Ennie-ness of ENworld

[C.W.Richeson]

Hey, C.W., a question for you: Do any of the judges regularly post at Circvs, RPG Haven, or Story-Games?

I ask because I wonder if perhaps the ENnies have missed some opportunities to keep people engaged. Not just here, but this place does make a good case study.

I'm the only current judge particularly active in online forums, and I mostly haunt RPGnet though I occasionally post at the mentioned three.

RPGnet also had very little ENnies discussion - about the same as ENWorld, actually. If I had to put my finger on the ultimate issue, it's that fans had few questions but those producing product, be it podcast, book, or something else, wanted a more active discussion.

 

[Umbran]

RPGnet also had very little ENnies discussion - about the same as ENWorld, actually. If I had to put my finger on the ultimate issue, it's that fans had few questions but those producing product, be it podcast, book, or something else, wanted a more active discussion.

Okay, so the key to increasing traffic on the subject would seem to be to attract the producers of products to the various sites. That might not be all that hard to do...

 

[mxyzplk]

To get back to the original question, there has been surprisingly little discussion of the ENnies on EN World.

Don't you try your trolling tricks here Pramas! You just want to drag this thread off topic! Why, the thread is even entitled "ten guys try to argue against a clearly illogical argument with logic." Next season, it'll be a series on Fox!

 

[Herschel]

Except my view is perfectly logical and anybody with a clue could figure that out. (just like it's also logical to say "it's close enough for me") The difference being most people don't CARE about the degree of "impartiality" that I do because it works for them the way it is. That's why we have entertainment choices (and I don't attend Oscars parties either).

 

[C.W.Richeson]

Herschel, I'm not a Paizo fan boy. I'm not a 4E fan boy. I have played both games and enjoy them. Right now I'm running an oWoD Mage game and slowly gearing up for a Burning Wheel campaign. Simply put, I like games, and that's the same attitude the other judges have.

Why did Pathfinder get several nominations? It's a really awesome book, well done in every way, and I'm saying this as someone who has been actively writing detailed game reviews for five years now.

As for your argument about marketing, I disagree that it creates meaningful bias. The only evidence you've provided for the case you're making is that publishers submit products with marketing in mind. The impact of this on the judges is unknown to you, and to everyone else except the individual judges, but at a minimum it's safe to say that they're on the same footing as the other folk who submitted - they all submitted product with marketing in mind.

If you have more thoughts on the matter, please share them. I recommend conjuring up some evidence, though. Your current argument is based exclusively on idle speculation and a quick glance at this year's nominations. While I appreciate the argument "anybody with a clue could figure that out," perhaps a better argument would clearly lay out your case so that clueless folk, like me, can easily follow along.

 

[Herschel]

As for your argument about marketing, I disagree that it creates meaningful bias.

Meaningful bias is in the eye of the beholder. For most people, "close enough" is good enough, especially for entertainment purposes, and that works for them. In many things it works for me also. I don't like the word "best" anyway when it comes to entertainment because best is a purely subjective term in this context. There is bias in the pool (whether or not it's meaningful is up to the person reading it) and awards saying something is "best", when it's already a term I don't like in this context, is something I don't like. There's not enough objective criteria for my tastes. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Mark CMG]

There hasn't been any bias proven by you and it would seem that the factors involved (what has been submitted, the make up of judges this year, the full list of nominees, etc.) would point to either no bias or a slight potential bias away from what you are suggesting.

 

[Perram]

Meaningful bias is in the eye of the beholder. For most people, "close enough" is good enough, especially for entertainment purposes, and that works for them. In many things it works for me also. I don't like the word "best" anyway when it comes to entertainment because best is a purely subjective term in this context. There is bias in the pool (whether or not it's meaningful is up to the person reading it) and awards saying something is "best", when it's already a term I don't like in this context, is something I don't like. There's not enough objective criteria for my tastes. Your mileage may vary.

So let me get this straight:

1. Because anyone who wants to be considered for an Ennie has to submit a copy of their work for review, you feel there is a bias? And your argument is a fictitious group of people who may have written a book in Tibet not submitting to the Ennies, the award show for GenCon, the BIGGEST event in the entire industry?
2. You don't seem to like award shows at all.
3. You can't provide one example of a product that you feel should have been nominated but wasn't?
4. In fact you seem to dispute that anything CAN be the best thing produced this year.

I'm sorry, but you have no argument. No argument based on ANY level of logic at all. And all you've done is repeatedly besmirch the reputation and ability of judges you seem to know nothing about for an awards ceremony you seem to know next to nothing about because... the company currently sitting at #2 in sales in this industry, that produced one of the best selling books of the year, that released more product this past year than nearly every other company...

Got nominated a lot?

At this point I am finding hard to believe that we've not been trolled, much less being able to see any significant point worth considering in all the posts you've had in this thread.

 

[Herschel]

Again, it's how much bias you are willing to accept. The whole thing is subjective. Saying there is no bias is quite frankly ridiculous, saying there's no MEANINGFUl bias is certainly legitimate.

Let me put it this way witha different example: The NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament in March. for a number of years it was set at 64 teams. They play a head-to-head tournament to select a champion, a "best" team. There is, however, a selection committee, which introduces bias in to the selection process. There are plenty of legitimate arguments that the actual 64 "best" teams didn't get in and the only way to show who the true champion is is to expand the tournament and extend an invite to EVERY Division 1 team/school.

Considering the number of times lower seeded teams actually make it past teh first weekend, for me, the selection process is "good enough", even though there's bias in the selection process. I still don't begrudge those who feel the system is flawed because they have a legitimate, logical view.

 

[Herschel]

You don't seem to like award shows at all.

In fact you seem to dispute that anything CAN be the best thing produced this year.

I'm sorry, but you have no argument. No argument based on ANY level of logic at all. And all you've done is repeatedly besmirch the reputation and ability of judges you seem to know nothing about for an awards ceremony you seem to know next to nothing about because... the company currently sitting at #2 in sales in this industry, that produced one of the best selling books of the year, that released more product this past year than nearly every other company...

1. I don't like awards shows at all. I've said that repeatedly, and why.

2. To different people, anything can be "best" in a year. It's purely subjective. Are you saying nobody will prefer something that's not on the list?

3. Where have I besmirched the judges? By acknowledging they're human and unable to have access/know everything?

You obviously missed where I disregarded last year's list too, when WotC had a number of entries. Products I've bought alot of.

And just producing a lot does not mean quality. Talk about not having any logic behind a feeling. (Twinkies, anyone. )(Although in this case, Pazodid produce quality, at least in the products I looked at/purchased).