So we're still in the second half of the year and while this question is kind of early to ask, do you all think PUBG will be a contender for Giant Bomb's GOTY awards or even other outlets' award shows? It certainly has gotten plenty of attention all over the internet, especially on Giant Bomb with the countless Murder Island streams we've gotten. However, this is an Early Access game which while its out and released for people to play, its not a complete 1.0 game and the developers are making improvements overtime. Maybe because PUBG is in Early Access and if it doesn't get a 1.0 release this year, it might not be considered for GOTY at least here on GB but the crew may have a big video dedicated to PUGB to end the year.

Now if it gets a 1.0 release or if the crew decides F it they'll include it in GOTY deliberations, I think it has a great chance to win some awards. PUBG is a lock for best multiplayer, will probably be in a heated debate between it and Horizon Zero Dawn for best debut and will likely win best moment for whichever GB personality wins a chicken dinner on a Murder Island stream. Also I've read posts on NeoGaf and other places claiming PUBG has GOTY locked up here, but I'm not so sure in a year that we've gotten BOTW, Horizon and maybe Super Mario Odyssey or Wolfenstein II being big players for best game of 2017.

If it gets an official release then sure but that whole angle of "we know what this game is all about, not much will change" shouldn't fly. As long as it's in Early Access it shouldn't be eligible.

The only difference when this game comes out is the version number.

It should be in contention and I can't see it losing to anything.

I'm sure it will. It's unusual to have the staff all like the same game, gotta figure it's in the running for the top spot.

Now whether it should is another question

I think the mindset of waiting for 1.0 is outdated, you can buy it and have tons of fun with it this year. Gwent in currently in beta and it is one of my games of the year. I think early access games should have 2 rounds of consideration, if it is in a state that could be included in GOTY then it is eligible that year, if not then the year it "comes" out.

There's already been some discussion about this topic on the Beastcast. While battle lines haven't yet been drawn, there is some contention that the difference between a "full release" game like No Man's Sky and an early access title like Battlegrounds is so little as to be nonexistent. The arbitrary declaration of "Okay this is the final version except for all of the constant add-ons and patches we're doing" has lost basically all of its meaning. Whether the GOTY awards should continue to abide by those arbitrary declarations is looking less and less certain over time, and the sheer volume of content on the site for PUBG makes the case fairly well, especially when you consider how last year's decision basically came down to "look how much Hitman shit we did and how good that was vs our DOOM coverage."

The main reason (to my knowledge) for the GOTY exclusion was to make things make sense with the wiki database of release dates, but even Jeff has said that work is being done to determine whether those should be separated into initial, early access, official, and final releases, among others. I can also recall part of the necessity for "old game of the year" being that, on at least one occasion, a game was released in the calendar year but after GOTY deliberations, and then passed over the following year due to its release date; not an especially sensible or practical way to do things.

It always comes down to what the purpose of the GOTY list is, and even that changes from year to year. Sometimes it's to provide a list of recommendations, other times to highlight trends, or make a historical note, and yet other times it's meant to present the site and its personalities to new readers. Generally, though, the consensus is reached that the GOTY list should reflect Giant Bomb's year in review, and it would be irresponsible to leave PUBG off this year even if it doesn't release properly.

I'm in agreement that it should be considered - a game that is this beloved on the site deserves at least that much. I don't think a version number being too low should change that.

I think waiting for a "1.0" made sense at a time, but in the here and now it's a very outdated artificial restriction to place on this whole thing. If the idea is to talk about and celebrate the best games of this year and PUBG isn't a part of the conversation it's not actually a conversation of the best games of this year at all.

Did they play it a ton? Did they enjoy it a ton? Is it going to get its fair due if in the discussion? Yes, absolutely.

Yes, it absolutely should compete.

And (at this point anyway) it should win.

I'll be a little surprised if it doesn't just win. Never mind individual lists, it's the one that GB as a staff has played the most this year, like Hitman last year.

It should but most likely it'll just get its own category to win because "early access" and DoTA getting 2nd like 3 years after it came out just because of a technicality.

Game development is so different now that you either need to go along with it, or dig your heels in and state absolutely that a game is considered done when it's 1.0. I think GB has had the 1.0 as a guide, but I don't think it's set in stone. Battlegrounds is going to be the game that breaks them of the idea that an unfinished game can't win GOTY. And the game is absolutely a lock for #1, unless Mario is somehow the best game ever made. And I say this as someone with zero interest in playing it. This year has been amazing for game releases. But even Zelda, a game with more critical praise than almost any game I've ever seen, has a range on the staff of "this is one of the best games I've ever played" to "it's pretty good but I fell off of it". Whereas PUBG has captured everyone's attention and held it.

@reasonableman: Personally, though, I don't think how #content friendly a game is should be the only or even the deciding factor in what is the site's GOTY. I don't know about anybody else, but I was thoroughly sick of Hitman vids by the end of last year, and I'm almost in the same place on PUBG vids. I played both Hitman and PUBG myself (and enjoyed my time with them), but just the fact that they lend themselves well to being streamed doesn't mean they're more worthy of recognition than games that don't. Using that logic, Mario Party 10 should've been GOTY that year. Great vids don't necessarily equate to great games.

Likewise most hours spent playing also doesn't 1:1 equate to how good a game is (see Destiny 1).

I think it makes a pretty strong case for the practise of excluding all early access games being kinda useless.

But I play it fast and loose with my own GotY shenanigans, so ultimately it's up to them whatever they wanna stick by.

@freedom4556: I think in the case of Hitman and PUBG, there are tons of videos of them because the staff enjoy playing them for a long time. If Hitman sucked, they probably wouldn't bother making more videos of it. And maybe they'd try chasing the cultural zeitgeist of PUBG with a few videos anyway, but it's clear they just enjoy playing it.

It would be a significant departure from previous years in which they stated that a game had to be officially "released" to be considered.

It will certainly end up on some, if not all, of their personal lists, but honestly it would seem strange to me to do away with this long-running rule they've had if they do so just to award one game. I'm not saying it's an "ethics" thing by any means, it would just seem weird, and I'm not a fan of giving individual games a pass on stuff like this. Especially when it's a game that they've produced a ton of subscription-only content for, and had the creator of the game on their E3 show. Whether or not there's anything shady going on there (and I firmly believe there isn't), I think it's a bad look for the site.

They could, of course, do away with this problem simply by saying that "any game that can be purchased to be played can be in contention for GoTY talks." I just don't think THIS would be the year to make that change.

It absolutely should, I think. Times are changing, every game released today is supported and made better long after they come out, whether they're released in early access or not. Even story based games like Final Fantasy XV are getting huge updates after release to flesh out the plot and improve gameplay in campaigns that many players may have already finished. I'm not saying that's good or bad, but it is different.

If the gang feels like they played and enjoyed what's there enough for it to be in the 10 best games of the year, I don't know why that kind of technicality should matter. Between PUBG and Dead Cells, I think this is the year early access as a term became totally meaningless.

I thought they already dealt w this w Minecraft? I don't think it was up for the top 10 but it was nominated for a category and they basically decided, if they consider it that year then that's it, it can't be considered again in another year. Is PUBG somehow different?

yes. yes.

It's clear that PubG is the game that provides the most engagement / content among the site members. Alex and Vinny already talked about the Pubg situation on a friday stream and seemed to both be very open to using it for GOTY regardless of it's early access status. Especially since it's such an arbitrary tag in today's game production climate.

Then why did they make ten Mario Party vids? Those games objectively sucked, but the vids were wildly popular on the site. Now I'm not saying PUBG or Hitman are Mario Party bad, but the logic of "they played it the most, so they must like it the most" just doesn't follow for me. It's possible other games they played less of this year were more fun for them. I know they directly denied it about Hitman during last year's GOTY, but still.

I don't see why it shouldn't be considered.

I think Jeff said it on the podcast a few weeks back but there isn't that much difference because games are constantly getting updates and add-ons even after they officially release.

I agree as well, especially if this game did come out next year they may not talk about it as much because by 2018 GOTY it may have been some time since they checked in on the game, I think Alex mentioned something similar happened with Darkest Dungeon for the sites GOTY. As in he didn't push it as much because he mostly played it the year before.

The game will, in theory, have a 1.0 release at some point. I suspect people will be annoyed if it is not in GOTY consideration that year because the early access version was already discussed in 2017.

It will and it is their clear winner. I hate early access and feel games with that label get a huge pass for being all sorts of broken. That said they very rarely change greatly between early access and release so if they love the game as it is and not an ethereal promise of what it could be then they should totally include it.

It will open the floodgates of early access bullshit though.

What do you mean by this?

Actually DOTA 2 was ranked number 7 on Giant Bomb's 2013 list, but I see your point.

Though the more I think about it, the more I realize that it will likely be considered and probably will win out unless some other game later this year can steal PUBG's thunder. Mainly why Super Mario Maker and Hitman won game of the year was because those games got plenty of exposure on streams and were beloved by the staff as a whole, and PUBG is getting unprecedented love.

Though here's my next question. If PUBG ends up in the top ten (and even winning the award) and gets out of early access in 2018, will the Giant Bomb crew make it eligible for GOTY in 2018 or place the game in the "best old game" category?

Isn't it set to officially release this year anyway?

Those games got plenty of exposure on streams because they were loved by the staff. Not the other way around. If they didn't love those games they wouldn't have played them so much.

Even actually released games like Recore, No Man's Sky and Final Fantasy XV are having stuff added to them months after release.

PUBG should absolutely be eligible. It's a game you can pay money for and have a good time with.

@mike: I worded that incorrectly. My bad.

I think no. At the best, I think it'll get a category or an honorable mention.

If a game is listed as early access and the crew have a rule about keeping early access games from consideration, I don't think they should break it. It'll affect too many future discussions and they'll have to go case by case and pick out which ones are okay to talk about and which ones they can't with very little distinction other than "We liked/played this one more."

A full release is a full release and deserves all the bad considerations with the good. If you want PUBG to win GOTY or be up for discussion you have to allow all the criticisms and flaws into discussion. The game is buggy as hell, you have to mute everybody immediately or be subjected to slurs, and frequently servers can just die. If you thought it was unfair for Jeff to bring up what some consider typical Bethesda bugs for Fallout 4, I don't think you'll like this year's casts.

I'm going to bring up No Man's Sky as an example. If it released in Early Access instead, do you think it'd get Most Disappointing? Should it have? Could any Early Access game get those bad rewards? The answer should be a firm "No" on both sides. You can argue semantics, but at the end of the year even Hitman released all their content.

If EA games are allowed in the discussion, then logically from then on all games would HAVE to be judged based on EA release date rather than 1.0 release date. Otherwise EA games sold and "finished" in two separate years would hypothetically have an advantage. A game like The Witcher 3 would be automatically disqualified for winning GOTY 2016. But PUBG would technically be eligible in 2017 and 2018. But if EA games are eligible only in the year the go on sale, then this creates the problem of punishing developers by judging a game only on an admittedly unfinished and unpolished state.

Obviously, the chance of this actually being an issue is probably close to zero. Just something to think about.

It's a definite lock for best multiplayer. I have no problem with that.

If it releases this year or they make a "Best unfinished game of the year" award.

@mike: Just that once you allow Early Access games into GOTY there's no putting the genie back in the bottle and they all have to be considered. My use of "bullshit" is just from my general distaste of the whole early access system, I know that bad games naturally wont end up on GOTY.

@oursin_360: There's no contest in that category if you consider that PUBG will conceivably take the GOTY.

As long as most of the staff agrees and not just couple members filibustering its position, I have zero problems.

I hope that it isn't part of the final top-ten list if for no other reason than it seems like the inevitable winner. I'd prefer that list to be somewhat of a mystery until they put it together during the podcast.

Who cares if it turns over to 1.0 next year? It's out now. They're playing it now. They're all loving the shit out of it right now. If anyone has been paying attention to the site for the first half of the year, it's pretty obvious this is the most well loved game among everyone except Ben (I haven't heard him GUSH over it like the rest). I'm pretty confident they all can tell the difference between a fly-by-night early access scam game, and something like Battlegrounds. Sure, the game could drastically take a nosedive by next year, but if they're still feeling great about it come December, it absolutely should be included in the discussion.

With the amount that they talk about it, I certainly hope it's allowed to be in there. I predict it'll win whatever category it's nominated for though, whether that be Best Multiplayer, Best Surprise, Best Debut, Best Early Access Experience, or Best Game, and rightfully so. That game is really something special.

Has GOTY ever been that much of a surprise, though? You can usually figure out the top 2 or 3 with a reasonable degree of accuracy just by paying attention throughout the year.

Yes, and it's going to win.

Sure I'll know for sure some of the games that will make it onto the list, but in this particular case it feels like PUBG is practically guaranteed the top spot. I was feeling similarly about DOOM last year, and was pleasantly surprised when Hitman pulled through.

I can see them just saying "Not out this year" though. They have done that exact thing in the past basically. I think that it might really not be considered this year.

If it wasn't so well liked I'd say I can guarantee Jeff would rule it out given how he has in the past but I think they may make an exception, especially with "games as a service" being such a thing. I think they should do away with that distinction myself as I find treating EA games as some special separate thing that can't be critiqued when they are sold for money is bullshit to me. As soon as they are selling it, it's out for me.

I'm not really sure what they will do. If, and when, it is considered it will be high and contending. If it's in the running this year, it will basically have a Hitman like position (they all played it and liked it throughout the year and on the site for content) and I could see it winning for sure.

Yes. All this talk about slippery slopes or allowing one Early Access game you must allow all like its a hard law. If the group wants allow any specific game because it is complete enough and they played a shit ton of it then they should allow the game in the discussion.

It probably will be eligible, and if so will definitely win. It's my game of the year for sure.

You're right but there something to that. Hitman leant itself to stream, as does PUBG. I think the streams have made more of the guys try the game than would and I think love it. For a bit it seemed like Jeff was going to hate it for example, to me. He talked about never playing it at home ever and stuff like he does with stuff he hates.

I think Jeff with Hitman is a great example too because he didn't get into it for a long time but eventually got into the content on the site and liked the game. For me, I think Hitman kind of waltzed to GOTY because it was so dominate on site content that year. That wasn't said outright by the GB guys but I think it was the case. I can see that happening for PUBG too.

Hitman is so good at all the gameplay basics that it's what made the GB guys finally be able to play a Hitman game basically at all. I just think it's interesting to look at the factors. As people who are making content, I think they should weigh that kind of thing for their own award. If it comes down to say Zelda and PUBG this year, I think that will come up in PUBG favor.

As long as it hit's full release before the deliberations... aaaaand hell yes.

No way in hell it's not on the list, but I really don't think it should be at the top of the overall goty.

Jeff has been a hardline stickler about this shit in the past already so it would be a change.