Think about what you just said. I agree with you toally about COD. I think loads of games are better. 

But think about what you said. 

Its your opinion and mine that COD sucks. But I know tonnes of people who think its the best game ever. After all people dont que up for 4 days to get a game they dont and cant live without. Just because we think x game that sells 4 million on release sucks compared to others, it means we are in the minority. Of course advertising plays a part. But again I say advertising does not have people queing on a midnight launch in the millions.

Sales are a fair unbiased way to give GOTY in an awards ceromony IMO. Its what the majority obviously value more than any other game. 

Its fine for a website to post what their personal opinion is on what they view as game of the year, its their website and their opinion. But an official awards ceromony shouuld be about what games the public combined value as GOTY. And sales tell the story whether we like it or not.

Well Awards are designed to be given to the best game (or movie, or music, whatever), not the most popular one. Everyones opinion is subjective, so awards should be based on the quality of the game.

I agree with you, websites should give GOTY awards to games which deserve it, but our definition of what makes a game GOTY worthy is different.

Your arguing that sales alone reflect public opinion, if more people buy it, more people like it. However I don't think that's enough to give a game GOTY, or any recognition.

GOTY should be given to games with the most quality built into them. Yes tons of people like CoD, but how rewarding is the online experience really? How often can you repeat the same task over and over? Just because it sells, doesn't mean it's the best.

GOTY should be given to the best game. If Skyrim offers people the most quality compared to any other game (using it as an example because of the duration of the campaign), then it should win. Games are more then just something we do to pass the time, often times they are experiences that inspire people, or have them think of things in a new light. Story is very important, and unfortunatly, how people percieve the story is based off individual opinions. Sometimes a game with a 10 hour story is far more memorable then a game someone spent 100 hours online with and deserves to be GOTY.

Think about it, if you asked every person who owns every nominee, I think GOTY should go to the game those people argue was the most enjoyable experience, or offers the most content worth playing. If those people own all the games, then clearly they enjoy a variety of game types, not just the single FPS genre, and they should be able to give the least biased opinion on which game offers the most bang for the buck.

I don't think GOTY should ever be based off a scalar quantity. Whether it's the number of sales, or cost of development, there are more to games then just numbers.

I wouldn't put it in the top 5 either.

Gears 3 wasn't in my top 5 for 2011 either, not that it matters.

Then again, Gears 2 along with Resistance 2, was one of my biggest disappointments of 2008 as far as hype and personal anticipation failing to meet expectation.

Sales are not the real issue for GotY and have little business being factored in as a primary criteria otherwise Call of Duty would be the undisputed Game of the Year for four years running, which is safe to say next to no one would argue.

When it comes to big sales for titles, it's not the dedicated gamers (very loosely translated as those who buy more than a few new titles every year) who should have a reasonable opinion on what should be considered as Game of the Year that decide the numbers; it's the general game buying public (only buy a few titles every year) who in most cases, doesn't even care what the Game of the Year is. For games to sell multiple millions of units, a significant percentage of those units are being sold to consumers who don't buy many games to begin with, typically skipping all but the biggest blockbuster titles. To these consumers, buying a copy of a game is hardly a vote for Game of the Year.

To say otherwise would be similar to arguing that Academy Awards should consistently be given out to the films with the highest box office grosses, which again is something next to no one would argue.

For whatever reason Gears 3 wasn't nominated for this particular GotY list, they were for critical reasons alone.

That said, nominating 2 games that weren't even released at the time of their nomination is pretty odd, even though post release, I'd have to agree with both nominations.

How do games released early in the year get in , or better yet how do games released months later get in . this why i don't pay attenion to GT or any of these BS gaming award shows. they blantly show bias.

This is why Wii games of good quality (not exceptional) sell 20 million units plus, but the quality Wii titles typically only sell 5-10 million.

E.g. Wii Fit, New Super Mario Bros (ignore bundles), Wii Sports Resorts (ignore bundles) sold 15-20 million, while Donkey Kong Country Returns, Super Mario Galaxy 1 and 2, Super Smash Bros, and Zelda: Twilight Princess sold 5-10 million.

Same applies with HD console games with GT, Halo, and CoD (mind you all good/great games) selling 7-13 million, and others like inFamous, Heavy Rain, Alan Wake, and Fallout 3 selling 1-3 million each.

PC games are too niche? You do realise the withcher 2 was pirated over 4.5 million times!!! That doesnt sound too niche to me. 

If we look outside the gaming world, no award ceremonies base their awards on sales. They may have a single public opinion award but the major events like the Oscars are based on people within the industry who have informed opinions about their field. For there to be a proper awards system for the games industry both nominations and awards need to be decided by the game developers rather than the public/sales.

But everything your saying is subjective to the opinion of the player. Skyrim to one person might not the most quality. Which leads to my original point sales show what in popular opinion is the most value or quality fo an individual. More people find quality in COD.  While I disagree with their choice of purchase, I cant deny I'm disagreed with also, by the people who choose to wait inline for COD and spend their money on that instead of Skyrim or Battlefield 3. 

See my point is what is more quality and value to me and you ( Skyrim, Halo Anniversary etc ) is not the same quality or value to their opinion or taste. 

So quality and value is all respective of the person.

Hence my original statement salses shold be a factor for what the public deemas GOTY, and what thegeneral public value where their money should go.