The Witcher 3 Won Games Of The Year At GDC Awards

The Witcher 3 took home two awards last night at the 16th Annual Game Developers Choice Awards, including the coveted Game of the Year prize. Her Story, after winning big at the IGF Awards hours earlier, captured a further three trophies. Comes see the full list of winners and nominees below.

Game of the Year

Fallout 4

The Witcher 3 – WINNER

Metal Gear Solid V

Bloodborne

Rocket League

Wow, five very worthy contenders there, including RPS’s favourite game of last year. Any one of those games could’ve grabbed the crown in my book, as I’ve sunk ridiculous amounts of hours into each of them, not least CD Projekt Red’s open-world role-player.

Innovation Award

Her Story – WINNER

Super Mario Maker

Undertale

Splatoon

The Beginner’s Guide

Another strong list for a variety of reasons, but Her Story feels like the right choice here. Its brilliant mix of detective work, FMV sequences and masterful puzzling will have folk talking about it for many years to come. Nice to see Undertale getting mentioned here too, though.

Best Debut

Studio Wildcard (ARK: Survival Evolved)

Toby Fox (Undertale)

Moon Studios (Ori and the Blind Forest) – WINNER

Moppin (Downwell)

Steel Crate Games (Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes)

Pip described Ori and the Blind Forest as a “beautiful game” in her review, and she’s exactly right. If you agree, you might want to pop along to EGX Rezzed next month, where Ori animator and designer James Benson will be talking with us alongside Olly Moss about their work together on Firewatch.

Of those nominees, though, Undertale would’ve been my vote, but hats off to Moon Studios nonetheless.

Best Design

Rocket League – WINNER

Metal Gear Solid V

Bloodborne

Fallout 4

Splatoon

Yet another stonking list that could’ve went in any direction. Given Rocket League combines racing and football – two sports many people aren’t all too concerned about – the fact that it’s attracted so many folk to its caged arenas is an amazing feat. And it also has flying.

Best Handheld/Mobile Game

Lara Croft: GO

Fallout Shelter

Downwell

Her Story – WINNER

AlphaBear

Admittedly, I’ve not played all those myself however have been told good things about them all, not least Alphabear. It wasn’t specifically designed for mobile, but testament to Her Story’s design is how well it plays on any device.

Best Visual Art

Ori and the Blind Forest – WINNER

The Witcher 3

Star Wars Battlefront

Bloodborne

Splatoon

This is a tough category because I suppose it depends what you’re looking for. The Witcher 3 is one of the best looking games I’ve ever played, whereas Bloodborne, through its visuals, is one of the most harrowing. Splatoon is lovely and colourful but, again, Ori and the Blind Forest is beautiful.

Best Narrative

Her Story – WINNER

The Witcher 3

Life is Strange

Undertale

The Beginner’s Guide

This I have absolutely no qualms with (I like Her Story, can you tell?). For such a simple premise, Her Story weaves such an intricate narrative beneath its approachable veneer.

Best Audio

Star Wars Battlefront

Ori and the Blind Forest

Everybody’s Gone to the Rapture

Metal Gear Solid V

Crypt of the NecroDancer – WINNER

I first played an early build of Crypt of the Necrodancer way back in 2013 and I genuinely still find myself whistling some of its tunes to this day. Of those on the list, it’d definitely have gotten my nod.

Best Technology

Metal Gear Solid V

The Witcher 3 – WINNER

Star Wars Battlefront

Fallout 4

Just Cause 3

While Venom Snake has better technology at his disposal than Geralt, The Witcher 3 is a better looking game than the Phantom Pain. A worthy winner.

Audience award

Life is Strange – WINNER

Because I wasn’t at the awards, I sadly don’t know which other games were up for this. I like Life is Strange, though, so I’m going to assume it was a worthy winner.

The awards also paid tribute to the late Nintendo president Satoru Iwata with this touching video:

From this site

77 Comments

  1. SMGreer says:

    Can I be a fanny for a moment? I’m still a bit baffled by the endless praise heaped on MGSV. It’s not a bad game by any means but it’s one that is deeply flawed. Even ignoring the unfinished state of it and the lack of narrative pay-off, there’s whole chunks and hours of the game that are just god awful. Rubbish boss fights, repetitive, tedious missions and a complete lack of any kind of finale.

    Was it really still a game of the year contender? I’m not trying to be contrarian or anything but I bounced so hard off the game in the end I was left dumbstruck by its critical praise, given many other games ravaged for the same glaring flaws.

    So is there a reason people are overlooking its huge pile of flaws? Is the core gameplay just SO good, nobody cares about everything else it gets wrong?

    • LennyLeonardo says:

      Yes.

      • SMGreer says:

        Thanks, was worried nobody would let me be a fanny, even for a moment.

    • Anonymous says:

      That’s a lot of ifs/buts/maypes for someone so sure of their opinion. If you have an objection, just own it, confected polite queries just reek of trolling.

      • SMGreer says:

        Sorry, didn’t mean to come across that way at all. I’m just genuinely at a loss. Like there’s stuff about the game that seems really bad to me and yet I never see it brought up in discussions of the game?

        I get there’s obviously subjectivity at play but I mean there’s stuff in MGSV that’s properly, inescapably rubbish.

        • Aerothorn says:

          Given that I have read almost every aspect of MGSV taken apart and critiqued by someone, I’m wondering if maybe you’re just reading the wrong game sites? MGSV certainly had no sacred cows, other than “it has a really really good stealth loop/series of failure states” which I find hard to argue with unless you flat-out don’t like this sort of game.

    • Deano2099 says:

      Probably because most of those flaws are only noticeable in chapter two, which comes after a good 30-50 hours of gaming. Even assuming people got that far, there’s a degree of having got your money’s worth and more by the end of chapter one anyway.

      • SMGreer says:

        True but even a few hours in some warts began to creep in. Jumping in and out of the choppers, with the same agonizing wait time was a big grate after even just a few missions. And I never got the impression the game was actively encouraging me to experiment or improvise? The tranq gun you start with is the most useful weapon in the game. Using anything else is pointless, given the emphasis on staffing motherbase.

        You’re probably right though, that’s all there is to it. Just, “got my money’s worth” doesn’t make it sound like a proper game of the year, you know?

        • Deano2099 says:

          It depends how you play – I found the side-ops do encourage you to experiment, as you’re not penalised for a lack of stealth. Plus there’s the way the enemy adapt to your tactics – start wearing helmets etc.

          I do find the chopper thing annoying if you do it every single side-op, but then realised you’re meant to roam the open world doing the side-ops and driving/horsing between locations rather than hopping back in the chopper every time.

          Chapter two is messy, but then arguably if the game had just been chapter one, no-one would have really minded. Having extra unfinished, not as good content… should it bring it down? It’s arguable I guess.

        • gpown says:

          I agree, at least on the bossfights and tranq gun.

          There is a whole metagame of enemies adapting to your tactics and you sending troops on missions to counter that, but it just never has any effect on your tactics. A silenced tranq rifle is a no-risk, all-reward option. No consequences for missing a shot (a missed live ammo shot will alert guards), no consequences for not taking someone down in one shot (scratches his wound until he falls asleep), barely any consequences if they discover someone asleep.

          You realise that when you finish chapter 1 and play the first Subsistence mission. Suddenly you actually have to ENGAGE with the game’s systems, not just circumvent them with a single weapon.

        • J. Cosmo Cohen says:

          Just a quick tip: you can go directly into the chopper from the pause menu. No need to wait for it. Took me over 30 hours to realize this.

    • Synesthesia says:

      I think it’s a sort of fuck you to konami? I have no doubts that if kojima had been allowed to finish the game he’s been making for over 20 years, it would’ve won GOTY. The first act is flawless.

    • KenTWOu says:

      My guess, reviewers didn’t play the 2nd act or didn’t finish it, so they didn’t find it or the whole game tedious and boring. Because they played the game during relatively short review event. Their initial high scores supported the hype and influenced others.

  2. Troubletcat says:

    There can be no other choice than The Witcher 3. Last year had lots of amazing game releases, but The Witcher 3 is probably game of the decade so far.

    • Germansuplex says:

      Amen.

    • aunshi says:

      Agreed

    • Anonymous says:

      I’m looking forward to trying it. Held off because it’s given my current GFX card sleepless nights and panic attacks. But that’s soon to be no longer an issue.

    • deadlybydsgn says:

      While I enjoyed the first two games, The Witcher 3 left one of the biggest impressions a game has ever made on me.

      2015 was a busy year with a new job, many new responsibilities, and my gaming time being more limited than in years past. My Dota 2 obsession had to be toned back, and eventually came to a stop after 1,100+ hours. GTA V was fun for a bit, but failed to really capture my attention on a serious level.

      Despite all of that, as soon as I had the time to begin TW3, I was hooked. The music had very little of the past games’ themes, but had a wondrous (yet gritty) quality of its own. The visuals as I rode through White Orchard were captivating, with the winds howling, trees and lake tossing, all while the sunset winked behind an evening storm. The engine and art assets brought Geralt’s world to life, and the facial animations melded seamlessly with the top notch voice acting. (top. notch.)

      All of that’s to say the game had me entranced on a setting and mechanical way even before leaving the prologue area. Once Yen showed up and more characters came out of the woodwork, it became transcendent for me. Because of said year’s business, I didn’t finish the main quest until late October. That gave the game time to seep into my mental margins, cultivating a feeling of ‘at home’ in its digital space, and truly becoming my game of the year.

      In all honesty, my gaming felt a bit depressed after I finished the game. Every other title felt a bit hollow. After delaying Hearts of Stone to manage the gap between expansions, returning to the game to start it felt like a digital homecoming.

      Yes, it has some flaws, but that’s like saying people have freckles. While it’s possible that the game could bounce off some players as “not their thing,” I really believe this title is a work of art. It easily placed itself into my top games of all time, ranking with all my best experiences from gaming in the past ~25 years or so. (started at age 8 or 9)

      As a cherry on top, CDProjekt Red continue to prove themselves as one of the PC platform’s most invested and responsive developers. While it will be bittersweet to complete Blood & Wine when it releases this year, CDPR have me hopeful about both Cyberpunk 2077 and their future as a developer.

      • Troubletcat says:

        This is similar to how I feel about it. With the power of Nostalgia on the side of games like BG/BG2 and Deus Ex, and the fact that I’m no longer a kid like I was when I played those games, I kind of figured no game would ever make me feel the kind of wonder those classics did again.

        TW3 proved that to be incorrect.

      • Ivan says:

        Don’t have much to contribute here but wanted to chime in that I agree wholeheartedly.

        To me, at least so far, it’s the apotheosis of gaming and I don’t really even want to play other games after it because it was so good. So I’ve been making myself suffer in Long War because everything else feels kind of lame after finishing TW3.

      • Flatley says:

        I concur. We had our son in October (already have a 2-year old daughter) and I had been working my way through Witcher 3 since Christmas; it’s been the game to “get me through” his infancy — Xenonauts was that game for my daughter, incidentally. Anyway, the wife and kids were out of town last weekend so I embarked on a whirlwind binge section and finally finished the game.

        I really can’t remember a game that I cared about so much. I think it would have to be Morrowind, though obviously in a different way — Morrowind was more about this fantastic world; Witcher is more about the characters and the choices you make, along with the general bleakness and “realism” of the setting. It’s awfully unsettling to be walking around Novigrad in the midst of the Trump campaign. CD Projekt has a different viewpoint on the world than I do from the US, but certain aspects of human behavior are universal.

        For some reason, once I finished the game and respawned in Kaer Morhen, I felt compelled to take a screenshot and save it before shutting down. I know I can’t go back anytime soon, as the game just ate up too much of my free time and contributed to lots of general sleeplessness, so I guess I needed a little extra way of saying “goodbye” to the world. That was only a few days ago so I’m still in the midst of my post-Witcher funk, not really wanting or knowing what to play next. I’ll get around to The Witness or XCOM 2 eventually, but not yet.

        What a game.

      • Murdock says:

        Perfect words, my friend. Just, a simple perfect description about this game.

    • Premium User Badge

      gritz says:

      Agreed. It was pretty frustrating to see how it was treated by RPS at the end of last year, so I’m glad to see it cleaning up elsewhere.

      • ACE454 says:

        Agree. Starting to disagree more and more with what is written here on RPS.

      • Premium User Badge

        zigguratvertigo says:

        Yes, definitely this. Someone else gives it game of the year but RPS wouldn’t give it game of the month and came to the conclusion that Dark Souls was a better RPG. ‘Objectively wrong’ is an overused expression, but I’m not sure it’s unwarranted here.

    • Smaug says:

      Completely agreed.

    • dungeoncrawl says:

      When I get this for my PC, I play with mouse and keyboard or do I need to invest in a gamepad? That’s been my only holdback is that I’m a mouse and keyboard guy and TW1 and TW2 were un-freaking-playable with mouse-keyboard.

      • deadlybydsgn says:

        I played all 3 with kb&m and didn’t find them to be awkward. If you do, then the good news is that 3 is supposed to be the most gamepad-friendly of the bunch.

        Upon hearing 2 was supposed to be doable with a gamepad, I tried it. I hated it, but that’s my dislike of how stiff and “trapped” I feel when not using a mouse. It’s a great game, either way, so give it a whirl!

        • dungeoncrawl says:

          For me, I couldn’t get out of that first gated town where you were taking part in some type of contest where 3 people would take turns coming at you. It was clearly training to familiarize you with the controls. There was some timing required for something that was required for me to go to the next part of the tutorial (reposte maybe?). I never could get it and never made it past that. I googled and others were having the same problem. I chalked it up to “it guess I need a gamepad of some kind”. I hear TW2 was great but….

          • deadlybydsgn says:

            You mean the arena? I beat the game and never really liked that part.

            The controls work better for the normal game, I think. Either way, I really think the kb&m work fine on the whole, and TW3 is the most streamlined of the bunch. GoG tends to put it on salfe for 50% off on holidays, and chances are one of the solutions will work well enough for you.

  3. Germansuplex says:

    Good to see Witcher 3 take the trophy, but I’m legitimately baffled by Fallout 4’s nomination. I endured about 20 hours of its soul-crushing mediocrity before de-installing it.

    • Troubletcat says:

      I really wish I’d refunded Fallout 4 rather than forcing myself to play 10 hours of it…

      But I understand why it was nominated – it WAS hugely successful and largely very well-reviewed. There’s no accounting for taste, I guess.

    • Henson says:

      The thing about Bethesda games is that they all have their ‘honeymoon’ period where the game feels great, and after which you start to see the strings holding up the cardboard cutouts the game is made from. For a game like Skyrim, that period was long enough to legitimately call it a great game.

      I’m gathering the honeymoon period for Fallout 4 is not nearly as long. But since Bethesda games release so late in the year, it might be easier for the press, who play lots and lots of games, to overlook the problem of longevity.

      • fish99 says:

        If there was a honeymoon period with Bethesda games then Fallout 4 would currently be held in higher esteem than Skyrim, but it isn’t, and I don’t think most peoples opinion of Skyrim has really changed that much since launch.

  4. Antongranis says:

    Wow, People really like W3. As someone Who dissliked W2, is this sametinget for me? Is it just more of The same?

    • SMGreer says:

      It’s in the same vein obviously but it’s pretty much as big a leap in quality/design as the 2nd was to the 1st.

      You still do a lot of the same things ultimately, it’s just all those things are now heaps better. Combat, alchemy, leveling up, quests, writing…everything is just vastly improved.

      If you strongly disliked the 2nd game I doubt 3 will win you over but it is hands down a massively better game. As has been said elsewhere, probably one of the single best RPGs in years.

      • Antongranis says:

        Thanks! Being a fan of bethesda-games, W2 was a very jarring game for me. It was so guided. You were forced to use swords, for instance. Not that i cant see The appeal though!

        • deadlybydsgn says:

          If being forced to use swords bother you, then that certainly doesn’t change from 2 to 3. But hey, you’re playing a Witcher, after all, as opposed to making a blank slate RPG character.

          Witcher 1 and 2 are much more guided experiences, essentially containing Geralt’s (and the player’s) experience into distinct chapters. While it did not bother me, I can understand your angle.

          Witcher 3 takes a different approach, and you might be pleasantly surprised with how incredibly open it is by comparison. After the opening area, the next (and possibly largest) portion of the main quest is open to be done in any order you wish. There will be difficulties in doing it out of order in terms of enemy difficulty, but it’s doable. It walks a line between Main Quest urgency versus Side Quests versus Exploration that Bethesda could learn from.

    • Troubletcat says:

      I’m finding it hard to reply to this without fanboying everywhere since as I said above I think The Witcher 3 is probably the best game released this decade.

      I got about 1/3rd of the way through W2 before getting bored. After 130 hours of W3 (my first playthrough, although there’s a fair bit of stuff I didn’t do…) I just wanted more.

      If you’re an RPG fan it’s absolutely essential. I wouldn’t say that the first or second games were.

    • adwodon says:

      Honestly depends what you didn’t like but I wasn’t enamored with Witcher 2 but 3 is probably one of my favourite games of all time.

      The combat is no souls game but its a big step up from 2, much more fluid and interesting, the characters are great, the story is less boring and the world so much richer for being open.

      3 has its flaws, some very big flaws too, but for a game of such massive scope its one of the best of its class, I think it was SuperBunnyhop who described it as how you imagined RPGs would be in 2015 when you played games like Baldurs Gate 2 as a kid.

      I almost bounced off it too, one of the bigger flaws is that they borrow a bit of the ubisoft “fill the map with shit” ethos and if you try and collect-em-all you will suffer so my advise is to turn off a bunch of the hud, ignore pointless shit and just enjoy the game for what its best at, story, world and characters. Exploration should be done for explorations sake, not to check off something from your map.

      Took me over 100 hours over several months to complete and normally after that time a games sheen has worn off for me, but since then I’ve read all but one of the books and am secretly hoping for a dry spell so I’ve got a good excuse to go back and play it all again. The DLC is basically a distilled version of all the best bits too, worth every penny.

      • Antongranis says:

        I have heard nothing but praise, but that was also the reason i bought W2, so You can understand my hesitation. To which extent can i make geralt my own?

        • Paul says:

          You can choose how to respond to various events, make various choices, but they all fit into what would/could Geralt plausibly do, for the most part.You can choose what skills to focus on and experiment, you can choose what armor to wear, and most importantly, you can choose what haircut to wear and whether you want a beard or not.
          But yes, you are playing Geralt, legendary character with a long history behind him. Kinda like how in Max Payne you are playing Max Payne and cannot use swords or whatever.

          • Antongranis says:

            Sort of masseffect-ish? Im down with that.

            On a sidenote, i am very happy bethesda-games are getting some competition! That is good for just about everyone, including beth-fans like me

          • FriendlyFire says:

            More restricted than Mass Effect I’d say. Shepard was much more defined than, say, Dragon Age’s “The Warden”, but he remained somewhat of a blank slate you could put your spin on (good vs bad, lots of possible demeanors, etc.).

            Geralt is a very clearly defined character with many attributes and characteristics you cannot change. You can choose to be sassier or more distant and so on, but you can’t fundamentally change the character the way Shepard could be changed — for instance, Geralt will always remain a pretty good person, he’ll always be pretty gruff, and he’ll always not want to get involved in politics but end up doing so anyway.

        • derbefrier says:

          you cant.

          • Antongranis says:

            I guess this game is not for me then. If i am going to spend dozens of hours with a character, i want he/she to be “mine”. Im sure its a great game, but maybe not for me.

      • lokimotive says:

        Yeah, it’s probably a good caveat to say don’t even try to complete all of the side things noted on your map. The Witcher 3 is probably the only game I’ve played that actively discourages you from completing everything. Once you get to higher levels, you find that doing side quests from earlier in the game just isn’t worth it. Experience points are scaled to how close to the recommended level you are, so if you complete, say, a level 12 quest at level 24, you may only get 1 or 2 experience points.

        I actually really enjoy this aspect of the game, as it encourages you to make your own way through the world naturally, occasionally doing some side quests, but not bothering with others.

        • Germansuplex says:

          I respectfully disagree here. Sure, some side quests will not give significant XP or loot, but 90% of them are worth it for the story and presentation. I’ve 270 hours on my Witcher 3 clock (two and a half playthroughs) yet still discover new stuff.

    • Premium User Badge

      Qazinsky says:

      As someone that bounced off both the first and second game, I enjoyed the third more. I am not as over the top enamoured with it as some are, but it was good.

      You mention that you like Bethesda games and if it is the free to explore in any direction part you like, then Witcher 3 is a big step forward from the first two. You are usually in an area but apart from the starter area, the others are quite huge and lets you run away and explore places and do side missions as much as you want.

      As for forced to use swords, you’re kinda forced to do that in Witcher 3 too. There are some maces and axes but they can’t have creatureslaying oils applied to them. Essentially, it depends on what difficulty you play at and/or how good you are to compensate for no oils. Even then, with bad luck with drops, you might be forced to use a five level higher sword to stay competitive.

    • derbefrier says:

      if you didnt like W2 you wont like W3. take it from someone in the same position as you and took the risk anyway. All the praise i saw this game get made me curious so i took the plunge. it is better than W2 in my opinion but still a dull and bland expirience as far as gameplay mechanics go. I thought the story wasnt that great either ( or rather just your average video game story) so yeah dont do it.

    • Darth Gangrel says:

      “is this sametinget for me?” No, this is sametinget: link to sv.wikipedia.org (English version available).

      On topic, I also disliked TW2, but that’s because I expected it to be more like TW1, but instead it took away several things I loved about TW1 (music, fighting styles, potion duration, etc.) and added stuff meant to appease the console crowd.

      Even with that said, it’s far better than many other games and I did like it better the second time around. Expectations – they really mess with your mind.

      • Antongranis says:

        That is The swedish auto-correct Messing with me, sorry!

        • Darth Gangrel says:

          I don’t suppose you write that much about things concerning sametinget, do you? It’s weird how autocorrect chooses something so random. The Lord and autocorrect works in mysterious ways.

          • Cyrus says:

            Sametinget? That is one of the more stranger things to be named here..lol

  5. amateurviking says:

    FINE I WILL PLAY IT FINE.

    In all seriousness I ploughed* through both the preceding Witchers in January in order to play this but then got all Witchered out and I went and did some other stuff. I want to be a bit more circumspect with 3, but initially I was kind of turned off by the inelegant way you discover ‘things to do’. I felt like I was just hoovering up question marks on the map without really having any reason to other than the fact that they were there. Turns out I really need a good framing device for my ubi-style icon consumption.

    *Plopped them both down to ‘easy’ and had a blast. Top fun.

    • Premium User Badge

      gritz says:

      Yeah, playing through two 40+ hour games in a series just to prepare for a 120+ hour game is definitely going to burn anyone out.

    • Paul says:

      It is very important to disable the points of interest markers. Them being enabled by default is a mistake on CDP’s part, although I understand why they did it. If you disable them and explore naturally, it is more enjoyable.

      • Premium User Badge

        Qazinsky says:

        I can totally understand why they leave quest markers and prompts for everything on, the players that need them the most (ie new, inexperienced players, not trying to insinute that using those things makes you a ‘casual’ or whatever kids call each other these days) are usually the least likely to go in and fiddle under Options.

    • Troubletcat says:

      As with most good RPGs, you should turn off as many immersion-breaking HUD distractions as possible for the best experience.

    • kalniel says:

      Thought you meant something else by ‘ploughed’ for a moment there…

  6. Laurentius says:

    W3 is a great game and I especially loved Heart of Stone DLC but game has suprising flaws. For all its abmition, it’s kind of sad that CDPR couldn’t handle them and it doens’t bound well for futre of AAA game desgins. Marrying open world with strong narrative, they said they can mange that but it’s simply not there. Leveling and loot is very bad, leveling system is the worst from all three games and loot is very boring.

    • deadlybydsgn says:

      “…leveling and loot are very bad…”

      The way I kept loot interesting was to not craft any weapons. It left me hoping to find a better sword every few levels. I realize that won’t sound like an option to some players, though.

      I self-imposed another way to fix leveling while going through the main quest, too: just keep skill points unspent. Yeah, it’s a bit silly, but it kept me from being OP when I was doing too well on Death March.

      I’m still only part of the way through Hearts of Stone, but it’s nice to see higher difficulty content. Part of that surely has to do with my 4 month hiatus from the game, though. I suspect it’ll get easier once I get used to the combat again.

  7. DrollRemark says:

    Ok, I’m going to preface this by saying that I love Her Story, and have sold it to many people as something truly different in games, but I can not get on board with “Best Narrative.”

    “Innovation Award?” Absolutely.

    “Best Mechanic To Make Playing Through a Story Truly Feel Different To Reading One?” Yes yes yes.

    But after you unpick all the mechanics, the actual story is (whisper it) a bit rubbish. Going to avoid complaining too much so as not to give away spoilers (you should still definitely play this game, if you’re reading it and you haven’t), but it has a massive dose of ridiculousness in it that kind of ruins the story. Some people have tried to dress that up as deliberate ambiguity, but personally I just think that was a cop out to excuse its weaknesses.

    • lokimotive says:

      I one hundred percent agree with this. The story is absolutely bananas and not in a good way. Pure low-grade pulp.

    • anHorse says:

      Yeah, I just said this on the IGF article.

      The actual narrative of Her Story is atrocious, and it exists in a game with a focus on the real (believable interface, real actress) which makes the batshit (in a bad way) story hurt the game even more.

      It’s weird how the likes of Life is Strange got so much shit from sections of the gaming press for minor transgressions whilst Her Story got next to no actual criticism even though it’s a type of story that people love to complain about

    • Arkayjiya says:

      You’re talking about “best story” award, this is “best narrative”. Narrative is mostly about structure and presentation, it’s the syntax to the story’s semantic. Even if the quality of the story probably matters to some degree, it shouldn’t be the main factor.

      • anHorse says:

        Narrative literally means story buddy

        That’s the definition of the word and is explicitly how it’s used here

        • froz says:

          I’m not native speaker, but dictionaries disagree with you. The word has both meanings.

          Macmillandictionary.com:

          [countable] a story, or an account of something that has happened

          “a fast-moving first-person narrative”
          “At this point in her narrative, Lou suddenly paused.”

          a.
          [uncountable] the process, methods, or skills involved in telling a story

          “We have been working on different aspects of narrative.”
          “traditional narrative structures”

          Dictionary.com:

          noun
          1.
          a story or account of events, experiences, or the like, whether true or fictitious.
          2.
          a book, literary work, etc., containing such a story.
          3.
          the art, technique, or process of narrating, or of telling a story:
          Somerset Maugham was a master of narrative.

        • KenTWOu says:

          Nope. Narrative means the way you tell your story.

    • Smaug says:

      I feel like much of the postmodernist ambiguous or non-chronological storytelling is just lazy mashup of disjointed pieces of script.

  8. ohminus says:

    Fallout 4 nominated for Best Design? Seriously?

    • ZippyLemon says:

      With Gamebryo still being nominated for best technology D:

      I get the sales and the general acclaim, but it’s annoying to see BGS lauded for every release when they consistently fail to improve the parts of their games that suck. Clunky movement, boring combat, continually streamlined systems… forget about compelling stories. GOTY? Best Design? Best Technology?

  9. Fungaroo says:

    Maybe it’s because I played Gone Home shortly before, but am I the only person who thinks Life is Strange isn’t all that great?

    • anHorse says:

      It’s intermittently great

      The chapters done by the first team are brilliant but the chapters done by another team (2 and 4) are both bobbins

  10. Hidoshi says:

    Am I the only one who thinks it’s strange that Undertale wasn’t mentioned in the “Best Audio”?
    I don’t really like the game, but at least once a week I just start the game to listen to the awesome soundtracks (it’s not on Spotify anymore…)