk]

It's a shame that the most celebrated games are just bad movies. One of the best designed AAA game this year is probably Demon's Souls, a game from 2009, and it still shits all over most new games now. It's sad that game design moves at such a glacial pace when compared with graphics, production values and amount of 'content'. Not to say that I can't appreciate a nice looking movie-game, but I wish the industry didn't reward games so heavily based on how well they can resemble a movie and how much money was spent on polishing a simple concept.

 

[Atanascovich]

Games like Hotline miami, dont have a big production, but you cant deny how good is its game desing. We all know that its important, at least at same importance as story. So why not have it? It reallly says about game midia in general and Jaffe made a game, his credibility to talk about games is way superior to anyone who dindt make anything and gamemidia.

 

[Unknown?]

Games have evolved since the 90s. There is more meat to them than quriky gameplay.

As far as "game design" goes whatever that means, fortnite would probably win that every year considering it basically revolutionized the multiplayer genre and has by far the most "interactive" gameplay from any game in recent memory. You guys can laugh at that but it's the truth. There's a reason why a multitude of developers tried copying the the fortnite formula and still do today. There's a reason why fortnite basically brought all these normies into gaming.

A movie isn't a movie without compelling meat to it. That meat includes story and production. For a game, a game isn't a game without a compelling narrative and good gameplay. Idk why this guy is always so outraged over nothing. Game design includes all the moving parts of the puzzles these days, inlcuding story, soundtrack, combat mechanics, gameplay loop, etc..

So one has to actively be making popular games to have an opinion on games? Guess your opinion is worthless.

 

[off duty ninja]

The only redeeming factor for TLOU 2 is game design because the story is just a bunch of revisionist history bullshit that the director seemed to think was somehow “deep”.

Even then I loved the gameplay so much that I beat it twice to get the platinum because I enjoyed the game design that much. It’s certainly not for everyone though.

 

[kyliethicc]

He's not wrong, but there is that assumption that "Best Action Game" is also an award for best action game design. He does mention that at least. Game design, level design, systems, AI, physics, boss fights, etc.. are definitely under appreciated / awarded in games media.

All aspects of game development should be praised and awarded. Personally I wouldn't do the long list of best game by platforms or genres.

My awards would be something like this:

1. Best Game Direction
2. Best Singleplayer Game Design (levels, systems, challenge, progression, etc)
3. Best Multiplayer Game Design
4. Best Interactive Design (controls, UI, accessibility)
5. Best Programming (performance, AI, physics, etc)
6. Best Animation
7. Best Graphics (lighting, materials, textures, effects, etc)
8. Best Audio (design, mixing, fidelity)
9. Best Art Direction
10. Best Narrative
11. Best Performance
12. Best Music

It'd also be cool to give out awards for best game production and QA testing, etc. But thats hard to know/judge without behind the scenes access. But currently, games should be commended for launching in as polished, bug-free states as possible.

 

[PooBone]

Are there any games Jaffe likes that he didn't make?

 

[IntentionalPun]

Only fans of games that favor presentation over design even really care about these awards anymore, because that's all critics care about anymore, and they use these critics scores and awards to boost their egos since apparently critics liking what you like makes you superior.

 

[ethomaz]

There are a lot of awards for game design/director, no?
I'm missing something here.

 

[yurinka]

I agree with you, davidjaffe .

I think game design is key, but also think that most journalists (who vote in Game Awards/IGN/etc) and most gamers (their audience) have no idea of what game design is, so this is why they don't include a category for it or if they include it the votes wouldn't make sense. I bet for most people who is not a gamedev they think game desing is graphical design for games. Hell, there's even some bad gamedev schools who still have this mistake.

This is like those people -including many gaming 'journalists'- who complained about TLOU2 getting best (creative) direction in the Games Awards because they made crunch. They don't know that almost all the games nominated to all categories also made crunch (even some studios who claim to don't make crunch outsource work to other studios who they know they make crunch), and they don't know that crunch isn't related to direction but more related to production, budgets, dedication, huge competition building massive creative stuff without an existing magic formula.

I think game journalists should educate themselves and to explain better to their audience into what the gamedev roles are and how gamedev works in order to have these things clear and appreciate the important things. And well, to have a proper opinion both when making or voting awards, but also when reviewing games or writing articles.

Watching all of Ubisoft's games merge into one another has been fascinating. It's like the creature from Inside.

Bullshit.

Just Dance, Rainbow Six, Riders Republic, Scott Pilgrim, Roller Champions, Trackmania, Trials, The Crew 2, Hyper Scape, Prince of Persia remake, Rayman, Mario + Rabbids, their VR games or their mobile games... Ubisoft covers a huge amount of very different game types.

Even inside open world games Inmortals is very different from Ghost Recon, or The Division is very different from Assassin's Creed just to name a few examples.

 

[bender]

Bullshit.

Just Dance, Rainbow Six, Riders Republic, Scott Pilgrim, Roller Champions, Trackmania, Trials, The Crew 2, Hyper Scape, Prince of Persia remake, Rayman, Mario + Rabbids, their VR games or their mobile games... Ubisoft covers a huge amount of very different game types.

Even inside open world games Inmortals is very different from Ghost Recon, or The Division is very different from Assassin's Creed just to name a few examples.

So do cows.

Scott Pilgram came out in 2010 but I love the padding, lol. If you can't see the convergence in their titles, I'm not sure what to tell you.

 

[yurinka]

So do cows.

Scott Pilgram came out in 2010 but I love the padding, lol. If you can't see the convergence in their titles, I'm not sure what to tell you.

I just went to their website and listed some of the games that appear there. Some are new and some are old like in many other big publisher, as can be Nintendo or Sony.

I see the convergence between Just Dance and Far Cry, between Space Junkies, between Anno and Trackmania and Hungry Shark or between Watchdogs and Roller Champions: they are videogames made by Ubisoft. Outside that they have nothing to do, they are very different games.

Sure, Ubisoft also releases games from the same or similar genres, like any other company. But they also probably the publisher who bets on a wider range of genres and game types, and who bets in more new IPs every generation.

 

[bender]

I just went to their website and listed some of the games that appear there. Some are new and some are old like in many other big publisher, as can be Nintendo or Sony.

I see the convergence between Just Dance and Far Cry, between Space Junkies, between Anno and Trackmania and Hungry Shark or between Watchdogs and Roller Champions: they are videogames made by Ubisoft. Outside that they have nothing to do, they are very different games.

Sure, Ubisoft also releases games from the same or similar genres, like any other company. But they also probably the publisher who bets on a wider range of genres and game types, and who bets in more new IPs every generation.

If you need to be dense to present an argument, I've got nothing for you.

 

[davidjaffe]

There are a lot of awards for game design/director, no?
I'm missing something here.

Game design and director are not the same thing, any more than screenwriter and film director are the same thing.

Some examples:

The direction of GHOST OF TSUSHIMA (sp?) is amazing IMO. The game design- while wonderfully executed- is pretty standard (w/the exception of some very nice combat bits).

The game design of the new HYRULE WARRIORS is pretty cool (not ness. award worthy but FILLED with super cool ideas, mechanics, etc. and they all blend well enough together to make a fresh Musou style game). But the direction of that game is super bland.

RESIDENT EVIL 2 REMAKE is beautifully produced and is tons of fun. But the game design AND the direction are both pretty standard. Wonderfully executed, but pretty typical.

The direction AND game design are BOTH top notch- but in different ways- for games like INSIDE or SHADOW OF THE COLOSSUS and the 1st DMC.

 

[Virt McPolygon]

You mean the Manchildrens' Choice Awards?

I'm shocked that the viewers and people who put the show together don't get into the nitty gritty of game design and development.

 

[ethomaz]

Game design and director are not the same thing, any more than screenwriter and film director are the same thing.

Some examples:

The direction of GHOST OF TSUSHIMA (sp?) is amazing IMO. The game design- while wonderfully executed- is pretty standard (w/the exception of some very nice combat bits).

The game design of the new HYRULE WARRIORS is pretty cool (not ness. award worthy but FILLED with super cool ideas, mechanics, etc. and they all blend well enough together to make a fresh Musou style game). But the direction of that game is super bland.

RESIDENT EVIL 2 REMAKE is beautifully produced and is tons of fun. But the game design AND the direction are both pretty standard. Wonderfully executed, but pretty typical.

The direction AND game design are BOTH top notch- but in different ways- for games like INSIDE or SHADOW OF THE COLOSSUS and the 1st DMC.

Thanks... I got the point now.
You want more separably awards because like you well explained they are different areas.
I totally agree... plus it gives more praise to some specific part of the team that looks to not that recognized.

 

[a multicultural team of v]

People really struggle to understand why games like Death Stranding are great. It's not because of the story or the soundtrack or Guilemo Del Toro's oscar winning performance. It's the game design. It's the fact that kojima and his game designers made just walking in a game an engaging, terrifying and ultimately a fun experience.

I'm gonna come in hot on a tangent and say I am so glad somebody else gets this. It is so funny to hear people present themselves like game video game purists and talk shit calling the game out as a walking simulator. In reality it is just displaying their ignorance in game design because Kojima actually managed to, very effectively, gamify walking. All while directly tying the gameplay experience, the act of actually playing the game, into the narrative like he has done in the past.

 

[Fake]

Yea but why do that when you can just give every award to TLOU2?

 

[Fake]

I just want to make sure I understand.

I'm a washed up developer, right? 20+ years in the biz, some huge hits, a few profitable titles, and 1 pure miss. I've owned 2 game companies and worked at and with Sony for 2 decades. Was there at the start of the Playstation, worked with them when discussions of PS5 launching were kicking off.

All of that- plus being a human- doesn't allow me the ability to express my views about something I love and know quite a bit about: video games.

You- however- a coward who posts under a fake name- move thru your life under the impression that your thoughts (based on...what? Who the fuck knows) should be given respect and attention, am I right?

Kindly find the biggest piece of broken glass you can find and shove it up your asshole, k? Thx!

I love you!

JAFFE!

Duuuuude, love your job sir. And please don't take that member seriously. Neogaf love your thoughts.

Really glad to hear someone with experience here.

 

[Fake]

He's right ultimately. When we have best game direction. It's like we're turning the awards into where these people see themselves (i.e. movie industry). There's a reason why games was dropped from the WGA:



And certain people were assmad about it - can't be bothered searching twitter but the comments were like this (there were plenty of non verified designers etc who also chimed in).

The thing is if you have a bad story in the cinema, it lasts a couple of hours. Games nowadays, if it's a bad story you're stuck with it for 40 odd hours. Which is where the gameplay and interactivity absolutely needs to carry the weight of the game, and as Jaffe said I just don't think that's the case. Even the games that do manage to do it, still have an abundance of filler content usually which eventually erodes the interest in that as well.

Games are ultimately loops. So games need to be designed so people return to that loop. Probably the best award that is indicative of how well a game is designed is by its replayability factor. Not necessarily 'let's finish and dive into NG+'. But 'does it make you want to continue to pick up that controller repeatedly?'

There probably needs to be smaller more focused awards on things like climbing mechanics, stealth implementations, flying controls. But we don't, which is why we still pretty much have the climbing mechanics that we saw in TR:Underworld, stealth is still pretty much stealth-lite etc.

And thats 'WHY' I really concerned about modern gaming in general. Summing up looks like they just want to make games just for Games Awards/Critics and not to people play anymore.

 

[Halo is Back]

For once we agree on something.

 

[Guilty_AI]

In a side note, I've replayed MGS1 recently and it's insane how it's still by far the best game of all time.

You mispelled Super Ledgehop: Double Laser

 

[Wonko_C]

All they talked about in Geoff's TGA's was "The characters! the writing! the storytelling!". It's like mechanics, controls, and gameplay don't matter anymore. They don't want games, they want Dragon's Lair.

 

[Wonko_C]

NVM double post.

 

[Guilty_AI]

All they talked about in Geoff's TGA's was "The characters! the writing! the storytelling!". It's like mechanics, controls, and gameplay don't matter anymore. They don't want games, they want Dragon's Lair.

its just that a considerable portion of the gaming industry is obsessed with being like Hollywood.
Why do you think the first TLoU gained such a legendary status in mainstream gaming media? It was exactly what they wanted, a "serious" movie-like game. And honestly, lots of players want just that too.