Should WOTC participate in the ENnies?

[Morrus]

When there is a vote to cast people simply vote what they know, they certainly don't vote for a book they've never seen before. Every WotC book is always going to be known by many more people than a 3rd-party book, and I think that is enough to cause a biased effect on the results.

Ony in a "make a single vote for your favourite" voting system. We've done a LOT of research into voting systems, and the one we use addresses that. I can't stress that enough or say it enough times.

Others can explain how it works (heck, look on the ENnies webiste and inform yourself - there's a link which explains the voting system). But visibility alone will not ensure a win.

 

[carmachu]

Sure, WotC won just about every category that they entered, but I think products from other publishers has improved considerably since then, and people are likely more aware of and interested in products from other publishers now than they were five years ago.

I guess we won't know unless WotC submits products for consideration.

I think they should be allowed in. Personally I cant see anything from WotC actually winning anything as of late. Take best gaming product of the year......I'd put Ptolus up against anything WotC has put out and its just not going to compare, all their stuff will get blown out of the water....

 

[Umbran]

But it's still hard to make the dollars-and-cents case that they should risk losing sales for potentially long term profit when its a pretty small and fragile industry.

I think you'd have to do some work to demonstrate that sales would actually be lost.

The awards are going to happen with or without them. The 3rd party publishers are getting publicity whether or not WotC enters - so if sales are lost due to the ENnies publicity, they are lost with or without WotC involvement. Meanwhile, if WotC doesn't enter, they fail to take advantage of the cheap publicity the ENnies offer.

By the time of the ENnies, the products involved have generally been on the shelves for a while, and already had much of their sales impact. The awards might boost sales late in the product's life, but they won't kill sales that have already happened. So, it would seem to me that the ENnies are a no-lose proposition in terms of direct sales. Winning gains, but losing doesn't lose.

Now, the PR impact is a different story, far more complicated.

 

[Steel_Wind]

WotC chooses not to enter products right now. I would rather they continued with that decision - but if they choose not to - then that's what they do.

If they choose to do so, we’ll see if their presence overwhelms the process for the reasons I have stated.

Whilst we’re on the subject of changing the Ennies (not that WotC’s entry would change the rules, as such) my preference for a change – if there is to be one - is to expand the categories of entries.

We do not have candidates for:

• CCGs,
• Non-collectible Card games
• Miniatures, painted
• Miiatures unpainted,
• CMG games,
• boardgames (war)
• boardgames (non-war)
  

In short, Gencon is a much bigger industry event than simply RPGs. And while the RPG nature of the ENnies reflects the bias of games covered by ENWorld, the awards have become bigger than this site.

These are categories that I would like to see covered by the Ennies - and I would propose electing a separate batch (or two batches, if required) of judges to deal with the new categories of nominations.

Consimworld and Boardgamegeek.com would link to the site for voting in the same manner as other RGP sites have been approached to do so and who deliver votes.

Yes, that duplicates Origins industry awarded awards. The difference is, given a choice between winning an ENnie and winning an award at Origins, I have not a doubt in my mind as to which I would prefer to receive – and I put it to you that the ENnies is of more value, commercially and as a feather in your hat.

In short, I think the ENnies have more legitimacy and have become - for better or worse - a PART of Gencon. The ENies already partly duplicates awards given at Origins. The sugestion that to expand the categories is somehow cutting somebody's elses grass does no stand up to scrutiny.

The ENnies organizers have been asked to add these categories in the past and have demurred. I would ask that that decision be revisited.

If you want to change the awards in a significant and beneficial manner, I submit that this is a more substantive and overwhelmingly positive a change than WotC’s entering or not entering products.

 

[Morrus]

Ughh... not posting my reply in both threads, Steel Wind!

 

[Steel_Wind]

Ughh... not posting my reply in both threads, Steel Wind!

Yup. It was a very different topic so I thought better of it and split it off in a new thread.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I like to think that there's another aspect which is underrated - the fact that it's nice to get an award as a recognition of what you've done. Publishers I've spoken to who have won awards have viewed it as a very personal thing; especially given that many of them could make more money by workng in another industry

Recognition never hurts, obviously. I'm sure plenty of the publishers enjoy the process. I do remember the debates about whether the cost of sending the books and such was worth the benefit of maybe getting an award.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I agree they should participate, but am not sure I agree that OGL should embrace D&D products. Wouldn't D&D better fit into a d20 category? If they are included in both d20 and OGL categories, then I at least think that the same products should have to be submitted for both categories. It makes no sense, for example, to suggest that RHoD is d20 and Eyes of the Lich Queen is OGL.

I just mean that a couple years ago, WotC products couldn't enter into a lot of the catagories simply because they weren't d20/OGL, they were Closed Content.

RHoD should be entered into the same slot as every other adventure it competes against financially.

Maybe Star Wars is OGL? If it were developed by a third party, wouldn't it have to compete in that category since it has character creation rules? Then again, d20 modern might have to be OGL too if it were created by a third party, so maybe it doesn't make any sense to put Star Wars in the OGL camp.

It does raise the point of when does a game become a game rather than an OGL game... or something...

 

[Mark CMG]

Whilst we’re on the subject of changing the Ennies (not that WotC’s entry would change the rules, as such) my preference for a change – if there is to be one - is to expand the categories of entries.

We do not have candidates for:

• CCGs,
• Non-collectible Card games
• Miniatures, painted
• Miiatures unpainted,
• [highlight]CMG games[/highlight],
• boardgames (war)
• boardgames (non-war)
  

If this is done, some might think the fix is in.

 

[Cameron]

What is more arrogant, purposely with-holding submissions for voting or submitting and hoping we win?

Let me put it this way: After seeing how my friend was treated by the biased, arrogant mods at the WotC forums, and the way they persecute certain segments of posters, I have vowed never to buy another WotC product as long as I live, and have convinced my peers to do the same.

Are you gonna call that arrogance? For not wanting anything to do with WotC?

Who's the arrogant one now, eh?