Given that we're only halfway through 2016, 2015 games haven't really had much time to shine, so it's expected that we'd get some interesting holes due to lack of accumulated playing time. Hell, if I hadn't bought The Talos Principle recently, I probably wouldn't even have had a 2014 candidate.
Game of the Year
- Thread starter civvver
- Start date
Akka
Moody old mage.
2015 is gonna be a comically one-sided one. It's a rather empty year, combined with a colossal 800 pounds gorilla that is more or less a shattering moment in the entire gaming history.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Pretty much the only 2015 game I played is Cities: Skylines, which, while fun, probably doesn't deserve to win.
Since I have faith in you guys to vote Witcher, though, I'll vote for Skylines out of a desire to represent games I like.
Since I have faith in you guys to vote Witcher, though, I'll vote for Skylines out of a desire to represent games I like.
Lohrenswald
世界的 bottom ranked physicist
Haven't played most of the popular games from 2015 so I'll vote cities skylines
Snerk
Smeghead
As far as I recall the only game from 2015 I've played was Star Wars Battlefront. It was really good fun for a while but teamplay wise the game was too shallow for any real staying power.
Lohrenswald
世界的 bottom ranked physicist
All my votes has been restricted to games I've played
GoodSarmatian
Jokerfied Western Male
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 9,408
2014: In general a year of disappointments. There were two games I was looking forward to that year: Dragon Age: Inquisition and Beyond Eart. I won't mention BE again in this thread. It does not deserve the attention.
Inquisiton was quite good but suffers from pretty bad combat and an unsatisfying leveling system.
I'll vote for a game that flew under my radar until is aw the revies: Divinity Original Sin. Now that's what combat in an RPG should be like. It also has some issues, but I have not enjoyed the actual gameplay of an RPG that much since Chrono Trigger.
2015 is obviously Witcher 3.
Which is a bit sad because Pillars of Eternity would have really deserved to be a game of a year. Shame it came out around the same time.
Inquisiton was quite good but suffers from pretty bad combat and an unsatisfying leveling system.
I'll vote for a game that flew under my radar until is aw the revies: Divinity Original Sin. Now that's what combat in an RPG should be like. It also has some issues, but I have not enjoyed the actual gameplay of an RPG that much since Chrono Trigger.
2015 is obviously Witcher 3.
Which is a bit sad because Pillars of Eternity would have really deserved to be a game of a year. Shame it came out around the same time.
civvver
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,855
haha 
beyond earth... it's like a crappy civ5 mod. There's probably better actual civ5 mods out there.
I'm assuming you mean witcher 3, but can you expand on what you mean by shattering moment in the entire gaming history? That's a pretty bold statement.
beyond earth... it's like a crappy civ5 mod. There's probably better actual civ5 mods out there.I'm assuming you mean witcher 3, but can you expand on what you mean by shattering moment in the entire gaming history? That's a pretty bold statement.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Witcher 3 is a beautiful accomplishment, and a very well done game - a masterpiece to be certain. But it didn'T redefine society'S relation to gaming, it didn'T redefine people's conception of video-gaming. It was a magnificent refinement of what had come before.
A shattering moment in gaming history, for me, would have to be something that completely redefine our understanding of what video-game are, what they can be. How they're played, and our relation to them.
There is a game that came out in the past two years that has a shot at becoming THAT kind of moment (And it'S not there yet, and may not get there). But it came out this month, not last year, and is not out worldwide yet.
A shattering moment in gaming history, for me, would have to be something that completely redefine our understanding of what video-game are, what they can be. How they're played, and our relation to them.
There is a game that came out in the past two years that has a shot at becoming THAT kind of moment (And it'S not there yet, and may not get there). But it came out this month, not last year, and is not out worldwide yet.
Maniacal
the green Napoleon
Yeah, half the reason the game is a big deal is because so many games that come out, while usually still at least somewhat to very fun, are really not much above average (overall). The other half is because it's a really good, well made, and unusual for gaming, well written, game.
It wasn't without its flaws, but so many of them have been patched. It was great playing it slow and watching as it kept getting patched as I played through it which fixed things and didn't break my save files.
It wasn't without its flaws, but so many of them have been patched. It was great playing it slow and watching as it kept getting patched as I played through it which fixed things and didn't break my save files.
civvver
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,855
what game is that?
Zack
99% hot gas
pokemon go?
civvver
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,855
Ok sorry I barely even consider that a game. It's basically like a facebook game at this point. I mean where's the depth or strategy honestly?
It's a social game and will have impact on *real* video games I'm sure, but I don't put it in the same category as what we're voting on here. Has anyone voted for a mobile game? I mean angry birds took the world by storm but would anyone call it game of the year? Heck no.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Yep. It's no masterpiece. The graphics are meh. The gameplay is basic. The plot is non-existent. (Though the idea that "it doesn't count because mobile isn't real video gaming" is a silly, antiquated, elitist view of video gaming).
But it's a game that's taking its level best shot at redefining society's relation to videogaming, and completely redefining what the word "video game" even *means* to people.
It's one thing to be popular. It's a whole other thing to be popular while doing something, if not unprecedented, at least still very new to the world of video-gaming. Angry Birds and Plant v Zombies stuck largely to established mechanisms and systems of video gaming. Go, on the other hand, pushes the use of your own body as your game controller (in that you have to actually physically visit the real-life location to access the in-game one). It blends real-world information with in-game ones, both in being location-based, and in making rudimentary use of augmented reality philosophy. And it's wildly popular while doing all these things.
And, directly linked with that...GO is one of the first game built to fully take advantage of what mobiles (and to a lesser degree handhelds, I suppose) can do that consoles and computers just can't. You could have Angry Birds and PvZ on a computer. You couldn't have Pokemon Go there. So in that light, too, Go is a groundbreaker.
But it's a game that's taking its level best shot at redefining society's relation to videogaming, and completely redefining what the word "video game" even *means* to people.
It's one thing to be popular. It's a whole other thing to be popular while doing something, if not unprecedented, at least still very new to the world of video-gaming. Angry Birds and Plant v Zombies stuck largely to established mechanisms and systems of video gaming. Go, on the other hand, pushes the use of your own body as your game controller (in that you have to actually physically visit the real-life location to access the in-game one). It blends real-world information with in-game ones, both in being location-based, and in making rudimentary use of augmented reality philosophy. And it's wildly popular while doing all these things.
And, directly linked with that...GO is one of the first game built to fully take advantage of what mobiles (and to a lesser degree handhelds, I suppose) can do that consoles and computers just can't. You could have Angry Birds and PvZ on a computer. You couldn't have Pokemon Go there. So in that light, too, Go is a groundbreaker.
civvver
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,855
I get what you are saying but the categories are still quite different imo. It's like that iphone commercial where a girl cuts onions and wins a bunch of oscars for her viral video. A viral video on youtube is not the same as an indie flick or big studio movie, despite that it may be more watched or on the internet and talked about on facebook, they're quite different.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Comparing mobile gaming with homemade films on youtube sounds downright condescending, I hope you realize.
The point, though, is that popularity is not what make Pokemon Go noteworthy. Being a game that completely upends what the word video game *means* is what makes Go noteworthy.
A youtube film that pioneered new cinema technique and redefined our relation to cinema while being wildly popular might not stand for an oscar (because they have some fairly silly rules), but it would definitely be talked about by cinema experts as the big deal of the year.
The point, though, is that popularity is not what make Pokemon Go noteworthy. Being a game that completely upends what the word video game *means* is what makes Go noteworthy.
A youtube film that pioneered new cinema technique and redefined our relation to cinema while being wildly popular might not stand for an oscar (because they have some fairly silly rules), but it would definitely be talked about by cinema experts as the big deal of the year.
civvver
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,855
Condescending to who? Mobile game developers? I mean are you mad I said it's barely a video game? Do you love it or something? lol
You don't see the parallel? Remove the social/gps location aspect of pokemon go and just look at the game. The compare it to witcher 3. It's like comparing a 2 year old's doodle to a picasso or something, the scope and complexity and depth are that different.
Just cus it's noteworthy doesn't mean it's good. Candy crush is far and away one of the most profitable video games ever. Does that mean it's a masterpiece? Candy crush and angry birds are noteworthy cus they showed how much money there is in mobile gaming cus more people are willing to play a shallower mobile game than invest a lot of time in a desktop game or something. But they're on totally different levels.
You don't see the parallel? Remove the social/gps location aspect of pokemon go and just look at the game. The compare it to witcher 3. It's like comparing a 2 year old's doodle to a picasso or something, the scope and complexity and depth are that different.
Just cus it's noteworthy doesn't mean it's good. Candy crush is far and away one of the most profitable video games ever. Does that mean it's a masterpiece? Candy crush and angry birds are noteworthy cus they showed how much money there is in mobile gaming cus more people are willing to play a shallower mobile game than invest a lot of time in a desktop game or something. But they're on totally different levels.
Similar threads
