America’s Dominance in The Game Awards Is Officially Over
The Game Awards’ voting jury has become more internationally balanced, ending the United States’ position as its clear largest national group. The change may affect which games receive recognition, while reflecting a broader shift in the awards’ membership and the countries represented among winners.
The 2026 jury has 17 US outlets, down from 24 in 2024 and 2025, while the UK has risen from 14 to 17 and Brazil has added four outlets to reach 14. Latin American members now make up about 21% of the jury, and mainland Europe accounts for 27%, close to the 28% share of English-language media. Several US mainstream and lifestyle publications have left the jury; since 2020, every Game of the Year winner has come from outside the US, including games from Sweden, Belgium, France and Japan.
- The US and UK each have 17 jury seats in 2026.
- Brazil has grown to 14 seats as Latin American representation rises.
- Every Game of the Year winner since 2020 has been non-American.
New here? Start with this
The Game Awards is an annual event that recognises video games across categories such as game of the year. A jury of games media outlets contributes to choosing the winners, alongside a public vote that has a limited share in some categories.
The jury’s membership reflects where its outlets are based, so changes in its national mix may influence which games and perspectives are represented. The United States used to be its largest national group; the latest figures show more members from the UK, Brazil and other regions.
The awards have recognised games made in several countries, and every game of the year winner since 2020 has come from outside the US. A broader international jury matters because it may affect how games from different markets and audiences are considered.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
A more internationally balanced jury may better reflect the global games industry and the audiences who play its games. Broadening representation can bring more varied critical perspectives into the awards and reduce the influence of any one country’s media, while the record of non-US winners suggests the jury has already recognised work from across the world.
The case against
The awards’ national mix is not, by itself, proof of fairness or better judgement; a shift in membership could change which games are recognised without making the process more representative in other ways. The departure of US publications may also narrow the range of domestic perspectives, and the winners’ countries of origin do not establish that US outlets previously dominated the results.