GOTY Talks - signs of bad preparation

" One thing I will say, though. Dear god the best DLC discussion was painful to listen to. Brad was basically talking to a brick wall. And Jeff, using the transitive property to determine some shit he hasn't even played is better, what a joke. "

There's a lot of pots calling kettles black in this thread.  oh, and...
 

This is a good point. Great, in fact. But I would propose that the only reason why this is even brought up is the full disclosure approach of GB to their GOTY discussions. All GOTY awards are pretty much decided along these lines, and having more staff doesn't mean that each of the editors discussing has played more games. When it comes down to it, discussions are often going to go along the lines of "I really like this game you haven't played and you really like that game I haven't played" and making compromises because of that. 
 
Nobody can play every single game, piece of DLC and downloadable game released in the year AND maintain a full time job, even if that job largely consists on playing games. And, for the record, TV, movies and music awards work in exactly the same way.

Yeah, listening to the DLC discussion felt like a waste of time. Arguing against a piece of DLC they haven't played invalidates the entire category. And it really feels like none of them are willing to change their opinion, no matter the argument. I haven't played Minerva's Den, but Brad seemed to make some excellent points compared to the others.

" @Vinchenzo said:

" Or you could just stop complaining about their choices. "

You haven't read the post at all it seems.  I am not complaining about their choices of winners at all, but the methods of which they do it.  If you mean something else, please clarify.  Or do you think that none of these highlighted problems such as the staff not playing all the games or making the distinctions clear well before-hand are problems to you?  Just wanting to understand where you are coming from. "

The picks and posts and podcasts are for the entertainment of the readers. They are not serious awards, so calm down.

" @ShiftyMagician said:

" @Vinchenzo said:

" Or you could just stop complaining about their choices. "

You haven't read the post at all it seems.  I am not complaining about their choices of winners at all, but the methods of which they do it.  If you mean something else, please clarify.  Or do you think that none of these highlighted problems such as the staff not playing all the games or making the distinctions clear well before-hand are problems to you?  Just wanting to understand where you are coming from. "

They can't all play every game.  I haven't listened to the podcasts yet, but they did this before too, like with Silent Hill for best Wii game I think it was.  They trust each other's opinion, so when Brad gave his reasons for it being the best, they liked what they were hearing and agreed.  They can't just remove a game from the list because they didn't all play it. "

" @ShiftyMagician: For someone who isn't outraged about how the particulars of the GOTY awards discussion were handled you sure are quick to assume I thought you were outraged. If their opinion doesn't matter, than neither should how these discussions are carried out.  Why should they take the time out to gussy up this shit when it ultimately isn't going to matter. At all.  I find the game of the year content perfectly palatable. If I want to have a serious discussion about video games I will seek it out or instigate it. "

DLC discussion kind of continues to piss me off. Honestly? "Best DLC", you're saying the lesser of the two is better by merit of requiring you to buy te better game? That's the most pethetic argument I've seen all week. Guys what's the better deal, ME2 with Shadow Broker or Bioshock 2 with Minerva's Den? Let's say they both cost 70 dollars. Yeah that's fucking fair. Ridiculous. The better DLC still won, but Jesus.

Its fine. This time around they were a lot more transparent about how they worked things about. If they never did the bombcast on the GOTY, we'd never knew how they really operate behind their written choices in previous GOTY awards.

" @Aus_azn:  I would completely, completely, completely dis-agree.  This year was amazing for games.  In fact possibly my favorite on record ever.  I've seriously bought goddamn near 30-35 retail games this year.   "

@Skytylz

" @spankingaddict said:

" @Aus_azn said:

" @Vinchenzo said:

" Or you could just stop complaining about their choices. "

That, and this year sucked in gaming with the notable exception of Starcraft 2. "

100% disagree. Are you just a pc gamer or what? "

Yah, I'd say this year was better than last year and maybe even the year before.  "

Quick and dirty math:
A shortlist of about 10 games, per category, would be fair, I guess, considering we're talking about the entirety of 2010. Let's say at an average duration of 20 hours give or take (shorter games like Vanquish, longer games like Fallout, multiplayer, etc). Total workload per podcast participant (take note that Vinny isn't a staff writer, so he doesn't normally have to even touch a game) 200 work hours. Considering the number of overlap in titles, cut that in half, for the sake of the argument, to 100 hours.
Management wise, that's 400 hours of productivity (4 people, 100 each) you lose from the end of November to, judging by the actual date on the GotY posts, December 20th, when official Whiskey Media activity ceases. Oh, you know, pesky holidays and being with families and such.
20 days, 24 hours in a day, that's a total of 440 productivity hours. Which leaves 40 hours over 20 days to eat, sleep, pay attention to significant others, socialise, produce WM Happy Hours, interim podcasts (including these very GotY podcasts), write their own GotY lists...

People who want 8 hour work days are pussies.

I thought the Best add-on category was the only thing that was ill prepared. The only person who played through Bioshock 2 didn't play Minerva's Den and the two people that did play the add-on didn't finish Bioshock 2. So it was a really weird discussion. 

I totally agree. It might be too much to ask for these guys to play every major game out there, but I'm often dissapointed when the debate is sort of crippled by only 2 or 3 of them having played the thing in question.
 
Still, really liking the GOTY podcasts. I still enjoyed hearing Brad and Vinny argue for a solid hour about Shadow Broker vs. Minerva, even if I wished the whole staff could join in in a more meaningful way.

The crew created Giantbomb so they could handle things their way. This is the way they choose to handle GOTY. Love it or leave it. God Bless America!!! lol.

for sure man, they needed to at least dig deep enough into their minds to remember games that came out earlier in the year rather than just randomly choosing from the stuff they've been playing recently

At least they let us in on their methods. Most other sites just give them out and we have no idea how they came to it, whether they blind voted, discussed it, based it on reviews, had one dude decide, whatever...
 
If they just threw out the awards like every other site we wouldn't have an issue with them. I love the GotY podcasts. 

" Quick and dirty math: A shortlist of about 10 games, per category, would be fair, I guess, considering we're talking about the entirety of 2010. Let's say at an average duration of 20 hours give or take (shorter games like Vanquish, longer games like Fallout, multiplayer, etc). Total workload per podcast participant (take note that Vinny isn't a staff writer, so he doesn't normally have to even touch a game) 200 work hours. Considering the number of overlap in titles, cut that in half, for the sake of the argument, to 100 hours. Management wise, that's 400 hours of productivity (4 people, 100 each) you lose from the end of November to, judging by the actual date on the GotY posts, December 20th, when official Whiskey Media activity ceases. Oh, you know, pesky holidays and being with families and such. 20 days, 24 hours in a day, that's a total of 440 productivity hours. Which leaves 40 hours over 20 days to eat, sleep, pay attention to significant others, socialise, produce WM Happy Hours, interim podcasts (including these very GotY podcasts), write their own GotY lists... People who want 8 hour work days are pussies. "

" @Vinchenzo said:

" Or you could just stop complaining about their choices. "

But he's not. He's complaining about their methodology. "

Doing it "right" would take too much effort. I'd rather have 20 quick looks than a solid, well-thought out GOTY-list. Ultimately, I just don't care what was their games of the year.

" @Aus_azn:  I would completely, completely, completely dis-agree.  This year was amazing for games.  In fact possibly my favorite on record ever.  I've seriously bought goddamn near 30-35 retail games this year.   "

Oh yes, because that doesn't happen at other sites.  
 
*Sigh* 
 
Other sites just put out a list, whereas here they put out a list, and present the process by which they came up with that list; if other sites were to do that, then you would see that the goings on there are equally, if not more chaotic.

Listening to the bombcasts was painful, they were essentially making stuff up as they went along.  
 
Also, Vinny should stop being such a pushover. He makes good points all the time (in fact he's probably the brightest of the bunch) but he often allows others to trample over him. 

"I kinda like how it's all come about. Hearing them talk about the games on the podcasts, and the reasons for and against works quite well. The Bayonetta slip up was a bit silly, but  this isn't the worlds most serious site, so it's fine. "

I love all these posts that are totally irrelevant, like discussing their time and whether or not the year was good. Have you guys seriously been at Giantbomb for more than a few weeks? 
 
The reason is, because they openly mock GOTY awards, they're bullshit and half assed and they know it. Thats kind of the point. Look at last years!  If you want some self serious "professionalism" this is probably not the site for that. (you should've worked that out by now)

" @ShiftyMagician said:

" @Vinchenzo said:

" Or you could just stop complaining about their choices. "

You haven't read the post at all it seems.  I am not complaining about their choices of winners at all, but the methods of which they do it.  If you mean something else, please clarify.  Or do you think that none of these highlighted problems such as the staff not playing all the games or making the distinctions clear well before-hand are problems to you?  Just wanting to understand where you are coming from. "

I want to know what the fuck you think these awards are. This isn't the Oscar academy, its the foreign press and its a joke by design. "

They're busy dudes with busy lives. They're a small team. I honestly, HONESTLY think that most other publications and sites do EXACTLY the same thing, it's just that the GB team make their deliberations public. They give their reasons. They let us see why they  decide to award what games what, and for that I thank them. If you want them to play every single game on every list to completion, they'd have to shut down the site for about a month or more. I don't want that, do you?  
 
ANY GOTY debate is going to involve concessions, personal preferences and whatnot. There really is no "professional" way to do it, unless you want to organize a committee and make everyone speak in turn and have "house rules" and then subject the proceedings to a vote - which would be stupid, given that they're a team of 4 friends who like to just have fun. 
 
GOTY awards are fun things that come at the end of the year - they aren't actually that important. The GB team are being open, funny and are doing the best job they can. I have no complaints. Sure, I might disagree with some of their choices, and they could turn that argument right back at me.  
 
It's not important, they're being open and honest, it's funny and I'm pretty sure everyone does the same thing. Other sites might make it "look" more professional, but either they have the same raucous informal debate, or it's an imposed, editor-makes-the-final-say "discussion" and that's never good. 
 
Cut them some slack jack.

god could you imagine how much longer each of these would be if all four had played every game they were going to discuss? they would still be in that room recording, one of them possibly dead.

The amount pf people who completely missed the point the OP tried to make is staggering. Personally I am with the OP on this one. If you haven't played the game then kindly keep your trap closed. Having to rely on someone else opinion about any aspect of the game is plain and simple idiotic and unprofessional. How, as someone in a position where your opinion actually matters to people, can come out and declare, I don't like that game genre therefore I am not going to play it but come the time I need to actually consider it for an award I am going to have an opinion about it?  
And please just stop it with the "Don't have enough time" bullshit excuse. It's your job so make the fucking time. People actually somewhat value what you have to say so make even a half assed effort to experience what you are going to talk about.  

If you haven't played the game, then don't just come up with assumption and then use them against it, instead argue for what you want to win in a compelling manner.

" god could you imagine how much longer each of these would be if all four had played every game they were going to discuss? they would still be in that room recording, one of them possibly dead. "

" I love all these posts that are totally irrelevant, like discussing their time and whether or not the year was good. Have you guys seriously been at Giantbomb for more than a few weeks?  The reason is, because they openly mock GOTY awards, they're bullshit and half assed and they know it. Thats kind of the point. Look at last years!  If you want some self serious "professionalism" this is probably not the site for that. (you should've worked that out by now) "

god could you imagine how much longer each of these would be if all four had played every game they were going to discuss? they would still be in that room recording, one of them possibly dead.

Considering its only the 4 of them, i think its remarkable that there doing a great job. I dont really care if there unprepared, its makes the debating more interesting instead of becoming corporate and boring.

" god could you imagine how much longer each of these would be if all four had played every game they were going to discuss? they would still be in that room recording, one of them possibly dead. "