Our Oscars - Why Games Deserve Better than the Spike Video Game Awards - Extra Credits

So, we've spent a lot of time lately thinking about how to put a video game awards show together. You can probably guess why. And even though it's not at all what our show is trying to be, the question keeps coming up. Where's our Oscars? So, today we're going to talk a little bit about why such a ceremony might be important and where we might find such an event. So, why do we care if we have an Oscar type event at all? Well, you could argue it's the legitimacy that it would bring. And you could say that such an event might make us seem more respectable in the eyes of the non-gaming public, and you'd be right. But, that's not the big reason why we care. No, no. We care because of the effect the Academy Awards have on the film industry. Have you ever noticed how right around the holidays a slew of films come out that take a few more risks, that demand a little bit more of their audience than some of the summer blockbusters? That's because Oscar season's coming up, and film studios want to win Oscars. Winning an Oscar helps the film sell more tickets. It helps the studio establish its brand, and it helps the writers, directors, and actors involved to draw in larger

audiences to the films they make in the future. And hey, if they don't win the Oscar, no big loss for anybody. So, Oscars are great for the film industry, but all of that's old news to most of you guys. What people tend to think about less is how those December films get made in the first place. How do you pitch something like Juno or Eternal Sunshine, Black Swan, even The Social Network to a film studio? By saying it's Oscar material. The Oscars give Hollywood a reason to green-light the films that would otherwise never see the light of day, and I'm convinced we are richer for it. So, where can we find our version of such an event? Well, first let's look at where we most certainly cannot find it because bad examples are often easier to learn from. The Spike TV Video Game Awards. For those of you who didn't see this year's event, lucky you. Spike TV has yet to post the show in its entirety anywhere, so apparently they feel the same way. But, there is a lot we can learn from it, so here we go. Number one, if you want your awards to be taken seriously, they can't be marketing events. Much of the Spike TV Awards was filled with trailers for games that haven't come out yet. The entire show felt like a big marketing ploy reminding people to buy all the big games that had come out in the last 6 months, and to let everyone know that sequels were on the way. There was even

an award for most anticipated game. That is stupid. Number two, celebrities from other industries are okay, but only if they actually care about video games. The Spike TV Awards was packed with celebrities, most of whom have nothing to do with and know nothing about the video game industry. We really got to cut that out. Shigeru Miyamoto, Tim Schafer, Gabe Newell, maybe Cliff Bleszinski, even the Penny Arcade guys. All of them are far more qualified to be handing out awards and talking about games than Denise Richards. It's really selling ourselves short to say that famous people from other industries are better choices than we are to reward merit in our own field. Or hey, maybe just bring in celebrities who really care about games. Put Felicia Day in there. Get Vin Diesel on the phone. Wil Wheaton, Jack Black. Heck, I can even see the argument for guys like Stephen Colbert, Samuel L. Jackson, or Ice-T. My point is, most of the celebrities on the Spike Awards were phoning it in, and very clearly uncomfortable with the subject matter they were speaking about. It's not glamorous. It's just awkward for everybody. Number three, ditch categories like strongest hero of all time. That's pretty self-explanatory, I think. Number four, it can't just be the best-selling awards. Outside of the

categories specifically designated best indie and best handheld, I'm not sure there was a single game up for an award that didn't ship at least a million units. So, we basically wound up seeing only the games which were most heavily marketed this year. And while it's true that most of those big AAA games sold that many units because they really are good games, and they often totally deserve the awards, they're certainly not exclusively the best. There's a lot of interesting stuff happening on the indie and handheld scene, and they probably deserve a little more than a single category. Speaking of which, number five, have categories that make sense for games. And I don't blame Spike TV so much for this one, because I'm not sure anyone's actually figured out how to do this. I don't think we should have platform-specific awards, but other than that, do we have awards by genre? And if so, what are these game genres, and what fits into them? We'll probably talk more about that one later. Otherwise, do we go by discipline, like the Oscars? Best design, best production, best technology, or or maybe we have to break it down even further. Best systems design, best mechanics design, best level design, best graphics programming, best physics, best engine architecture. I really don't know the best answer to this one. That's something we're going to have to figure out. Anyway, and to be

fair, Spike isn't trying to be our Oscars. At least I really hope not. So, let's look briefly at two groups that have a chance at taking that title. The Developers' Choice Awards given out at GDC and the Interactive Achievement Awards given out at DICE. Both of these awards are chosen by developers and have developers as presenters for the most part. They both focus on the community and they look to honor not only excellence in games, but also those that helped to make them. And both of them try at the very least to look beyond what's popular at the moment and reward what might have a lasting impact on the industry. Now, right now, neither of them really has the sway or the pageantry of the Oscars, but they're getting there. Especially the Interactive Achievement Awards, simply by its nature as a slightly more upscale affair. Unfortunately, there's one thing that really holds both of these ceremonies back. They're not very visible to the consumer. I'd be surprised if more than 5% of you watching this show today had ever actually watched either of these award shows. And you guys are game enthusiasts. I mean, you're here on The Escapist. You're watching me. To the mainstream gaming consumer, these shows are almost completely invisible. So, unfortunately, they have very little impact on the general game-buying audience. And that means that they don't really have the Oscar effect in terms of what types of games get greenlit. Which

brings us to the last thing our Oscars are really going to need. Number six, to be public-facing without pandering. These have to be awards for the industry and by the industry, but they also have to be available to the consumer and interesting for the consumer. And that's a very, very fine line and one that I think it'll take us a long while to learn to walk. But it's the last necessary component to our Oscars. So, yeah, I guess that's about it. If you can, try to tune in to the Interactive Achievement Awards and the Game Developers' Choice Awards next year. At the very least, I can guarantee you it'll be more enjoyable than the alternative. See you next week.

Woo!