Game of the Year Winners That Have Not Stood the Test of Time

October 27, 2026 - 06:16

Winning Game of the Year is supposed to be the ultimate validation. It signals that a title has reached the peak of its medium, that it will be remembered as a landmark release, and that players will still be talking about it years later. Sometimes that holds true. Other times, the honor looks strange in hindsight, and the games that once seemed untouchable now feel dated, clumsy, or simply outclassed by what came after.

One clear example is Dragon Age: Inquisition, which took home top honors in 2014. At the time, its size and ambition impressed critics, but the years have exposed bloated side content, repetitive combat, and a story that drags in places. Returning to it now is a chore for many players who once praised it.

Another is Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor, a 2014 winner at several outlets. Its Nemesis system was genuinely fresh, but the core loop is thin, and the sequel improved nearly everything. Without that novelty, the original feels like a proof of concept rather than a classic.

Then there is Batman: Arkham Knight, a technical showcase in 2015 that has aged poorly on PC and leans heavily on tank battles that players now openly dislike. The list goes on, and each case raises the same question: was the award about lasting quality, or just the hype of the moment?