Nominees for Game of the Year
- Thread starter The Escapist Staff
- Start date
I'm actually a little confused as to why Bayonetta isn't on this list. The only major criticism I can come up with is the horrible QTE that shows up on the first two levels and then never again.
It's a baffling design choice, but not enough to knock it off a GOTY list.
[small]Okay, the story is preposterous and there's enough fanservice to kill a horse, but it's still awesome.[/small]
It's a baffling design choice, but not enough to knock it off a GOTY list.
[small]Okay, the story is preposterous and there's enough fanservice to kill a horse, but it's still awesome.[/small]
There are two major omissions on this list. Demon's Souls and Gyromancer. Ok, probably just Demon's Souls.
There is only one game that is not a sequel or part of a franchise. The titles with numbers on them are easy to spot. Nintendo´s franchises too. Extensionpackages of most play MMO too. You probably thought Read Dead Redemption not part of a franchise because its predecessor is the not well known Read Dead Revolver. So the only game is Heavy Rain.TiefBlau said:
So far the only noticable games released 2010 that are not psn/xbla/nds/psp or sequel/franchise are Heavy Rain, Metro 2033, Dante´s Inferno, Dark Vois, Darksiders, Bayonetta (american release) and R.U.S.E.
Let us cut the list short of the shameless ripoffs Dante´s Inferno and Darksiders (God of War)and the list is even shorter of what it already was. We still have Heavy Rain which is not a ripoff even though its mechanics are stunningly the same as Idigo Prophecy/Fahrenheit which is like saying every FPS uses the first-person as a perspective. It is just the very core of the very mechanic of these type of games.
If Date´s Inferno is a ripoff of God of War why is Bayonetta not a ripoff of Devil May Cry? When you play it you will understand that Bayonetta plays as much akin to devil May Cry as Devil May Cry to God of War. Again saying God of War, Devil May Cry and Bayonetta are all the same game is like saying you cannot pause in a RTS to think. Metro 2033 is a rather forgettable FPS that we will only mention when talking about its likeness of S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
Dark Void´s only strong point is the flying and nothing else. Enough to be noticeable as a release this year but not enough to cry about it being the best game of the year.
Last comes R.U.S.E. Cannot realy talk about that one because I have not played it. But seeing how it never gets any mention it does not seem popular and stunning enough to be the face of gaming of 2010.
So there are only two true competitors out there for game of the year because of their own merit and not relying on brandname or numbers after the title. How very sad 2010.
At first when I read this,I was like, "That's idiotic, Gears of War 3 hasn't even come out yet!". Then I realized I was thinking like an idiot. GOD OF WAR 3 should definitely be up there, instead of some Kirby game. And very glad to see Black Ops didn't make the cut.IamSofaKingRaw said:
I said nothing about either of those games. Someone said something about Minecraft not being on the list, and someone replied that it was because the game isn't finished yet. Woodsey said it was available for purchase, then I said that if they are going by when it was available for purchase, then that wouldn't work either since it was available back in 2009. Woodsey then said "TF2 was on PCG's 2010 list" and I said that was stupid because you could just say Doom was on a list every year, and then you called me a troll. If you don't believe me, follow the string of quotes back up.Valagetti said:
Heh. Heavy Rain for Game of the Year? I say yes.Jachwe said:
I don't entirely disagree with the idea of continuing a franchise or making a sequel. What disappoints me are their raisons d'être, so to speak. When you make any story, sequel, franchise, or neither, the one thing you should ask yourself is, "Why should it exist?" And the answer should always be "Because I have something interesting to share." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman:_Arkham_Asylum] Whether you think you can add a new element to gameplay that will make the experience entirely different, or if you think you can expand on the story to introduce further insight into the world that the series has created, a sequel must have a reason to exist. For most of these sequels and games, however, it's readily apparent that they were only made "Because it's about time for a sequel." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization_V] or "Because people will buy it." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_warfare_2]
I really think everyone should go and reanalyze Heavy Rain. Specifically, attention should be drawn to the points where the killer's thoughts are never about killing, and rather about sympathy. How Madison had to decide to take evidence to the FBI guy before she ever knew the FBI guy or to give it to the dad. Also the red herrings that are constantly thrown out during the dad's thoughts are plainly offensive.
Were Heavy Rain a movie, and not a video game, this shit would not fly.
Were Heavy Rain a movie, and not a video game, this shit would not fly.
I was playing the same game as this guy. So were a lot of other folks.Halley M said:
You know, the dumbed down game that throws out most of what Biowares traditional fanbase could enjoy, and instead focused on linear cover shooting through the game?
I agree this year has been shit, and when a game that does nothing but dumb itself down into a Gears clone is touted as "refinement" and "innovative", and one of the best games of the year, its a horrible indictment on the industry.
The game didnt even have a coherent main plot. It was just a bunch of fucking errands to run until the game would occasionally snap you back into unaviodable missions that were mostly about - yup, you guessed it - lots of cover shooting through linear, waist high wall filled levels.
I don't know what bothers me more..the fact that there is no Black Ops on the list, or that there is no Black ops on the list. -.-'
Although, I hope Kirby wins =3
That little pink bubble thing winning over monster games like DRD or ME2 etc would be awesome.
Just imagine Kirby flipping deathwing the bird, if only Kirby had fingers v.v'
Although, I hope Kirby wins =3
That little pink bubble thing winning over monster games like DRD or ME2 etc would be awesome.
Just imagine Kirby flipping deathwing the bird, if only Kirby had fingers v.v'
I haven't played it, but from the reviews, game video, my understanding of the story:
Mass Effect 2 should be game of the year.
If (I am playing) Cataclysm wins, I will be very disappointed in the judges for this award. While it's a good game, its not a great game. A great game doesn't thought out huge game changing patches a month after it releases. That means they shouldn't have released the game in the first place.
Mass Effect 2 should be game of the year.
If (I am playing) Cataclysm wins, I will be very disappointed in the judges for this award. While it's a good game, its not a great game. A great game doesn't thought out huge game changing patches a month after it releases. That means they shouldn't have released the game in the first place.
Says who? Why is "released officially" a condition for game of the year? Laid down by what gods?Slycne said:
Fact is, millions of people discovered Minecraft THIS year, even when it was in Alpha. So what if it's now in Beta and continuing to get better - even the basic minecraft as released already is a worthy GotY contender - actually, my GotY.
Also, why is Just Cause 2 not on the list? Ridiculous though the plot may be, the gameplay really shone. And that island! (Well, islands.)
Well, except that no-one would nominate Doom as their game of the year in 2011. You don't need to make up arbitrary rules about what year a game qualifies for in order to rule out outdated games: the simple fact is that no games journo would choose them.Assassin Xaero said:
I'd say the year a game should be considered is its biggest year, the year most people (including the list maker) discovered it. Which, for Minecraft, was 2010.