Here's something I was thinking about last night re GOTY, noting it's a nice accolade but ultimately a load of ********, and no this isn't bait for @Paul_cz, didn't want to derail the KCD2 thread.
I haven't played KCD2 yet which is probably a contender for it along with Expedition 33 so far, but what do you think the criteria should be when determining a GOTY *edit: talking of 'official' ones*? Sales doesn't work on its own, so I think (assuming any thought goes into it and it's not sponsored) they look at the game holistically across things like art, music, gameplay, reception/reviews etc.
That in itself made me think of KCD2, I know it is highly regarded and has done well, but how do you judge an area like art in this case? Everything is based on real world, arguably the devs did not have to be creative when designing 99% of the assets because they already had a reference to copy from for just about everything (buildings, weapons, armour, flora, fauna etc). Creativity is of course shown in the quests and characters, plus any music it has possibly (unsure if that is also representative of the era).
Then take Expedition 33, the creativity for the world itself is IMO incredible, so many unique aesthetics in the game and while they may have had references to base stuff on, ultimately I suspect just about everything in that game required a level of creativity I can't comprehend, and whilst I'm sure you can say "oh well monster a is clearly just a take on monster b from whatever", the point is they didn't just have to google 'Guisarme' and model it (or in this case probably reuse).
Which made me think how would you even compare the two games if they were the only two runners for GOTY? KCD2 is objectively lacking in the visual creativity department for most of the world just by virtue of being based on a real world setting, that is not a criticism. Appreciate I'm just focusing on one thing here but I am trying to imagine how they decide this stuff. Makes me wonder how much thought goes into it at all, and if they just take notice of online noise and pluck one out a hat.
I haven't played KCD2 yet which is probably a contender for it along with Expedition 33 so far, but what do you think the criteria should be when determining a GOTY *edit: talking of 'official' ones*? Sales doesn't work on its own, so I think (assuming any thought goes into it and it's not sponsored) they look at the game holistically across things like art, music, gameplay, reception/reviews etc.
That in itself made me think of KCD2, I know it is highly regarded and has done well, but how do you judge an area like art in this case? Everything is based on real world, arguably the devs did not have to be creative when designing 99% of the assets because they already had a reference to copy from for just about everything (buildings, weapons, armour, flora, fauna etc). Creativity is of course shown in the quests and characters, plus any music it has possibly (unsure if that is also representative of the era).
Then take Expedition 33, the creativity for the world itself is IMO incredible, so many unique aesthetics in the game and while they may have had references to base stuff on, ultimately I suspect just about everything in that game required a level of creativity I can't comprehend, and whilst I'm sure you can say "oh well monster a is clearly just a take on monster b from whatever", the point is they didn't just have to google 'Guisarme' and model it (or in this case probably reuse).
Which made me think how would you even compare the two games if they were the only two runners for GOTY? KCD2 is objectively lacking in the visual creativity department for most of the world just by virtue of being based on a real world setting, that is not a criticism. Appreciate I'm just focusing on one thing here but I am trying to imagine how they decide this stuff. Makes me wonder how much thought goes into it at all, and if they just take notice of online noise and pluck one out a hat.
Last edited:
