Support NeoGAF

[DryvBy]

“I play a lot of games and my GOTY is usually just the game I had the most fun with overall.”

Quoting you Op. That’s all that really does matter.

I wasn't clear. I thought me saying that would make it clear this is about GOTY award shows. Personal awards? Whatever. But it's crazy to me when a game like Alan Wake 2 can even chart and possibly win when 10s of other options are out there.

 

[Flabagast]

Terrible idea

 

[TGO]

The real question is, should you buy a game simply because it's a nominee ?
The answer is no

 

[xrnzaaas]

Sales numbers shouldn't matter. There are many GOOD overlooked games being released every year. Sometime it's because of lack of marketing, in other cases it may be because of a poorly picked release date or representing a niche genre. Even being nominated for an award could be a big boost to their popularity.

If a game's really good it should have a chance to be nominated no matter if it was a sales hit or not.

 

[Fbh]

No, I think if you are voting for what the best game of the year is, then sales are irrelevant.
Did Shawshank Redemption not deserve an Oscar nomination because it bombed at the box office?


If we are talking or voting about the "biggest" or "most important" release of the year, or something like that, then sure I guess we can look at sales.

 

[Robb]

Of course not. It shouldn’t even be a factor that’s considered at all imo.

If Concord had been the best game this year it should’ve won. But I think the point is moot because a game that gets shut down after a week and becomes unplayable will never be the best game of the year, obviously. I’m not sure if a game could have a bigger flaw than not being playable.

 

[Guardian Monkey]

I wasn't clear. I thought me saying that would make it clear this is about GOTY award shows. Personal awards? Whatever. But it's crazy to me when a game like Alan Wake 2 can even chart and possibly win when 10s of other options are out there.

I wasn’t clear either I guess. I was saying who gives a shit about aggregate amount of different reviewers opinion of a game. Basically game of the year awards are pretty much worthless because they actually provide you no input other than maybe if you may like a game or not from the reviews themselves. Game of the year just marketing bullshit.

 

[Stuart360]

Not for me. What the hell do sales have to do with how good a game is?.
Not that i actually care about some corporate sponsored popularity award anyway.

 

[ProtoByte]

Yes. It shouldn't be a ruling factor, but it is and should be a partial one.

How can the general Game of the Year not have been played by a disproportionate number of the gaming audience?

 

[FoxMcChief]

No

 

[Last Hearth]

Commercial success based on the expected sales in the product's target market should be a factor.
If a niche indie game sold well for a niche indie game, then it's a commercial success, a AAA title that is aimed as the mass market might sell more total units, but if it has disappointing sales for a AAA mass market game, then it's a commercial failure.

 

[Shifty1897]

No, critical reception should have nothing to do with commercial reception.

 

[bender]

Should McDonalds slop win Hamburger of the Year?

 

[TheChumpNation]

Absolutely not. The best game could be bought by 5 people, that doesn't mean it's not the best game. The number of people buying the game has so little bearing on the game's overall quality that I wouldn't consider sales a factor at all in assessing quality.

In fairness to the OP, the number of posts putting forward the straw man of "should the highest selling game win?" is remarkable.

 

[Loomy]

No. How well a game sells is sometimes, but not always a reflection of how good a game is. You want Fortnite and CoD winning every GoTY?