When twitch streamer and former pro player Shroud recently declared that “single-player games always win GOTY and it’s bullshit,” he didn’t just make a bold statement; Instead, he threw down a challenge. In rallying behind the multiplayer-heavy Arc Raiders and calling out narrative-driven favourites like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, he lit up discussions around how we judge “Game of the Year” in the modern era.
What exactly did Shroud say?
During a recent live stream, Shroud made his position clear: he believes multiplayer games don’t get the recognition they deserve. “Us multiplayer gamers are the minority, okay? We are the minority, being multiplayer gamers,” he said, in urging his viewers to vote for Arc Raiders over what he sees as the more likely narrative-heavy winner.
He followed up with a blunt line: “I just think single-player games always win Game of the Year, and it’s bulls-t.”
Is there truth behind the claim?
Let’s pause and ask: Is Shroud off base, or is there something to this argument?
It’s true that many GOTY-type awards tend to favour games with a strong campaign, deep narrative, or auteur-style design, traits more common in single-player titles.
On the flip side, multiplayer and live-service games dominate many of the biggest metrics: player numbers, engagement, and revenue. Yet they rarely seem to take home the “big” GOTY at major award shows.
A forum comment put it plainly:
“You will almost never see a competitive shooter, a racing game or a fighting game be a serious contender for GOTY no matter the quality.”
So yes — while “always” is obviously an exaggeration, the pattern Shroud points to does appear rooted in reality: narrative-driven single-player experiences do seem to enjoy an edge in awards.
Why Single Player games always win?
There are a few reasons this imbalance might exist:
Awards often reward tightly directed experiences, character arcs, dramatic beats, and a clear beginning-to-end structure. Single-player games excel here. Reviewers and award juries might evaluate a complete packaged experience more easily than a multiplayer game built for ongoing story lines and updates.
Multiplayer or live-service titles frequently wear the “just fun” label, rather than the “art form” label that many award bodies favour. Narrative games tend to drop, get reviewed, and enter the awards cycle. Multiplayer games can linger, evolve, and their full value might not be captured in a single awards year.
In other words, Shroud isn’t just griping. He’s pointing to structural realities of how game criticism and award culture work.
The counterpoint: It’s not all black and white
But let’s be fair: there are layers to this.
Some multiplayer games do get recognition, though perhaps less so for the major “overall” prize. The categories blur: “Single-player” and “multiplayer” aren’t always strictly distinct. Many modern games mix campaigns + online modes.
What “Game of the Year” should represent is itself up for debate: Is it the most polished story experience? The most popular? The most innovative? The one that brought the most players together?
So even though Shroud’s rant is deliberately provocative, it sparks a worthwhile question: Are we measuring games differently depending on genre, and is that fair?
Shroud’s statement, “single-player games always win GOTY and it’s bullshit,” is deliberately bold. It’s meant to stir up conversation. While it’s not literally accurate in every case, it does reflect an underlying frustration that multiplayer experiences may not get fair representation in top-tier awards.
