And what of busted port jobs, that still haven't been tended to, or is it okay when a PC port is busted and the console version up for nomination?.

Overwatch certainly had more going for it but I don't see much "art" in most multiplayer games, and certainly not PUBG. They're a different kind of experience, and one that was born long after single player games, so it only makes sense for the industry to focus its praise on the single player games that made it become as prominent as it is today.

Regardless, the merits of single player games and multiplayer games are very different. You can say Overwatch has plenty of good artistic material with its characters and stuff, but in the end the reason why the game was successful is because of how well it created a competitive environment through refining the core gameplay and through balancing and that sort of thing. Sure you can praise the level design or the core gameplay for it as much as you would for single player games, but the way in which the levels are designed and the way in which the core gameplay works is vastly different to that of the best single player games.

Maybe splitting everything is a bit too extreme, but I definitely feel the world would be more at peace if we had a "single player GotY" and a "competitive GotY" or something.

Edit: also another factor towards single player games is that they can have memorable moments and iconic set pieces. Multiplayer games are only memorable for specific experiences a specific player might have had, which makes that pretty much impossible to judge, let alone award, objectively. Of course a good multiplayer game is bound to have a higher likelihood of creating memorable moments, but it's not like a single player game where you can be sure everyone will be talking about that thing, or that people remember the game for that experience.

I'd personally opt for inclusion if there exists a finished and nomination worthy version of a title (regardless to which platform holds that version), but i don't this the alternative position is unreasonable. Anger from the PC or console gamers with the alternative version would be understandable.

Edit: also another factor towards single player games is that they can have memorable moments and iconic set pieces. Multiplayer games are only memorable for specific experiences a specific player might have had, which makes that pretty much impossible to judge, let alone award, objectively. Of course a good multiplayer game is bound to have a higher likelihood of creating memorable moments, but it's not like a single player game where you can be sure everyone will be talking about that thing, or that people remember the game for that experience.

So it becomes a choice of nominating the game anyway, even though the version on PC is still borked and hasn't received a single update?.

Doesn't my comment already act as a response to this? Again though, yes, if there is a finished and nomination worthy version then i'd personally still include it even if there's a poorer alternative (though i wouldn't object to it being a platform specific nomination). As i said though, i don't consider the alternative position unreasonable.

Yes, but this is exactly my point. Both multiplayer and single player games can bring memorable moments, but they do so in largely different ways. Both kinds of games require good level design and a good set of mechanics to be any good, but the way in which those things must be designed is quite different, too.

I'd hardly say I greatly favor and love SP over MP. I'm a somewhat competitive Smash player and take the game considerably seriously (I've traveled to tournaments on at least 3 or 4 occasions), and I love it quite a lot, so clearly I do understand what makes multiplayer games awesome, which is why I feel confidence in stating that they're very different from single player. It isn't to say that time when me and 2 friends (because 1 disconnected) beat a full S+ rank japanese team with a crazy last second comeback in Splatoon wasn't memorable, but rather understanding that that was a moment created by the players who were playing the game, within the realms of what the game engine allows (including disconnecting players I guess) - unlike in a single player game where you'll have memorable moments that have been created by the developers for you to experience. And yes, of course I know single player games can also have memorable moments created by the player (in fact most great games do that), but that's still not really the same thing.

The way you had previously said it didn't entirely make sense, but now you have fully clarified it for me.

I'd have to disagree with your previous point on withholding PuB from the wards then, if that is the case. If an early access title isn't allowed to be nominated, then a busted version of a game shouldn't either.

I find it rather unfair that people, who weren't invested in PuB, don't want it to win anything, yet a busted PC version of Nier is legit fine and okay. I find it rather warped to even remotely think that it's acceptable. It wasn't acceptable when Skyrim released a rather buggy PS3 version, we all know that story.

Personally I don't care too much that they're not split, because I'm fine with single player games dominating the nominations, but I think this is a much better scenario than one where we're mixing MP and SP titles in equal amounts of representation competing for only one GotY award, because that's pitting two very different beasts against one another, each with different kinds of fans and with very different merits to them.