Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MThibault" data-source="post: 731128" data-attributes="member: 7971">Just my two cents.  (Well, its turning into 10 cents.  Sorry.)I'm not convinced by the arguments against Silver and Bronze awards. Saying that it is meaningless because there might be a 5 vote difference between 3rd and 4th place sort of assumes that there will be more than a 5 vote difference between 1st and 2nd place.  This is probably true with WotC in the running, but nothing to brag about.  It is definitely not a strength of the single-award system.  There will always be an arbitrary line somewhere so you draw the line in such a place that it supports the goals, terms of reference, or the mission statement, of the award.So what exactly is the mission?  I'm not sure if this statement is still the one being used but I found this on the Ennies section of this site:"The EN World d20 System Awards (known as the 'ENnies') allow the gaming public to give the best publishers, writers and artists the recognition they deserve. These prestigious annual awards are a sign of quality and excellence, a visible symbol that tells people that they are looking at something a cut above the rest."The first sentence means that the voting should be squarely on the shoulders of the "gaming public".  I don't think that this has to preclude a spearate Judge's Choice Award, but having a Juried Winner in each category would probably move too far away from the stated mission.The second sentence is where the debate about degrees of recognition comes into play.  While I do agree that being nominated is an honour, you really don't end up with a "visible symbol" of the gaming public's recognition, without being number one in your category.  This plays in two directions: 1) Without a silver or bronze award a publisher can only honestly say that a panel of judges thought they were a cut above, so nomination as an honour doesn't support the mission and it probably shouldn't be part of the equation when considering change and growth of the system.  A silver medal does actually indicate that the gaming public voted for you more than 3 or more other products (I too would be in favor of increasing the number of nominees if the emphasis were going to be placed on the top 3 finalists).  No one has ever complained that having 3 medals in the Olympics takes away from the prestige of the Gold Medalist -- there is still only one Gold Medal.  Well, except in figure skating last year but you take my point.Clearly identifying and recognizing 2nd and 3rd place with a visible symbol does take away some of the prestige from the "also rans" but those who don't recieve medals in the ENnies aren't being recongized by the gaming public, so that should not be the highest priority.2) As things stand now the prestige of the ENnies is compromised by the single-award system.  If the assumption is that WotC will win 60% of the awards, and WotC does not associate the award with its winning products (except for one press release on their website) then the bulk of the potential visible symbols that promote the awards themselves will leave circulation.  If the awards are supposed to "tell people that they are looking at something a cut above the rest" then expanding visibility by adding two more "cuts" will serve the mission and increase the exposure and by default prestige.Why does visibility of the award increase its prestige?  In this case, it is because it is a fan-based award.  I don't want to sound like I'm denigrating people's-choice awards, I'm not.  I just think that they are a different animal than industry-insider awards.  The winners of an award that is granted by industry peers is prestigious because those people are peers, colleagues and competitors.  The assumption is that they know more about the industry and the work involved in creating a product, they have thought longer and harder about what makes a good product or they have more invested in the industry so they take the award more seriously.  Hopefully all three, often not though.  Now what generates the prestige of a people's choice award is the recognition it has amongs the people.  I could get a bunch of friends together put up a web poll and hand out MT (pronounced Empty) awards, but if public hasn't heard of them they are worthless -- worthless to the fans and the publishers.  I don't want to put too fine a point on it, but the more visible the awards are the more prestigious they will be.  If there are three awards given out for each category this triples the potential visibility (and threefore prestige) of the awards themselves.  This prestige is assumed in the mission statement, and to a large degree I don't have a problem with this assumption, but the mission will not be served in the long-run with only one award per category.Cheers.Michael S. ThibaultPS I'm assuming that WotC will always be eligible for ENnies; that they will always have suffient quality in at least one of their products eligible in most categories to be nominated; and overwhelming market share to make winning the gold medal in most of the categories a breeze.  In other words, if they can get on the ballot, only a fool would put money against them.PPS I'm also assuming that WotC won't be sending out stickers or bookmarks or whatever to advertise their wins on the products themselves, or including the "Medal" in 2nd printings, ongoing web enhancements, etc.PPPS Sorry to ramble.MT</blockquote>

Verification