They lost all credibility when they announced MW3 as best shooter above both BF3 and Gears 3.
Do they judge these on quality or is it just a popularity contest?
well to be fair COD was the best on that list.
if they would have had more nominess, should it have won? NO
Killzone 3 should have won this catagory hands down
KZ3 failed from the day it came out of GG's womb. the direction GG took brought the fall on the series.
BF3 should have won
you said yourself you dont have a PS3.
anyway... battlefield had a terrible generic, short campaign. that did the opposite of what Battlefields are known for: Openness to the maps and humor.
i have never liked Battlefield (or bad companies) online, it always seems to slowe and filled with snipers. but i can see how people think its multipayer is great.
but a game with only competative multiplyaer going for it, shouldnt win.
COD had a generic campaign, and you hardly knew who you were playing as, never cared about the characters, or what the hell was going on in the story, but at least it was a fun action packed roller coaster ride.
then COD has great multiplayer, with split screen, great co-op. it has a lot more content.
Killzone 3 should have won though:
it had great action packed campaign, 2x as long as COD, so around 12 hours. you knew you where playing as sev, you knew what was going on in the story, and the graphics were insane. it was an awesome action packed roller coster ride. then it also had split screen co-op, 3D, the best motion control implementation into a FPS yet, and deep and engrossing multiplayer, with tons of level ups and unlocks.
killzone should have one hands down.