vivster said:
pokoko said:
Obviously, there are no "official" awards, they're just opinions. The bigger an awards show, the more often money is involved somewhere, so they become less transparent and more suspect.
If I ran an awards program of some sort, it would have transparency and it would be focused on games. No music, no celebrities. The information about who is voting would be out there, as well as an explanation of the voting process. There would definitely be video clips from voters about why they endorsed the winner and what set that game above the rest for them. Perhaps even a smaller clip for each nominee but maybe not, depending on time.
The obvious problem is that a big, puffy show takes a lot of money, which usually requires corporate backing. Corporate backing is when things turn murky. The ideal solution would be to avoid any conflict of interest but then you loose things like "world premiere" trailers, which do bring a lot of people.
It's a trade-off, either direction. |
World Premier trailers have nothing to do in an award show though. That's what trade shows are for. Award Shows shouldn't be about clicks or profit in the first place.
|
Sure, that's true, but without trailers you get just another middle of the pack video that no one watches. No viewers, no money, and anything major falls apart.
I'm fine with the big industry sponsored event, to be honest. I think the burden falls on the intended audience to realize that such shows hold no special meaning. Really, because of all the conflicts of interest, any awards show put on the industry itself should have less meaning. I know that and a lot of other people know that, it's just that now and then you see some special flower remarking about how such and such game won "Game of the Year" as if it were a singular designation.
