@dipset said in Vote for the forum's Game of the 2010s Decade!:

Without trying to compromise the integrity of our individual lists and what they mean to us, what can we do to avoid splitting the Yakuza vote 6 ways?

Like, let's say you were only going to choose ONE and only one Yakuza game to allow space for another 14 games on your list, which game would you choose?

For me it's very easily Yakuza 0 and that's the one I suggest we back up IF you're only going to choose one Yakuza game.

Tangent: as someone who put all games from multiple franchises in their list (i.e. not doing a "one per series" rule), I can't help but comment here. In the quest to solve one issue (caring about whether too many IPs are falling below the arbitrary threshold of "top 20"), I think people are creating another one by doing "one per series".

Or rather, there's always a trade off, with no way being best. Do you want your list to be an accurate personal ranking? Do you want your list to be a public form of self-expression ("here's the variety of games I felt were best")? Do you want your list to be a strategic vote in order to influence the final result? ("I know X is hugely popular and Y has no chance, so...")

Incidentally, the best theoretical solution to path you are taking is to have everyone submit some kind of list of Yakuza games, either ordered from best to worst or with their personal, subjective scores. Then you can choose a voting algorithm to find the best 1 or 2 candidates, and let everyone know.

An interesting question is: what's the best voting system that would decrease people's desire to do "one per series" in the first place?

@TokyoSlim To be fair, guessing an executive is going to wear a "pale blue or white collared shirt with the top button undone" is like guessing the Pope is going to wear a white robe. It didn't have to be a button down shirt without a jacket, but if it was then almost all of that probability is contained in these combinations.

I got 9 correct too, but way off on tie breaker.

1: Will there be any spoken or on-screen appearance of Master Chief's full name, "John-117" during the presentation?
No

2: The words "World Premiere" will appear on screen MORE than 9 times.
No

3: Will a new Fable be shown?
No

4: Will the word "Batman" be spoken?
No

5: There will be a celebrity presenter. (I will count any real life person that does not work for Microsoft that has a wikipedia page, Tim Schafer does not count)
No

6: Will the price be revealed?
No

7: There will be a self deprecating joke about "showing real gameplay this time". It has to be an attempt at a joke and not an apologetic statement. I will consult joke experts if necessary.
No

8: Will a demo for any of these games shown off in the 1st showcase be shadow dropped during the second showcase? Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Dirt 5, Yakuza: Like a Dragon, Madden NFL 21, Chorus, Scarlet Nexus, Bright Memory Infinite, Call of the Sea, Scorn, Second Extinction, The Ascent, The Medium, and Vampire: The Masquerade-Bloodlines 2.
MUST BE SHADOW DROPPED and not made available earlier in the week!!!
No

9: "Ray Tracing" will be said more than 4 times.
No

10: The game that The Initiative is working on will be announced.
Yes

11: Halo, Forza, AND Gears will all be present. (montages count)
Yes

12: The Xbox Games Showcase will be longer than 75 minutes.
Yes

Tie Breaker: Total number of times the phrase "Game Pass" is spoken aloud.
6

No Gods & Monsters bet?

Will there be a new Nintendo crossover game or partnership? (Mario + Rabbids, Star Fox in Starlink, etc.)
No.

Will Ubisoft acknowledge the recent sexual misconduct accusations in any way during the main show?
No.

Across all videos for Assassin's Creed Valhalla, which version of the main character will be featured the longest (male or female)?
Male character

Will Rayman reveal himself?
No.

Will there be MORE than 20 cannons be fired across all Skull & Bones videos? (so if 10 cannons fire, reload, and fire again, that's 20)
No.

Will a new Far Cry game taking place in Europe be shown?
No.

Will we hear Michael Ironside's voice?
No.

Will there be MORE than 4 separate Tom Clancy titles individually featured on the show? (recap montages don't count)
No.

Will there be MORE than 2 different planets shown across all Beyond Good & Evil 2 videos?
No.

Will a brand new IP be revealed?
Yes.

Will Trackmania be featured for MORE than 3 minutes? (gameplay, trailers, interviews all count)
No.

Will Yves Guillemot wear a shirt or a suit or neither?
Shirt.

Will a new game where you control a car (or any racing vehicle) be revealed?
Yes.

Tie-breaker: How many kills will be shown across all HyperScape videos?
7

I find Stealth Takedowns and Stealthy Alternatives to be increasingly unwelcome design additions. When I see a trailer and can identify a game that includes them, I involuntarily perceive this as a potential knock against the game. Their prevalence represents a (relatively) recent shift in design sensibilities, because the games I'm talking about are not in the "Stealth Genre" and they don't want to sell themselves that way either. Stealth actions have just become a verb to be thoughtlessly included in other types of games. (The stealth genre itself, however, is perfectly enjoyable and escapes my ire.)

Somewhat in jest, I would propose a universal rule: if a game nowadays includes a "stealth option" and a "guns blazing option", then they won't be created equal. The stealthy option is going to be encouraged more, both in terms of actual efficacy and the abstract satisfaction that the game can reward you with. So even though stealth may be optional, it is unwelcome because the game is designed with it in mind. First, all levels and mechanics have to be created so as to allow stealth to take place, perhaps, 50 to 100 percent of the time. Second, the designers have to draw your attention to necessarily details that a stealthy player needs to see/hear at various points. Finally, the combat foundation of the game has to be sufficiently hampered so it doesn't feel "too good" to play that way, where too many players might choose combat exclusively and forget about the stealth. (I'm just being cynical in that last part for my own amusement.)

I recommend people start by unscientifically picking the first 20 games (approx) that really catch your eye from the list, then start sorting those 20 for a while. You'll inevitably feel that some of those picks are iffy in comparison to the rest and/or you'll realize you picked fewer than 20. Then you go back to the big list and rope in a much smaller amount. Now you have 20ish games, and finish sorting them. You could repeat the process again to really make sure you don't want to make a few minor additions or removals, but each additional round is going to matter far less.

Don't get hung up over the games that fall below the arbitrary threshold of "20" or else you will think of yourself as dooming one game or another. Like, imagine as a thought experiment if you had access to your perfect, theoretical internal score for each game. That would make the ranking automatic, but if we also imagine that there were 10 games in your heart of hearts tied at 100/100, 10 that were tied at 99/100 (in the figurative, unknowable sense), and so on then of course the games that are "theoretically" ranked 21, 31, or 51 are going to be virtually no better or worse than the ones at ranks 9 or 19. That example was a bit extreme, but a version of this is just the reality If you are a fan of a lot of games. It's not slight against some especially revered game if you only had it at number 30. Nor is there a reason why you have to view your list as being a project that resolved detectable differences between all those games when the reality might be that many "spots" on your list could be tied between many games and that's just the way it is.

@shoulderguy The 2010s was a good decade for games with 'Odyssey' or 'Kingdom' in their title.

@dipset

Sometimes I almost think to myself that if a studio can't pull of voice acting, scene blocking, and animation to the extent that, say, TW3, TLOU2, GOW2018, Yakuza 6, and other games like those, then don't do VO in your RPG. However, I don't even know if I fully agree with myself on that statement so don't hold me to it.

Yep, I think that way too. There are obvious counter-examples though that I can self-undermine this assertion with, i.e. examples where I've really enjoyed voice acting with little to no associated animation:

• when the VO is coming into your character's ear like a walkie-talkie during normal gameplay (near ubiquitous in first person games nowadays)
• codec scenes like from Metal Gear Solid and RE4
• narration over a cinematic (often the opening cutscene of games)

Games like Star Fox and the flying sections of Kid Icarus: Uprising have both memorable and very frequent voice acting and it wouldn't make sense to add 3D modeled animation during on-rails gameplay even if they wanted it.

Another thought is that somehow Dark Souls pulls off VO very well without having almost any character movement during those interactions. I think it's because those games don't use dialogue very much to begin with, and it's basically just one person talking about something that is usually very disjointed from what the player has been doing recently. This lets the player settle into thinking "well, I guess the whole game world is just mysterious and lonely, and there isn't normalcy like the real world". The other JRPG examples we've been referring to use dialogue very frequently, and want to have much more normal interactions where characters are emoting back and forth and speaking about recent plot events.

@dipset (Didn't see your post when I replied initially). The pantomime'ing is related and almost inseparable, although technically I was referring to the character "cutouts". These cutouts appear as overlays on the screen, and don't exist in any perceivable space even though the regular game screen and its perceivable space is still visible in the center of the screen (it is the latter place would typically have pantomime'ing, although games with an even less detailed art style wouldn't of course).

I'm not a fan of pantomime'ing for the same reason: it has replaced more expressive animation and scripting the character sprites to move around dynamically (think FF6, Super Mario RPG, Chrono Trigger). But pantomimes alone (with no cutouts) don't split your attention at least. Usually they aren't rise-able to me even though they are obviously a knock against the quality. I think the main culprit behind pantomime'ing is voice acting (when the amount of production values can't reach something more like a voice acted cutscene), although since you are professionally involved with stuff like this you'd probably understand what is going on more.