One could argue that Fallout doesn't deserve it any more than MGS4 (though, honestly, I would really have to swallow hard before giving MGS GotY). Both are good, but flawed, games.

Most improved effort from an aimless developer definitely goes to Fallout, though.

What I find most interesting is their choice to put Left4Dead on the list.

Anybody who nominates GTAIV as GotY deserves a kick in the nuts.

That leaves the one game I haven't had enough time with... LBP. Personally, I think it's definitely the most interesting title on the list and deserves at least a few votes, if not the title.

IGN will pick Fallout as game of the year.

Personally I don't necessarily think Fallout 3 "deserves" it either, but out of that list I think I enjoyed playing that one the most. But there is a whole slew of games I would pick for MY Game of the Year over those listed, and also ones I think deserve it more than those listed. Like Valkyria Chronicles. That damn thing needs a trophy now.

I'd say MGS4. The story was epic all the way through. Fallout 3... disappointed me with its ending unlike MGS4. I love FO3 but that ending had me say "WTF is this?"

Okay, ditto. I may have enjoyed L4D more but I didn't get enough time with it and frankly, the game is a little limited to nominate it for GotY in my book. I also might pick Fallout if we're going for "game I enjoyed most", though Gears 2 would be way up there, too.

This is why these lists are bullshit. I can watch Star Wars 500 times (and I have) but I would never call it a "better" film than 2001, A Clockwork Orange, or Full Metal Jacket.

There are things you enjoy and things you appreciate. They don't have to be one in the same.

yeah, I think it may end up being Fallout 3. Looking at the 360 editors list only one of them had MGS4 on their list (at number 7) but three had Fallout 3 on their list. Other than the PS3 team MGS4 doesn't seem to be getting love from the other editors involved in the voting process. Same for LBP. Fallout 3 seems to be getting the most love, but this is at a glance. I haven't actually tallied anything up.

Yeah, that's one of the many problems with the young fledgeling industry and it's critics. "Game Of The Year" doesn't actually have any meaning, there is no particular criteria for it's being chosen. One person may vote their game of the year based on it being an incredible technical achievement, one may vote for it because they think it advanced videogames the most as an artform, one may vote on it based on which it had the most fun playing, another may vote on one just to spite fanboys, or because it had poodles and he votes for anything with poodles. But there isn't any particular criteria for what determines what "game of the year" means other than this particular group happened to put one on their list of games more than another. Meh. But who doesn't love the juicy catfights that ensue!

So basically what IGN is saying is "multiplat FTW".

A rather disingenuous method of voting.

Since we're all stuck on one console, let's only vote for what we know!

Looking at their respective lists, it's pretty true. Each voted along party lines just about. Not entirely but you could pick out which editor belongs to which system by looking at a list.

That's goign to happen no matter what. GOTY awards are still somewhat political inside of teams. The Wii team knows they've got no chance and the 360 team may not like MGS4 that much, and everybody liked Fallout 3 so that's probably going to get the body of votes from every team that isn't writing Sony articles.