The Game Awards are losing their shine — and that matters more than the viewership

There’s a strange feeling watching the biggest night of gaming while also feeling like you’re trapped inside a very expensive ad break. The Game Awards still pulls massive numbers — announcements trend, trailers light up Twitter, and stream counts climb every year — but increasingly the ceremony feels less like a celebration of creators and more like a packaged hour-and-a-half of marketing punctuated by a handful of awards.

This isn’t nostalgia for a purer past so much as an observation about priorities: flashy reveals and celebrity cameos get time and airtime; the people who actually make games rarely do.

Why the glow is dimming

• The ceremony’s format and pacing reward spectacle.
  • Big reveals, music performances, and celebrity presenters generate headlines and clicks. They also fill the runtime while the acceptance speeches and developer moments get a shotgun blast of airtime. Reporters and devs have noted winners being cut off or rushed to make room for trailers and commercials. (theverge.com)
• Marketing dollars shape what the show emphasizes.
  • The event functions as an enormous marketing platform where publishers debut trailers to captive millions. That commercial value naturally pushes awards and earnest developer recognition to the margins. (videogameschronicle.com)
• Credibility and community goodwill are being stretched thin.
  • Programs meant to spotlight diverse, emerging talent — like the Future Class — have reportedly been paused or under-resourced, leaving participants feeling tokenized rather than supported. Meanwhile, the show’s handling of industry-wide crises (mass layoffs, worker concerns, geopolitical issues) has attracted criticism for silence or inconsistency. (theverge.com)
• Popularity ≠ trust.
  • Streaming numbers can climb (and they do), but popularity doesn’t negate feeling sidelined. For many developers, being trotted onstage for 30 seconds between trailers isn’t a win — it’s performative recognition. (en.wikipedia.org)

A brief history so this makes sense

• Geoff Keighley founded The Game Awards in 2014 as a producer-hosted ceremony intended to honor both creators and players while providing a platform for announcements.
• Over the past decade the show grew into one of gaming’s main cultural touchpoints: huge livestream numbers, major reveals, and celebrity moments.
• That growth brought attention — and with it commercial opportunity. As ad-sensitive and trailer-hungry content increased, the balance between honoring craft and selling products began shifting. (theverge.com)

The cost of the imbalance

• Developers lose meaningful recognition.
  • When acceptance speeches are slotted for 20–30 seconds, the work and stories behind a game get flattened into 140-character headlines. That diminishes the ritual of recognition the awards are supposed to provide. (windowscentral.com)
• Important industry conversations get sidelined.
  • The show’s reluctance or inconsistency in addressing labor issues and other systemic problems sends a message: spectacle over substance. That erodes trust, especially among workers the industry depends on. (theverge.com)
• Audiences get a distorted picture of game development.
  • When trailers and celebrity moments dominate, viewers — especially casual ones — are reminded that gaming is about releases and marketing, not the long, collaborative craftsmanship behind games.

Could the show be different? What a better balance might look like

• Give winners room to breathe.
  • More time for developer acceptance speeches and short profiles would humanize creators and their process.
• Limit commercial blocks during award segments.
  • If trailers are essential, structure the show so awards remain a core throughline, not an intermission for ads.
• Reinvest in initiatives like Future Class.
  • Turn programs for emerging creators into sustained mentorship and networking resources, with transparency and measurable outcomes.
• Add editorial accountability.
  • Publish selection and programming rationale: how nominees are chosen, why certain awards are brief, and what trade-offs go into the show's structure.

Quick takeaways

• The Game Awards remain huge in reach but are losing esteem among creators because spectacle often drowns recognition.
• Commercial incentives — reveals, trailers, celebrity moments — warp airtime and priorities.
• Meaningful, sustained support for developers (especially emergent or underrepresented creators) would rebuild credibility.
• Popularity alone isn’t a substitute for trust. The awards must manage both if they want to keep their cultural authority.

My take

I love the idea of a single night where the industry’s creative work is given a spotlight. But magic fades when the spotlight looks like a billboard. The Game Awards still has the muscle to be meaningful: it can drive sales, shine attention on small teams, and uplift careers. If it truly wants to be the industry’s stage rather than its podium for marketing, it needs to stop treating awards as an interruption and start treating developers as the show’s heartbeat.

There’s room for trailers and spectacle — those are fun and important — but not at the expense of the people who make games. If the ceremony can rebalance airtime and resources toward real recognition (and meaningful programs that survive beyond a press cycle), the glitter will feel earned again.

Sources

• The Game Awards are losing their luster — The Verge.
  https://www.theverge.com/games/841710/the-game-awards-2025-preview-geoff-keighley

• “There has to be a balance between reveals and awards,” Geoff Keighley interview — Video Games Chronicle.
  https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/lots-of-games-get-sold-out-of-the-game-awards-there-has-to-be-a-balance-between-reveals-and-awards-keighley-says/

• Developers felt let down by the Game Awards — Windows Central.
  https://www.windowscentral.com/gaming/the-game-awards-2023-let-down-developers-and-viewers-and-we-at-windows-central-have-something-to-say-about-it

• Future Class and industry criticism — The Guardian.
  https://www.theguardian.com/games/2025/nov/11/future-class-gamings-oscars-game-awards

A small update that will save millions of minutes: Google Maps now saves where you parked — on iPhone first

You know that tiny moment of panic after a concert or grocery run: you step out of the car, the lot looks the same from every angle, and your brain suddenly forgets which row, level, or light pole you claimed. Google just smoothed that friction — quietly, neatly, and in a way that will actually matter to everyday drivers.

Google Maps on iPhone can now automatically detect when your drive ends and drop a parked-car pin for you. No manual saving, no photo-taking, no mental note needed. The pin expires or disappears when you start driving again. For people who spend any part of their life hunting for a parked car, that’s a tiny UX miracle. (tomsguide.com)

Why this feels bigger than it sounds

• It replaces a repetitive microtask (save parking spot) with an invisible one. People hate extra steps. Removing them increases satisfaction and adoption.
• The feature works when your phone connects to the car (USB, Bluetooth or CarPlay), so it fits with how most of us already use phones in cars. (tomsguide.com)
• Google preserves privacy-friendly behavior: the pin goes away when you drive again and auto-removal limits clutter (the saved spot lasts up to 48 hours in initial reports). (the-sun.com)

This kind of seamless assistance is exactly the sort of small automation that moves a feature from “nice to have” to “I use it every time.”

A little context: parking features on phones aren’t new — but automation is

Both Apple Maps and Google Maps have supported manually saved parking locations for years. Apple’s iPhone has also long offered a parked-car marker when you disconnect from CarPlay or a car’s Bluetooth, provided certain privacy/location settings are enabled. What’s new here is that Google’s parking save is automatic and, crucially, it’s rolling out first to iPhone users rather than Android. (support.apple.com)

That reversal — a Google feature debuting on iOS first — is notable in itself. It highlights how cross-platform product strategies and device ecosystems have evolved: developers target where the feature will have immediate impact and reach. For end users, that just means the convenience is arriving where they are, sooner. (tomsguide.com)

What drivers should know

• How it triggers: your phone must be connected to the car via USB, Bluetooth, or Apple CarPlay while you drive. When you stop and disconnect, Maps will show a parking pin next time you open it. (tomsguide.com)
• How long it stays: early reports suggest the pin persists up to 48 hours unless you start driving again. (the-sun.com)
• Appearance: Google now supports custom car icons for parking, so instead of a default “P” you might see a colored car icon you previously selected. (tomsguide.com)
• Android parity: Android already has parking reminders but requires manual removal of the icon in many cases; Google hasn’t committed to an Android timeline for automatic pin removal. (tomsguide.com)

Who benefits most

• City drivers juggling street parking and multi-level garages.
• Shoppers, concertgoers, and travelers who park in unfamiliar or large lots.
• People who share cars or switch vehicles — automatic detection reduces human error.
• Fleet drivers and gig workers who frequently stop and restart drives (though corporate device policies may affect behavior).

In short: anyone who’s ever spent extra minutes circling a lot will appreciate the time savings and stress reduction.

Potential privacy and edge-case considerations

• Location settings and permissions still matter. If you’ve tightened up Location Services or “Significant Locations” settings on iPhone, the parked-car marker might not appear reliably. Apple’s Maps similarly depends on those system settings, which illustrates how platform privacy controls shape functionality. (support.apple.com)
• Repeated parking at the same location (home/work) may not trigger a pin, by design, to avoid clutter and false positives. (support.apple.com)
• Shared cars or phones could produce confusing markers if multiple users connect to the same vehicle. Expect a few kinks as the feature hits more users.

My take

This is the kind of product improvement that wins quietly: it doesn’t need a splashy headline, but it measurably improves daily life. Saving a few minutes and removing mild stress across millions of trips compounds into real user delight. Google shipped sensible defaults (auto-removal, limited lifetime) and leaned into existing behaviors (phone–car connections), which makes the feature more likely to “just work.”

I’d like to see Google confirm an Android rollout plan — especially because Android users often park across more device types and car setups — but as a practical matter, iPhone users will enjoy the convenience right away. (macrumors.com)

Quick practical tips

• Check your phone’s location and Maps settings so the feature can run:
  • On iPhone: Settings > Privacy & Security > Location Services and System Services (Significant Locations). Also check Settings > Maps > Show Parked Location. (support.apple.com)
• If you prefer not to have parked pins shown, disable the Maps parked-location option.
• If you customize your “car icon” in Google Maps, watch for that icon to appear at your parking spot — small personalizations like that make the feature feel tailored to you. (tomsguide.com)

Final thoughts

Technology's biggest wins often come from reducing tiny frictions. A saved parking pin is not a paradigm shift, but it’s a thoughtful quality-of-life tweak that will quietly save time and frustration for a huge number of people. If you drive and carry a phone, expect fewer confused walks around parking lots and more time enjoying where you actually meant to be.

Sources

• Google Maps just made it a lot easier to find your car — and it's coming to iPhones first — Tom's Guide
  https://www.tomsguide.com/computing/mobile-apps/google-maps-will-now-automatically-save-your-parking-space-but-theres-a-catch

• Google Maps quietly added this long-overdue feature for drivers — MacRumors
  https://www.macrumors.com/2025/12/10/google-maps-latest-automatic-driving-feature/

• Get directions to your parked car in Maps on iPhone — Apple Support
  https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/get-directions-to-your-parked-car-ipha13ef1c2e/ios

• Motorists receive major mobile upgrade that solves biggest parking nightmare — The Sun (coverage of rollout details)
  https://www.the-sun.com/tech/15624039/mobile-parking-google-maps-app-car/

Notre Dame’s Public Meltdown and the Cost of Burning Bridges

The college-football offseason rarely delivers on drama like a rivalry game — yet here we are: Notre Dame’s athletic director, Pete Bevacqua, publicly calling out the ACC after the Fighting Irish were left out of the 2025 College Football Playoff, and Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark answering back by calling Bevacqua’s actions “egregious.” The exchange is more than headline fodder. It’s a study in modern power dynamics in college sports: brand protection, conference alliances, and the long memory of favors.

Why this row matters more than just pride

• Notre Dame is unique: football independent in practice but tied to the ACC in most sports and scheduling agreements. Its network of relationships matters more than ever in an expanded 12-team playoff world.
• Public finger-pointing isn’t just awkward — it can cost future scheduling, revenue, and political capital when the sport’s power players make decisions about expansion, access, and TV money.
• Brett Yormark’s rebuke highlights an important theme: institutions that benefit from alliances don’t always get to publicly scold their partners without consequences.

What happened (plain and simple)

• After the CFP selection favored Miami over Notre Dame (Miami had the head-to-head win), Pete Bevacqua publicly criticized the ACC, accusing it of undermining Notre Dame’s case by pushing Miami in league messaging and social media.
• Notre Dame officials also signaled the relationship with the ACC had been “strained,” and Bevacqua suggested the league’s actions did “permanent damage.”
• At the Sports Business Journal Intercollegiate Athletics Forum, Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark called Bevacqua’s conduct “egregious” and “totally out of bounds,” noting the ACC had “saved” Notre Dame during the COVID-19 season in 2020 by giving them a full conference schedule and access to the conference championship.
• The episode opened talk of potential reprisals from other athletic directors (scheduling aversion), and renewed speculation about where Notre Dame fits in the evolving conference landscape. (bleacherreport.com)

A closer look at the players and incentives

• Pete Bevacqua (Notre Dame AD)

  • Incentives: Protect Notre Dame’s brand, fight for access to the playoff and its financial upside, and signal to fans and donors that the program will push back.
  • Risk: Alienating conference allies, compromising behind-the-scenes relationships that matter for scheduling and future political support.

• Jim Phillips (ACC commissioner)

  • Incentives: Advocate for all ACC members and preserve the league’s credibility when promoting its teams.
  • Risk: Accusations of favoritism, even if the league was acting within normal advocacy duties.

• Brett Yormark (Big 12 commissioner)

  • Incentives: Defend conference solidarity and discourage public feuds that could destabilize the broader system.
  • Risk: Appearing partisan or discouraging legitimate transparency about selection processes.

Bigger context: governance, memory, and leverage

• College sports is a relationship economy. Conferences and independents trade scheduling, revenue sharing, and access. Publicly criticizing a partner is not just emotional — it’s strategic malpractice if you need that partner again.
• Yormark’s point about the 2020 season is a reminder: favors are remembered. The ACC allowed Notre Dame a 10-game conference slate in COVID-impacted 2020; that accommodation had long-term competitive consequences and built goodwill.
• The CFP’s expanded format and the myriad memorandums and understandings that govern access mean that political capital and perceived fairness matter almost as much as wins and losses.

Key takeaways

• Publicly calling out a partner rarely wins loyalty; it often costs leverage.
• Short-term PR satisfaction (rallying the fanbase) can come with long-term strategic losses (fewer high-quality opponents, strained negotiations).
• Transparency in selection criteria is crucial — but the way institutions air grievances matters just as much as the grievance itself.
• The Notre Dame–ACC–CFP spat is a microcosm of college sports’ transition: bigger stakes, more politics, and less room for emotional outbursts without consequences.

My take

Bevacqua’s frustration is understandable — missing the CFP stings, and athletic directors are tasked with fiercely protecting institutional interests. But stewardship in college athletics requires a balance between defending your program and preserving the relationships that make future success possible. Publicly accusing a conference partner of undermining you burns trust. Yormark’s rebuke isn’t just rhetorical theater; it’s a reminder that in the post-expansion era, relationships are currency. Notre Dame’s leadership needed a different channel: a private, strategic response that preserved options rather than narrowed them.

Sources

• Bleacher Report — Big 12 Commissioner Calls Out Notre Dame AD for 'Egregious' Behavior After CFP Snub
  https://bleacherreport.com/articles/25322272-big-12-commissioner-calls-out-notre-dame-ad-egregious-behavior-after-cfp-snub

• ESPN — Big 12 commissioner: Notre Dame AD's behavior has been 'egregious'
  https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/47261132/big-12-brett-yormark-calls-notre-dame-pete-bevacqua

• CBS Sports — Big 12 commish blasts Notre Dame AD's 'egregious' reaction to College Football Playoff snub
  https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-brett-yormark-notre-dame-acc-pete-bevacqua-college-football-playoff-rankings/amp/