At the end of each year, the gaming community comes together to argue and fight about the Game of the Year.  I think this is an incredibly useless and illogical ritual, and let me tell you why.   
What is a GOTY?  There is no clear definition, but I think most people think it is 'the best game that came out in a specific year'.  This means that if you give the title of GOTY to a game, then no other game that came out in that year is better than the GOTY.  So, what makes a game better than another?  There are two things to consider, the objective and the subjective.  The objective things that people consider are: Does the game have any glitches?  Are there any texture pop-ins?  Is there any clipping?  Does the game tend to freeze?  In short, the objective represents the physical construction and coding of a game.  Either a game is well constructed, or it isn't.  The subjective represents personal opinions: Was the game fun?  Did I like the story?  Did I like the look and feel of the game?  Both the subjective and objective play a part in deciding on a GOTY, but it seems that the subjective is more dominant.  Because subjective opinion is used in determining a GOTY, that means a GOTY for one person may not be a GOTY for another.   
A GOTY is very different that a game review.  A good review points out the positives and negatives of a game to help the consumer make a decision on whether or not they want to play or purchase the game.  However, a GOTY's only purpose is to say 'this game is better than all others this year'.  How is this useful to anyone?  The only thing I can think of is that a publisher could put GOTY on the box of their game.  It does not help the gaming community at all.  It only creates more arguments and trolling.  
It is a fact that games are multi-media mediums.  They incorporate writing, acting, music, sound, images, video, and the interactive experience that is unique to games.  In my subjective opinion, some games have better sound or graphics, and some games have better story or interaction.  I also think that people like different games for different reasons, like better graphics or story.  So when a GOTY is picked, there will be people that dislike it for many different reasons. 
So, it all comes down to the publication.  A GOTY is just what a certain media outlet thinks is the best game that came out in a certain year.  I don't know about you, but I couldn't care less about what a bunch of writers think is the best game of the year.   
I am writing about all this because I have been unmoved by the game of the year selections from the past decade.  Uncharted 2 as been named Game of the Year for 2009 in almost every single video game publication.  I have a PS3, and I played Uncharted 2.  I didn't finish it, I got up to chapter 5 or 6 I think.  I found the game incredibly boring.  I hated the way Drake jumps and moves around, I hated the combat, the story was uninteresting, and I found the humor in the game unfunny.  Sure, the graphics are quite impressive, but as I mentioned before, people like different games for different reasons, and graphics alone do not make me like a game.  So I am an example of someone who disagrees with last year's GOTY.  This is because my subjective opinion is different than everyone else's.  Again, a GOTY is also just a subjective opinion too.   
In conclusion, GOTY awards are useless.  They do nobody any good, and they propagate more fighting within the video game community.  Gaming journalists spend hours deliberating GOTY awards, all for nothing.   
 
Anyone agree or disagree with me?