Monte on Origins awards and ENnies

[Krug]

From Monte Cook's Origins 2005 report:

The Origins Awards

I haven't had much nice to say about the Origins Awards for a long time. In fact, even when I got into the industry in the late '80s, people complained about how they were run. They voiced pretty much the same complaints that people voice today, and I think they stopped being relevant quite some time ago.

A few years back, Charles Ryan, then president of the Academy of Adventure Gaming Arts and Design (the body that runs the Origins Awards), worked to improve the awards by enhancing the ceremony itself -- people were encouraged to dress up, presenters had little intros prepared, just like an awards show on TV. While it didn't solve all the awards' problems, it was a step in the right direction.

Now fast forward to the 2005 awards "ceremony." I'll be the first to admit that I wasn't actually there, so my knowledge comes secondhand, but the people who described it to me used words like "farce," "debacle," and "sad." Apparently, it consisted of someone standing on a platform while people waited to get into the dealer's room in the morning, shouting out the nominees while belly dancers -- no, I'm not making this up -- walked around with signs naming those who didn't win.

Perhaps this kind of treatment is a sign that the feeding tube is about to be removed from the awards, which seem to have been in a persistent vegetative state for the last few years. That, it would seem, would be the merciful thing to do.

There are two fundamental problems with the Origins Awards, which I think are inextricably linked. The first is that the awards have become virtually meaningless in the eyes of the customers who buy (or don't buy) the products that win them. The second is that the system used for determining the awards produces results that are unsatisfactory to industry members and consumers alike. And as long as the people handling the awards believe they are more qualified to judge merit than gamers at large -- the very audience for which the games are designed -- these two problems are unsolvable.

But there's more to it even than that. It might just be that an award system designed to compare the merit of games designed by one guy in his basement alongside those produced by multimillion-dollar corporations is inherently flawed and can't be fixed. Not that I wouldn't mourn its passing. On the contrary, I truly wish there were some kind of professional recognition of merit in the industry that was worth paying attention to.

As it stands now, it seems clear that the ENnies are the industry awards worth supporting, and so that's what I'm doing. In fact, at Origins I spoke with Denise, the charming woman in charge of the ENnies this year, and it appears that I might even get to play a very small role, which I couldn't be happier about. I'm always honored to be a part of something cool like that -- it may be the biggest perk of being in the industry.

 

[Alzrius]

I think I know how he feels about participating with the ENnies - I feel like the same just because I'm on EN World so often. I know it's not the same thing, but it's still a great feeling.

 

[Turanil]

As it stands now, it seems clear that the ENnies are the industry awards worth supporting, and so that's what I'm doing. In fact, at Origins I spoke with Denise, the charming woman in charge of the ENnies this year, and it appears that I might even get to play a very small role, which I couldn't be happier about. I'm always honored to be a part of something cool like that -- it may be the biggest perk of being in the industry.

Just meet a hot female gamers, and you will agree with anything she likes or belong to.

 

[Pramas]

I agree with Monte about this year's awards. When the new system was unveiled, Green Ronin decided not to participate in this year's awards. In my blog, I wrote this:

"As expected the Origins Awards were a pathetic sham this year. Apparently, we as an industry don't even have enough self-respect to merit our own awards ceremony anymore. Instead, the winners were announced to the largely disinterested crowd gathered to await the opening of the Exhibit Hall. This meant, of course, that most of the creators of these games couldn't even be there because they were likely inside the Exhibit Hall preparing their booths. And even if you were there, you had no chance to actually accept the award or say anything. No, for that, you had to go to the "party" on Friday night. Winners got in free but others had to pay $30 if they wanted to attend. The whole thing was ill conceived, lame, and frankly insulting. In five years, the fan-created and -run ENnie Awards have far surpassed the Origins Awards in respect and prestige. I look forward to the ENnies at GenCon next month."

But this part of Monte's post I don't agree with:
"And as long as the people handling the awards believe they are more qualified to judge merit than gamers at large -- the very audience for which the games are designed -- these two problems are unsolvable."

This is a very tricky subject. Theoretically, the Origins Awards are supposed to recognize the best games of a given year. How you define "best" is what creates all the problems. Some people think the awards should just be a straight up popularity contest. Others point out that a game that sold 500 copies is going to have an awful hard time winning such an award, regardless of how good it is. This is the conflict that has led to the yearly revisions to how the awards are given out. The Origins Awards were originally a popularity contest voted on by the attendees of Origins. They later became a hybrid award, with an Academy of professionals and the public both having influence over the winners. Last year the awards were split into two categories, with the Academy voting on one set of awards and a public vote determining the Gamer's Choice. This year was similar, but used a panel of judges to determine the initial slate of candidates (which is not unlike the ENnies, but with much less participation).

What the awards have struggled to balance is a game's inherant qualities with the influence of sales and marketing. If the awards are nothing but a popular vote, the games with the best sales and retail penetration will win every time and that's not a satisfying answer for most of the people that work in the game industry. And you'll note that even the ENnies don't just throw the whole thing open to a public vote. They have judges that read all the submissions and determine the final slate for these exact reasons.

 

[Glyfair]

What the awards have struggled to balance is a game's inherant qualities with the influence of sales and marketing. If the awards are nothing but a popular vote, the games with the best sales and retail penetration will win every time and that's not a satisfying answer for most of the people that work in the game industry. And you'll note that even the ENnies don't just throw the whole thing open to a public vote. They have judges that read all the submissions and determine the final slate for these exact reasons.

I think this combination make the ENNies attractive because it has qualities of both. The judges create a system the limits the advantage of market penetration. The public voting allows this element in, but still allows the cream to rise to the top (since the ENWorld reader is almost certainly more informed about niche products than the average gamer).

I think this system adds meaning to the cliched phrase "It's an honor just to be nominated."

 

[Roudi]

This sure is quite the turnaround from his opinion of the ENnies last year.

I'm still not impressed.

 

[Rasyr]

This sure is quite the turnaround from his opinion of the ENnies last year.

Yup.

Last year Monte blasted the ENnies very hard. Making numerous claims and just about (if not actually) outright insulting the judges. Then he compounded his egotistical claims by announcing his "Monte Presents The Year's Best".

After pretty much saying that 5 judges, of differing views and tastes, were not qualified select the top products in each cateogy, he turns around and effectively says that he, alone, can choose the best. And do so with a scheme that allows him to make money off of other people's work, with no payment of any sort to those other people. It is hilarious because several of those judges that he insulted turned around and blasted him for being such a huge hypocrite.

Also note that he is says:

And as long as the people handling the awards believe they are more qualified to judge merit than gamers at large -- the very audience for which the games are designed -- these two problems are unsolvable.

Please note that this is EXACTLY what Monte is doing with his "Year's Best" product. Believing that HE is qualified to say what has merit and what doesn't. It is also very close to the comments he made about the ENnies last year....

In regards to the Origins Awards -

First off, Mr. Pramas is absolutely correct in his statements regarding them. However, I would like to point out that Green Ronin's decision not to support the awards this year was made well before GAMA royally screwed up with their "shout it from the podium" awards announcement. That in itself was a last minute decision on the part of GAMA, not on the part of the Academy, who was responsible for the selection of awards. While it may have vindicated GR's decision not to participate, it was not a factor in their decision. I won't even speculate the reasons behind the decision not to participate, that is up to Chris to tell you if he likes.

Now, I was part of the OATF, the group that was trying to revamp and come up with a better system for the Origin Awards. Green Ronin was involved, and so were a lot of other people. However, I don't recall seeing Monte involved. Nor involved with the Academy either before or after. Even though Green Ronin did not support the awards this year, they are STILL involved in trying to make them better (an extremely laudible position for them to take).

The OATF was formed because it was recognized that the Origin Awards had lost meaning, and that solid guidelines were needed for them, and that something needed to be done. This is one of the topics currently under discussion on the Academy lists. It is also recognized that this is NOT soemthing that is going to be accomplished overnight, or even in a single year! This is a long term goal. One that will take time to accomplish...

The biggest problem that the OAs have is that there is no consistency. Things can change greatly from year to year. In the past, the Academy has basically been at the mercy of the Chair, who was appointed by the GAMA Board. And the whims of the Chair and the Board makes things highly unstable (as shown by a single board member using his influence on the President of GAMA to get the Chair terminated very soon after his election (simply because he did not personally like the Chair) leaving the Academy without a Chair until after the start of the solicitation of submissions for the OAs). This is a major concern of the Academy right now and something the Academy wants fixed.

(BTW - any d20 authors on these forums, I would like to urge you to contact me and we will get you added to the Academy so that you too, can help in making the OAs better).


Monte also makes another error at the end of that quoted bit. The ENnies are not an industry award. They are a fan-based award for the rgp industry. He also neglects to mention the OAs encompass much much more than just rpgs. This does not mean that the ENnies are worthless, quite the contrary, they have great worth.

When HARP won an silver ENnie (was it last year?), my reaction was not "We should have won!", it was "We won a silver? KEWL!!!!".

One thing that is a problem with both the OAs and the ENnies, isn't actually a problem with the awards or their processes, but with what some publishers want the awards to do/be, and that is a marketing tool

Okay, so I rambled a bit....

 

[Rasyr]

As I mentioned above, the Academy is actively recruiting new members - authors, designers, artists, etc.. All you need is 3 credits in the gaming industry. If you have 3 credits, then contact abby@gama.org and she will add you to the Academy list.

And if Monte reads this, then I would like to encourage him to join the Academy as well, and try to be part of the solution rather than just sitting on the outside making disparaging remarks. The slot of Academy Chair is up for nomination if you think you are up for it....

 

[DaveMage]

Shouldn't all such awards *be* marketing tools?

After all, if the awards themselves have no market value, then what's the point?

I could present the "Dave" awards each year, and, while those that won might get an ego stroke (albeit, an extremely little one), no one else in the world would care. Awards have to mean something to others beyond the awarding body and the winners.

Now, if no marketing value is to come from them, then an award could be switched to artist(individual)-based award. In other words, products don't win, only people win. The individual could then list the award on a resume, which would be respected by those who might work with that artist in the future.

 

[Psion]

Interesting. Thumbs up to Dextra.

Here's the thing about awards: there is no one perfect solution that is going to satisfy everyone 100%. I sort of learned that one from the inside. I hope that's what Monte is getting at or realizing.

I do think it's worth drawing some attention to some of the more worthy products and giving those who brought those products to life recognition. (And there are always going to be people bitter they weren't pick /their favorite product wasn't picked.)

It's sort of difficult in the gaming enviroment for awards to have a significant marketing impact. Unlike movie awards where a significant fraction of potential movie goers pay attention to movie awards, the bog standard gamer doesn't pay attention to gaming award. I don't think there's a real good way to fix this without a marketing budget of some sort. The ENnies are run on a shoe-string as it is.

As such, it remains more of an ego massaging than a marketing tool. But I hope that the more savvy sections of the market can appreciate the effort and results of the awards process.

Incidentally, beforehand, I think that the publishers need a big and hearty thanks for giving us a chance. Especially the non-d20 publishers. There is a lot of emnity in this field and lots of publishers have been offish when the ENnies solicited their input. But a fair amount of big non-d20 publishers have submitted entries, and in that very act, gives us more impact in the larger gaming arena.