Hey now. Some of us are just enjoying making fun of them. 

*looks at comment sections across the internet*

I can’t help but think they’ve just with opened themselves us to mockery simply by calling it remaster.

You misunderstand what I’m saying. Minds change over time, they judge their favourites across an entire year. They arnt looking at metacritic and nominating based on what got the highest scores and those scores are what we *tend* to mean when we say critical reception.

Maybe if one of the older editors were in charge they would but they fired those people to make room for extra Call Of Duty articles.

I'd say be careful trying too hard to expand into other mediums, even EAs huge coffers and beloved properties like Dead Space couldn't really manage it. 

Not sure why you think it’s absurd. I dont think I’ve ever heard “we strongly take into consideration the results on rotten tomatoes”, however I have heard about people literally basing votes on the pre screenings that they could actually be bothered to watch.

Im still a tad confused. After all if they tweaked the dialogue a little I would have thought it would have been a sign that the gameplay could have been tweaked too and if I spent 60 bucks I’d want to find out what that was.

You’re mentioning metacritic a lot and I’m trying to explain that neither the Oscars nor the TGAs are looking at critical reviews to decide who to nominate. I dont think a poorly reviewed game has won an award either? I think you’d have to back to the Spike awards for that and they were an entirely different beast, so…

Randomised loot, crafting, levelling, numbers coming out of the bad guys heads repeating quests, damage sponge enemies.

You’d be suprised how many titles are decided right at the end. It’s all decided by marketing, not really the guy who sticks it at the top of his word document script.

I dont think many people class Advance Wars as an RPG And Mario RPG hasn’t been released yet so I think that explains that.

They are nominated on by people who work in the industry. The Oscars also work similarly to this. Critical reception has never had anything to do with either of those award shows.

Did you really stop playing a game because of a single bad joke?

Im guessing the people who do the nominations wernt the people who reviewed Forza. Or maybe after playing it for anhundred hours it didn't leave as good an impression as it did when you started. 

Depends what you wanted from it, I liked the stories and questing it told and because I had no interest in building and exploring I mostly ignored it so it didn’t harm my experience. So what I did play I really enjoyed. 

I mean that could be it. But it also could be that it was nothing exceptional and there’s not really anyone that thinks it was one of the best games of the year.

Being “objectively” better doesnt matter because these are always popularity contests no matter how hard we try, more people play AAA than indie by their nature so are more likely to win.

Gotham Knights was a story driven action adventure (a story I quite enjoyed myself) that didn’t stop the live service gameplay from sucking.

I think it’s more to do with the bad campaign and the general rushed feeling to be honest.