The P3N1S award????????????

[Akatosh]

There wasn't many votes between not being nominated (i.e. only getting 2 votes) and being nominated...

So why didn't anybody else vote for A walk in da Tomb?

[SSH]

There were 10 games with 2 votes in this category and 23 games with 1 vote. As I said, a broad spread.

[Peder 🚀]

While those 2 nominated had more? or was they 2 of the 10 that had 2 votes?

(I offcourse think that they had more....)

[BOYD1981]

the P3N1S award is like all the other nominations and votes; it is based on individual personal opinion of either the game and/or it's content, or of the people involved in making it.
so you may like a game but you don't like the person that made it, so you might nominate it for that award.
i think the reason it most likely got nominated for it is due to the price tag and not just the fact that it had one.

[GarageGothic]

I think we need to make a decision whether the p3n1s award is meant for INTENTIONALLY bad games (such as Are We There Yet, which was obviously meant as a joke), or UNINTENTIONALLY bad games (which Al Emmo imho is an excellent example of). If the first is the case, we might as well change it to a category for "Best joke game".

[m0ds]

I'm pretty sure it's always been meant for both. However, it's not often an unintentionally bad game gets nominated. This year it's just been unfortunate that still a relitavely good game compared to things like Andy Penis's Big Aventure has made it into that category. But thats simply because a lot of the voters have obviously had bad experiences, or a few induviduals just want to make them look bad.

As I see it, that's tough shit. That award has been there to serve a purpose since the start, and how the developer takes it is purely up to them, and really is their problem alone. If we're all alowed to have personal views on a game, liking it or disliking it, that should still be reflected through the AGS awards. If they are offended then so be it. I probably would be too. But awards are about what other people think, not me. Most developers who've one the P3NIS award seem to take it very light heartedly, so I'd just hope Himalyi do too, if they win that award.

The P3NIS award isn't all that bad! It's still an award! And I don't see Al Emmo up for anything else except one of the graphics awards, so they have a chance to win a good award and a joke award. If they can't take the joke, they've too little experience with the AGS community & that shouldn't bother any of us. It's not our problem.

[Andail]

In my opinion, this is exactly what the penis award is meant for. Just clinically selecting the "worst" game wouldn't serve any purpose. This is an award with a twist; it's up to the voters to decide who deserve it.

And whether you like it or not; going commercial with a game is to open a can of worms. A free game is a gift to your peers, but a game with a price tag is not a gift anymore, it's a part of a deal, and people will question that deal, evaluate it, tear it apart to see what's in it.

[Alynn]

Yes, but I didn't get nominated... I should have just nominated it myself, but it was against my palidin code.

Damn you Lawful Good alignment!!!

Erm... Nothing to see here. Move along.

[LimpingFish]

The  P3N1S voting of Al Emmo was simply a backlash against Himalaya. They promised a lot, and delivered the sort of game that "killed" the commercial adventure in the first place. And then moaned about the harsh reception it got.

Penis worthy behaviour in my book.

Technically, though, Al Emmo is certainly not the worst ags game. I don't think such an award is needed in general.

I think the P3N1S award should be for "white elephant" games. Those that promise so much, and fail spectacularly.

[esper]

Let's not harsh on the p3n1s. First, people say "I don't like that, it's degrading." Then you get rid of it. Next you know, someone says "I don't think it's fair that my game didn't get any nominations, I worked hard, and put alot of effort into it. Since my skills aren't as good as Grundislav's or Yahtzee's I had to work a lot harder to make a good game. Why isn't mine up there? It's not fair, and it's degrading to me as an indie game developer." Then, the next thing you know, the whole AGS awards is down the drain, and the whole AGS community as we know it gets taken over by the n00bs and the trolls and becomes a totally politically correct, boring-ass environment.

Besides, the thing that bothered me... which, by the way, didn't start bothering me until AFTER I voted for Trilby's Notes all up and down the line, is that a game by someone who left the forums some time ago and doesn't even post his own games here, letting Rui, M0ds, and AGA do it for him, gets nominated all up and down the boards. If we kept the voting entirely "in the family," so to speak, it would have eliminated the Himalaya problem...

...and more people will have a chance in 2007 without having to go up against 6DAS... said the guy who's currently producing a game due out later this year...

EDIT: yes, I know, that makes me  a coward. But Yahtzee's games are just so good.

[Andail]

I don't mind Yahtzee winning prizes, he prolly deserves it considering the absurd amount of time he must spend on all those games.
However, I'm slightly puzzled by the fact that certain people still persist in running his arrends on these boards, despite the fact that he left them for a reason.
I mean, it's not like he doesn't know they exist.

[Ishmael]

In my opinion, this is exactly what the penis award is meant for. Just clinically selecting the "worst" game wouldn't serve any purpose. This is an award with a twist; it's up to the voters to decide who deserve it.

Exactly.

Keep your hands off this award if it's not presented to you, and go get a sense of humour.

[MrColossal]

I think the P3N1S award should be for "white elephant" games. Those that promise so much, and fail spectacularly.

I vote that award gets named The SCRAMM award.

also, andail:

"And whether you like it or not; going commercial with a game is to open a can of worms. A free game is a gift to your peers, but a game with a price tag is not a gift anymore, it's a part of a deal, and people will question that deal, evaluate it, tear it apart to see what's in it. "

Thank you so much, that is a perfect rebuttal to people who moan "Why do commercial games get different treatment!" and I will use it every chance I get.

[voh]

Andail said it perfectly. If you're going to ask money for something, it had better be worth what you're paying for it.

And if you've got a commercial product and your demo screams "lame!" then what am I going to do? Definitely not buying the game. The Blackwell demo was amazing (I'm buying it), the SJM demo was unsatisfying but I'm still contemplating buying it, and the Al Emmo demo was bad enough that I actually didn't finish it.

Al Emmo is not a good game. And just because the backgrounds are nice, the music is nice, whatever else that's nice according to some people, doesn't make it good. The game has to be fun, and as far as I've been able to see, Al Emmo is far from fun.

Also, the behaviour from the Himalaya guys really wrecked any intent I had in supporting them. Buying a game is 50% wanting the game, and 50% wanting to show the creators that you're supporting them in what they do. For me, anyway, don't know about any of you all. I will support Wadjet Eye, Herculean Effort (most likely) and I've done the same for Yahtzee, even if I didn't like the game enough to pay for it, but it was decent enough and donating/purchasing made me feel good about giving something back.

I'll never do the same for Himalaya, because I can't stand misplaced arrogance.

PS. To those who're going to say I'm being too harsh, save it. This is my opinion and I'm entitled to share it. Besides, it might explain why I would vote for Al Emmo in the P3N1S category.

[TheCheese33]

What is SJM?

[voh]

Super Jazz Man, Herculean Effort's latest game.

[DGMacphee]

This year it's just been unfortunate that still a relitavely good game compared to things like Andy Penis's Big Aventure has made it into that category.

andy penis big adventure was brilliant so fuck you

Seriously, I think it's fun that an alter ego of the guy who created the award wins the very first booby prize.

I almost heard a vaudeville WAH WAH WAH WAAAAAAH trumpet noise when "Andy" won that thing.

[AGD2]

So if I understand this correctly, then essentially the P3n1s award's voting criteria consists of any or all of the following:

1) Disliking members of a dev team and overlooking the game itself.
2) Disliking the full version, despite the fact that the majority of voters didn't buy/play it, yet are still able to resgister votes for a demo in place of the full game.
3) Releasing a game that falls so far below accepted quality levels, that it's production can only be taken as an intentional act of jest on the part of the developers.

If that's the case, then I can't help but notice that the voting criteria is a little skewed... in which case, so much for the credibility of any other AGS awards. :

On the other hand, if the whole thing really is meant to be taken as a bit of light-hearted fun, then I'm sure you won't mind me suggesting that you can take the P3n1s award and stick it up your As$!

[Nikolas]

Hmmm.... it seems that grudges go both ways as it appears...

1. Attitude does play an important role! Keep it in mind. (and dont' forget that I started this thread!)
2. The other alternative would be to have the game for free, or not to include commercial efforts to the AGS awards, which would be a pity for all those great games this year... Don't also forget that Al Emmo has been nominated for best BGs as well!
3. Indeed!

Watch for No. 1!

Ouch!

(I followed the exact form of your post so I wouldn't have to quote you everytime!)

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

1) From what I recall, the only thing said about it was "the studio's arrogance". It did not mention anyone in the team, and it implied that said arrogance was directly connected with the game. Face it, if people dislike your attitude they'll take it out in your game. Why?

Because that's where it *hurts*. So it's the most effective way to show displeasure.

2) A demo is a preview, ayuh, so it doesn't always measure up to the real game, but it *should*. Rolling demos are a laugh, a demo has to show gameplay and actually give you a taste for the real thing. If people gave up on the DEMO, it's not likely they'll buy the game, and they DO have something to say for it if the demo effectively showcased what the game was going to be like. And from what I understand, the demo did exactly that.

3) That is the case with most penis awards. In this particular case it was a case of the community getting back and "taking revenge" on a game that promised a lot, made by extremelly talented people who have given us to fabulous remakes, one of them an extraordinary game in its own right, and that not only fell flat on its face, you had to pay to see it fall. This lack of imparciality seems to surprise you. It shouldn't, it's human nature. I say again, you hurt people, people will hit you where it *hurts* - re, your game.

Finally, the criteria of any of these awards is simple - what the players think. There's no critics, no professionals, just people making games and looking for a good time, and with these awards reward those who, they feel, have achieved the most.

If you want to stick to your last comment, go ahead, but it hardly puts you in a good light.