Why I Secretly Want Smash Bros to Win the Game Awards

The Game awards are upon us, and of course eager fans, like myself, are voting for who they think should win game of the year.

However, I want chaos. Lots of chaos.

The nominations of game of the year are:

Control (Remedy/505 Games)
Death Stranding (Kojima Productions/SIE)
Super Smash Bros. Ultimate (Bandai-Namco/Sora/Nintendo)
Resident Evil 2 (Capcom/Capcom)
Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice (From Software/Activision)
The Outer Worlds (Obsidian/Private Division)
I feel like certain games get put on a pedestal because they’re “artsy”. Over the last few weeks I’ve seen countless arguments on why Death Stranding is a superior work of art, and if you don’t like it, no matter your reason, then you just don’t understand it, which is infuriating to say the least. Nothing shuts down a dialog more than someone saying your opinion holds no value. It’s annoying and takes a certain amount of arrogance.

Love it or hate it, Death Stranding is very experimental, and I applaud it for that, I really do. But because of that, not everyone will take to it right away. New and refreshing doesn’t automatically make it bad, nor does it make it automatically good.

You see this a lot in the film industry, the artsy-fartsy films tend to get all the accolades, and if you dare say you didn’t like the film or think something else should’ve been nominated, then you’ve committed an unforgivable sin. Because after all, this one big and visionary director made it, or everything in the film was actually a metaphor for something else. This means it’s good, right?

I don’t want Death Stranding or any other game to beard-stroke its way into winning game of the year.

I want people to have an honest conversation about games (and let’s face it, a majority of the people voting have not played all the nominees) where we can honestly evaluate the games’ pro and cons.

Yes, Death Stranding is a groundbreaking game but it’s also extremely slow to start. A person shouldn’t have to wait to around hour 10 for a game to start to get good. That’s quite the time investment.

So that’s why I think Super Smash Bros should win just because it’ll piss a lot of people off.

I’m not saying the other games don’t deserve to win or that even Smash Bros is better. I just know when Smash Bros was announced as a nominee, there was collective scoff and chortle from certain members of the gaming community. All this because it’s not arsty-fartsy, it’s not filled with metaphors or has this grand overarching story.

I feel like the same people that scoffed also forget that yes, while games can be artsy and make you think, they should also be fun and you shouldn’t alienate and discount someone’s opinion because you don’t think they understand all the levels of Kojima’s cleverness when he attached a baby to Norman Reedus’ chest.

I don’t want to see the Game Awards go the way of the Oscars and have nominees not even be considered because they’re not highbrow enough.

I think every nominee deserves to win in one way or another, but I think the underdog of the show is Smash Bros. and that’s why I want it to win. In the words of the joker, “It’s about sending a message.” No game is infallible or immune to criticism, and all games should be seriously considered. Each of those games earned a spot, and the developers worked hard on them. Hideo Kojima is a great director, but so is Masahiro Sakurai, Mikael Kasurinen, Kazunori Kadoi, Yasuhiro Anpo, Leonard Boyarsky, Tim Cain, Hidetaka Miyazaki, and Kazuhiro Hamatani.

I think Smash Bros. winning would be controversial. It’ll cause arguments and anger, but hopefully it’ll start a conversation and make people realize no one’s favorite game is everyone’s favorite game.

Sometimes the best game is just the game people enjoyed the most.