As a lifelong gamer who's spent countless hours immersed in virtual worlds, I've always had a love-hate relationship with The Game Awards. Geoff Keighley's annual spectacle draws global attention, but let's be real—it's often a messy affair where subjective tastes clash over who deserves the top honors. I mean, every year, there are titles that get nominated for Game of the Year (GOTY) that leave me scratching my head, wondering how they made the cut while true masterpieces get overlooked. It's not just about quality; it's about timing, hype, and sometimes, pure luck. Over the years, I've compiled my own list of nominees that I believe were undeserving based on my gaming experiences and chats with fellow players. Buckle up, because I'm diving into this rabbit hole, sharing my raw thoughts with a dash of personal flair. 😊
Starting off, I have to mention Black Myth: Wukong. Sure, it's a solid Souls-like with stunning visuals, but come on—it's the lowest-rated nominee ever on Metacritic with an 81 average. That screams 'overhyped' to me. Why nominate it when gems like Astro Bot or Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth were shining brighter? It's not a bad game, but in my book, Dragon's Dogma 2 or Nine Sols deserved that spot more. The press didn't rave about it, and I felt like it coasted on novelty rather than depth. 
Next up, Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft takes the ninth spot for me. Don't get me wrong—I've sunk years into this card game, and it's legendary now. But back in 2014? It was rough around the edges, far from its polished form. Nominating it felt hasty, especially when Wolfenstein: The New Order and Alien: Isolation were breathing innovation into single-player experiences. Why rush to crown it when it hadn't proven its staying power? It's like giving an award to a promising rookie before they've even hit their stride—totally unfair to more established contenders. 
At number eight, Control lands on my list. Remedy's universe is fascinating, but this game alone? It felt unbalanced compared to peers. Devil May Cry 5 nailed combat precision, Outer Wilds offered mind-bending exploration, and Disco Elysium delivered narrative brilliance—yet Control got the nod. I appreciate its ambition, but it wasn't the best in its class. The competition was fierce, and this nomination just highlights how connections can overshadow actual quality. Weirdly, I still replay parts of it, but that doesn't make it GOTY-worthy. 
Then there's God of War at seven—oh boy, this one's controversial. The reboot was groundbreaking with its story and Norse setting, but let's be honest: the open world felt repetitive, combat got stale, and mechanics weren't refined. Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire or Celeste should have been nominated instead. Even Red Dead Redemption 2 was robbed! I know it's highly awarded, but for me, it wasn't a masterpiece until Ragnarök polished it up. It's a case of great ideas needing time to mature, and the nomination felt premature. 
Number six is Call of Duty 2, a real head-scratcher. Nominated in 2005? With Shadow of the Colossus, Jade Empire, and Kingdom Hearts 2 out there? It's baffling—this shooter wasn't even the best in its genre that year. The excess of quality in other games makes this feel like a major oversight. It's one of those moments where you question the committee's taste, like they were stuck in a warzone themselves. 
Moving to five, Assassin's Creed Odyssey makes my list. After Origins rekindled my interest, Odyssey's nomination surprised me—and not in a good way. It's not terrible, but it diluted the series' identity. More isn't always better; it felt bloated while gems like other nominees lost out. I'm mixed on this—some love its scale, but for a GOTY contender, it lacked the sparkle. 
At four, The Outer Worlds—I have a soft spot for Obsidian, but this RPG wasn't their best work. It's fun, sure, but in 2019? It paled against titans and indies alike. Nominating it felt like giving credit for being 'just good,' not extraordinary. A GOTY candidate should aspire to greatness, not mediocrity. Sad to say, but it didn't belong. 
Number three is Overwatch, the multiplayer phenom. Don't get me started—2016 was packed with single-player masterpieces like Dark Souls 3 and Dishonored 2, yet Overwatch won. It's influential, but unavailable now? That fuels my belief it was overrated. So many games could've taken its place, and it feels like a missed opportunity for diversity. 
Then PUBG: Battlegrounds at two—unfinished when nominated! It broke records, but competing against NieR: Automata or Hollow Knight? Those were revolutionary, while PUBG was a buggy early access title. It's sad that such incompleteness overshadowed polished gems. The player count doesn't equate to GOTY merit—period. 
Finally, the top spot: Stray. I still can't fathom this one—a cute cat platformer nominated in 2022? It's not the best indie, let alone GOTY material. Titles like Tunic or Signalis were superior, yet Stray swept awards. Maybe it was the feline charm, but it's a glaring misstep. To me, it's the most undeserving nominee ever—a baffling choice that tarnishes the awards' credibility. 
Reflecting on all this, my mind jumps to the future—2025 is here, and I'm hopeful for a shift. With indie games gaining traction and technology evolving, I dream of a GOTY process that truly honors innovation, not just popularity. Maybe we'll see more underdogs like Pentiment or Norco get recognized, balancing the scales. Personally, I envision a gaming landscape where quality trumps hype, and awards become more inclusive. It's a messy journey, but one I'm excited to witness. Let's keep the conversation going, folks—what are your hot takes? 😅