The annual AGS awards debate

[Dualnames]

Concerning Nelly, yes. The award should be re-named as
Newbie. Newcomer means that it's about someone that has just logged in the forums, while newbie means that Ali here, was virgin about making AGS games, and h just lost his virginity with Nelly Cootalot. :

[edmundito]

I endorse the Best Innovation category. I suggest that if there are several games out there introducing new things, then perhaps more than one game should be awarded with Special Achievement in Innovation. As an example, Gesundheit for innovation in game design and The Adventures of Fatman for being the first fully talkie AGS game* (but of course ONLY for games released in 2008).

Some of the names could be better:

Best Game by a newcomer should perhaps be Best Debut or Best Debut Game. Best Debut seems to go more towards a particular person or group, so I like that better.

Best Parody or Remake should be Best Adapted Game (Remake, Parody, or Fan-Made)

Though Best Game should always stand above all else... perhaps it should be renamed to something like AGS Game of the Year

Best Puzzles always puzzled me. I was never quite sure what it all meant, mostly because a lot of the times the games that got it I didn't really think they had the best designed puzzles. Perhaps the nominations should refer to a particular puzzle or a particular set of puzzles.

Best Programming is another one. I mean like that would kind of mean also reading the code right? Perhaps this should be something like Technical Excellence.

On other things:

The nominations process have always been mixed, as a lot of people just vote for the games they've played. While there's been a lot of promotion on games, there should be a way to mention certain games that people should check out. I'm not sure if the "for your consideration" thread worked last time...

Another one is the voting of the nominees. Not all people play or try all the games, and while some do, sometimes for the smaller categories a lot of people just vote for that one game they played, instead of trying them all out.

Perhaps the nominees need to be asked to participate a bit more. For example on the nominations page for best background each candidate should submit a couple of backgrounds that they think are best, in the same format that ended up on AGS. The arts are probably the easiest ones.... while the others you'd obviously have to download the game to get them.

And I like the live event, though it was nice to incorporate the art of the games into the awards. Which is why I mentioned the example above.

* This might not be true, but it's just an example.

[LimpingFish]

I'd like to address some of Edmundo's points.

I half agree with the definition of Best Innovation, though I wouldn't give something like Fatman any kudos. Being the first to implement a feature isn't really an innovation (if it is, then where's my innovation award for being the first panoramic AGS game?! ), and it's this muddying of just what a particular award covers that may result in some confusion.

Best Debut seems a good replacement for the "newbie" award. It doesn't refer to the length of time someone has been part of the community, which I think is what people have a problem with.

I don't think we need a parody or remake category, as we don't really get enough of either. I'm sure these games could be absorbed into an existing category or a newly combined one.

AGS Game of the Year seems like a good alternative to Best Game.

Best Puzzles is certainly a sticking point. How do you define best? Most straightforward? Most fun to solve? Best technique? It seems too vague, and, imho, could also be covered by Best Gameplay.

Programming is something that a lot of people who play these games, and vote, may not be familiar with - in a large enough capacity, that is, to differentiate between the pros and cons of a particular game's scripting. I suspect a number of people simply put the game they may be nominating as "Best Game" into this category also, regardless of any outstanding technical achievements in said game.

I'm not so sure about the whole "for you consideration" situation, nor whether all games that happen to be eligible should be automatically eligible. Perhaps a thread where a game has to be officially submitted before a second cut-off point? Although this would result in a nominate the nominees for nomination-type situation, which seems even worse.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

Programming is something that a lot of people who play these games, and vote, may not be familiar with - in a large enough capacity, that is, to differentiate between the pros and cons of a particular game's scripting. I suspect a number of people simply put the game they may be nominating as "Best Game" into this category also, regardless of any outstanding technical achievements in said game.

I think this is especially true and has been one of my issues with this category for awhile.  Most casual players don't seem to realize (or care) about the amount of scripting effort and fiddling with ags it takes to make a competent beat-em-up game or any non-standard adventure, really. 

[Obi]

As the winner of the last p3n15 award, I'd like to see it's comeback. As long as people don't go voting for Al emoo and the thingy majig again.

[SSH]

Programming is something that a lot of people who play these games, and vote, may not be familiar with - in a large enough capacity, that is, to differentiate between the pros and cons of a particular game's scripting. I suspect a number of people simply put the game they may be nominating as "Best Game" into this category also, regardless of any outstanding technical achievements in said game.

Having seen 3 years of individual nominations and votes, I can assure you this isn't true. Don't underestimate the voters. Most "I think people vote in stupid way X" are misapprehensions.

I'm not so sure about the whole "for you consideration" situation, nor whether all games that happen to be eligible should be automatically eligible. Perhaps a thread where a game has to be officially submitted before a second cut-off point? Although this would result in a nominate the nominees for nomination-type situation, which seems even worse.

All games that are eligible ARE automatically eligible. The FYC has no bearing on anything: it's just an advertising thread.


Finally, no matter how many people or who they are ask, I am not reinstating the booby prize. Someone else is quite welcome to have their own "Golden Raspberries" awards, but I don't want it as part of the AGS awards:

1) It makes the awards and AGS in general look unprofessional, silly, jokey and puerile to outsiders.
2) It means that some of the award winners in the games DB are crap
3) It can offend people who didnt want to be nominated
4) It doesn't add anything to the awards by having it in

So, as with the IRC ceremony, someone is welcome to do their own awards (like the Foregos and Ergos in times past)

[Pumaman]

Lifetime Achievement, Best Innovation and Best Game by a Newcomer are chosen by committee

I'm not sure of the need for the Best Game by a Newcomer. In a way it seems to be implying that newcomers aren't able to produce a high quality game that will stand on its own merits, and need their own award to make them feel special instead ... I dunno, it just seems like it could be unintentionally patronising. And what if the same game wins Best Game by a Newcomer and the main Best Game award? It would be a bit silly.

Games in the DB as "Non-adventures" are eligible for:

Best Non-adventure, Best non-adv programming, and all the main categories except Best Game, Best Short Game and Best Programming

Games in the DB as "Joke games, MAGS games or Short games" are eligible for all the main categories plus Best Short Game

Games in the DB as Commercial are eligible for Best Commercial Game as well as the main categories

Games in the DB as medium or full length games are eligible for the main categories:

Overall: Best Game, Best Remake or Parody
Design/writing: Best Gameplay, Best Story, Best Dialogue, Best Puzzles, Best Tutorial or Documentation
Art: Best Character Art, Best Background Art, Best Animation
Sound: Best Voice Acting, Best Effects, Best Music

This all sounds a bit complicated ... I'm wondering if we actually need "Best non-adventure" at all? Why not allow the likes of Art of Theft to compete on the same stage as the rest of the year's games? If it's good enough then it could win the main Best Game award; it seems a bit silly that we're effectively sidelining some games just because they don't quite fit the Adventure genre.

Also, I'm not sure of the need for a Best Remake/Parody either ... again, why not let these compete with all the other games? I'd probably exclude remakes from being nominated for Best Story/Dialogue/Puzzles categories, but the rest of the game assets are original and I'd say they should be allowed to compete with other games.

[edmundito]

I think best non-adventure game is important because AGS is intended/promoted/designed for making adventure games, and so those who use it for something completely different deserve recognition. Every year we have enough non-adventures out there anyway. However, it shouldn't mean that these games don't qualify for other categories as well. I see it analogous to the foreign film or the feature animation award at the Oscars.

[DanielH]

Someone else is quite welcome to have their own "Golden Raspberries" awards,

Ooh, ooh, me sir, pick me sir! I'll take that as a challenge. Between now and janurary (when I plan to begin my new awards) I shall think of the  most unprofessional, silly, jokey, and puerile awards ceremony, dedicated solely to the humourous side of AGS games. Some awards off the top of my head-

Most Comedy (intentional)
Most Comedy (unintentional)
Least comedy in a comedy game.
Least proffessional from a proffesional

etc, etc.

And none of the awards will appear in the database, nor harm the AGS awards' good name, to boot.

[LimpingFish]

Having seen 3 years of individual nominations and votes, I can assure you this isn't true. Don't underestimate the voters. Most "I think people vote in stupid way X" are misapprehensions.

Most active AGS developers may understand the ins and outs of programming, but I would personally hold the opinion that a large number of players would not. I certainly don't. When I do vote in that category, I usually end up nominating whichever games seemed to technically hold together the best, and contained the least amount of bugs. I wouldn't recognize complex scripting if it bit me in the face, though that's what the award is generally supposed to recognize, right?

All games that are eligible ARE automatically eligible. The FYC has no bearing on anything: it's just an advertising thread.

What I was getting at was the unfocused nature of all games being eligible by date, and the possibility of some form of secondary or follow-up period of eligibility. Technically all films from date X to date Y are eligible for the Academy Awards, but only those that meet the rules of eligibility can be considered for nomination. I know we're not the Oscars, and the awards are traditionally just a friendly bit of fun. Perhaps then, just as AGS grows beyond the walls of this community, the awards need to evolve as a whole.

So, as with the IRC ceremony, someone is welcome to do their own awards (like the Foregos and Ergos in times past)

I don't agree with this splintering of the ceremony, with one version being more "official" than another. The FOREGOS and ERGOS aren't necessities, I agree, but who deemed the IRC ceremony redundant? The IRC ceremony may have failed last year, but that doesn't mean it has become obsolete. I'm a fan of the different input into the IRC ceremony, and, no offence (or depreciation of the work and time SSH puts into the awards), watching the ceremony become a one man show doesn't appeal to me, regardless of who that person may be. It was a laugh to see once, but watching an in-game ceremony, as it were, grow larger (and possibly longer!) each year (without the prospect of spontaneity, or random people showing up like they sometimes do on IRC) seems like a drag to me.

If anything, I would consider the in-game ceremony to be the optional factor of the awards.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

I'm wondering if we actually need "Best non-adventure" at all? Why not allow the likes of Art of Theft to compete on the same stage as the rest of the year's games? If it's good enough then it could win the main Best Game award; it seems a bit silly that we're effectively sidelining some games just because they don't quite fit the Adventure genre.

I somewhat agree with this, CJ.  Perhaps the logical compromise would be to change 'Best Game' to 'Best Adventure Game' and leave in 'Best Non-Adventure Game'.  This way people can vote on their favorite adventure and non-adventure game without feeling conflicted by which should take more precedence.  There seem to be more and more non-standard games being made with AGS these days, which is why I think a second category is useful.  It hasn't been as true in the past, though.

One thing that's honestly bothered me about the awards for some time now is people being nominated who don't even give a piss about winning the award or being a part of the ceremony/community.  I'd really like to see the authors themselves have to put up their game(s) for consideration, and I know from some discussions I've had with other members of the forum I'm not the only one who feels this way.  It shows a genuine interest on the part of the game creators to involve themselves in the awards rather than random fanboys/girls recommending their games, and modesty should have/has nothing to do with it.   I'm really against the award by proxy concept.



Just a thought.

[SSH]

One thing that's honestly bothered me about the awards for some time now is people being nominated who don't even give a piss about winning the award or being a part of the ceremony/community.  I'd really like to see the authors themselves have to put up their game(s) for consideration, and I know from some discussions I've had with other members of the forum I'm not the only one who feels this way.  It shows a genuine interest on the part of the game creators to involve themselves in the awards rather than random fanboys/girls recommending their games, and modesty should have/has nothing to do with it.   I'm really against the award by proxy concept.

But Yahtzee hasn't made any AGS stuff this year anyway...

[Radiant]

Wow, lots of suggestions here.

I don't really think we need so many new categories.

"Best newcomer" sounds more like a FOREGO award, besides we seem to be unable to give it a meaningful definition. If Mr. A releases a short demo-ish game and then a big one, whereas Ms. B starts a handful of projects and abandons them without releasing anything, before doing a big game, why would A be less eligible?

I don't think "best parody" or "best remake" is necessary either, considering neither is at all an under-appreciated genre (and besides, we don't get enough submissions to fill those extra categories). Likewise, I don't see the point of adding a category to give an award to the (few) commercial games we get each year, as those are hardly under-appreciated either. Unless the point is to omit commercial games from the other awards, which I don't think is a good idea.

And the "best innovation" category strikes me as rather arbitrary. Doing some clever scripting trick is really best programming instead (and likely won't be noticed anyway); doing a feature that simply hasn't been done in AGS before is hardly innovative either.

I think my point here is that having more categories dilutes the purpose of all of them, which I don't think is a good thing.

Gameplay is definitely distinct from puzzles, though. For instance, LOOM has great gameplay but barely any puzzles.

Personally I'd like bringing back the P3n1s award, but restricting it to games made as a joke. But given the flame wars we've had on the subject, I can see why people wouldn't want to.

[paolo]

Personally I'd like bringing back the P3n1s award, but restricting it to games made as a joke. But given the flame wars we've had on the subject, I can see why people wouldn't want to.

In that case, how about we have "Best Joke Game" instead? This will make it an award for inventiveness rather than a potentially insulting booby prize.

[LimpingFish]

ProgZmax has highlighted something that I feel could be avoided by having a more active eligibility process; if developers had to be personally responsible for submitting their games for consideration for nomination, for instance. As far as I know, Yahtzee doesn't even bother adding his games to the database himself. Nor has he posted, on these boards, his thanks for people having voted for his games. It's like Marlon Brando sending a Native American to collect his oscar.

Actually, it's more like a fan of Marlon Brando sending a Native American to collect his oscar!

I think if we got more developers actively involved, we might find a bigger audience for the awards. For those who can't be bothered, and therefore may miss out on an award or two, well, dems de breaks!

Radiant echoes my earlier points about superfluous awards, and I agree that less categories (and perhaps clearer definitions about the remaining ones) would (hopefully) streamline the awards process.

[bicilotti]

Gameplay is definitely distinct from puzzles, though. For instance, LOOM has great gameplay but barely any puzzles.

Enlightening, thanks!

One thing that's honestly bothered me about the awards for some time now is people being nominated who don't even give a piss about winning the award or being a part of the ceremony/community.  [...]

I understand that but don't agree. I feel it all boils down to what you think the "scope" of the awards is: if you consider them a community activity you might want developers "involved" with the boards.
If you, like me, see the Awards as something addressed to forumers but to "outsiders" too (a showcase of AGS as a tool of creation), you want every AGS game to compete.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

Well, I very much do think the awards have been and are a community activity and a community reward for outstanding games made by members.

Also:

But Yahtzee hasn't made any AGS stuff this year anyway...

This wasn't really necessary, was it?  I think it's pretty clear that I wasn't just talking about Yahtzee.

[Ishmael]

Indeed, the awards are a community activity and thus should stay as a fun, relaxed event to the community, atleast as long as they don't start attracting media around the world. AGS hasn't gone that professional yet, that we'd need polished and professional looking awards, in my opinion.

I don't really see the grounds for the best remake/whatever category being too strong. There are so few released every year to my knowledge that having a category for them would need them excluded from the rest, which again doesn't sound that ideal. Then again, if it were so it might encourage people to make remakes and run for quality in them, as it might seem like an "easy" award with a lot of value.

The Best Adventure/Best Non-Adventure divide sounds good, with both types being eligible in the more specific categories, as far as they go in those aspects.

Since the Best Programming awards seems to cause so much confusion, should it be renamed to something a bit more elaborate? If the award was about the game done with most care to it, as in no bugs, functional and easy interface, etc, maybe something like "Best Technical Design and Execution" or something. Since "programming" as it is is perhaps hard to see to the outside by most of the players maybe the award should be geared a bit more towards the technical output and what is carried over by the scripter's work to the player.

Another thought, "The P3n1sh Award aka Best Joke or Other Non-serious Game". (Authors of nominated games could maybe be asked to confirm that their game can be a nominee here, to avoid upsetting anyone too badly or something...) Community spirit and legacy, or some such somethingorother, anyone?

[Snarky]

Stray observations:

I like the "Best Debut" idea. I think it's nice to recognize the people who have stepped out on the scene and made a game for the first time. There are some definitional problems with what counts as a first game, and if it still counts if you got help from AGS veterans, but I think a committee could easily vet the nominees.

I also think "Best Innovation" is an important quality to honor. It's not about clever scripting or implementing some obvious feature that no AGS game has got around to including before. It's about coming up with new, creative ideas that increase the scope for how adventure games are told and played. There have been many innovative and original AGS games (including previous winners, as well as several games by Radiant), and I think that innovative games often don't get the attention they deserve.

While "Best Gameplay" and "Best Puzzles" are not exactly the same thing, I don't think we need separate awards for them. I'd argue for just one "Best Puzzles/Gameplay" category instead. Puzzles are just one particular form of gameplay, so a game with excellent puzzles could win the gameplay category on that strength. I also get the impression that some people are confused about what "gameplay" means, so this might help.

I like the "Parody/Remake" idea in theory, since it's often very hard to decide how to treat them compared to other entries, but there's not much point if there aren't enough eligible games.

I really dislike the idea of creators having to submit their games for nomination. For one thing, I think it's unfair to players and voters: If I feel that some game by a non-forum member was the best AGS game of the year, I should be allowed to vote for it.

I also kind of miss the P3N15 award. In the discussions at the time, the consensus seemed to be to keep it, and the unilateral decision to eliminate it kind of rubs me the wrong way. A separate awarding body might be an acceptable compromise, though.

[SSH]

I like the "Parody/Remake" idea in theory, since it's often very hard to decide how to treat them compared to other entries, but there's not much point if there aren't enough eligible games.

Well, there's at least 3 top quality ones: QFG2VGA, Quest for Yrolg and Little Girl in Underland.

I really dislike the idea of creators having to submit their games for nomination. For one thing, I think it's unfair to players and voters: If I feel that some game by a non-forum member was the best AGS game of the year, I should be allowed to vote for it.

People have been confused by the two-step process already, so a three-step process doesn't seem to have a point.

I also kind of miss the P3N15 award. In the discussions at the time, the consensus seemed to be to keep it, and the unilateral decision to eliminate it kind of rubs me the wrong way.

You don't want to rub your P3N15 the wrong way, thats for sure.


My current feeling from the debate is that we try having these extra awards out this year and see how it goes. If the Debut and Remake/Parody awards fall flat or just duplicate other awards then we can drop them again. After all, I dropped the best resource award after the time when it only had one nominee...