Call of Duty wins AIAS GOTY - and no one cares

[Glockstar]

Prince of Persia is the console GOTY. (As if it matters.)

What happened to the AIAS awards, huh?

I guess there have been "issues" with their awards process for quite some time, but this year a lot of people didn't even pay attention to it.

Which, actually, sounds about just, if you ask me.

For one thing, their "big" ceremony took a real big step backwards this year and was downright small-time. And that's not right. Not if the videogame industry is right up there with movies and music with regards to revenues - which they say it is. Videogaming is huge anymore, and it deserves a worthy recognition and awards ceremony.

The other thing is though, is that they collect a lot of money from "candidates". Not only do I question where that money goes, but I certainly question whether games are being fairly represented when it costs $1500 just to nominate them for one category!

The following link will take you to a GameSpy article regarding this years AIAS awards show. The article also goes into some detail on why their nomination - and ultimately their award - process is so qustionable. You should read it. (On the third and final page of the article is the list of all the categoies and award winners):

http://gamespy.com/articles/march04/dice/awards/

Just on the basis of them not doing enough to honor the industry, alone, I say take "it" away from them. "It" being the authority, and the recognition, that their awards have over others. I say give it to someone else - and let's see if they can't do it right, or at least come up with something better.

But the whole $1500 per nomination thing really bugs me. The AIAS awards will always have some credibility because they are voted on "by those who take an active, creative role in making games" only. But their process has too many loopholes, and at times sems downright shady, for theirs to be considered the pen-ultimate award(s). If you read the article, you'll see that some categories had only one game nominated for it (which, of course, it won) - simply because of "the fee". How is that fair?!? I mean, where's the recognition in that?!?

I think someone needs to come up with a formula for determining the true GOTY's. Something computerized, like ABC's and the NCAA's BCS dealio, where all of the different game sites, and magazines votes are factored in.

If I were running it, I'd make sure that certain requirements are met (like I don't see how The OXM's, The OPM's, or Nintendo Power's awards could be counted), and (like the BCS method) I'd give extra say-so to certain inputs - like the AIAS, IGN, GameSpot, and EGM. I already explained why I think the AIAS votes should (still) carry extra clout, but IGN, GS, and EGM also exhibit a high degree of expertise and professionalism. None are without their faults, but these 4 still do it better than anybody else.

We were doing a good job of keeping track of who won what... and I wonder if we could bring that back one more time to see if we can make our own computations as to who the true GOTY is. If y'all wanted to try it, that is?

Btw, does anybody know if G4 ever did an award thingie? I've never seen the results, if they have.

[Gadfly2317]

Prince of Persia is the console GOTY. (As if it matters.)

What happened to the AIAS awards, huh?

I guess there have been "issues" with their awards process for quite some time, but this year a lot of people didn't even pay attention to it.

Which, actually, sounds about just, if you ask me.

For one thing, their "big" ceremony took a real big step backwards this year and was downright small-time. And that's not right. Not if the videogame industry is right up there with movies and music with regards to revenues - which they say it is. Videogaming is huge anymore, and it deserves a worthy recognition and awards ceremony.

The other thing is though, is that they collect a lot of money from "candidates". Not only do I question where that money goes, but I certainly question whether games are being fairly represented when it costs $1500 just to nominate them for one category!

The following link will take you to a GameSpy article regarding this years AIAS awards show. The article also goes into some detail on why their nomination - and ultimately their award - process is so qustionable. You should read it. (On the third and final page of the article is the list of all the categoies and award winners):

http://gamespy.com/articles/march04/dice/awards/

Just on the basis of them not doing enough to honor the industry, alone, I say take "it" away from them. "It" being the authority, and the recognition, that their awards have over others. I say give it to someone else - and let's see if they can't do it right, or at least come up with something better.

But the whole $1500 per nomination thing really bugs me. The AIAS awards will always have some credibility because they are voted on "by those who take an active, creative role in making games" only. But their process has too many loopholes, and at times sems downright shady, for theirs to be considered the pen-ultimate award(s). If you read the article, you'll see that some categories had only one game nominated for it (which, of course, it won) - simply because of "the fee". How is that fair?!? I mean, where's the recognition in that?!?

I think someone needs to come up with a formula for determining the true GOTY's. Something computerized, like ABC's and the NCAA's BCS dealio, where all of the different game sites, and magazines votes are factored in.

If I were running it, I'd make sure that certain requirements are met (like I don't see how The OXM's, The OPM's, or Nintendo Power's awards could be counted), and (like the BCS method) I'd give extra say-so to certain inputs - like the AIAS, IGN, GameSpot, and EGM. I already explained why I think the AIAS votes should (still) carry extra clout, but IGN, GS, and EGM also exhibit a high degree of expertise and professionalism. None are without their faults, but these 4 still do it better than anybody else.

We were doing a good job of keeping track of who won what... and I wonder if we could bring that back one more time to see if we can make our own computations as to who the true GOTY is. If y'all wanted to try it, that is?

Btw, does anybody know if G4 ever did an award thingie? I've never seen the results, if they have.


I don't know a damn thing about Call to Arms, but I had this weird feeling it was going to win. Is it really a great game, or was this a cop-out way to avoid picking sides between two major financial contributors to AIAS, MS and Nintendo (who this year were running head to head with Zelda and KOTOR.)

Anyway, all awards are political, lots of lobbying and other shenanigans to get awards. The more important the awards become the worse it would be. So far as I know, the game awards worlds doesn't have its own grim version of Miramax's Harvey Weinstein.

Thanks for reminding me about the AIAS awards though, I was wanting to check out all the smaller categories too. They are actually more interesting most of the time.

[Hieremias]

Call of Duty (not Call to Arms) was a good game, but not a great one--but that's more than can be said about KotoR or Windwaker. It was virtually identical to Medal of Honor (made by the same people). Why on earth it won the AIAS awards I have no idea (not that I care much though). It used 4 year-old technology and rat-in-the-maze gameplay. I mean it wasn't bad, it was a fun game, but it's like Pirates of the Caribbean winning the Best Picture oscar.

Frankly they really dropped the ball on this one. 2003 was not a stellar year for PC gaming but there were a bunch of titles better than Call of Duty, like Max Payne 2, Chrome, and Gothic 2.

[no.1gamer]

I care!!! Call of Duty is a sweet game. Although you can't drive around WWII armored vehicles like in Battlefield 1942. Nevertheless Call of Duty is a great FPS and deserves the GOTY award...