I love how the comments so far are complaining about “clickbait headlines” when in the article he says he doesn’t consider these to be “clickbait” because the definition doesn’t fit these.
That’s probably because the definition is a personal one. In the very literal sense of the word, a headline baiting you into clicking onto it needlessly is clickbait. It baited you into clicking.
And while the author is free to use a very narrow definition, it’s entirely reasonable - and has as far as I can tell become the norm - to define it as any headline where the article only says something that would have trivially fit into the headline to begin with.
So for example, this very article could be better titled “Clickbait has made video game headlines exhausting to read”, and without being longer it would convey the crucial part of information - why is it exhausting?! - without someone having to first open and scan the article. Which, if the article were well-written, they’d still want to do, assuming the subject matter is of interest to them.
And that’s the thing: clickbait precludes being allowed this choice. By not telling you the crucial piece of information, you are forced to open the article (generating ad impressions!) to find out whether you want to read it or not, often wasting time diagonally scanning said article.
I love how this headline, too, doesn’t tell us what it’s about. But fair enough, it’s a good way to poke fun at the clickbait problem.
And frankly, the shitty part is that by now clickbait headlines/titles have become utterly ubiquitous. To the point where most users will no longer even notice, because they’ve become 100% of headlines.
I think for that title to accurately reflect the overall complaint it would be something more like “I Don’t Really Understand What This New Movie Release Was About, And It Wasn’t Good, But I Didn’t Hate It” or to use the lower level comment’s example “You Can Finally Fall for Your Favorite Character In This Dating Sim Based on a Popular Recent Release”.
Where the title is intentionally vague so that you need to read it to even understand what they are talking about. The original titles could be easily summarized as “Opinions on Five Nights At Freddy’s movie” or “Dating Sim based on character from Armored Core 6” just based on the title alone. So if you are aren’t interested in either of those topics, you can easily skip reading.
It's just a celebration of videogames, an event for fun, an average of opinions. There is nothing to fight against or try to prevent. Simply put, if you don't like, don't watch it. To me it's a relaxed day and I like watching that event. Don't ruin it for others, because you hate it.
There are many Award shows and events for Games. What about them? Do you hate them all?
They made Crucible which got some hype, but it flopped hard. For a game that was in development for 6 years, it didnt feel like they playtested it at all.
So much snarky hate from baby coders but can you imagine if you had to be a person and pick up the phone and actually talk to your customers. Or actually manage your own time and stay on task?
Perhaps if you’d get over your density, you’d realise that a lot of developers (myself included) do manage our own time. That take of yours isn’t it. You may want to reconsider.
I like watching it. But i like to see the faves I played throughout the year get recognition and hear a little bit from the Devs when they receive the awards. Announcements are a bonus for me. Plus I prefer to watch things fully even if they had already passed rather than just looking up the winners (in the case of the game awards). It would be like being into a sport but just looking up the results the next morning instead. I prefer to watch the full game unknowing of the outcome, and I take that mentality with me with both award shows (that i care about) and even Nintendo directs and it’s counterparts (which admittedly the game awards is half of)
The main problem with the Steam awards is that they don’t respect the actual release dates. For example, Red Dead Redemption 2, a 2018 game (or a 2019 game if you go by PC only) was named the Steam GOTY in 2020.
Steam also had little to offer in the years that were heavy on Epic exclusives and great games like Kena or Control, resulting in it being hard to think up a nominee.
Moreover, if I remember correctly, they also bar prior winners from their “most supported game” type category, which makes no sense because some games, like Euro Truck Simulator 2, get regular content and technical updates to this day. On the other hand, The Witcher 3 recently won in a category despite having been untouched for years.
Yeah the dates thing is an issue but it is because they take the Steam release of the game. That and they take from the last award to the next one not a calendar year. So RD2 was a 2020 game awards on Steam.
But yeah it feels weird I agree.
The most supported one I understand but the idea is to not have the same game every year even if it has been supported plenty otherwise Terraria would still be there…
The Witcher case I do not know… But the issue there is like any public voted stuff people don’t always vote based on category but they vote what they like. Or maybe they only played that game of the category so they vote that one etc… Some places might play with the numbers around behind the curtains and choose another one if it doesn’t make sense… but that also doesn’t feel right.
Hitman VR won the VR title despite being a bad port to the best of my knowledge. Because people without VR saw it as an option and said that sounds cool then picked it.
Last year's TGA was somewhat exciting because they gave away a bunch of Steam Decks. I normally just see the winners posted the next morning, along with any new game trailers.
I’ve never watched game awards. I don’t even know if there is even a main one. Watches speeches is boring which is why I don’t watch award shows in general.
Only goty I care about is the goty edition where the game releases with all the DLCs bundled at a discount.
aftermath.site
Gorące