By Tru3_Blu3 46 Comments
There, I said it!
Reason: The game shows nothing new to the game industry or the shooter genre itself. Gears of War1 introduced a golden rule that many games, afterwords, have followed--Take cover or die. Because of this, Gears of War1 won most of the GotY awards of 2006.
GeoW2 does nothing more except add some pointless gameplay mechanics, guns, and tweaks. GeoW2 didn't try to be innovative like it's predecessor, it tried to please the fans of the previous game; which is fine! But really though, GeoW2 is overrated enough to an area where people are expecting a freaking GotY Nominee to be given to the game. It's just insane.
Personally, games like Braid, Dead Space, and Left 4 Dead deserve the GotY category because they do something new and nail the newity. CoD4, winner of 2007 Game of the Year from almost every single publiation, had an addictive ranking system; modern setting and weaponary; and perks. Sure, some of these things have been done before, but when Infinitywerd inserted the brisk, simplistic style of the CoD franchise; it intertwined so well that it became an innovative masterpiece. Even games today try to immitate CoD4's multiplayer, showing proof of how successful the game was.
Now I am not trying to change minds here. You have your own opinion as do I. It's just I personally think GeoW2 doesn't deserve GotY. It's not a bad game by no means. It's a phenomenal retake of Gears of War1 with an epic single-player campaign and an addictive multiplayer (and lets not forget Horde); but it just adds nothing new in the franchise, the genre, and the game industry in general. That, in itself, is simply why GeoW2 doesn't take the golden award.
That is all.