As every year comes to a close, we witness a familiar cycle of traditions like Spotify Wrapped, New Year’s resolutions, and the holiday season transforming our daily lives. Alongside all of this, one staple across cultures and generations is the annual awards season. For gamers, few awards carry as much weight as the Game of the Year Awards, as what many believe to be an unshakable cultural phenomenon. However, be that as it may, Expedition 33 winning was an unexpected–and inevitably controversial–outcome.
While there is a small group of players satisfied with this result, the majority of gamers I’ve spoken to and/or seen on social media strongly disagree with Expedition 33 winning the Game of the Year. Normally, Game of the Year awards are highly anticipated, often between a few seriously close games that are each incredible in their own regard. This year, however, in place of that significance, Expedition 33 won, and for most people wasn’t just undeserving, but virtually unknown.
Historically, we see these awards fuel passionate debate and discussion, and for good reason. For instance, let’s look back to seven years ago, when the best game award was nearly split between God of War (2018) and Red Dead Redemption 2. Both revolutionary games challenged not only the limits of technical game design, combining stunning graphics with creative and long narratives, but how far gaming can be taken as an artform. It was a close decision that has a lingering effect of remembrance almost a decade later.
Today, in contrast to that value, we’re seeing little significance in online communities other than distaste, and long anticipated games like Hollow Knight: Silksong losing to what many consider to be an asset-flipped, turn-based title reminiscent of Raid Shadow Legends. The original Hollow Knight had left an indelible mark on gaming, and Silksong being announced in 2019 had gamers excited for six years. It’s silly to lose to a game that simmered into irrelevancy since its announcement in June 2024. The lineup isn’t the issue either; while there have been more overwhelmingly potent bunches of games, the choices for 2025 were nothing to scoff at.
What makes things worse for those who care about authenticity and the direction of gaming in general is developers later revealed that the developmental phase of Expedition 33 included a fair bit of generative AI placeholder textures, not all of which were removed upon release due to an oversight during the quality assurance process. Users on TikTok like “@thebobcobsequal” also allege that the game has asset-flip elements in models and animations, which was proven true as per their disqualification from the Indie Game Awards. One user on X (Formerly known as Twitter) wrote, “Expedition 33 built their game on a judicious use of marketplace assets and a heavy reliance on UE5’s ingrained technology, just to be clear. I think most people would get tired of games being made this way quite quickly, even though they did a great job.”
I asked fellow journalist and student Jordan Killian’s thoughts on the award going to Expedition 33, to which he said, “the Game Awards need to reconsider their evaluative process and what it means for a game to really be Game of the Year.” The problem isn’t that Expedition 33 is a lesser known game that won, but that it seemingly did so by taking shortcuts and not pushing boundaries. Gaming as a medium in my opinion cannot be treated with such disregard for creativity and craftsmanship. When an award like Game of the Year overlooks games like Expedition 33 using a significant amount of marketplace Unreal Engine assets, or unfinished developmental aspects, it sets a bad precedent for the industry. In fact, I think it’s reasonable to assume that it might encourage developers to believe negligence is rewarded and ultimately impact the direction of their games in a negative light.
