Well...
The skypecast was fun, between the dinner of my family, the yellings and everything else. I missed most part! I was happy with the awards (except the BJ5 case... :'(), but I was quite shocked with the P3N1S award!
Now I still have a hope that maybe there is a mix up and the worst game is El Ammo, and not Al Emmo! Could be the case... Dunno...
But if indeed people (and most people as it appears, since only 2 games were nominated) voted for Al Emmo truly as the worst game, to stand agains "are we there yet?", then obviously (for me, as this is personal) there is something wrong with AGS community!
Sorry to say it, and sorry that it sounds so insulting, but it actually is! To take a game with a budget, a commercial release, so much into it, even if you didn't like it, and promote it as the "worst game"! What was it that was the worst game of 2006? The BGs? Cause I thought that they were in the 10% of the best. Animation? Same! Music? yup! Length? It was quite big! Voice acting? Ok annoying for many, but still it was done pretty well. It had bugs? Few, none of which I've found!
You didn't like the attitude of Himalaya studios? I can certainly understand that, but... this is completly different to voting it for the "worst game".
What is actually the difference between Al Emmo and the Shivah, or Blackwell, or SJM? (Or the Zone, lats year!). I can't really compair any element of these 4 games and say one was better or worst! So? Why is the first nominated for the P3N1S award and not the othe 3?
Is there a problem with commercial games from AGS? Cause I do remember that SJM also had some posts about being commercial... :-/
Anyways, Al Emmo atm is taking negative advertising from the AGS awards. I have no idea how small or large the awards truly are, and I've not idea if any other person outside this community will know about the awards, but after seeing the link to mobygames where there were games with 4.80/5 and Al Emmo had something around 1.70/5...
Then again maybe exactly that fact with mobygames means that I'm not unbiased. That Al Emmo is truly a bad game. And that I should just shut up...
Sorry for the rant. This is nothing personal to any member, but a point towards the community as a whole!
Here are some points:
1. That award had a very wide distribution of votes across many games, including some of the other ones you have mentioned. There wasn't many votes between not being nominated (i.e. only getting 2 votes) and being nominated...
2. Al Emmo was also nominated for Documentation and Backgrounds
3. I think that some people got annoyed at the rhetoric from the himalaya people in the completed games thread
4. Al's voice.....
5. They themselves said that the demo isn't the best part of the game and was a bit of an afterthought, and I think the demo is what most people's opinions will be based on
6. It might be time to expunge this award from future years...
I think a number of factors resulted in Al Emmo being nominated for the P3N1S, and SSH has mentioned most of them.
I think most damning was the attitude and hyping of the game by Himalaya (which, of course, they are entitled to do), and the resulting product turning out more like a weak LSL clone, that annoyed most people.
I can only speculate on its quality from what I experienced while playing the demo, though.
The casting of Al's voice was a big mistake, and smacks a little of ego on the part of Chris Warren, and immediately made me despise the character. That might be a little harsh on my part, but that's what I felt at the time.
The P3NIS is only a bit of fun anyway, but I do admit it can seem a little mean-spirited.
Quote6. It might be time to expunge this award from future years...
AGS needs its Raspberry awards, but perhaps not as part of the official AGS Awards.
I'm not ashamed to admit that I voted for Al Emmo in the P3N1S category. The thing is, sure you can't compare Al Emmo to Are We There Yet, but the fact that it's a commercial game puts in in a whole other league when it comes to criticism. Hell, I didn't even pay for the game because I wrote a magazine review of it, but if I had spent almost the price of a brand new game - which it cost with overseas postage included - I would be even more harsh. I also see how people can be very disappointed with such a sub-standard game from a team who should be able to do so much better.
The exterior background art is mostly great, which is why a lot of people, me included nominated the game for best backgrounds. And the voices seem to be something people have to get used to. Even when I no longer shivered from the sound of Al's squaky voice, the narrator's lame puns and Al's reaction to them still got on my nerves. Then there's the embarrasingly predictable and unfunny jokes, horrible 3D cutscenes, awkward interface, characters who are either dull or annoying, random puzzles with little story relevance. Oh, and the story itself feels like it's being made up as we go along. Why, for the love of god, am I spending a whole act on creating a bottle of sunscreen for a Pamela Anderson clone? And wasn't this supposed to be a treasure hunt? Instead I'm running around the entire desert, searching for the single cactus whose thorns can be used as a fishing hook.
The Tierra fanboys love it. Just Adventure gave it an A. (There's no accounting for taste - I mean, there are people out there calling Runaway 2 the game of the year). Yeah, I can see that a lot of work was put into the game, and that's admirable. But that doesn't mean I have to like a game that tries so hard to be like the games of yesteryear but fails in almost every aspect. Most of what I consider the game's flaws aren't even in the costly part of production (except the 3D scenes, which should just have been left out), but should have been caught in the design document.
It may not objectively be the worst AGS game of the year, but considering that you're likely to avoid the most amateurish games just from reading their threads, and that you don't waste many minutes on a plainly boring freeware game, the fact that this is commercial does make a difference. You want your money's worth and are not likely to give up before the end - and as such, this is among the least entertaining game experiences I had all year.
P3N1S factor = (expectation*price)/(production quality+gameplay value)
Seems a tad harsh.
Sure, you may not have liked it... but worst AGS game? I think it's a bit mean spirited.
Bt
Why do the criteria change because it's a commercial game exactly? Everyone is completly different and different age and all. You can't really compair the art/music/game of a 14 year old and a 30 year old...
Of course the awards are just for fun, and nothing serious. But it's just this hatred with Himalaya studios and Al Emmo that has me thinking... It's not that the "are we there yet" is the aboslutely worst game I could think of, but the repeated attacks on Al Emmo... :-/
Perhaps this award should only be open to games that are nominated by their authors... many people have a sense of humour about it and openly petition for the P3N1S award, and that's in good fun; however, it does seem kind of mean to nominate people who try to make their game as good as they can.
This award isn't "worst game." It's the P3N1S award. What constitutes a candidate is debatable. Just because you don't like what was nominated, you're going to "expunge" the category (from future years)? Sounds somewhat reactionary.
The community has spoken.
PS I didn't nominate the game - I didn't nominate anything. I didn't think much of it (my opinion is much like GG's, except that I rather liked what the narrator had to say and wasn't a big fan of the backgrounds). However, Himalaya were well aware of some of the faults, e.g. the god-awful 3d cutscenes, and released it anyway.
PPS RE Mash's idea. That could work. I think it's a bit timid, but it's a good compromise.
I would like to mention this award is called the P3N1S award. I rest my case? As a past and, hopefully, future recepient of this award, I hope this community never gets too mature to get rid of it.
-MillsJRoSS
I was always of the understanding that the p3n1s award wasn't for the worst AGS game, but... you know.... the n00biest, or the crappiest on purpose... You know, like "I Am Spartacus." It was shit, but it was supposed to be. I agree that criteria shouldn't change because the game is commercial, and I was always of the understanding (I guess now that I was wrong) that EVERY AGS game nominated for anything was nominated by a member of the team that made it.
Then again, I've been away for a while. Can someone catch me up to speed on this Al Emmo thing? It doesn't LOOk like it deserved the p3n1s, but...
How I envisioned the PEN1S Award...
The award is partially supposed to be a bit of fun but also to be the kind of award to help people put more effort. Way, way back in the good ol' days of AGS there were a lot of people who were phone in their "games" usually they'd be one room pieces of crap using the default anims and sprites.
Oddly enough, I made a parody of this kind of crap called "Andy Penis' Big Adventure", which won the first ever PEN1S award. However, there have been nominations I think are justified such as squalman's garbage. Nice kid but he made shitty games.
But like I said, it's about effort. I don't think a game deserves a PEN1S award if the author has clearly demonstrated a certain level of effort. For example, I thought Flashbax didn't deserve a PEN1S nomination. If I remember correctly, there was a fuss was over a severed hand in the game. Great, but at least the author tried hard to made a solid adventure.
So yeah, give the award to people who put very little effort in their games. But don't knock the people who are actually trying their best.
Hmmm. Well, this is an interesting debate.
I guess I'd have to imagine if it was my game that got this award-a game I've been working on for literally years, on and off. I'd be somewhat disappointed, I guess, but you know, life's tough. We get rejected, and we can either give up, or we can keep trying. It's the people who keep trying that will probably eventually succeed. To get this award would just be an experience that I could look back on in the future, and learn from. Eventually you're going to lose at something, somewhere, and be rejected by somebody. You might as well get it over with so you can be better in the future. I'd have to say that the PEN1S Award isn't doing much harm. If somebody's really serious about adventure games and really putting their effort into making a good game, they're going to see it as something, well, good. It's not good to keep your head buried in the sand all your life and always wondering why you never succeeded in life. On one hand, they can shake off the shame and keep trying, or they can just say "to heck with y'all" and give up. If they give up, they're not putting enough effort into succeeding. Sure it's a bit mean, but people have got to learn to get over this type of stuff.
I say-keep the award. People need "tough love" sometimes. It's more mean to just ignore it when somebody makes a crappy game and pretend you never played it/liked it. If people don't learn stuff like this early on, they'll never learn to grow up.
And then, of course, everyone has different opinions, some people might like the game, some might not. Just because a game gets the award, doesn't actually neccessarily mean the game is hopeless. Anybody who makes a game, should also realize this.
EDIT: Though I'd just like to point out that I've never actually played Al Emmo, so I can't really say if it deserved it or not. But I don't really appreciate people complaining about how expensive it is.
Quote from: DGMacphee on Tue 30/01/2007 04:07:41
So yeah, give the award to people who put very little effort in their games. But don't knock the people who are actually trying their best.
Absolutely. I always saw the p3n1sh award as a humorous kick in the ass - not some spiteful thing.
Bt
To be honest, I'd quite forgotten about Al Emmo and his quirky adventures and didn't nominate it for anything. I will also say that when it comes to the ags awards, the nominations and voting do not surprise me. I also don't see why people make threads every time something that happens bothers them/makes them question something. It's like watching Family Ties all over again, and that leads to the madness!
I shall make a game so bad it must be called the 'worst game ever' and recieve this award :D
Yes please, we haven't got enough dumb joke games.
I'm baffled. Where's the extended version of "A walk in da tomb"? Did my votes get counted via the "flordia system" or what?
QuoteWorst AGS Game (The P3N1S Award)
More detail on the nominated games for Worst AGS Game (The P3N1S Award):
It is the p3n1s award, next to the Worst AGS Game, noted everywhere...
I certainly understand the reason d'etre of the p3n1s award, and do not wish at all to see it cancel! I do have some games in my mind that could earn the p3n1s award over the years... "Spartacus..." etc...
The point is that putting Al emmo up for nomination for such an award seems to be proving that some people in here really
hate that game so hard. There was the El Ammo parody a couple of days before release! There was a message in the completed games page. Then there is the rating in mobygames, with 2 votes (1.90/5 where The Uncertainty Machine got 4.80/5 and SJM 4.60/5 much deserved the last two. But honestly if you show the 1.90/5, would you expect that game, or some shity little bullshit?). Then it is the p3n1s award.
All individually, of course are a bit a fun! Heck if nothing else had happened, of the above, I wouldn't mind having Al Emmo in the p3n1s award, if not only for that awful voice casting. But now it seems the attacks to the game keep coming and coming, every chance there is.
Do keep in mind that with all of these, there could be some harm to the sales, or the living of some people. It may be a little "Himalaya are shit and deserved this because of their rhetoric!" for you, but maybe again not...
How many votes did a game need anyway to get nominated??
I remember voting on other games that did not get nominated.
And I agree with Nikolas on this....
Thats all I got to say..
Quote from: SSH on Mon 29/01/2007 21:40:41
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?
There were 10 games with 2 votes in this category and 23 games with 1 vote. As I said, a broad spread.
While those 2 nominated had more? or was they 2 of the 10 that had 2 votes?
(I offcourse think that they had more....)
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.
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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Quote from: Andail on Tue 30/01/2007 17:19:22
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.
Quote from: LimpingFish on Tue 30/01/2007 20:02:25
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.
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.
What is SJM?
Super Jazz Man, Herculean Effort's latest game.
Quote from: m0ds on Tue 30/01/2007 16:55:16
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.
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$! ;D
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!)
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.
Meh I just thought it was a crack up that Al Emmo got nominated.
I voted for it. Though I do hope the creators dont take it personally Generally I just go for the funniest option.
Anyways I hope the award stays around.
Maybe one day Ill win my own P3N1S.
I sure hope so.
Quote1. Attitude does play an important role! Keep it in mind
1) Yes, it does. Though some people feel that thier sensitivities have been offended by extremely trivial and often imagined things. And when you are at the receiving end of the pack's verbal jousts, people will hold you accountable for every little detail you say, while conveniently forgetting to apply the same netiquette to their own behaviour. Things get blown way out of proportion. Not everyone is going to like you as a person, nor your games for that matter. And that's fine. You can't please everyone, and I don't expect to. I really don't care to get tangled up in all the forum politics and arguments as I consider that a big waste of time that could be put to better use. There will always be people ready and willing to tell you that your work is crap, and beleive me, I've become well-accustomed to it over the last 7 years. This doesn't bother me in the slightest. I prefer to focus on the simplicity of just making games.
At the same time, this doesn't mean I'll refrain from defending certain actions or comments just to ensure that I stay in everyone's good books. I talk about what I believe is factually correct, not politically correct, and I'll only ever react to someone in the same tone that they have first spoken to me. I don't go out of my way to be rude to people. I guess you could say that attitude begets attitude. Unfortunately many people here accuse others of something that they themselves are equally guilty of. However, one thing is certain; spite will only continue the vicious cycle on all sides.
Quote2. The other alternative would be to have the game for free, or not to include commercial efforts to the AGS awards
2) Like voting for games on the main AGS Games page, perhaps it would be fair if voters could only vote if they had actually played the full version. Otherwise, how is the vote valid? Academy Award panelists don't judge the Best Picture Oscar based on viewing only the 2-minute trailers of some movies, while viewing full screenings of others. By the same logic, voters should not be able to vote for best backgrounds either, unless they have played the full version so that they have an overview of the entire quality. I think it is better to exclude commercial games from the runnings (at the developer's wish) if such a confusing loophole exists.
QuoteThat 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.
3) With all due respect, I honestly don't beleive that is the case here. I can tell genuine criticisms apart from spiteful ones, and the reaction to the game here in the AGS forums has been far harsher than in many other places on the net. As you said, people will take their votes out on perceived 'attitudes' of the team, even if they haven't played the full game, as a way of extracting revenge. If this is the case, then the voting system is flawed. The game's are supposed to be what's being judged here. As I said, I don't care about receiving a P3n1s award (though, I think it should be called a "Chonky" instead). What concerns me more is the fact that the voting system loses its credibility if people can use it for such purposes.
QuoteIf you want to stick to your last comment, go ahead, but it hardly puts you in a good light.
Aw, come on... it was just a light-hearted joke! If the community can't take them, then it certainly shouldn't be issuing them in the first place! ;)
*ahem*
QuoteCompany founders, Britney K. Brimhall and Christopher T. Warren, previously established AGDInteractive, LLC (formerly known as Tierra Entertainment), a company which nearly single handedly resurrected classic adventure gaming.
You call this factual? :o
I call this an insult to AGS, to the community, to me, and everyone else here making adventure games! This quote has been discussed for ages... But just don't try to turn things around even now! You came out waaaaaaaay over the top and more over you dissapointed a lot of people with some real problematic issues in the game: (voice acting, 3-d cutscenes, portraits...). I personally don't mind and I've bought the game and the soundtrack! I also support all the way your decision to go commercial! I always did!
Anyways, no need to respond really as this is waste of my time as well. ;)
I wonder, would everyone be happy if we had nominated the Al Emmo DEMO instead of the full game?
I find it hilarious to see people argue like this.
*sits in middle of it all*
Continue.
Actually, I wasn't too thrilled with Al Emmo, mainly because it resembled Leisure Suit Larry, which isn't the kind of game I really like to play.
On the other hand, it had some great graphics, and the voice acting was way better than anything I could throw together (that goes for music, too)
But it's kind of like paying to go see a movie. You go into it, not knowing what to expect, and in the end, you decide it wasn't bad, you weren't expecting anything either good or bad.
However, let's say that movie has some damn good previews, and you get to the movie and it's still just an okay movie. That okayness shrivels into mediocrity. Sure, it looks nice, but we came for a deep story, or at least something not thrown together like a Family Guy episode.
Just my two cents.
This reminds me of "The Avengers" movie. The trailer and main actors were sexy, cool and generally awesome IMHO. The movie was.... garish and surreal. Now, some people may like garish and surreal, but that's not how it was presented in the build-up, so nearly everyone was disappointed.
QuoteCompany founders, Britney K. Brimhall and Christopher T. Warren, previously established AGDInteractive, LLC (formerly known as Tierra Entertainment), a company which nearly single handedly resurrected classic adventure gaming.
You call this factual?
I didn't write that. Britney said she designed the site from a pre-existing template which she created for another company. The page still contained the other company's text. Our own company text was quickly typed-over some of the existing words to serve as a space filler when the page was being designed. This page was accidently uploaded with that line of text left in place. It was changed as soon as it was pointed out to us.
This is a good example of how things get blown out of proportion and such assumptions are made. Despite explaining this many times, people continue to drag up. The situation was resolved, why bring it up again?
Quotemore over you dissapointed a lot of people with some real problematic issues in the game: (voice acting, 3-d cutscenes, portraits...).
KQ2VGA+ included all of these features too, and Al Emmo improved on them significantly (i.e. lipsynched portraits, character & enviromental models in the cutscene movies). To jump from an award of "best game" to "worst game" when such improvements are given major attention (even if they are not deemed totally perfect) is quite a large jump backwards. We're talking about complete polar opposites! The commercial factor must hold a heck of a lot of influence in the voting system... yet if most voters didn't play the full version, then how could that possibly work?
Just my two cents, AGDs...
But I think Al Emmo was nominated for worst game just because your previous effort, KQ2VGA was so good. It doesn't have anything to do with the game being sold, at least not in my opinion. It doesn't have a spark of the fire KQ2 had, even if the portraits were not lip-synced, even if the graphics were not as good. As I am sure you are well aware of the fact that the game was out on practically all torrent sites, I shall say that the demo discouraged me to download the game for free, let alone buy it. The latter is something I would not have hesitated to do for KQ2VGA.
So, in my opinion, the immense difference between great expectations and the modest game Al Emmo seems to be, at least story-wise, got you a p3n15 award nomination.
And if you want another opinion of mine, you should not try to bring back classic adventure gaming - it is as flawed as it is dead, but strive for new heights of the genre - you've surely got the potential.
Well, I didn't finish 2010: World Of Chaos, but I still know it's a terrible game (but ain't in the games DB so isn't eligible).
Personally, I think the backlash reflects the disappointment rather than the quality. You had set a high bar for yourselves, and when people came to pay more than double what games like Bone and Sam and Max charge they expected something more. In some ways, its like a formula:
rating = quality * price of old game / quality of old game * price of new game
and since your old game was free, you've got a multiply by zero which screws you up bigtime
Anyway, as I hinted earlier: it only took 3 votes to get you nominated. And you're in illustrious company here: http://forums.adventuregamers.com/showthread.php?p=387491 where you were narrowly beaten to worst game of 2006 by Benoit Sokal and Broken Sword 4...
The P3N1S award is just a chuckle. It has no real meaning whatsoever because there are no rules to guide what you should nominate. Some people nominate the games that were unintentionally bad, some nominate the intentionally bad, some just nominate what would be the funniest game to get the award. It's just whoever you think deserves a P3N1S. And since there were lots of games that got 1 nomination, a few that got two, and only two games that rose above that, we're not looking at a unified forum consensus here.
Take it with a chuckle and brush it off. It doesn't mean that the other awards are broken or have no merit. It just means that three people wanted to give you a joke award.
And on the whole arrogance subject, which may or may not have had something to do with your nomination, some people gave the Herculean Effort boys some crap for having the slogan "it's not easy being the best." And that's just being sensitive. However, I have to admit, your website, even in its current revision (http://www.himalayastudios.com/history.htm) is still a bit pretentious. I can understand why some people would be a little riled up by it.
Quote from: SSH on Thu 08/02/2007 11:56:06Well, I didn't finish 2010: World Of Chaos, but I still know it's a terrible game (but ain't in the games DB so isn't eligible).
Yeah, and what the hell, Yodaman? Did you delete it? You were totally going to get an award!
Quote from: AGD2 on Thu 08/02/2007 11:15:28
For your consideration: Al Emmo, for the P3N1S Award.
You guys
seriously need to get someone else to do your PR for you. And if there's something you absolutely need to get off your chest, post anonymously. Can't you see that you're only making it worse?
Quote from: Snarky on Thu 08/02/2007 13:39:31
And if there's something you absolutely need to get off your chest, post anonymously.
Can you be more anonymous than "Anonymous Game Developer"? ;)
QuoteCan you be more anonymous than "Anonymous Game Developer"?
Not after accidentally uploading this page, no!!
QuoteCompany founders, Britney K. Brimhall and Christopher T. Warren
Do you call each other number 1, and number 2? ;)
Quote
Company founders, Britney K. Brimhall and Christopher T. Warren, previously established AGDInteractive, LLC (formerly known as Tierra Entertainment), a company which nearly single handedly resurrected classic adventure gaming.
You call this factual? Shocked
I call this an insult to AGS, to the community, to me, and everyone else here making adventure games! This quote has been discussed for ages...
Enough already! I'm sick of reading about this, so please stop including 'everyone' in your claims, Nikolas. I for one don't give a good shit what they claim they've done for adventure games, and neither should any of you, really. It's just advertising whitewash for one thing, and for another it's an opinion.
One you don't have to share or acknowledge. If you like their game play it. If you don't then don't play it.
Please stop rehashing this garbage and move on.
Thanks.
I suspect that this might all be a culturally based misunderstanding, one that if it has any bearing might be of interest to americans wishing to avoid alienating the european market.
As a european, or, to narrow it down, swede, I'm not really used to reading claims like that of Himalaya studio and Herculean Effort, so instead of just filtering it away, like Prog seem to be able to, I get a conceited impression of them, which I assume is bad for their PR.
Out of curiosity, do you other americans react similarly to Prog (without the agitation)?
Quote from: AGD2 on Thu 08/02/2007 10:00:13
There will always be people ready and willing to tell you that your work is crap, and beleive me, I've become well-accustomed to it over the last 7 years. This doesn't bother me in the slightest. I prefer to focus on the simplicity of just making games.
No. If so many people have told you this then maybe it's time you considered the possibility and stop being arrogant/dillusional, cause people claiming they are amazing and ain't gets into these kinda trouble when they produce something.
You won't find 2 people that say Herculean Effort is crap, or the Shivah team. Cause they aren't.
Also there is a huge difference between remaking a game and making one, since you didn't have the design experience, the other commercial people have made some original freeware games and it shows. Hopefully you will learn from all of this and grow.
Quote from: calacver on Thu 08/02/2007 15:30:38
You won't find 2 people that say Herculean Effort is crap, or the Shivah team. Cause they aren't.
Actually, Dave also suffered a going-commercial backlash from The Shivah, and 2 people did nominate it for the PeeThreeEnOneEss
Quote from: AGD2 on Thu 08/02/2007 07:32:33
1) Disliking members of a dev team and overlooking the game itself.
This works in reverse, too. Why would a game with a very uncomfortable GUI get the best scripting award? Why would a game with simple graphics get the best graphics award? Because it's made by a cult type of person or team. People go "OMG <person>'s game! I vote it for everything!", happend in may awards in a row.
How many people voted Al Emmo for this award?
10?
20?
20,000?
It is my understanding that these awards have a very small turn out. If 5 people voted for Al Emmo and 4 people voted for another game, Al Emmo wins the nomination. This isn't some huge backlash from a silent majority of people. You don't like that you're game was received badly by some people? Too bad, accept it and move on. You can't change their mind by posting about it on a forum, they played the game and they didn't like it. The only way to change their mind is to make another game and hope they like it.
Also, I to wish people would stop with the whole "arrogant" kick and ALSO stop comparing game makers. Who gives a shit what someone's tag line is on their pretend interenet company? Are we so desperate for drama in our lives that we have to make mountains out of mole hills?
anyway, in my opinion and all that
Quote from: SSH on Thu 08/02/2007 15:40:11
Quote from: calacver on Thu 08/02/2007 15:30:38
You won't find 2 people that say Herculean Effort is crap, or the Shivah team. Cause they aren't.
Actually, Dave also suffered a going-commercial backlash from The Shivah, and 2 people did nominate it for the PeeThreeEnOneEss
I assure you, purely a publicity stunt by dave :D :P j/k.
Quote from: Ishmael on Thu 08/02/2007 15:55:30
This works in reverse, too. Why would a game with a very uncomfortable GUI get the best scripting award? Why would a game with simple graphics get the best graphics award?
Why not? An uncomfortable GUI is a design problem, not a scripting problem, and simple graphics are often the best.
QuoteBecause it's made by a cult type of person or team. People go "OMG <person>'s game! I vote it for everything!", happend in may awards in a row.
This may have been a problem in the beginning, but I don't think it has been lately. You don't see many games being nominated in tons of categories that they don't deserve.
QuoteNo. If so many people have told you this then maybe it's time you considered the possibility and stop being arrogant/dillusional, cause people claiming they are amazing and ain't gets into these kinda trouble when they produce something.
I wasn't talking about being perceived as arrogant. I was talking about different people complaining about various technical aspects of the games we've released to date (KQ remakes included). For example, some people disliked the plot changes in KQ2VGA+ and the fact that collaged backgrounds were used. Conversely, despite complaints, most of Al Emmo's reviews have still given it an above-average rating, and the game is selling fairly steadily outside of the core adventure gaming communties with little to no backlash. This can be put down to different strokes for different folks.
Listening to criticisms doesn't necessarily mean listening to everything thrown at you. It means weeding out the genuinely constructive stuff from the bullshit and using that valuable feedback to finetune things. This is why it somewhat surpised me that the lipsynching, diaogue pics were pretty much overlooked in Al Emmo, when those improvements were a direct result of negative feedback that we tried to improve upon from KQ2VGA+.
QuoteYou don't like that you're game was received badly by some people? Too bad, accept it and move on. You can't change their mind by posting about it on a forum, they played the game and they didn't like it. The only way to change their mind is to make another game and hope they like it.
Yes, and all of those criticisms were noted the first time around when they were mentioned many, many months ago. It just gets a little old when every single thread on the AGS forums seems to re-hash the same old points. We've heard all the criticisms already - points taken. We're looking into them. But repeatedly smacking others over the head in every single discussion with the same arguments is like flogging a dead horse.
QuoteWho gives a shit what someone's tag line is on their pretend interenet company? Are we so desperate for drama in our lives that we have to make mountains out of mole hills?
Not sure if you're referring to some previous discussion, but it doesn't bother me further than meeting someone who greets people with: "Hello, my name is X and I'm the best".
Unless your irony detector picks something up, you just think: "Ok, what kind of weirdo is this". Then your life goes on.
The problem is when this person produce something you enjoy. You can't help but to feel ambivalent towards them, when both you and they would benefit from an untainted appreciation.
From the extensive survey in this thread, americans seem less affected by this kind of bold claims, so this might be a regional problem, and something they might want to consider, even if it seems silly to them. It's like avoiding a company name that's offensive in the language of the main market countries, even though it's perfectly harmless in your own.
Quote from: AGD2 on Thu 08/02/2007 20:41:32
Yes, and all of those criticisms were noted the first time around when they were mentioned many, many months ago. It just gets a little old when every single thread on the AGS forums seems to re-hash the same old points. We've heard all the criticisms already - points taken. We're looking into them. But repeatedly smacking others over the head in every single discussion with the same arguments is like flogging a dead horse.
And you're not going to stop people posting things on the internet by telling them to give it up. It's one of the hardest things in the world to do with something you've created but you have to let it go. For me, sadly, only time helps me get over things like this.
Besides, these awards take the entire year of games into account. The complaints about Al Emmo aren't being dragged up from the depths just for fun, people are looking back at their year of AGS gaming and remembering.
Quote from: AGD2 on Thu 08/02/2007 20:41:32
It just gets a little old when every single thread on the AGS forums seems to re-hash the same old points.
Every thread? You see, its those delusions of grandeur than just rile people...
QuoteAnd you're not going to stop people posting things on the internet by telling them to give it up
And where exactly did I tell anyone to give it up?
QuoteEvery thread? You see, its those delusions of grandeur than just rile people...
There's two threads about Al Emmo, both are filled with the same stuff. So yes, every thread.
I can't honestly believe that Himalaya looked at the overall, finished Al Emmo and thought to themselves "This is a winner."
They saw a game that was the typical quality of adventure that sells purely on the basis that it is an adventure game.
Al Emmo is no worse than eighty percent of commercial adventures doing the rounds, and the only reason we care is that it was made using AGS.
Personally I have nothing against these people, but the furore surrounding Al Emmo is not how a team that wants to be taken seriously (and more importantly, build a fanbase) does business or behaves in a professional arena.
The whole thing, company included, smacks of a vanity project; from this (http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,189307/) Mobygames profile, to the website, to the voice thing, to the response to any negative feedback the game procured.
You're not rockstars, you're not the reanimator of a corpse genre that's commercially dead for a reason; and lets face it the commercial adventure is dead because it couldn't adapt to a changing market, and those games that did were shunned by a core community that, like it or not, had/has an almost anal perspective in what it likes and dislikes in an adventure game.
The position of adventures today is perfect for small e-distribution studios, such a Wadjet Eye, to carve out a small niche in a market that has more or less discarded the genre.
But bad games are bad games.
Taking an agressive stance because, deserved or not, your game received negative feedback isn't the greatest of business strategies.
Quote from: AGD2 on Thu 08/02/2007 22:54:33QuoteEvery thread? You see, its those delusions of grandeur than just rile people...
There's two threads about Al Emmo, both are filled with the same stuff. So yes, every thread.
Saying 'every single thread on the AGS forums' and meaning apparently 'every single thread on the AGS forums about our game, namely, two of them' surely provides some insight on how you think about this issue, this community and so in.
If you want to draw straws, then sure, you'll find lots of stuff you can use to twist around in an attempt to turn public opinion against any given team to make them look vain or arrogant. If people like to spend their time reading through the fine print on websites to say "Ha! look what dirt I found on these guys!" well, good for them. I'm not complaining about constructive criticism of the game. I'm complaining about the mob mentality and the ridiculous conclusions that people draw.
That said, this will be my last post on the subject, because it's just going around in circles, and I've already said all I wanted to say. So ciao!
Quote from: AGD2 on Thu 08/02/2007 23:22:49
If people like to spend their time reading through the fine print on websites to say "Ha! look what dirt I found on these guys!" well, good for them.
To be honest, I didn't have to look very hard.
And I don't even have a vested interest in misrepresenting Himalaya. Imagine if somebody
did...
And this is why there's a group of people that don't take the AGS Awards this seriously. After all, there is an award called the P3N1S award as one of the categories. Not to mention the people who don't play all the games and still nominate/vote...
It's just an award!... for fun! Like the MTV awards...
I would never presume to know what the Himilayan crew thinks, nor preach to them about how to run their business. They do have a fanbase. Their game, from what I can see, is a commercial success.
Whatever they are doing, they are obviously doing it right. They obviously care about the genre or they wouldn't be putting all their time and money into these games in the first place.
I am honestly shocked and disappointed at the reaction of this community towards Himilaya. Criticise the game, certainly, but don't criticise them.
Well, Dave, most of this argument stems from two things, really.
1 - The P3N15 award has as a candidate a very questionable nominee. This has been settled already, really, many times over - it was the opinion of 3 people in the whole community. In fact, I don't find it serious at all, I find it hilarious how a game like Al Emmo can be nominated for that award, it goes to show that unexpected things can happen.
2 - One of the creators of Al Emmo has told the community to stick the prize up its collective arse, after making several points in a generalistic manner when - and now that the matter has evolved I can say it, I couldn't say it now in case I was wrong - it was clear that he wasn't being generalistic at all, he was using the experience of his own nomination (and what a tragedy it was, too! :P) to call down the whole voting system... two lines of behaviour which I don't really approve of.
The game has been criticised to death where it has to be criticised, and has been praised where it needs to be praised. This nominnation was a fluke, a bit of a laugh, and if AGD2 hadn't replied as he has, I'd very much doubt Al Emmo would actually win the award. As it is, I reckon the chances are higher... but it's still a long shot, and everyone knows it, for crying out loud.
Am I saying AGD2 is wrong for being so mindful of his creation, for being ticked off when it gets nominated for a very bad award? Hell no. But telling the community to stick it up its collective arse, smiley or no smiley, is hardly the best way to respond.
I wish Erpy were here. I like his posts far better.
Quote from: Dave Gilbert on Thu 08/02/2007 23:43:40
They obviously care about the genre or they wouldn't be putting all their time and money into these games in the first place.
So what? They deserve free money for that? For a product that at it's core, is no better than many games people make for free.
I see a company that made a sub-standard game, genre notwithstanding, charged for it, and expected the adventure community to buy it on that age old perception (which is, unfortunately, partialy true) that adventure gamers buy adventure games regardless of quality. Which is fair enough. Business is business.
But if I buy a game made by EA, and then say it's crap, I don't expect to hear from an EA representitive accusing me of having a vendetta against the company.
Non-professional behaviour, regardless of a companies stature, in response to a small percentage, if indeed it
was a commercial success, of dissatisfied users, isn't the done thing. Not by them, not by Nintendo, EA, etc.
If it was, TellTale would have me on speed-dial.
Caring about the genre has little to do with their position, or any negativity caused. Some people liked the game, some people didn't. Some people hated the voice tracks, some people hated the main characters. Some people loved the whole thing.
Where is the need to cry foul on any of this?
Nobody deserves support based on the fact that they seem to support a genre I enjoy. I see no need to rally around them, and buy their product because they
chose the adventure genre.
Going commercial is a whole different ballgame, and I applaud anybody who has the cajonies to do so. But complaining when people aren't as receptive as they were towards any
free games is just foolish.
EDIT: It's the cynical nature of the game which grates. It has all the ingredients from past successes (the LSL-style main character, the narrator, the breaking of the fourth wall, etc.) but none of the soul. It's just...product.
EDIT: My avatar speaks the truth. The commercial adventure game has left me a shell of a point-and-clicker. ;)
Who said anything about free money? Nobody is giving them money for nothing. Nobody is forcing you to buy the game.
As Rui says, the p3n1s nomination was a fluke. A one-off. A by-product of a democratic system that got ruined by a few idiots. This doesn't concern me.
What does concern me is this incredible bitterness that has erupted from nowhere like a geyser. A geyser aimed straight at Himilaya. And why is that? Because people don't t like the game? Does that justify this insane flamefest?
If I ever write and sell a game that (heaven forbid!) people don't like, I hope they have the decency to direct their rage toward the game, and not toward me.
I just want to maybe say that Dave, you might be taking the words of say 4 people and calling it a geyser of bitterness.
At least as far as this thread is concerned.
Even so, I wouldn't call this a flame-fest.
I think that AGD2 has every right to defend his game from abuse if he sees it as undeserved. It seems to be fine that some people here have the god given right to critique a game and a company yet can't handle that same level of critique being leveled at their comments.
To me, this seems to come down to the fact that people don't like AGDI / Himalaya's attitude. I can understand that and probably agree with that view. But I think that Chris (AGD2) has a couple of good points that are being overlooked because of the attitude of his writing.
I think it's about some people being jealous of others achieving something when they themselves haven't been able to do anything that would come close to the standard that games like KQ2+ and Al Emmo achieve.
Is the game good? It's okay. As someone else said it's an adventure game of the past, it's nothing new or revolutionary. But to nominate it for this award is mean spirited.
1. I think the award in question shouldn't be given if the number of voters does not exceed a minimum threshold. I suggest this formula:
50 % of number of people who voted in Best Game / number of games nominated in the Penis category
So if, say, 60 people voted in the Best Game category and there are 3 games nominated in the Penis category, this would give a Minimum Threshold of 30 / 5 = 10.
So, the game that gets the most votes in excess of the threshold gets the award; if none of the games exceed 10, then nobody gets the award at all.
2. I think the name of the award should be changed to something more whimsical, akin to the Raspberry awards. Especially if the award is really supposed to be as light-hearted as some of you claim.
The word, "penis" is just too strong and distasteful, and a negative reflection on BOTH the recipient and the community.
.......I urge whoever makes the rules (who does, actually? I gather it's not Mr Chris Jones) to take my suggestion into consideration.
1 - That's giving the award waaaaaaaaay more importance than it deserves.
2 - Actually, I'm not sure this isn't a bad idea, and for a very simple reason - it's an in-game joke, as it were. People who were here in Andy Penis' day and played his big adventure will know of it. Lurkers and people who played the really old adventure games and read the older posts will know it. But Andy Penis is a name of the past now, and there's very little connection now. It's like that IRC thread that cropped up - it was suddenly full of people who DIDN't go to #AGS giving their opinion on how things went along there based on a couple of quotes, and it just didn't work because they were totally out of their depth, had no idea what it was like in #AGS.
Similarly, at the time the P3N15 award was a gag, and right now it's a strange artefact.
HOWEVER - changing it at this point might be akin, to the community, to changing the BlueCup into something else, and besides it'll once again give much too importance to the award.
QuoteIf I ever write and sell a game that (heaven forbid!) people don't like, I hope they have the decency to direct their rage toward the game, and not toward me.
If you start making bold claims on your site, drop by only occasionally with an self dillusional attitude and create new titles of declining quality, then I suspect you might have to deal with similar treatment eventually.
Then again, you've struck me as a nice, humble (as far as entrepreneurs can be) guy, so the above seems unlikely to happen, and even if it did, you'd probably get away with much due to your history.
(My insight into this conflict is limited, so my facts are questionable.
What strikes me as weird is the blindness from, what I can see, americans towards the thing that's annoying, again, from what I can see, to europeans. So I feel inclined to point this out, as there seems to be much unneccessery confusion and irritation.
(And I hope all this isn't taken as another example of america bashing. As the land of entrepreneurs, it would be strange if self promotion wasn't more accepted than in other cultures.))
personally i tip my hat to AGDI since i would never have known anything about AGS or this forum without then seeing as i was doing a nostalgic search on kings quest and came across their site then after that this site. as for al emmo it was definately not a p3n1s type material. i thought the voice acting wasnt too bad and the backgrounds were typical of their work (meaning its great) sure i had problems with the animation seeing as how im a 3d animator (i did try to get on the team to do the cut scenes but i was too late to submit an application) i never did finish the demo though since i am way too busy with my film to finish anything (i still work on asterix though even though i havent recently since im pretty busy with work at the moment but ill be getting back to it)(damn i put alot of stuff in brackets. guess its just because my grammer sucks(not that ive ever cared))
I'd like to move on from the Al Emmo issue on to a more general debate as to the future of the award. I don't think we're going to get any further defending or bashing Al/Himalaya/DaveG/URMOM any more, so lets consider the future:
The "Bobbit" option: Get rid of the P3N1S
1. People are offended by their games being nominated sometimes
2. It means rubbish games get listed on the games page as having awards
3. It might encourage people to make deliberately bad games, and that needs no encouragement
4. It perhaps lowers the prestige of the other AGS Awards
The Chastity Belt option: Leave the P3N1S alone
1. There's no such thing as bad publicity, so this debate simply serves to raise the profile of the awards (although I know that AdventureGamers deliberately refrained from commenting on this issue in a news item or such, being above such tabloid sensationalism)
2. It's just a laugh and demonstrates the fun nature of the whole awards
The cold shower option: Make it smaller
1. Only allow joke games
2. Or have a committee decide it
The Viagra option: make it bigger
1. Have a joke games awards AND a worst proper game award
The Sapphic option: have a strap-on one
1. Split the booby prize off as a separate award, like the razzies...
Are we voting, then? I vote for the chastity belt, really - it's just a laugh, we're all in this for fun, we're just members of a gaming community, we're not official, we're not professionals, we just look for what we consider good games, and thankfully there's pretty much all sorts in this community so we actually have a hugely diversified database of games.
I also vote for the Chastity belt option.
If there was 2 prizes (viagra) for worst games and joke games, the Al Emmo would probably be in the worst game nominations, so nothing earned... (I still think that Al Emmo is not a "bad" game, especially compaired to other games here, but the nominations were mean spirited... I say this, just to explain the above comment).
Making it only for joke games, would remove the ability to actually give proper feedback, even through the way of an award, to someone who is maybe trying, or not trying, or should stop making silly joke games and so on...
We need an award for worst/p3n1s game so it makes sense...
Leave it as is.
Just let's clarify why we are voting exactly and why we should vote... (Not to mention that after all the awards are publicly voted, and well... when the public speaks we have to listen. )
In all the above post "we" is used in the most lovingly manner, Anyone who would like to exclude himself from the "we" I mention, it goes without saying that he already is excluded. ;D I do speak for myself and nobody else. I'm just making a suggestion to what I think is right. ;D
I think the best solution would probably be to change it from "Worst game" to "Best joke game" and maybe change the name in the process. When looking at the awards from previous years, the only game I see nominated which isn't a joke game is Flashbax - an otherwise excellent game which just grossed some people out. All the others have been produced exclusively to be crappy and vulgar for a cheap laugh.
There's really no reason for a booby price if it's given to games that are intentionally bad anyway. Instead of lowering the prestige of the awards it could then be just another catagory in the real awards. The only "danger" I see (meaning a big, maybe too big, change to the concept) is that well designed parody games such as Sven Gordan would run off with the awards due to being listed in the joke games category along with the usual nonsense joke games.
Edit: I guess this is "The cold shower option", though I dislike the idea of a committee.
Edit 2: Have the FOREGOs been dropped entirely? If so, should we really keep the P3N1S award? Even though it has to do with game making, I always saw it more along the line of the community based FOREGOs than the engine based AGS Awards.
Quote from: Nikolas on Fri 09/02/2007 12:17:53
We need an award for worst p3n1s
Well maybe, but it might not be fair for the female users.
Nah AH!
Thats why well have a boobie prize :)
I'd vote for the chastity option also. I don't see why we should be so quick to change historical elements of the AGS community to make it more palatable to newcomers. It's a niche community, and esoteric in nature to begin with. If this were a general game development forum, I would agree with censuring the award to appeal to mainstream sensibilities.
Cold Shower option seems to be the best. I think the award, historically, has been tongue in cheek - but it may need a committee to decide what is having fun and what is just rancor.
Bt
I agree with Blackthorne. A pseudo cold shower might be best. Let the community nominate as per usual, but have a committee step in if a nomination is obviously mean-spirted.
So, a chastity shower. I second that.
I say get rid of it, but having a committee (and then of course it would need to be a committee of reasonable, responsible people who actually play the games) make the decision is the next best thing.