Should Expansions get Game of the Year Consideration? Remasters/EEs?

[SniperHF]

Side poll from the GOTY thread, should expansion packs/DLC get consideration for game of the year picks?

How about Enhanced Editions or Remasters?

Click to read more...

 

[Frankie Spankie]

How many expansions are there anymore? The only ones I can think of are The Witcher 3: Blood & Wine and MMO expansion packs, WoW being the big one from this year. And even still, there's so much content in those expansion packs that are all new than plenty of other AAA games that get released every year. These are whole new experiences that are new to this year, so I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to up for consideration of game of the year. Sure, the base of it is the same engine as the base game, but at the same time, that's what a lot of sequels sadly are these days, publishers just don't call them expansions and call them sequels instead.

And for that reason, I'd say remasters shouldn't qualify, because aside from graphical update, bug fixes, and small updates here and there, they're largely the same experience you've already had when the base game was originally released.

 

[awesomo]

Let's be real, B&W is like its very own game haha

 

[Leafs at Knight]

Ehhh I'll say expansions yes, remasters no.

 

[Sarcastic]

Hell no to remasters. Would not consider them eligible unless they added a fair amount of additional content. Graphical upgrades along shouldn't deserve merit.

Indifferent to expansions since I don't think there's a whole lot of releases that we could legitimately call expansions instead of DLC.

 

[RandV]

Yes-no. There's few enough expansions out there that if one is notable then there's no harm in it. That can regulate itself, I wouldn't say the same fore remasters though.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Remasteres nope.

The only time I'd consider it is if it did it like gears of war ue. Where it added to the game (it added a deleted scene from PC). And the multiplayer is overhauled even then I still don't want to see it

Expansions yes. It's just game of the year. And blood and wine is probably better then most actual games of the year. This is just a dumb award show. People have different tastes

I'll play blood and wine years from now. Overwatch? Probably not. And I'm good at overwatch. It's an alright game.

 

[aleshemsky83]

If you can't play it without the original game, no.

Remakes, yes, remasters, no.

Some examples

Blood Dragon, Gat Out of Hell: yes.

Blood and Wine: No.

for Remakes these examples are pretty dated but the MGS1 remake and Resident Evil 1 remake (since remastered for PC) on gamecube I'm perfectly fine with since they're rebuilt from the ground up. They'll be remaking Crash so we'll see how that works. Wipeout games might just be remastered ports they looks significantly better so can't be sure.


Last of Us, no.

 

[Trap Jesus]

I'd usually say no to both, but it's tough to not include something like Blood and Wine. Yes it's built largely off of the actual game, but when you have an entire new open world that rivals other games in terms of time of play and size... I dunno, it's a tough call. Can't make exceptions for only a select few so I'll say no to both.

 

[18Hossa]

If you allow expansions they'll police themselves. Crappy, short, mediocre expansions will never make lists but true top quality basically a new games worth of content will rise to the top.

 

[Diamondillium]

I think you have to say yes to expansions just because of the way MMO expansions work. Legion for example is more content than most full games and is designed to last multiple years.

 

[wingsnut19]

If you allow expansions they'll police themselves. Crappy, short, mediocre expansions will never make lists but true top quality basically a new games worth of content will rise to the top.

This is my thought exactly. You're not really losing anything because if there isn't enough quality content, people aren't going to consider it for awards.

I said no to remasters because its a previously fully developed game without new content and only upgraded visuals. Not really sure where I would stand with complete remakes like FF7R.

 

[Butchered]

Tough question. I'd say DLC should count in the following situations:

If the base game was released this year
If the DLC can be played standalone

I'd also say definitely no to remasters.

 

[weaponomega]

I don't think so. Expansions generally are adding content, but building off an existing game. The game itself has already been released.

 

[FLYLine27*]

NO and NO.

 

[SeidoN]

If you allow expansions they'll police themselves. Crappy, short, mediocre expansions will never make lists but true top quality basically a new games worth of content will rise to the top.

this exactly

 

[Butchered]

I think a decent solution would be to just have a mention of the best DLC. Honestly, Blood and Wine is the only reason this is a discussion, so you can just say Blood and Wine is the best DLC of 2016.

 

[RandV]

I think a decent solution would be to just have a mention of the best DLC. Honestly, Blood and Wine is the only reason this is a discussion, so you can just say Blood and Wine is the best DLC of 2016.

This is one of my big pet peeves, expansions packs aren't really DLC. Expansions were around long before DLC's came into being, and back then they weren't "downloadable content" but rather something you still bought in the store. Technically they are 'DLC' now, but so is everything else you buy from a digital store.

 

[Butchered]

Hate it that the way someone else refers to a piece of digital content can bug you that much.

 

[Big McLargehuge]

I'm against expansion packs being considered for Game of the Year because they're, well, they're expanding on a game that already exists. Unless an expansion pack completely changes the way a game works it's not something I'd ever vote for...this is the one and only chance Civilization VI will have of being GotY in my eyes, even though we all know it won't be a finished product until 2018.

Remasters are an absolute no and frankly there isn't a good argument for them, especially not something like Skyrim that didn't change a thing about the gameplay.

 

[Mikeaveli]

The distinction between a remake and remaster is key here. I agree that Skyrim is a definite no, but games like Pokemon Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire and the Resident Evil 1 remake, as mentioned earlier in this thread, are fair game imo.

 

[RandV]

Hate it that the way someone else refers to a piece of digital content can bug you that much.

I called it a pet peeve, not something I necessarily hate, and there's a very good reason for it.

Let's say about 10 years ago we got The Shivering Isles, what was commonly known as an 'expansion pack', released for the TES: Oblivion. This was the norm on PC and had been around for a long time. Meanwhile on the console, Bethesda was experimenting with something they called "DLC" and released purchasable Horse Armour.

Fast forward to today, with PC gaming getting an injection of influence from consoles, and somehow the expansion packs younger ******** cousin has become the industry norm, both in common practice and in naming convention. Yes proper expansions do get made, but they've become a rarer breed as devs/publishers have become far more interested in peddling their 'horse armors' on us.

So it bugs me to see them sold under the same flag: DLC, when they're not really the same thing and there's already a long standing name for the other.

 

[SniperHF]

Expansion packs were economically questionable even back in the day though, which is also a large part of why they don't exist much anymore. The ability to sell cheap low content DLCs is part but not actually the biggest reason from what I've seen.

 

[The Head Crusher]

Where is the Expansions no remasters yes option?

 

[SniperHF]

Where is the Expansions no remasters yes option?

Seemed kinda illogical to me. If one is going to say a game with a fresh coat of paint should be considered I don't understand the argument for disallowing an expansion that has 20-30hours of brand new content. Both recycle the engine/gameplay mechanics which was the main objection in the other thread so that chief complaint would still exist.


I'm in the NO/NO camp fwiw.