[QUOTE="deedaw"]

Up until now I have been a Video Games Award Fan; this year I feel they did a very poor job on not only nominating games, but selecting winners. I will begin by saying I do not disagree with ALL their decisions, but most of them were very poor. First off, no FPS is represented in the "Game of the Year" section; I find this hard to believe considering this was one of the biggest years EVER for the FPS genre: BF3 revolutionized the genre with its new engine, Crysis II stunned us early with fantastic graphics (along with BF3) and MW3 sold record numbers! I am not saying either of those deserved to win, in fact I am satisfied with the decision, but I feel the FPS genre definitely deserved a chance and recognition towards GOTY. On other categories I also see a lack of the FPS genre: Best Xbox 360 Game.

There are a few other things that definitely stand out to me, and just seem plain wrong. The 'Best Graphics' category was one of the first I really was appauled by. Needless to say, both Crysis II and Battlefield 3 should have been nominated here. They forced thousands of gamers to drop mad $$ in order to run their game, where were their nominations? AGAIN we see lack of the FPS genre, and where it deserves it the most. Uncharted 3 is a gorgeous game, but it is restricted by the console! It deserves to win up against the other nominees, but not all that has been released in 2011.

I will go on with my rant on Portal 2/Steam. I am no fanboy, or hater, but Portal 2 won a few awards that seemed out of place. Best PC Game, Best Multiplayer were a long shot in my opinion. It is a great game but there are many more games that have a more innovative and immersive multiplayer, and several other games did things none had done before on the PC.

All in all I was about as unsatisfied with the VGA this year as I am with America's, The VMA's and the BCS's voting system COMBINED! They failed to represent many games/genres that deserved their place in the list. I hope they can stray away from this in the coming years.

This is the short version, I'm tired.

/endrant

LazySloth718

BF3 revolutionized the genre? Really?

Crysis 2? lol no

MW3? lol god no

Best 360 game? All they had this year was Gears 3, what would they put as contenders?

As far as PC's, face it the mainstream doesn't play PC's.

UC3 deserves every award it gets.

Yes, it did. What FPS have you played with a fully destructable environment and physics as real as these? As far as I'm concerned, BF3 is the video game setting Par standards. Crysis 2 has fantastic graphics, not argueable. These awards should not be based on 'mainstream', and I do not think they are because PORTAL 2 won awards it didn't deserve. Who the hell plays Portal 2?!?!!?

Who actually watches that show for the awards? lmaochilly-chill

Considering it is "The Video Game AWARDS", I am sure at least 75%

[QUOTE="deedaw"]

MW3 sold record numbers!

Jackc8

By that logic, Wii Sports should get Game of the Year pretty much every year.

It would only be qualified to have won the year it came out - that's why the VGA is done yearly. And Wii sports did not hit 15million copies by the end of the first week, it took 2 years for it to start getting into the millions of sales.

I just see a total lack of consistency with nominations and winners, I would have liked to see C2 or BF3 win best graphics, BF3 > MW3 in the multiplayer genre (maybe not # wise, but anyone who has played BOTH on the PC will easily say BF3 has the superior gameplay), and how did Portal 2 win PC game of the year? I mean come on, they just added co op and a longer story to what they made a few years ago.

Like I said, I am not unsatisfied with all of their decisions, I just see inconcsistency here!

Fortnite seems to be a action/adventure/strategy/RTS/RPG imo - at least that is what would make it most fun to me

Up until now I have been a Video Games Award Fan; this year I feel they did a very poor job on not only nominating games, but selecting winners. I will begin by saying I do not disagree with ALL their decisions, but most of them were very poor. First off, no FPS is represented in the "Game of the Year" section; I find this hard to believe considering this was one of the biggest years EVER for the FPS genre: BF3 revolutionized the genre with its new engine, Crysis II stunned us early with fantastic graphics (along with BF3) and MW3 sold record numbers! I am not saying either of those deserved to win, in fact I am satisfied with the decision, but I feel the FPS genre definitely deserved a chance and recognition towards GOTY. On other categories I also see a lack of the FPS genre: Best Xbox 360 Game.

There are a few other things that definitely stand out to me, and just seem plain wrong. The 'Best Graphics' category was one of the first I really was appauled by. Needless to say, both Crysis II and Battlefield 3 should have been nominated here. They forced thousands of gamers to drop mad $$ in order to run their game, where were their nominations? AGAIN we see lack of the FPS genre, and where it deserves it the most. Uncharted 3 is a gorgeous game, but it is restricted by the console! It deserves to win up against the other nominees, but not all that has been released in 2011.

I will go on with my rant on Portal 2/Steam. I am no fanboy, or hater, but Portal 2 won a few awards that seemed out of place. Best PC Game, Best Multiplayer were a long shot in my opinion. It is a great game but there are many more games that have a more innovative and immersive multiplayer, and several other games did things none had done before on the PC.

All in all I was about as unsatisfied with the VGA this year as I am with America's, The VMA's and the BCS's voting system COMBINED! They failed to represent many games/genres that deserved their place in the list. I hope they can stray away from this in the coming years.

This is the short version, I'm tired.

/endrant

thought I would share, pretty good stuff in here!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrDO5OwNbqU&feature=youtu.be

GODFATHER II!!!!!! Also Valkyrie Chronicles

Depends on your style. COD is a game I believe anyone can pick up and be great at.... I mean (i'm not being cocky) but I own in CoD4 and WaW..... There are perks in CoD that are pointless, no one uses them. Then there are perks that everyone uses, they own, make yourgame better. This to me makes is easy for anyone, you can kickass at CoD in a good week of playingwhen in Killzone I see it taking a lot of time to get used to. It's a completely diff game, aiming is a lot tougher so you can'tpull a complete 180 degree spin andown the personwho had your backoff the bat; which I see a lot in CoD.Killzone 2, to me, DID take some time to get use to and enjoy more. Once you get intoclan play, and actually take the time to sit and plan out what classes need to be used to achieve a win (becuase they all help eachother out in some way) is when you start seeing what KZ2 is good for. They are completely different games and I think it is very tough to compare the two..... Ihonestly do miss CoD, but I'm still very intruged by the gameplay KZ2 is offering. Here in a week or so it will be a lot easier tosee which one I am going to play in the long run.