Every December, games news does the same two-step: celebrate what shipped, then sell you the future. In 2025, that rhythm got a twist. The Game Awards delivered the expected fireworks winners, world premieres, and a trailer firehose but the bigger story that kept rippling afterward was about how games are made, who gets credit, and whether generative AI is crossing a line the industry can’t un-cross.
A Game of the Year that felt like a statement
At The Game Awards 2025, Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 dominated, including Game of the Year.
Even without getting into taste (every GOTY is a debate), the result reads like a trend report. Players and juries are rewarding RPGs that look “expensive” in art direction and world-building, but still feel authored crafted, specific, and confident. It’s a counterweight to a year where many big releases leaned on live-service pacing and endless roadmaps.
The show’s other function advertising the next 18 months was equally loud. Polygon’s roundup framed the night as a bounty of new reveals and fresh looks at upcoming releases, including major franchises and new IP. In other words: the pipeline is still full, even as studios publicly struggle behind the curtain (more on that in Article 3).
The reveal machine: trailers as the new storefront
The Game Awards is increasingly less “awards show” and more “interactive retail window.” One recap counted dozens of trailers and highlighted how the night opened with a new Star Wars project and ended with another big reveal classic pacing for keeping viewers locked in.
That matters because trailers now do what magazine covers and retail endcaps used to: they decide what “exists” in the public mind. A good showing at TGA can move wishlists, attract investors, and (quietly) help recruiting. A weak showing can make a game feel like it’s already behind, even if it’s years away.
And in 2025, one of the clearest “we’re back” signals was the Tomb Raider news. TechRadar reported two new projects revealed around TGA, including Tomb Raider: Legacy of Atlantis (described as a remake targeting 2026) and another title in development. Whether you’re excited or skeptical, it’s a reminder that publishers are reaching for brands that can cut through the noise.
Then the conversation flipped: the Indie Game Awards shock
Just as the industry was congratulating itself, a second awards headline detonated: the Indie Game Awards retracted its Game of the Year and Debut awards from Expedition 33 over generative AI use, and reassigned GOTY to Blue Prince.
That decision didn’t just spark discourse it exposed a new reality: “AI policies” are now a competitive and reputational factor, not an internal footnote. The committee’s move was blunt: if AI was used in ways that violate the rulebook, the trophy goes away, even after the spotlight moment.
Game Informer’s coverage of the Indie Game Awards (and the reshuffling of winners) captured the weirdness perfectly: the story became less about who won and more about why the win was undone.
What this means: 2026 will have “AI credits,” not just credits
Here’s the likely outcome: awards and festivals won’t be the only ones setting boundaries. Storefronts, platforms, and publishers will be pushed to define “AI disclosure” the way they define accessibility features or content warnings. The indie scene will feel this first because reputational trust is part of the product. But AAA will follow, because big budgets can’t afford big ambiguity.
We’re probably heading toward a world where:
- Games clearly disclose if generative AI contributed to assets, localization, or marketing.
- Festivals and award shows require submissions to include AI usage breakdowns.
- Developers create “human-made” value propositions the way some studios emphasize “hand-drawn” animation or bespoke music.
The irony is that 2025’s awards season proved two things at once. First, players still crave authored worlds (TGA’s big winners supported that). Second, the industry is about to argue—loudly—over what “authored” even means in the age of generative tools.