ENnies 2002 - Making Decisions

[Morrus]

Since last year's ENnies ceremony, I have spoken to numerous publishers about the way things were set up. Mostly, people were fairly happy with the process, although two main areas of concern came up repeatedly:

1) Publishers felt disadvantaged by the fact that they could only enter one product per category, and felt that they were playing a guessing game trying to match products to categories. The solution to this is to allow publishers to enter as many products as they like for as many categories as they like.

2) Publishers were - by and large - disappointed by the fact that the ENnies were voted for by the public, turning the contest into one of popularity. Those publishers with smaller print runs and less coverage of retail outlests were disadvantaged because, while their products may well have been very good, nobody had seen them - and thus nobody voted for them. The solution to this is to have the judges themselves choose the winners, although a 'People's Choice' style award should be added to allow the public to participate.

I'd appreciate your opinions on these issues, and on any other related issue that may spring to mind. I'm making some decisions over the next couple of weeks, so if you have any concerns, or even if you just agree with the above proposals, now is the time!

 

[Dave G]

I realize I am not a publisher, so my vote might not count for much, but I think that you might want to have more than one people's choice category. I have no problem with the judges deciding the bulk of the winners, but the community aspect of these awards is what made me pay attention to them.

I also think that if you are going to have the judges doing the decisions, you definitely will want a larger panel of judges to get a more representative panel.

Hope you don't mind me butting in!

 

[d20Dwarf]

I also think the community aspect of the awards should be closely guarded. Its a fair argument to say that neither the judges nor the public will have read every single product that gets nominated, so either way it becomes a hit or miss "popularity" contest. Such is the way of awards.

As for entries, I don't think making it any number in any category is a good idea either. I do think some middle ground should be considered, however, as one per category is probably too restrictive.

 

[EricNoah]

I think having the judges narrow down the field helps reduce the "popularity contest" feel, but I also feel that it's vital that the community get to vote. But in a sense it IS a popularity contest. Maybe one key is to announce the judges' selections a good long time (several weeks) before the voting begins so the public has a chance to get to their local store and flip through the nominees or buy them.

A logistical thing -- I'd recommend maybe having someone in the US coordinate the distribution of the products to the judges -- most companies are in the US and likely many of the judges will be too. That might speed up the process of getting material to the judges.

I don't mind multiple submissions per category.

Did we miss some categories last time? Were there some that needed to be combined or eliminated?

 

[mearls]

Well, I'm not a publisher, but I am opinionated, so here goes:

I think the set up from last year worked out very well. True, while smaller companies might no have as much of a chance to to win in the final vote, everyone started from the same level in the nominations round. Furthermore, since polling was conducted on line, I really don't think the gap between big and small companies is as wide as it normally would be. Some of the smaller publishers are also the most vocal and active in on-line discussions.

Personally, I really don't see what the big deal is about having the public vote. After all, the average gamer decides what makes a good product by purchasing them. I think the nominations round does a good job of picking out and recognizing quality products.

Companies don't become popular by making bad products. IMHO, saying a company is winning because it's "popular" is like saying their products won because "people like them" and isn't that the point of an award?

- Mearls

 

[Dave G]

I have a real entertainment world example of how popular does not equal good... boy bands.

In Hollywood, some awards are more prestigious than others, simply because of who is doing the voting...

I'm not saying you don't have a valid point, but these concerns are worth discussing and striving to reach a consensus.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

You've already got two filters to keep the "boy band" scenario from happening:

1) You need to be a gamer.

2) You need to know about EN World.

I trust the votes of people who can hit both of those qualifications.

 

[Master01]

I hope there will be space for Electronic Publishers without have to send hardcopy materials...

 

[Morrus]

I hope there will be space for Electronic Publishers without have to send hardcopy materials...

There is a big problem with this. The judges are all volunteers. They don't get paid for this, and it is unfair to expect them to print out hundreds of pages of documents so that they can review them all. Ink costs alone could mean that they are shelling out a couple of hundred dollars each, just for the privelage of fairly reviwing your product.

Think about it - there are a *lot* of pdf products out there now. Well over a hundred. Some of them with page counts well above 60 (last year there were a few with page counts of 100+). They aren't going to be able to print all of them out. You, on the other hand, as the profit-making publisher, are merely asked to print out 5-6 copies of your product. I think that's more than reasonable.

 

[bramadan]

What I am curious about is how will the judges be selected. Are they going to be acknowledged industry people, some community luminaries (like Eric) or in-betweens like Piratecat ?