Game of the Year Lists; Why they suck and how they can get better

On every video gaming site and in every game publication, people are putting out their 2008 Game of the Year lists.  In most cases these lists serve little to no purpose, being merely one person's opinion of what the best games of the year are.  While these lists can be fun and entertaining, they give no real insight into the progress that video games made this year. 

Bionic Commando: Rearmed is unlikely to appear on anyone's game of the year list, yet I feel that the game's release is a strong indication of a new direction for video gaming.  Capcom's new strategy of remaking old games into fun and exciting downloadable games showcases a new emphasis on smaller downloadable product, yet no game of the year lists will ever acknowledge this.  Burnout Paradise is being touted as one of the best game releases this year, and while I agree that Paradise is an excellent piece of software, simply putting the game on a list is a disservice to all the innovations that Criterion introduced with the game.  The ability to warp seamlessly between single and multi player at the push of a button is easily the best multiplayer innovation of 2008.  This multi/single player integration, coupled with Criterion's continued support of the game almost a year after its release, both stand as extremely important steps in video gaming this year, yet the progress being shown in these steps is being overlooked by the majority of game players and games media.

In order for video gaming to continue this innovative forward progress, we need to identify and give credit to all the things games have done this year that exemplify innovation and progress.  Game of the year lists should praise games that did something to move video gaming forward, even if the games themselves are not the best of the best, if they have done something to help push video gaming forward, I feel that they should be awarded for any innovation they showed.  Personally, I feel that game of the year lists would be acceptable if they focused on topics that actually told of what video gaming in 2008 was about, and not just what a certain sites favorite games were.  I'm curious to hear if anyone else feels that "favorite games" of the year lists are as worthless as I feel they are, and I'm wondering if anyone else feels that publications would be better suited doing meaningful 2008 lists as opposed to the personalized favorites lists they are now.