Unveiling the Reality of Video Game Awards

As The Game Awards approach, the gaming community is once again abuzz with anticipation and debate. With my extensive experience in organizing around 50 video game awards, including the prestigious BAFTA panels, I've developed a nuanced view of these events. Despite my involvement, I must confess that I don't have a deep affection for awards. As a spectator, I find them overly long, and as an organizer, I'm aware that they often leave more people disappointed than happy. The judging process is invariably a subject of controversy, with critics arguing that it's either too subjective or not representative of the players' voices. I recall a particular instance where I was on a BAFTA panel, and the winning game was decided by a single vote. This experience made me realize that the outcome could have been vastly different with a different panel composition. On the other hand, the populist approach, where winners are determined by fan votes, also has its drawbacks. For instance, the Golden Joystick Awards, which are voted on by fans, may prioritize popularity over quality. I remember a year when Assassin's Creed Liberation won the Best Handheld Game award, despite being overshadowed by more deserving titles like Fire Emblem Awakening. Many awards attempt to strike a balance between these two approaches by combining panel judgments with fan votes or using a large panel of experts to vote. However, I've found that this middle ground can sometimes result in the worst of both worlds: an event that's both populist and subjective. Ultimately, there is no perfect awards system, and each has its inherent flaws. Rather than treating awards as the definitive judgment on games, we should view them as one perspective among many. The winners deserve their recognition, but the losers don't deserve to be dismissed. Beyond the judging process, awards events often face criticism for their categories, finalists, and overall purpose. Some awards, like The Game Awards, serve as marketing vehicles for announcing new games, while others, like the Women In Games Awards, aim to promote diversity and inclusivity in the industry. The Best Places To Work Awards, which I've been involved with, focus on improving the games industry's work environment and promoting excellence in areas like diversity, mental health support, and charity work. The categories in these awards are carefully crafted to support the central objective of making the games industry a better place to work. Another example is the MCV Awards, a UK publishing and retail awards event that I worked on for nine years. We had an award for Best Distributor, which was often won by the same company, CentreSoft. While some might argue that this award was unnecessary, its inclusion was crucial for the event's primary purpose: serving as a networking opportunity for the publishing and retail industries. The Game Awards, with its numerous categories and focus on core game fans, is designed to entertain and showcase upcoming games to publishers. While it's not perfect, we should accept its limitations and view it as a celebration of video games and the people who create them. By acknowledging the fallibility of awards events, we can appreciate them for what they are: a way to recognize excellence, promote the industry, and have fun.