AGS AWARDS 2008 - WINNERS ANNOUNCED!

[TheJBurger]

Hey, thanks, Goldmund! I'm very happy Chatroom got nominated, but I wasn't sure what to expect since it seemed to be more of a sleeper 'hit,' if a hit at all.

As for the rest of the games, this year I haven't actually found the motivation to finish all of them. I've played most of the major ones on the list, but I found myself basically dropping games mid-way through with no plans to finish them to the end. The short ones I can muster up the time to finish, but it's been a real struggle for me to get through the longer ones every time I get stuck. (Sorry! It's just a personal problem.)

[Essex]

.....it only had two weeks on release to find such high favour. Such a high nom result in this case is going to raise eyebrows, weather we like it or not.

I don't think that the release time has really something to do with the results, it is maybe more a question of the number of downloads and the distribution of the game.

I found out some info after looking at the major nominees database entries:
"Ben Jordan 7" was downloaded 1600 times in five months.
"Nanobots" was downloaded 1250 times in six months.
"A Second Face" was downloaded 2200 times in three weeks.

The other thing is that all the major nominees used teams, with voice actors or beta testers, that usually become potential nominators and voters.

Last year ATOTK was brought by a team of 17 persons. As far as I remember 50 persons took part at the nominations. It is pretty clear that some of the team members always vote for their game, which is not a crime, but with such a high number of team members and such low voting numbers it can actually influence the result.

[The Ivy]

I don't think that the release time has really something to do with the results, it is maybe more a question of the number of downloads and the distribution of the game...
"Nanobots" was downloaded 1250 times in six months...

To clarify, that only accounts for the number of downloads from the AGS site. Both Vince and I distribute Nanobots from our respective websites, and other game sites have asked and received permission to host and distribute it. So, the actual numbers are hard to figure out, but the AGS count is definitely a lowball estimate.

[LimpingFish]

The other thing is that all the major nominees used teams, with voice actors or beta testers, that usually become potential nominators and voters.

Last year ATOTK was brought by a team of 17 persons. As far as I remember 50 persons took part at the nominations. It is pretty clear that some of the team members always vote for their game, which is not a crime, but with such a high number of team members and such low voting numbers it can actually influence the result.

That's actually a good point. It's debatable whether we could label this as unfair, though. But it does mean that a one-man game could automatically be at a disadvantage. I don't see how such a situation could be addressed, though, without implying that some form of abuse of the system is in effect.

Every awards season brings with it new discussions about how the process should be structured, and numerous voting/nomination/qualifying foibles are argued over. This can sometimes have the knock-on effect of tainting the nominees, which isn't really fair, and shouldn't be an issue when it's the fault of the system. I'm still of the opinion, as I've expressed in previous threads, that an overhaul of the award process in it's entirety, is past due.

Not to stop games from sweeping the boards, but to protect the developers from accusations of voting abuse.

[qptain Nemo]

Well, I personally was really worried to find wonderful The Vacuum in the only one nomination. But at least it's there and I really hope it will got the well deserved award. If you haven't played this game yet, don't be heartless and ignorant, play it now and really consider voting for it!
Also I'm kinda shocked Quest for Yrolg didn't make it to graphics-related nominations... It just doesn't make sense. I like BJ and all but come on, it doesn't make it graphically superior to anything.
And it was nice to see that not only I nominated ManBoy for the music, hehe.

Anyway, congrats to everybody who got his game nominated and to Ivy as well. You all have what to be proud of.

[bicilotti]

The other thing is that all the major nominees used teams, with voice actors or beta testers, that usually become potential nominators and voters.

So, Essex, to sum it all up, you don' like the Rogers as they are now. Now, for pars costruens, any suggesion on how to improve them?

[kaputtnik]

Blockbuster... Hollywood, or what have you, whatever.

I wasn't saying that to disapprove of any of the games that are nominated in lots of categories - I was simply saying that very notable games that manage to attract lots of interest among the gaming community will always be, say, present in a way. I was going to compile a long explanation, but I think Goldmund already put it very well.

The AGS awards are for the AGS community, and games that make it beyond those forum and community borders and are well received deserve community awards both for drawing attention of the Indie gaming world to AGS and for helping the genre. And giving out AGS awards also means: giving fans of the genre who do not know much about independent game development, yet, a lead.

[Fizzii]

Last year ATOTK was brought by a team of 17 persons. As far as I remember 50 persons took part at the nominations. It is pretty clear that some of the team members always vote for their game, which is not a crime, but with such a high number of team members and such low voting numbers it can actually influence the result.

That's true, but by the end of it, we only had around 4 regular people on the team (the rest became busy with real life, and most were no longer active in the adventure game community), so I really don't think we had 17 people nominating ATOTK for everything, heh. In terms of nominations, I'd say that games with higher profiles or games that become much-loved favourites tend to receive more nominations anyway. I'd personally like to see more discernment when people nominate games for particular categories, but it's not really surprising that people would nominate their favourite in every category (they, of course, would like to give that game the best chance of winning something).

[SSH]

Every year people have suggested this happens and they underestimate their peers on the forums: in looking at the actual votes in previous years I can see that this hardly happens at all. I can't see the nominations in the same way this year, but I can see the final votes, so I'm sure that it won't happen again (it hasn't so far).

[Le Woltaire]

Well, if some of you take this award very serious and would like to change the way it works, I see only one possibility:

Make it like all other awards: Use a jury.
The jury can be elected by the community.

Then the jury will decide in a discussion what game gets what award.
In real life it is like this. I took part in a lot of music, painting and architecture competitions and there was always some kind of expert jury that kicked me out...

But if this award is taken serious like this, at least there should be a prize or something...

Another thing is that nominations don't say anything: Last year for example I got nominated here for eight awards. I didn't get a single one. When there are only five games left the selection becomes somehow harder.

[Dualnames]

Well, let's face it we can't have our favorite games on the list. Barn Runner is my fav for this year but it didn't got nominated. Why? Because I for example lost two years in this community to press that download button. So it's really normal. And well BJ is fun. but when it comes to voting for best documentation doesn't mean that the overall best game with a txt should get it..just a thought. Go Tinkerbell!!!

[Montague]

I´m surprised the Vacuum and Life of D. Duck II didn´t get more love. Other than that the selections seem very reasonable to me, based on what I´ve played

[Snake]

kaputtnik:
What I wrote wasn't meant to be taken as an argument. I agree %110 percent

I was only saying that whatever was happening, I was very suprised and thankful that something that I shit out was an actual nominee.

[m0ds]

I agree it's for the community, but the community certainly gets its chance. It seems a fairly small number of people vote (and nominate) each year. One hundred of all our members? :/ It'd be good of CJ to send a mass PM and notify the other 4000 inactive members

[MashPotato]

I think an email reminder would be a good idea as well

And thanks for the Beauties & Beasts nomination!

[Stupot]

Perhaps, next time, if someome took it upon themselves to do the rounds, visiting other forums and plugging the AGS awards.
And perhaps if more of a big deal was made about the awards on the front page.  I know it's up there in the little 'recent news' box but I should imagine that goes largely unnoticed.

[SSH]

Perhaps, next time, if someome took it upon themselves to do the rounds, visiting other forums and plugging the AGS awards.

As a slightly-active member of the AdventureGamers forums I considered this, but getting other forum members coming over and signing up just so that they could vote would possibly be counter-productive and could lead to the kind of "fanboi" nominating for every category that people have been speaking out against. If the problem is that most AGSers don't play enough of a cross-section of the games then getting outsiders in would hardly help. That also applies, to a lesser extent, to inactive forum members.

[LimpingFish]

Just to clarify, I don't think unfair voting practices are taking place to such an extent that it influences the end results, and I don't want it to appear that I'm of the opinion that everyone is guilty until proved innocent.

What I am saying is that, with the current system, we couldn't really spot if someone was engaged in such practice and, conversely, we couldn't prove that someone wasn't. So when a game does really well at the nomination stage or the end voting stage, it wouldn't take much for someone, who may feel they were unfairly overlooked, to cry "Fix!". And we have nothing in place to repute such accusations except the hope that our community wouldn't go in for such shenanigans. Admittedly, as far as I know, this has never actually happened. Maybe I'm just overly cynical.

And perhaps if more of a big deal was made about the awards on the front page.  I know it's up there in the little 'recent news' box but I should imagine that goes largely unnoticed.

There was a recent thread concerning that very idea, but nothing much came of it (and floods of people weren't exactly scrambling share the workload, anyway ). To be fair to everybody involved with the awards, particularly SSH, these things don't run themselves and there's only so much free time that can be devoted to such.

Well, if some of you take this award very serious...

I don't know about "serious", but I like the awards, and I like the idea of someone striving to improve their games to win one. It's nice to have an incentive to aspire to, regardless of the lack of standing the awards may have outside the community. The awards usually get a mention on a number of outside websites, though, and winning games may arguably benefit from this.

[Le Woltaire]

Well, if some of you take this award very serious...

I don't know about "serious", but I like the awards, and I like the idea of someone striving to improve their games to win one. It's nice to have an incentive to aspire to, regardless of the lack of standing the awards may have outside the community. The awards usually get a mention on a number of outside websites, though, and winning games may arguably benefit from this.

I see the social function of this award: It brings people together at a certain time of the year so that they have a little discussion about the games that were released during the year...
That is all.

Being nominated for this award doesn't mean anything, it is just about taking part at the community and that you release something during the year.

I know and have worked with a lot of persons who have won several awards while they make underground games. Noone of them made a career or got successful, or something... Some of them run out of funds and can't allow themselves to produce more games anymore.  And the games they made are widely unknown although they deserve more attention. If someone says: "I was nominated for the AGS awards" on the street, people would look at them and think: "Who's that crazy gone garbageman?" It doesn't mean anything...

It's all about meeting some people, and have some happy time while making a game and savouring the last remaining time of your youth, before you end up in a common office-driven world, that forces you to work for your retirement pension and nothing else... We shouldn't destroy these happy times with formalistic behaviour...

[SSH]

What I am saying is that, with the current system, we couldn't really spot if someone was engaged in such practice and, conversely, we couldn't prove that someone wasn't. So when a game does really well at the nomination stage or the end voting stage, it wouldn't take much for someone, who may feel they were unfairly overlooked, to cry "Fix!". And we have nothing in place to repute such accusations except the hope that our community wouldn't go in for such shenanigans. Admittedly, as far as I know, this has never actually happened. Maybe I'm just overly cynical.

Well, I can see the IP address, username and votes of everybody who has voted...