GOTY? Sure why not.

So far, the sequels have gotten worse IMO... But take that how you will; I consider TW1 to be in the top RPG of the last decade.

Let me just put it this way. BGS has been winning GotY with every single title they release since Morrowind in 2002. I'd say the likelihood that they will do it again with Fallout 4 is pretty high.

The only competition Fallout 4 really has is The Witcher 3 and it's quite possible that CDPR's lastest game may be better. We shall see once Fallout 4 is released.

Other notable contenders will be Star Wars Battlefront, MGS V, and Batman Arkham Knight, but those three will likely pale in comparison to Fallout 4 and The Witcher 3.

Skyrim's big contenders were Battlefield 3 (and another title I think). It still beat out the competition. Battlefront 3 looks great but there's a lot that's hampering it at the moment - lack of spaceship battles for one.

Like everyone else has said though, it really comes down to hype train as Goty tends to boil down to a popularity contest.

Agreed

The last BGS games (Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Skyrim) all did. I think it's unlikely for other games to even have a chance against that record.

Yes but, with that being said some games stand out to fallout. I kind of thought metro was a copy of fallout put together first day i played metro last light i went off the train at the beginning and glitched out. I really hope fallout 4 has a chance of winning though.

I think you're underestimating MGS V a bit. I'm positive that game will walk away with the most awards this year, easily, no doubt; it will be hailed as Kojima's magnum opus. In the RPG category though, I'm of the opinion that the Witcher 3 will get the most awards, even though I couldn't care less about it, you would think it's the best thing since sliced bread from the way people praise that game.

F4 is going to have to be exceedingly spectacular to compete with those two games this year. I hope Bethesda can truly deliver but, I'm not expecting much above average, just more-of-the-same type quality we've come to expect of them, if I'm to be completely honest.

I bet it will and hopefully it will be because of quality and not misguided hype.

Ya, brace yourselves for the heat MGS 5 is bringing. Perfect 10's from both Gamespot and IGN? I mean obviously reviewer scores say very little about game quality these days, but then again, neither does GOTY, and chances are GOTY will follow the best reviewer scores.

I think MSG is one of those franchises that gets rave reviews from people who have been invested in it for years, and generates little interest from everyone else. I personally fall into the latter category. Like most games out of Japan, it just doesn't appeal to me.

Battlefield 3 was great for multiplayer, but had horrible coop and a single player. The only other great game that came out in 2011 was The Witcher 2 on PC, and it wouldn't have stood a chance against a multiplatform title.

Space battles in Battlefront 2 really weren't that great. Plus, we actually have full-on dogfighting in DICE's Battlefront, so I think it may actually be a hit. I played it in Alpha and I enjoyed it quite a bit, although I did have some criticisms. Overall, it was a lot of fun.

Fallout 4 already wins out on hype. BGS has long been established as a multiplatform juggernaught, much like Rockstar. I don't think anyone except for maybe Rockstar at this point could really beat them.

Not at all. MGS has largely been a Sony franchise for most of its existence. The franchise has not been multiplatform as long as The Elder Scrolls or Fallout. Yes, there is a lot of hype and anticipation for that game, but I believe its former Sony exclusive nature will damage that game's chances. Unless you owned a Playstation console, most people likely won't care that much.

The Witcher 3 is actually an amazing experience. I still have yet to beat it and I'm really blown away by the level of detail and attention put into each and every quest. It certainly has the capacity to give Fallout 4 a run for its money. CDPR is no joke and they are rapidly catching up to BioWare and BGS in terms of professionalism and the ability to make great games.

I think you are underestimating just how much anticipation and hype is around Fallout 4. Every BGS game is always a hype train int he same way Rockstar games are always hype trains. Unless Fallout 4 is terrible, it's going to win GotY already. The moment the game play footage was shown at E3 people were already claiming it was Game of Show. Fallout 4 did win Best of Show, by the way, as well as best PC game and best RPG. MGS V didn't win any awards (MGS V was nominated for best action/adventure and lost to Uncharted 4).

Fallout just has multiplatform recognition and it's a long-established franchise that has been widely popular under BGS. As long as they make a solid game, it's likely going to dominate based on popularity and hype alone.

lefty I would agree with you generally but MGS 5 is looking to be far and away the most accessible game in the series (something us purists are really pissed about, much in the same way the Fallout purist here moan non-stop about skills and such), and while it doesn't look to stay true to the punishingly difficult stealth gameplay of the older titles, it looks to be a easy to learn action sandbox with top notch graphics and a wide variety of content. In a post-GTA 5 world, that's the sort of game that generates a [censored]-ton of sales; the reviewers going absolutely mad for it is just going to drive hype and sales even further.

That I have to disagree with. All of the "10 reviews" have been from gamers who have played MGS games since the beginning. Unless you are already interested in that franchise, the rest couldn't care less. The fact that it was also largely a Sony exclusive hurts its appeal even larger. I wouldn't say the game is anymore appealing now than with its predecessors as newcomers wouldn't understand the characters, the story, or what is happening. Slapping on a pseudo open world and some flashy graphics won't be enough to sell a game. Many gamers are hesistant to buy sequels when they never played the original games (look at the sales of ME2 and ME3 on the PS3 compared to the X360). I think many will be shocked that MGS V will not perform nearly as well as many think.

Redguard King you make good points but I think you're over-estimating the effect of MGS's past. I think we're going to see it follow a similar sales pattern to the Witcher 3- people who have no history with that series (myself included) picked it up because of the overwhelming hype and positivity that surrounded its release. MGS V being a prequel (and, as previously mentioned, being way more casual friendly) really helps it in this regard.

I guess the fact that the series has been PS-only for so long (as Redguard King mentioned above) means it is on fewer people's radar. For me, if it's not on PC then I haven't played it and haven't paid attention to it. Suddenly number 5 in a series appears on PC, but if I'm not too familiar with the franchise, then I'm less likely to take notice, especially with how many quality games come out these days. I have a hard enough time keeping up with all the games that I'm already interested in.

But maybe that's just me. The game does seem to be getting good reviews, so I'm sure it'll expand its audience with this release.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it does, but as I said I'm betting you're going to see a lot of people who have never picked up an MGS game before getting this one. I ended up getting Dragon Age Inquisition despite having never played any of the previous titles; I wasn't deterred by it's dense backstory or my unfamiliarity because it was December, nothing was out, and I was desperate to play a decent game. For most gamers the next two months are completely dead, as have been the last few months. People are going to be looking for something to keep themselves busy between now and CoD, Battlefront, Fallout, or whatever it is they're waiting for. I have many, many concerns about MGS V, but sales performance isn't one of them.

Notice there are two major differences between MGS V and TW3. For one, CDPR early on got rid of the number "3" in their advertising of the game. CDPR even recognized that advertising the game as a sequel could turn people off, and they are right. So it became "The Witcher: Wild Hunt" with three slashes in the middle. The other major contrast is that you don't have to play TW1 or TW2 to play TW3. It's a separate standalone experience. Besides a few key choices in TW2 having some effects on the game and characters you meet, you didn't have to play the previous games. I've played all of them and can tell you playing TW1 and TW2 are not required.

Yes, MGS V is technically a prequel (albeit not the first game in the chronology) as most of the games focus on Solid Snake and not Big Boss. But again, you are largely dealing with long established characters in the franchise. Unless the game is built to be standalone and meant to appeal to newcomers, which none of the trailers have even tried, I just don't see it being that popular among new players. Even the last trailer paid homage to the entire history of Metal Gear games, showing to gamers just how much they've missed if they have not played this franchise from the start.

Certainly there will be some newcomers who pick it up. Ground Zeroes was partially a test on PC to generate interest. Much like TW3, DAI was built to be standalone. DAO and DAII really have nothing to do with DAI, other than a few cameos and certain choices affecting the world state. I think it would be more conducive to compare MGS to ME, which kept the same protagonist (Shepard) throughout the experience. Yes, Big Boss is technically not Solid Snake, but the majority of the franchise has been focused on Solid Snake.

The game will do well. Don't get me wrong. I just don't believe it will win GotY. It might win best Playstation game, unless Uncharted 4 beats it out. I just think the competition from Fallout 4 and perhaps The Witcher 3 are going to give MGS V a run for its money. Had it released a year earlier, like DAI did, I think its chances would be better. DAI was a great game, but it would not have won GotY if TW3 wasn't delayed. It probably wouldn't have won it if BAK wasn't delayed.

Considering that the devs themselves are renowned for the Titan gameplay from 2142, it's a complete shock that they didn't take what they learned and adapted it to Battlefront 3 on a larger scale. Either it's a missed opportunity or an attempt to keep content on the side for DLC.

What's ironic is Battlefront 2's space battles are inspired by Titan mode in 2142, much like Battlefront was inspired by Battlefield.

I honestly think DICE doesn't want to do too much and wants to create a solid foundation first. Of course, they will likely do a premium membership, so space battles could be coming later. This happened with Battlefield 4 where DICE added in Titan mode in the form of aircraft carriers (you couldn't move them around the map though) in the last DLC pack for premium membership.

Remember, this is DICE's first Battlefront game. They are rebooting the franchise, not doing a sequel to Battlefront 2. Battlefront 3 did happen and was unfortunately cancelled and scrapped by Lucasarts. This is an entirely different game.

It won over 160 E3 awards and was probably the one presentation that made Bethesda won E3 for the majority of people who've watched it... It already has a good record and it will probably continue to grow, earning many GOTY awards. It might even beat Bethesda's previous titles in the number of GOTY awards.

Off-topic but... I have no doubt DICE would do Battlefront good... It's EA Games that I don't trust. EA Games does own DICE and will be the publishers, I'm assuming, for the game. Right?

Yea EA is the publisher of all sports games, ufc, mma and many other things, they tend to shut their servers down on some of there games.

Given the massive fan backlash over MGS5, I don't see it winning GOTY.