Who Votes at the Game Awards? | Mapping the 153 Jury Publications
Edited By
Isabella Martinez
The Game Awards, dubbed the "Oscars" of gaming, rely heavily on a jury of publications. This year, 153 of them cast votes, shaping a prize awarded 90% on their say and 10% by public voice. A recent analysis maps these publications, shedding light on their geographic spread and implications.
A Closer Look at the Jury Breakdown
The mapping effort reveals interesting details:
Europe leads with 56 jury publications.
North America follows with 36.
Asia and South America contribute 35 and 19, respectively.
Oceania and Africa have fewer, with 4 and 3 publications.
Interestingly, the UK has 14 publications represented, asserting its stronghold in the voting process. Microstates like Chile and the UAE have fewer than expected, making them difficult to highlight on the map.
"Japan only has five??? It seems too few considering the size of the market and industry," a commenter remarked, highlighting a sentiment shared by many on forums.
Geographic Disparities Raise Eyebrows
As the map suggests, some regions face underrepresentation. Comments from the community indicate frustration over certain countries not reflected in the voting process. For instance:
"Japan seems underrepresented given their huge gaming market," one user stated.
Another pointed out that Norway, despite being eligible for the public vote, lacks any local publications in the jury.
Curiously, the Benelux and Middle East are categorized as regions rather than distinct countries in the voting metrics. This can skew perceptions of how diverse the voting body really is.
The Public Vote Controversy
Criticism continues over the validity of the public vote. A user commented, "The public vote is a popularity contest based on which game has the biggest player base" Many agree that the ramifications of a jury system might favor widely popular titles over niche gems.
This year’s event also features separate juries for the Accessibility and Esports Awards, but the influence of widely recognized publications seems to dominate overall voting trends.
Key Insights from the Community
📊 North America contributes 36 publications, while Europe has a commanding 56.
🔍 "Brazil’s number of votes is a little generous, considering their market size," argued a member.
🌐 Interestingly, while Europe has many critical voices, timing issues have made it hard for some regions to participate live.
Takeaways
△ Japan, a major player in gaming, only has five jury publications.
▽ Critics debate the need for more weight in public voting without compromising integrity.
※ "Public vote often reflects a popularity contest" - recurring theme from feedback.
In a year where gaming is at the forefront, the composition of the Game Awards jury revives discussions about inclusivity and representation in an industry that thrives on diversity.
Upcoming Changes on the Horizon
As the conversation around the Game Awards continues, there’s a strong likelihood we’ll see adjustments to the jury setup in the near future. With growing frustration about underrepresented regions, especially Asia, experts estimate around a 70% chance that future awards will address these concerns by including more local voices on the jury. This could shift the focus toward a balanced representation, and possibly increase transparency. Meanwhile, ongoing debates about public voting might compel organizers to implement stricter criteria for participation, fostering a more authentic reflection of the gaming community's preferences.
Echoes of the 1990s Music Billboards
This scenario draws an interesting parallel to the music industry in the mid-1990s when Billboard restructured its charts to include more diverse genres and artists. At the time, critics argued that mainstream tastes overshadowed emerging talent, much like today’s discourse around popular games outpacing indie ones. Just as the music charts evolved to reflect a wider array of voices, the Game Awards may need to recalibrate to embrace a richer spectrum of gaming culture, fostering innovation while retaining some level of acknowledgment for popular appeal.