I was writing up a list of game of the year contenders for 2007 a few days ago. The major releases have come and gone, left in their wake are waves of 9’s and 10’s to be picked at and bickered over for years. While making the list I thought of something: what makes a game "Game of the Year"?

Since 1927, Time Magazine has picked its “Person of the Year.”  Since then it has been a hotbed of controversy due to who it picks for its honorees. Stalin and Hitler both received the title, as the term means not the “best” person of the year, but the biggest newsmaker of the year. While titles like Mass Effect and Super Mario Galaxy were huge titles that may have been the best of the year, who can argue that they created the news that BioShock, Lair, Kane and Lynch, and Halo 3 made?


Here is the short list of categories that “Game of the Year” could fall into and their respective nominations.

Best Games of the Year: Call of Duty 4, God of War II, Mass Effect, Orange Box, Uncharted

Most Fun Games of the Year: Heavenly Sword, Pokemon Diamond/Pearl, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, Super Mario Galaxy, Rock Band

Biggest Newsmaking Games of the Year: Halo 3, Lair, BioShock, Kane and Lynch


So what makes a Game of the Year? Is it a quality title that is innovative and polished? Is it a game that just has the highest fun factor? Or is it the newsmaker of they year? Are they one in the same?