The Game Awards: Do We Need 10 Nominees, or Just a Better Spell for Spotlight?
AI Gaming News Author · Polygon ·
The Game Awards should consider expanding its Game of the Year nominations from six to ten, not just for popular titles (which it already covers), but to spotlight innovative indie games that often get overlooked, despite potential risks of diluting the prestige.
Right, so we're talking about The Game Awards again, aren't we? Specifically, that ever-thorny question of who gets to wear the coveted Game of the Year (GOTY) crown. And, perhaps more importantly, how many even get a seat at the table. It’s a bit like deciding how many legendary artefacts can fit into your inventory before you're just hoarding, isn't it?
This whole fascinating discussion was sparked by an excellent piece over on Polygon, penned by Oli Welsh, delving into this very question. He brings up a cracking point about how Hollywood tackled a similar conundrum years ago, and it got my digital gears whirring.
Remember back in 2009, when the Oscars — yeah, *those* Oscars — decided to double down on their Best Picture noms from five to ten? Fair dinkum, they had good reason. Ol' Batman, the *Dark Knight* one, got famously snubbed the year prior, and Hollywood was having a bit of an existential crisis. Were they too busy admiring their own arthouse navel-gazing to notice the blockbusters blowing up the box office? Expanding the field was a cheeky way to bring popular cinema back into the fold without forcing the voting body to dramatically alter its tastes. And you know what? It mostly worked. We’ve seen popular hits like *Avatar*, *Black Panther*, and *Barbie* get their nods, sitting alongside more critically revered, often international, darlings like *Parasite*.
Now, fast forward to our digital realm. The Game Awards currently rolls with a tidy six GOTY nominees. Used to be five, then they chucked an extra one in back in 2018. The simplest argument for pushing it to ten? Bloody hell, so many cracking games come out every year! Limiting it to six, especially in a stacked year, feels a bit like trying to squeeze an entire open-world RPG onto a floppy disk. You just know something awesome is getting left behind.
Last year, for instance, we saw a proper kerfuffle when Bethesda Game Studios’ *Starfield* missed out on a GOTY nomination. I mean, it was a stacked year – *Baldur's Gate 3*, *The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom*, *Alan Wake 2*... a tough crowd, right? Bethesda fans, bless 'em, were quick to clamour for a ten-game limit then, and you can see their point. Imagine if, this year, an acclaimed game from someone like Hideo Kojima – a notable TGA supporter, mind you – was nudged out by a couple of other titans. Unthinkable! Or at least, worthy of a good ol' online debate.
But here's where my digital tea leaves start swirling differently, mate, and where The Game Awards’ situation diverges from the Oscars in a rather significant way. The Oscars wanted to bring *popular* films into the fold to feel more culturally relevant. The Game Awards? Well, it’s usually swimming in blockbusters already! Past winners like *The Witcher 3*, *God of War*, and *Elden Ring* aren't exactly niche arthouse flicks. Last year's *Astro Bot* is the *only* GOTY winner to sell less than 10 million copies in the award’s history. That’s a serious indicator that the voting jury already leans heavily towards the big productions with massive fan bases.
So, if TGA already embraces the popular, what’s the real argument for expanding to ten? It’s not about reflecting mass audiences back at themselves; they're already doing that rather well. Instead, it's about shining a light on the smaller, perhaps artier games from indie studios that often escape the broader audience's attention but absolutely deserve it. Think about it. Where's *Hollow Knight*? *Stardew Valley*? *Undertale*? *Firewatch*? *Outer Wilds*? Critically adored gems, often pushing boundaries with innovative gameplay or storytelling, yet they often don't even get a sniff at the big one. The Game Awards has never nominated more than one indie game in both its Independent Game and GOTY categories. That, my friends, is a missed opportunity for discovering truly groundbreaking experiences.
For these independent developers, a GOTY nomination isn’t just a shiny trophy; it’s a potential game-changer. It’s exposure, validation, and a massive boost that can make a monumental difference to their studio's future. It’s not an existential crisis for The Game Awards itself, which isn't exactly struggling for cultural relevance. It’s more of an opportunity to burnish its artistic credibility, to show that it’s not just about the biggest marketing budgets and the loudest fanbases, but also about genuine innovation and artistry, wherever it might come from in the industry.
Put it that way, and it’s hard to see why Geoff Keighley, the benevolent digital wizard behind TGA, and the board wouldn't want to do it. Apart from one crucial concern: the potential to devalue the nominations. Is there a risk of letting 'too many mediocre games' through, as the original article from Polygon wisely posits? That's a fair point. You don't want the equivalent of a glitch-riddled early access title sneaking into the final build, do you? And who knows what games are currently sitting in those '7-10' slots? If an expanded category isn’t substantially more diverse, or if it waters down the quality, then that could be embarrassing and even harmful. To the awards, to the voting jury, and to gaming as a whole.
Ultimately, it's a tightrope walk. A wider net could catch some truly magical fish, but it could also haul in a bit of digital debris. We’ll just have to trust that if TGA does decide to cast a wider spell, they’ll have done their homework. But personally? I'm always up for more hidden gems getting their moment in the digital sun. Just make sure the sun isn't actually a giant laser beam from a space whale, eh? I'm optimistic, but always cautiously so.
Tags: The Game Awards, GOTY, Gaming Industry, Indie Games, Award Shows
Original article: Polygon