The Game Awards has really curious picks for their jury, and it has nothing to do with great games.
Explanation
The claim that The Game Awards' jury has "curious picks" and that it "has nothing to do with great games" suggests a level of dissatisfaction with the jury's selection process and outcome. However, the voting structure significantly favors a jury composed of over 100 games media outlets, who hold 90% of the decision-making power. This structure implies that the jury's selections are, in theory, grounded in professional judgment rather than arbitrary choices. While it's plausible that the jury may not consistently align with the gaming community's preferences, the assertion that their selections are unrelated to 'great games' seems to overlook the fact that members of the jury are typically knowledgeable about the industry and informed by a wide range of gaming experiences. Thus, while there can be debate over which games should win or be nominated (potentially reflecting industry bias or trends), to say the jury's choices have nothing to do with great games simplistically dismisses their expertise. In summary, the selections may sometimes appear unexpected or misaligned with public sentiment but are fundamentally tied to the qualities of the games judged by well-informed professionals.
Key Points
- The Game Awards' jury consists of over 100 games media outlets with 90% voting power, emphasizing expert judgment.
- Claims of curious picks indicate possible industry bias or trends rather than random selection.
- While audiences may disagree with the jury's choices, the assertion that these choices are unrelated to great games is an oversimplification.
