Printable View
http://www.bafta.org/awards/video-games/
So? Was it deserved? Is E:TW so amazingly good that it deserves to to be picked above C&C, Halo Wars and ,uh, Plants vs. Zombies?
The fact that Hearts of Iron III didn't even get a nomination is a disgrace. Maybe in the eyes of the BAFTA, E:TW would have deserved it over HOI anyway; I'm not going to argue that. But to leave a game with such a large scope and ambition as Hearts of Iron out over a tower defence game is just stupid.
I'm going to start a Washington Academy of Computer and Console Arts and then give out awards to movies.
Seriously, this is stupid. They're giving the strategy award to a game the designers wouldn't give away free to friends?
I guess we are left to ponder what other, better strategy games came out this year. What about the EU3 expansion?
Plus, we have six nominees, two of which are soccer managing sims and the other is a casual tower defense game? :dizzy2:
I guess that's what happens when film makers give out awards for video games.
CR
The weird thing is, the BAFTA is very prestigious when it comes to movies, yet they made such a dumb choice when it comes to video games.
I wonder if any of the people who nominated the games has actually played them for at least 12 hours each, or did they just watch the nice, shiny promos? The ETW promos look suitably cinematic and epic. Likely the only one they played was PlantsvZombies. You can't get a real feel for a game by playing it for 1.5 hours, not like a movie where you can watch it and be done.
Fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
They probably have too many people who pick the former involved with the latter. Or possibly, not enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
Plants vs Zombies is probably the best one there, though I mentally don't view sports sim productions as games so I can't say about two of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Also, CA is British...
And bleh at all the CoD:MW2 love in that list.
I don't see why HoI3 should have gotten any award o_O Game really isn't that great, and it was just as buggy as ETW post-released until it got patched a few times.
If this is a general BAFTA thread it can stay here. If it's intended to focus mainly on ETW's win then it belongs in Parliament. I shall leave it for now and see which way it heads.
IMO the BAFTAs and other awards are all meaningless. Notice how it's the same few big budget, high profile so-called triple A titles that fill every category? Including games in categories which are barely relevant at all. That says it all. The games in the awards lists are invariably the same limited selection of games which are hyped up from the moment of announcement, are practically guaranteed glowing reviews, and which will sell in the tens and hundreds of thousands.
Perhaps, but Paradox have a very good track record of improving individual games over time (See:Victoria, Crusader Kings etc.). Can't say the same about CA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
Well what does that say about the game industry? Is that good for the industry, and for gamers?Quote:
Originally Posted by frogbeastegg
At least MW2 didn't pick up their Best Game of 2009 award, huh? :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good
In my opinion, Arkham Asylum was a more deserving winner and I'm glad that was the final outcome. :3
I played CoD:MW2 again yesterday and after playing BF:BC2 it just...you get the point.
Uncharted 2 I still want to buy, seems like a triple A title that actually deserves being called that.
Concerning stars liking "triple A" titles, I suppose most of them are casual gamers, they wouldn't know any better. ~;)
ETW, hmm, at least it crashed less often on me than HOI 3, Plants vs Zombies I play on my iPhone, absolutely love how it works on the small device.