IMO, it does. Awards showcase and highlight ‘best of’ games, but what’s the point of highlighting a game that is inaccessible to a significant portion of the gaming community? You could potentially make the argument that their purpose is more towards recognising the efforts and success of the devs, but that’s not the aspect of awards that are being discussed in this context.
I feel that making a game exclusive can sometimes make better games, because you’re making one game instead of 2 or 3. Even with games that are on multiple systems, one version always ends up being “the definitive”, and the other versions are not up to the same standard because they’re put out just to appeal to a wider audience. Focusing on one system let’s you put everything into making your game great instead of making it accessible.
That may have been true a decade ago, but nowadays unless you’re trying to squeeze out top-tier graphics performance (which isn’t the case with this game) you only need to worry about the control scheme. The code can be compiled for multiple platforms.
But, also, why Astro Bot?
Your right, it should have been belatro
Balatro is the objectively correct choice.
Because the Game Awards hates indie games.
N stiwtosotsotskgsgms
That is no indie game.
N stiwtosotsotskgsgms
“Indie game” is not a genre…
N stiwtosotsotskgsgms
I don’t know about that. I am saying, that I wouldn’t count It Takes Two as an indie title.
N stiwtosotsotskgsgms
You’re*
Learn basic grammar, FFS. You make yourself look like a 12-year-old with learning disabilities by failing to get simple words right.
Go back to reddit.
Did you understand what they said? Great! They did perfectly fine then. Waste less energies.
Your a dweeb lmao
Have you played Astro Bot? It’s phenomenal. It is the best non-Mario 3D platformer ever made. And possibly in the Top 3 if you include Mario.
And also a PS5 exclusive. Eww
That has no relevance to how good and deserving of an award it is.
IMO, it does. Awards showcase and highlight ‘best of’ games, but what’s the point of highlighting a game that is inaccessible to a significant portion of the gaming community? You could potentially make the argument that their purpose is more towards recognising the efforts and success of the devs, but that’s not the aspect of awards that are being discussed in this context.
I feel that making a game exclusive can sometimes make better games, because you’re making one game instead of 2 or 3. Even with games that are on multiple systems, one version always ends up being “the definitive”, and the other versions are not up to the same standard because they’re put out just to appeal to a wider audience. Focusing on one system let’s you put everything into making your game great instead of making it accessible.
That may have been true a decade ago, but nowadays unless you’re trying to squeeze out top-tier graphics performance (which isn’t the case with this game) you only need to worry about the control scheme. The code can be compiled for multiple platforms.
N stiwtosotsotskgsgms
Cry about it… Astro Bot was fucking awesome.
And it’s also made by Sony who have a lot of money
“Big company, therefore manipulation” is one hell of an argument my dude
These pathetic conspiracy theories should’ve died out in the 90s.
The people who review the games are the same people who vote for the winner, and Astro Bot was the best reviewed game of the year.