Guys, I'll be honest--I hate Game of the Year Editions of games. I understand why they exist, it's a great way to bring new life to a game that isn't selling as well as it once was, and they come with all kinds of DLC and special rewards to add to it as an added incentive for people to jump on board. I'm not going to sit here and say that I haven't bought a few of these myself. Overall, I think it's a great idea, but I take exception with the term "Game of the Year." That term should be reserved for games that legitimately won a top game award from a major games publication or website.
I recently started playing the first Dead Island
, and other than the fact that the game is a glitch-factory and crashes at least once every time I sit down to play, I'm really enjoying it thus far. It reminds me a lot of Borderlands
, and if you have my kind of affection
for the vault hunter's adventures, then that's definitely a good thing, but Dead Island
is far from being a "Game of the Year" contender, and yes, it does have a Game of the Year Edition.
It's fine if Deep Silver wishes to re-release the game to try to squeeze a few more dollars out of people that didn't take the initial plunge, but slapping a GOTY on the cover is very deceptive. Speaking of Borderlands, even though it was my personal favorite game of 2009, I'm not going to lie and say that it deserved to be released again in 2010 with the title. The game was the most fun I had had in quite some time, but it was definitely not without it's flaws.
Having a GOTY implies that the game is the best of the best of that year. If the game didn't receive that amount or type of praise, then don't lie to gamers. Fallout 3
has a GOTY Edition, and I hated that game, but it was one of those games that you couldn't go a day without hearing or reading about, so I understand why it exists. Same deal with Red Dead Redemption
, I played for about 4 hours and realized how much I didn't care about what I was playing, but the praise that was bestowed on that game made it more than easy to swallow when it was given new life.
Videogames are subjective, so who's to say what the best game of the year actually is? If I were to name a terrible game my personal favorite game of the year as a joke, does that mean that Ride to Hell: Retribution
will come out next year with a GOTY? Why wouldn't it? A no-name dude who writes community blogs on a major site said it was game of the year. Champion! There's no sanctioning body to determine which game should actually win Game of the Year. I know the Video Game Awards on SpikeTV are the closest thing we have to the videogame Academy Awards, but that's like saying I'm a singer because I farted into a microphone.
Transformers films, VGAs, Linkin Park makes everything legitimate.
I have no problem with games that prefer to go a different route. For instance, when Mortal Kombat
released a newer version with all the new characters, they went with "The Komplete Edition," because misspelling is still kool. Saints Row the Third
has "The Full Package," because references to balls are still funny. Skyrim
now has the "Legendary Edition," because...because Skyrim
, that's why. All of these examples are fitting and unoffensive.
Of course, I'm not being completely serious. I don't really get offended when a game has an undeserving title, but I do feel that throwing out a Game of the Year Edition is implying to uninformed gamers that the game is of the highest quality, and when someone picks that game up expecting to be blown away, and they're not, it's only doing damage to the industry.
HEY! Thanks for reading.