Game Theory - The Game Awards Are WRONG! (Game of the Year)

Episode Date: January 2, 2024

Join Game Theory Host MatPat as he explains how to WIN Game of The Year! *Credits:* Writers: Matthew Patrick, Tom Robinson, Mike Keenan (The Pokémon Biologist), and Bob Chipman Editors: Dan "Cybert" Seibert, Alex "Sedge" Sedgwick, AbsolutePixel and Pedro Freitas Sound Designer: Yosi Berman

Oh, it's that time of the year, folks. The days are getting shorter, the air's getting colder, and little gamers around the world leave out their Doritos and Mountain Dew in the hopes that gamer Santa, Jeff Keely, will deliver us yet another unforgettable game awards. Where all the biggest players in the gaming industry come together to share in the latest announcements, bad jokes, and whatever this was. What do you think, Zelda? Do this IRL.

Can't really tell if that means we've been naughty or nice this year, but thanks for that one anyway, Jeff. Absolutely incredible. I've been waiting for years to show that to you. Oh, internet, welcome to game theory, the show that wanted to nominate you for fan of the year. But it's not a real category. Today we're talking about the Game Awards. That one time of the year were the biggest names in gaming descend upon Los Angeles' famous Nokia Theater, Microsoft Theater, Peacock Theater, to celebrate the year in gaming. And talk about a glow-up, my friends. The Game Awards are truly the epitome of faking it till you make it.

They started out back in 2002 as the Spike TV VGX Awards, and they looked a lot. lot less like this. This is a show about bringing our community together to focus on something we can all agree on. There's nothing more powerful or more immersive than an extraordinary video game. And a lot more like this. We dress up like video game characters and that isn't creepy at all cosplay rules. I'm going to have sex with these guys tonight. It's like the show was aggressively determined to insult all the very people that they were hoping would watch it. In between bouts of laser battles against Samuel Jackson. But that's when host Jeff Keely stepped in,

took over and rebooted the whole thing. Delivering what's now the biggest night in gaming with over 100 million people tuning in to see the winners, the losers, and the obligatory cringe. See? Ah! That's a good selfie, my friend. Did you just say shelfy?

Oh, and let's not forget the uncomfortable brand deals. Hydrobots. Taking it to the next level, that was sick. But of the whole night, no award is more prestigious and hotly debated than the ultimate in-gamer achievements, Game of the Year. Now, this year's show was a big one. Not only did this year mark the 10th official Game Awards, but the nominee list was stacked. We got two mainline Nintendo games, a new

Spider-Man game, Baldersgate 3, an amazing Resident Evil 4 remake, and also, Ellen Wake, sure. But honestly, when you look at this year in gaming, I'm impressed that they could narrow it down to six. If you take the average Metacritic scores for all six Game of the Year noms, it would be the second highest average score in Game Awards history behind the amazing year that was 2017, which, fun fact, also had itself a Mario and Zelda nomination. It feels almost like there's a pattern here. Hold on, because that's exactly what we're going to be talking about today. You see, the Game Awards, like any other award show, is a game in and of itself,

with prizes to be had and achievements to be won. I've dissected the data for every Game of the Year nominee and winner over the past 10 years, and boy, howdy, let me tell you, there is a clear, perfect formula for winning this thing. And it all boils down to one singular word, Daddy. your acceptance speech is ready, loyal theorists, because Chic Hydrobot has gotten an award with your name on it. As a quick side note before we get started, the majority of the script was actually written before the Game Awards this year went live. So when we talk about the nominees,

we will be including this year's nominations, but we're not going to be including this year's winner in the statistics until the very end of the video. So when you hear me say stuff like nine winners, it's not that I missed one, it's just that we didn't know who that was going to be at the time of writing the vast majority of the script. All right, now then. The first thing that immediately jumped out to me when looking at the is the genre of game that tends to win. Although games like first-person shooters and sports

tend to be the top-selling games out of any given year, turns out that the Game Awards actually prefer themselves action. Of the 56 games ever nominated for Game of the Year, 30, or a whopping 54% fit into this action genre. But since that's a fairly broad category, I decided to break it down further. 17 were action adventure like Metroid Red, 12 were action RPGs like Eldon Ring,

and then there was one, Death Stranding, that was just listed as straight, Action, action. But that's just talking about the nominees. The trend becomes even more clear when you start focusing on the winners Five of Nine winners were action adventures. Last of Us part two, Breath of the Wild, it takes two, Sekaro and God a War. While three of nine were action RPGs, Eld and Ring, Witcher 3 in Dragon Age Inquisition. The only non-action game game game to win the big award of the night was actually Overwatch, team-based multiplayer shooter. This trend even tracks all the way back to the Spike TV Game Awards, where seven out of their 11 winners were also classified as action games. The outlier of Overwatch, though, caught my attention, so I decided to keep digging.

Despite multiplayer games dominating the scene with things like Fortnite, PubG, Among Us, Rocket League, and Apex Legends, when it comes to Game of the Year, only six of all 56 nominees are fully blown multiplayer experiences. And of the two that managed to go all the way and win the award, one was Overwatch, and the other was It Takes Two, a cooperative platformer game for two players telling the story of warring parents being forced to work together to save their marriage. Yeah, it's not quite the same as dropping with the boys in four. It's not what you typically expect out of that genre. Overall, it is very clear that single player games with compelling character-driven narratives rule the nominations in this category.

And while you're at it, make sure that the story that you're telling is a mature one. Six of the nine Game of the Year winners had themselves an M for mature rating in the US. But again, notice, they're not getting that rating for the gunplay, they're getting it for violent combat, language, sexual content. Clearly, people want to connect with more real stories and real characters, but real people tend to get messy. So when you get characters like Ellie swearing up a storm or Kratos ripping off heads or Garrell Wu and the ladies Those games have themselves a better chance of winning the big award and the safe clean family friendly options of Mario Okay, so we have ourselves an M-rated single-player action game focused on telling a deep narrative But now who should our lead character be? Well, sorry ladies, but as you'd probably expect

Male led games are the front runners not just for the game awards, but also for the Spike TV Awards that came before Of those 20 winners in total 12 featured a male protagonist Even the game with a female protagonist, The Last of Us Part 2, starts off with us playing as Joel, the male protagonist from the first game, and pretty much all the others offer a choice between male and female characters, with It Takes 2 and Eldon Ring being the most recent examples. But what's even more important than the gender of your character is being able to see them. While first person games dominated the industry for the better part of a decade,

third person games overwhelm both the nominations and winners lists, getting 73% of the noms and 89% of the wins. So if you really want to make it look cool, you've also got to put your effort into realistic, dark, and gritty visuals. Very often we're met with a big old see a grays, browns, and overcast blues when we're watching the Game of the Year nominees collage. Honestly, that's not all that's surprising when you look at the vibe of the show. The Game Awards wants to put a respectable show on that takes gaming seriously, that looks at video games as an art form and not just a childhood habit. They want to be the Oscars of gaming.

And just like the Oscars want real-life stories, the Game Awards want real-life visuals. You know what else they want? established IP. Only about 30% of nominees ever were wholly original IP. Of all 56 games that were nominated, 41 were prequels, sequels, spin-offs, or remakes. Just look at this year's nominees. Every single one is capitalizing off of a well-known brand familiarity. And honestly, it's not all that surprising. Humans or creatures a habit. We like what's familiar. But while being an established IP might help you get nominated, being a new IP actually boosts your chances of winning. Four of nine winners were coming from new IP. Though, to be fair, both Sekiro and Eldon Ring were technically following very closely in the footsteps of the Dark Souls and Bloodborns they came before, so calling them

new might be a bit of a stretch. Just calling the numbers like I see them. Anyway, let's take a minute to recap. To win game of the year, you need a single-player action experience with a third-person perspective that has a mature story focused on a male lead coming from an existing IP, or at least some that feels very familiar. So now, let's talk about your release strategy. It turns out that while yeah, your game's important when you release it may actually be just as important of a factor. You see, the game awards are always in early December, with nominations being squared away sometime in November. You might think that games should therefore come out just before

November for the best chance. That's how other awards tend to work. There's a recency bias amongst the voters. But with the game awards, it's not actually the case. If you truly want to springboard your game into Game of the Year consideration, you want to shoot for a spring release. Look at the previous game of the year winners and you'll see the commonality across their

release dates. It takes two, Sekaro, Got a War, Breath of the Wild, Overwatch, The Witcher 3, all of them released in March, April, and May. Eldon Ring came out at the tail end of February, and The Last of Us Part 2 released June 19th, technically before the first day of summer, so slid right into that window. In short, spring is the prime window for getting Game of the Year consideration. Now, at first, this seems random and arbitrary, but if you stop and think about it, it actually makes a lot of sense. Seven out of the nine winners take more than 20 hours to complete. Four of them clock in with playtimes between 40 and 60 hours. If you're releasing a 50-hour epic around nomination time, say like late September to November,

people aren't going to have the capacity to really dive into your game fully. But if you release it back in the spring, then voters have all year to invest to complete it, to develop opinions about your game, while having plenty of time to still focus on what they have to do in their day jobs. So there you have it, folks, the perfect guide for the perfect game of the year candidate. Just create a single-player third-person action game with a well-established IP. Give players a male protagonist with a deep mature story in really. realistic graphics, and then make sure that players feel like they've gotten a substantial experience,

making sure that your game takes around 20 hours to complete, ideally closer to 40. And then make sure that you're releasing it in spring to give voters a real chance to dig into your incredible new game. Now, you might think that this is where the episode would end. I mean, we've analyzed all the key data points and given you the winning formula, so what else is there to say? Well, for me, it's not enough to just know how to win. I want to know why. Gaming's a subjective medium after all, so why are all of these trends so predictable? Well, it all comes down to something that's a bit harder to quantify on a simple spreadsheet. The humans that are voting for this award.

I mentioned before that the Game Awards want to be the Oscars of Gaming, so you'd probably assume that the votes are done similarly, with winners chosen by an Academy of Industry Professionals. But in reality, no, that isn't the case. Nor do they let regular audiences vote like the VMAs. The Game Awards voting starts with an advisory board, a group of the biggest names in gaming. I'm talking president of Nintendo Doug Bowser,

executive VP of Microsoft Phil Spencer, companies like Activision Rockstar Valve, which might make you think that this is an Oscars-like situation, but then here comes the twist. The advisory board isn't actually voting. Instead, they're creating a list of over 100 games journalism publications from around the world, and then those journalists, known as the jury, they're the ones who decide which games get nominated, and they're the ones that get to vote for the winners. There's also an element of public vote here, but that only accounts for 10% of the final rankings. It's designed like this, so it's not about what's popular, but what's truly considered

the best by the people whose job it is to know these sorts of things. And when I saw that jury breakdown, suddenly every single element that we talked about today fell into place. Obviously, a lot of people who get into writing about games professionally did so because they grew up as gamers themselves. They grew up with video games in the 80s and the 90s. This means that the bulk of prominent games journalists are in their 30s and early 40s. They want games to have more mature stories because they themselves are more mature. Wise from software games had such success with games like Eldon Ring and Sekiro? It's a throwback to the good old days when games were harder,

when there weren't checkpoints everywhere, when it was okay to die. Breath of the Wild, it was able to sort its way to a win, not just because it was a great game, but because it was the perfect mix of a nostalgic IP from their childhoods put through a more modern, mature filter. Why are male characters so prominent in this winners list? Well, not only are there more male journalists in general, but do you notice anything specific about these characters?

The majority of them are older men. usually about 30 plus. Which means that these male journalists that loved gaming in the 80s and 90s are now playing as characters that they identify with. Men who are their age or just slightly older. Men who might be starting to feel past their prime, but who are still kicking butt and taking names. And it's not just age that's a factor here, it's also responsibility. Past winners like out of war, it takes two, Sekaro. All of them have lead characters that aren't just men, but fathers.

Or father-like figures. Sorry, internet, I know a lot of you have a thing for mommies in gaming these days, but it turns out that to win game of the year, it's all about that big daddy energy. Kataku actually dubbed the phenomenon the daddening of video games. And we're seeing it more and more lately because journalists and developers have grown up. They're starting families of their own, which means that they're incorporating those experiences into their work and identifying with the stories that are being told there.

And when your voters are parents, it's going to affect all the other criteria too. Being a parent puts a huge limitation on your time. When you have to do your job and then you also need to do the parent-partner thing, that means that you have less time to sit down and play games, which is why I suspect single-player action games are dominating the awards. Action games, specifically action-adventure games, tend to have much clearer and straightforward narratives, with more linear levels and missions.

It makes it easier to just sit down and do one level. Make me feel like you accomplish something in the game, getting a nice hit of dopamine, but then being able to move on to whatever normal adulting stuff you gotta do. You might think that this flies in the face of longer games being more successful, but actually the two are very closely tied. Remember, with bigger, longer, more open games, that means more collectibles, more side quests, more easy things that are measurable and quick to do.

Plus, if your time's limited, you don't necessarily want to have to pick up a new game every few weeks and learn a bunch of new controls or mechanics. Having one 50-plus-hour game means you can just keep chipping away at it, bit by bit over time, while still feeling like you're getting something out of it, again explaining why spring releases are doing a lot better than fall and winter ones. Also, as adults, your time's limited, and it's difficult to coordinate with your friends who are also busy with their own personal lives. As such multiplayer experiences,

they're just going to be significantly less fun because you're playing online with a bunch of randos. And there you have it, loyal theorists. Not only do you know how to win the game of the year, but now you understand why you can win the game of the year. The key thing above all else is to understand your audience and tailor the experience directly to them. Build a single player third-person,

M-rated, dark and gritty action game that takes itself seriously. Give people a chance to explore a deep and rich world from their childhood. Make sure the main character's a middle-aged man with some real dad energy that you'll be spent in the next 40 hours with. And finally, remember to release it in the spring so that the journalists and parents actually have time to play the darn thing. Now go forth and make some awesome games. All I ask is for a thank you in your acceptance speech. Now based on this criteria, it seemed like this year's race was gonna be pretty tight between Baldur's Gate and Tears of the Kingdom. Both of them are in the action genre, though Balders Gate was less likely with its RPG focus.

Both are in the third person. Both are primarily single player. Boulder's Gates rated M for M for Mature while Zelda's E for everyone. Zelda, of course, is a massive IP, but Boulder's Gate also equally massive. It's based on Dungeons and Dragons, which has been a huge game since the 70s. Both of them have nearly 60 hours of total playtime. Zelda, edges out slightly with its May release, while Boulder's Gate was released in August. Both games were tied for highest rated on the list, with 96%, and both of them offered male protagonists, though neither of them necessarily gave off a whole lot of dad energy.

That said, it wasn't all that surprising when Timothy Shalamay announced that Boulder's Gate 3 was a officially the 2023 Game of the Year winner. I guess that M rating for being able to have relations with a bear really helped to carry this one over the finish line. Though when the director of a game shows up to your award show in a suit of armor, yeah, probably deserving of the dub. Oh wait, nope, never mind. Definitely goes to Flute Guy.

Flute Guy, you are the 2023 Game of the Year winner, at least as far as I'm concerned. But hey, that's just a theory. A game theory. Thanks for watching.