Dancey resigns as GAMA Treasurer

[Nisarg]

1) High sales are not an indicator of quality, they are an indicator of popularity or of greater marketing and/or distribution.
2) Awards that are supposed to be based upon quality should not be swayed by sales or popularity, but should be judged on its actual quality (writing, rules, graphics layout, etc.) as determined by concensus of those voting for the awards.

Is that so hard to understand?

1. popularity and marketing should both be considered, if this is really an INDUSTRY award, not just a "creative writing for failed lit. majors" award.
Part of the quality of a PRODUCT is how it connects with the PUBLIC.

2. How do you propose we choose who is permitted to "vote" for the awards? What's to prevent a single ideology of game design to end up manipulating the voting, or for the president of the association to up and decide that his own products (even if they sell very poorly) have the best "quality"?

Nisarg

 

[Umbran]

why should i care who wins the Origins Awards, since i have no realistic expectation that it will match my own idiosyncratic idea of "quality"?

Because sometimes there is some wisdom to be found in other people's opinions, and while your own ideas may be idiosyncratic, they probably aren't so far off in left field that the judgement of others is completely irrelevant.

Personally, I like the Ennies. A large group of fans pick a table of judges that they feel have good taste. These judges apply that taste, pick nominees, and then take 'em back to that same group of fans for voting. A fairly reasonable way of distilling the collected impressions of the group as I can imagine. And while sometimes a group can be dumb, sometimes it can also be quite discerning.

I don't know what final voting procedure the Ennies will be using this year, but having seen the system used for the Hugo awards, I think I'd want to suggest it for next year.

 

[Rasyr]

but as you say, everyone has their own differing opinions of what quality is. therefore, an "award for quality" that is determined by someone other than myself is completely irrelevant to me.

why should i care who wins the Origins Awards, since i have no realistic expectation that it will match my own idiosyncratic idea of "quality"?

Ahh.. but if the awards were chosen by a group of individuals whose own work you might know and respect, then that might get you to check it out. The thing with the Origins Awards is that they are peer awards, awards given by other individuals within the rpg industry.

These are the people who create the games you play and enjoy who are saying that the winners are of exceptional quality. If you enjoy their work, wouldn't you think that you just might enjoy something that they think is a very good product?

By your own definition, you should not care what won the Ennies either. You were not part of the panel of judges who selected the nominees. You are only one of possibly thousands who vote for one of the nominees. What are you going to say about the one that wins a category if it is not the one you voted for?

I would like to point out that up until this year, the process for select the Origins Awards was virtually identical to that of the Ennies (and this year it was still extremely similar, with the Gamer's Choice being identical to the Ennies, and only the Peer awards differing by limiting the final voting to the GAMA members). Companies sumbitted products to the Academy (just like companies submit products to the Ennies judge's panel), then the Academy votes on the submissions (just as the Ennie judges do), and final voting is done by a larger corpus of voters. The main difference between the Origins Awards and the Ennies is that the Ennies is more focused on d20 products while the OAs encompass a much wider field of categories.

Did the OAs have problems? Yes, many problems, from companies trying to game the system to Chairpersons who would change some of the underlying rules on a yearly basis. Last year Nicole Lindroos (Nickchick - or however she spells it hehe) became Chair of the Academy and tried to institute changes that would have made the awards much more codified. However, there were several people did their best to obstruct any changes she tried to get implemented, one of the loudest obstructionist being a person who wasn't even a member of GAMA at the time, and who made (at the very least) many damaging remarks about the changes Nicole wanted to make without even waiting to see if they would be an improvement or not.

There is curently a task force (made up of one person) appointed by the GAMA board working on proposals (although he did create a mailing list open to whatever interested people wanted to join - effectively an idea generating list that has no real say in anything) for revamping the awards. Whether or not anything will come of this remains to be seen.

 

[Dogbrain]

Slightly O-T... I've been googling for that article for a while now without success; does anyone have a link to it?

I can't find it. It may have disappeared. The gist was that he came to the conclusion that what killed TSR was that it ignored its customers. It did no consumer research at all. It invested in massive prints of products that did not sell--and then printed more of them. It uprooted DragonLance from its home game system. It also did some really strange stuff, like buying a needlepoint concern.

 

[Rasyr]

Personally, I like the Ennies. A large group of fans pick a table of judges that they feel have good taste.

Hmmm.. did not realize that the judges were voted for. Interesting in that in the discussions for revamping the Origins Awards, we have been discussing the use of smaller panels made of professionals from the industry associated with a given award category, retailers and distributors.

Thus, the final nominations would be selected by those who have a good idea of the standards of quality associated with products in that category.

Another idea batted around is instead of having a public vote make the final decision, have the public make the pre-nomination submissions (i.e. a product requires a minimum number of voted to make it to the nomination panel, and only the top xx are considered), coupled with companies also being allowed to nominate one product per category, and the panel itself (if unanimous) being able to add non-submitted products to the ballot as well.

There were a number of other ideas floated as well.....

 

[d4]

Ahh.. but if the awards were chosen by a group of individuals whose own work you might know and respect, then that might get you to check it out. The thing with the Origins Awards is that they are peer awards, awards given by other individuals within the rpg industry.

assuming i did know and respect and agree with the group of individuals doing the choosing.

By your own definition, you should not care what won the Ennies either. You were not part of the panel of judges who selected the nominees. You are only one of possibly thousands who vote for one of the nominees.

exactly.

What are you going to say about the one that wins a category if it is not the one you voted for?

that it was the most popular. and given the large number of people voting for the ENnies, that is statistically significant and perhaps relevant to the gaming community (or at least d20 community) as a whole. awards chosen by a small, select group of people can't make that claim.

for what it's worth, i don't think a subjective thing like "quality" can ever be recognized and agreed upon by a large group of people. which is why i think trying to award people for quality is a strange concept.

on the other hand, something like popularity, or as The Sigil said, a game's impact on the gaming community, can in some way be assessed objectively. and sales are definitely one way of measuring that.

basically, all of these things boil down to popularity contests -- what things do the people deciding the awards like the best for their own personal reasons. we want these awards to be meaningful to the community as a whole. the only way to get results that are statistically significant is to make the sample size as large as possible. we can't poll every gamer on what he thinks is best. but starting from the (admittedly not entirely accurate) assumption that what he or she buys is what he or she thinks is good is at least a place to start.

leaving it in the hands of a small group of people is IMO not the right way to serve the community.

 

[eyebeams]

My google-fu is strong. I searched for "dancey tsr hear" (remembering that Dancey said WotC was dying because it refused to hear its customers) and this was the first link.

http://www.atlasofadventure.com/Archive/TSR1997Buyout.asp

This is interesting. Ryan Dancey structures the article as if he was on a mission from WotC to acquire TSR by placing a quote from Adkison in the middle, when, in fact, this is not the order of events. As Chris Pramas has explained, this is not how it happened. Dancey was not hired until he'd already investigated TSR and discovered his own company couldn't afford it.

 

[BrooklynKnight]

My main issue is that Origins, if its meant to be THE award for the industry, should in SOME way represent what people actually play and enjoy.
Nisarg

THE award for the Industry should be the Ennies.

 

[Nisarg]

basically, all of these things boil down to popularity contests -- what things do the people deciding the awards like the best for their own personal reasons. we want these awards to be meaningful to the community as a whole. the only way to get results that are statistically significant is to make the sample size as large as possible. we can't poll every gamer on what he thinks is best. but starting from the (admittedly not entirely accurate) assumption that what he or she buys is what he or she thinks is good is at least a place to start.

leaving it in the hands of a small group of people is IMO not the right way to serve the community.

You just hit the nail right on the head there. It is always just a popularity contest.
Given that, it means that a popularity contest voted on by a couple of thousand gamers is going to be a much more accurate reflection of what gamers really play and enjoy (and has had a real impact on the industry) than what a handful of self-anointed "experts" think is best.

Nisarg

 

[eyebeams]

1. popularity and marketing should both be considered, if this is really an INDUSTRY award, not just a "creative writing for failed lit. majors" award.
Part of the quality of a PRODUCT is how it connects with the PUBLIC.

Tha amusing thing here is that, of course, a sales-based award would feature lots and lots of White Wolf PRODUCT, which -- using your own definition -- connects with the PUBLIC more than the majority of D20 material.

In fact, most D20 products occupy the cheap seats of .pdf and POD. Meanwhile, the evil, industry-destroying stuff I've written sells on a scale that it almost inconceivable to any company short of WotC, so it would get nominated all the time.

Also, by your own standards, the Ennies are hosed, too.