"Game of the Year" is always going to be a hugely subjective concept and trying to decide a consensus this early on is basically impossible. People like what they like and come December opinions shift. What I take away from reviews is that Wild Hunt is overall a solid game that excels in some key areas that other games do not. Journos seem very pleased with the final game.
But like every game it won't be without its own share of "issues", also subjective, that'll impact the experience of each person who plays and, more importantly, shift opinions as time passes. Sometimes people grow to appreciate games more as the months go by and they better understand the game systems. Sometimes they appreciate them less as issues become more obvious upon reflection, or other games contrast how some stuff can be done better.
Bloodborne was the media darling. Now Wild Hunt. Arkham Knight will be. Phantom Pain too. I'd be shocked if Halo 5 didn't hit similar buttons. Battlefront might too. Who knows what else will surprise, or blow people away, and how folk will feel when the end of the year rolls around.
It's a high reviewing game that's the best thing ever until it's not the best thing ever and people pick it apart and something more interesting comes along. Inquisition reviewed extremely well and was GAF's No.4 GOTY, but obviously has its share of vocal criticisms. Same goes for Dark Souls II. Shadow of Mordor surprised, as did Alien: Isolation.
"GOTY" is just so...baseless, I guess. More like ammunition. As always I'm not concerned with the scores and the boxes ticked and the praise or whatever. I'm more interested in the substance of the reviews, the experience the journos had and how they articulate that.
And that's why I'm happy with the reviews so far. The game those who've played it are describing sounds right up my alley.
