A Derk appears from the mists...
United States
Portland
Oregon
BGG for the videogame world!!
BGG for the videogame world!!
-
The time has come. We are officially planning on having a gaming award associated with our dearest boardgamegeek. What I need from you are suggestions. Anything from how to determine the winner(s?) to what the physical award should look like. I can't guarantee a darn thing will come from your suggestion, as Aldie and I will be retaining veto rights on this topic. However, I'm very anxious to see what y'all have in the brain pan on this topic...
Here are some concepts we feel should be included in the final product:
 All users with a valid login should be some part of the selection process...
Um... that's about all I've got. We've been kicking around this idea for many years now, but we feel it's finally come time to act on it... Fill me with your knowledge people!
-
Cuppa Jack
United States
Los Angeles
California
-
Sounds great!
Will there be only a single game honored?
It might be nice to have a few different categories as well as one overall "game of the year."
I can see this becoming a hard-fought issues between the wargammers, those that decry the SDJ winners for not being "gamers game" enough, and the general BGG population.
The timing will be interesting as well, as if you use just the 2005 calendar year, many people won't yet have the chance to fully explore the Essen releases and games going into the holidays w/ a lot of hype may live-or-die on hype along (-cough Caylus -cough)
Can't wait to see what comes of this!
-
Boards & Bits
United States
Spokane Valley
Washington
-
I like the idea of having multiple categories, such as Card Game, Board Game, War Game, etc.
How many categories and how to categorize certain games that don't fit just one category I'm afraid I can't say.
I also like the idea of "Best New Designer" and "Best New Publisher", etc., to recongnize the amateurs that are trying to go pro.
Which brings up the Hall of Game award where games/designers are inducted into the all-time greats list.
Maybe we call the awars The Gameys 
Just a few ideas OTTOMH 
Tom
-
Based upon my poor understanding of history, science, and ethics...
United States
North Pole
Alaska
-
derk wrote: All users with a valid login should be some part of the selection process...
Whoa there. That gives CardChess Intl. a distinct advantage with his one vote, plus 250 proxies.
-
Anthony Rubbo
United States
Philadelphia
PA
-
Set up a single-elimination tournament of 64 games! You can seed by BGG rank, and then have 63 rounds of 1v1 voting by all BGGers. Each round it would be exciting to see who survives - perhaps call it "Geek Madness"?!
-
Fraser
Australia
Melbourne
Yep that was 12 Power Grid maps back to back over two days. Worth doing, but possibly not in such a concentrated burst.
Ooh yes, now a little to the left - my nose is itchy. No, no the other left! Now what colour is 12 supporter badge going to be I wonder?
-
Here's a couple of ideas off the top of my head:
If it is anything to do with creative writing, first set up the Joe Gola Hall of Fame 
Classes of GeekList. Most informative, Most Interesting, Funniest, Most Thought Provoking, Most Community Building, Most Interesting Title, Inventive use of the medium ...
Something to do with Strategy Articles (they are a lot of work and there's not many of them, so anything to promote them would be a good thing).
Overall contributor - Yes this is a bit of a "How long is a piece of string" and is probably impossible to judge, but we are just throwing ideas up at the moment aren't we?
Most number of uses of the word Caylus without any mention of hype or ratings 
-
Chapel
United States
Round Rock
Texas
Only for the love of the game...
-
LemonyFresh wrote: Set up a single-elimination tournament of 64 games! You can seed by BGG rank, and then have 63 rounds of 1v1 voting by all BGGers. Each round it would be exciting to see who survives - perhaps call it "Geek Madness"?!
Yeah but who decides the brackets? Bracket voting is always a trick. I'd say have a list of eligible games, then we pick (each of our) top ten. Weight the values 1 being highest 10 being lowest. tally the overall weights, then a winner. But I agree above maybe these should be in categories, wargame, cardgame, whatever.
-
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
-
Anything chosen by "the masses" is guarateed to be irrelevant. Look at all the "top" TV shows: Friends, Survivor, American Idol, etc. If there was a way to (self-)classify BGG users by how serious a gamer they are, then maybe it could work.
Gamer III (own 100+ games, play 20+ hours a week)
Gamer II (a few games per week)
Gamer I Gamer (a few games per month)
Then have the awards per gamer type. I would also like to see voting broken down by some of the more popular game types:
Best Auction Game
Best Area Influence Game
Best Combat Game
etc.
-
The Real and Only
United States
Aubrey
Texas
-
Will there be Shill busting votes to counter the hype of the eventual winnner?
Should a geek vote for a game if he has never played it and has only "read the rules."?
Can anyone stop the Caylus fanboys, who have surpassed the War of the Ring
fanboys in status, can they be stopped from propelling Caylus above all games. Including Halo 2 which is not even a boardgame?
Will the Cowboys beat the Eagles tonight?
-
Scott Tepper
United States
Chicago
Illinois
-
Derk,
I think that's a great idea! People enjoy being part of a voting process. And I think it would be a great way of manufacturers to additionally promote some of their best games and maybe get them into the hands of non-gamers: "Top-rated family game of 2005 by Boardgamegeek.com"
Might I suggest that if people are voting, you DON'T show current state of the vote as some people tend not to vote for the things they like, but instead vote AGAINST things that other people like. Instead, show the results at the end of the voting period. (oooh, was that too cynical of me?) 
-
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
-
 I concur with "Fraser" and any others, in that there ought to be numerous 'categories' to include "Strategy" AND "Variant" articles, since they don't garner much in the way of 'Rewards', including "Geek Gold"! WHY don't they? "Reviews" will, while expounding upon HOW to go about playing or 'Winning' in a GAME doesn't? Sometimes it takes MUCH more 'effort' to precisely lay out the proper 'means' to follow, when playing something. I don't blame most folks for NOT wishing to "waste their time" in providing such, unless they're just "EGO-pigs" and the like. Also, having various 'sub sets' within 'categories' would prevent(hopefully) any disenfranchisement amongst many, as witnessed by those disappointed in 'Awards' given to "Winnahs!"-perceived by some-as being LESS 'worthy' than some favorite of theirs.
-
(Mr.) Kim Beattie
United States
Rocklin
California
Embrace your inner geek!
In Flanders fields the poppies blow Between the crosses, row on row, That mark our place; and in the sky The larks, still bravely singing, fly Scarce heard amid the guns below.
-
A BGG game award is an interesting idea but the idea is fraught with dangers as you are probably aware...
Look at what a laughing stock the Origins awards have become. Categories just dilute the award. Forgive my cynicism, but multiple category awards are of use and interest to companies and marketing departments only...
Plus you always find someone who wants to "game" the awards by mis-representing a game's category. (Twilight Imperium 3 has cards, so it can be nominated in the "Best Card Game" category, right?)
What is the purpose of a BGG award? That's the question that should be answered first. Most awards are for the benefit of the manufacturer or publisher. Slap the award on the box and sell more copies. In this case, multiple categories are always good.
But if the purpose of the BGG award is to recognize the best game of the year, then there should be only one award. There can be only one "best" game of the year. Awarding "best of" awards by category just dilutes the award.
Which leads to the nomination and selection process. Talk about a can of worms...
No matter what process of selection is chosen, someone will always claim "foul" and say the process is unfair. (Meaning their favorite game wasn't selected.) I don't envy the judges...
-
Brian Bankler
United States
San Antonio
Texas
Modified Limited Rampage!
-
derk wrote: The time has come. We are officially planning on having a gaming award associated with our dearest boardgamegeek. What I need from you are suggestions. Anything from how to determine the winner(s?) to what the physical award should look like.
It isn't clear from the message ... are the awards going to games ("Best New Game", "Game most in dire need of republishing") or to geeks ("Best review", "Most creative use of fonts and typeset aka 'The Grog'")?
Or is it both?
-
Morgan Dontanville
United States
Brooklyn
New York
Plate of Shrimp.
Here we are folks, the dream we all dream of.
-
I proposed this a while ago.
I know this may seem egotistical, but you should really look at this conversation before you post suggestions. For some reason everyone got bent out of shape (including myself, shamefully). So, let's learn from past mistakes. Let's not repeat the past. Let's not digress. Let's be positive.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist.php3?action=view&listi...
Perhaps we should award these:
http://swapatorium.blogspot.com/2004/12/ski-masks.html
-
Dirk Gently
United States
Norman
Oklahoma
-
If it's a yearly award, then I would suggest in January you compile a list of all the games that were published in the previous calendar year, seperated by category (Card Game, Board Game, RPG, War Game, etc). Then have the BGG users vote on what they feel are the top 3 games in each category, in specific order. Each first place vote gets 3 points, second place vote gets 2 points, third place vote gets one point. The top 5 game point totals will become finalists and we hold the second voting round.
Individual Category Awards: This time people only get to vote for one of the 5 finalists in each category, and the most votes wins the category award.
Overall Game of the Year: The last voting round will be compiled of the winners from the individual categories to determine the Overall Game of the Year. Again, people only get to vote for one of the games, and the most votes wins the highest award.
This seems like a comprehensive way to really determine what the BGG users feel is the best games from the previous year.
-
Ted Alspach
United States
San Jose
California
www.board2pieces.com has the latest Board 2 Pieces comics and merchandise!
If you haven't played Ultimate Werewolf, you're missing out on the best version of werewolf ever!!!
-
If the voting on the selection (for nominees) is to be done by the greater BGG community, their votes should be recorded. Both on their my BGG page as well as in the record of votes.
The final decision needs to be up to a really diverse panel of judges, not just the folks tied to or buddies with the publishers, designers, and the Greater Geekdom of Aldie and Derk.
And from what I understand of the IGA voting process, use something, anything but the "elimination" method IGA uses. Ick. 
And we should be able to influence the outcome with spare Geekgold!
-
Kevin Nesbitt
Canada
Ajax
Ontario
-
Koldfoot wrote: derk wrote: All users with a valid login should be some part of the selection process... Whoa there. That gives CardChess Intl. a distinct advantage with his one vote, plus 250 proxies.
Agreed, this will definitely promote the creation of fake accounts; and it's bad enough already. Perhaps everyone with "x" amount of ratings and comments, or "x" amount of times they've said "Huh?" to a comment of Grognads'.
Also, perhaps the runner(s) up could be "geek certified" or something, and be awarded a certain number of stickers that they can adorn their game boxes with (say, 1000-5000 stickers with "Geek Certified 2005" and "www.boardgamegeek.com" underneath).
-
Andy Parsons
United Kingdom
Chelmsford
Essex
-
BoardsAndBits wrote: I also like the idea of "Best New Designer" and "Best New Publisher", etc., to recongnize the amateurs that are trying to go pro. Tom
Agreed. We already have more than enough game of the year awards. Focusing the Geek awards on new talent would make them distinctive and give a helping hand of free publicity where it is most needed.
-
Josh Adelson
United States
State College
Pennsylvania
Hello, can you run as fast as me? I hope not, because if you catch me I will thrash you!
This space available for rent.
-
Waste of time. Joshua Miller's Spiel des Josh has always been perfectly reasonable. Just let Josh M. tell us what wins every year, and save us the trouble of doing your thinking for you, when there's already somebody perfectly qualified to shoulder the task.
-
A Derk appears from the mists...
United States
Portland
Oregon
BGG for the videogame world!!
BGG for the videogame world!!
-
Bankler wrote:
It isn't clear from the message ... are the awards going to games ("Best New Game", "Game most in dire need of republishing") or to geeks ("Best review", "Most creative use of fonts and typeset aka 'The Grog'")?
You are quite correct, and I apologize. We're talkin' about an award for games here, not content. (Altho, that is an interesting concept, but one for another time)
-
Chaddyboy
United States
Olathe
Kansas
Bloooooop.
Bluuuuuurp.
-
I think it would make sense to vote for a "Game of the Year" that was released two years previous. So, in January 2006, we'd vote on a game that was released in 2004. This give us all of 2005 to play those games that were released in '04 before making a decision.
Otherwise, the award favors those games that were released earlier in the year. Also, games won't win based on "hype" this way. By the time a game has been out for over a year, the BGG population should know whether it's a game that will continue to get play or if it was just a splash in the pan.
-
W M Shubert
United States
Portland
Oregon
KGS is the #1 web site for playing go over the internet. Visit now!
Yes, I really am that awesome.
-
Heh, from the title I thought maybe BGG was going to go I18N on us, with some data split by language (ie, german forums for each game in addition to the mostly-english forums).
But this sounds like a good idea. I agree with the posters that we should give more weight to more serious gamers. For example, I only own about a dozen games, none of with were released in the past year, and have only played a few others. My vote would clearly be pretty worthless ("Uhhh...Caylus sounds good...so I'll vote for it...")
The difficulty of course is how to find out who has played "enough" games in the past year to have a valid opinion? Tricky! Maybe the easiest way would be just to ask Josh and be done with it.
-
Based upon my poor understanding of history, science, and ethics...
United States
North Pole
Alaska
-
chaddyboy_2000 wrote: I think it would make sense to vote for a "Game of the Year" that was released two years previous. So, in January 2006, we'd vote on a game that was released in 2004. This give us all of 2005 to play those games that were released in '04 before making a decision.
Otherwise, the award favors those games that were released earlier in the year. Also, games won't win based on "hype" this way. By the time a game has been out for over a year, the BGG population should know whether it's a game that will continue to get play or if it was just a splash in the pan.
These are wise words.
It is just such criteria that would set your awards apart.
Wise words.
I wish I had thought of them.
Every subsequent comment that fails to address this comment should be ignored.
Brian "Coldfoot" Waters
PS. I have never signed my name to a comment before. I feel strongly about this comment.
-
Melissa
Australia
Melbourne
Victoria
Best wishes to you all for 2011. xxx
Mostly offline, but trying.
-
otrex wrote: Also, perhaps the runner(s) up could be "geek certified" or something, and be awarded a certain number of stickers that they can adorn their game boxes with (say, 1000-5000 stickers with "Geek Certified 2005" and "www.boardgamegeek.com" underneath).
I wouldn't use the words "Geek Certified".
Use "Great game!" or something instead - much less alienating.
And definitely use the www.boardgamegeek.com URL there as well.
-
Based upon my poor understanding of history, science, and ethics...
United States
North Pole
Alaska
-
chaddyboy_2000 wrote: I think it would make sense to vote for a "Game of the Year" that was released two years previous. So, in January 2006, we'd vote on a game that was released in 2004. This give us all of 2005 to play those games that were released in '04 before making a decision.
Otherwise, the award favors those games that were released earlier in the year. Also, games won't win based on "hype" this way. By the time a game has been out for over a year, the BGG population should know whether it's a game that will continue to get play or if it was just a splash in the pan.
These are wise words.
It is just such criteria that would set your awards apart.
Wise words.
I wish I had thought of them.
Every subsequent comment that fails to address this comment should be ignored.
Brian "Coldfoot" Waters
PS. I have never signed my name to a comment before. I feel strongly about this comment.
-
|
|
