The Shrine

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '><b>Link:</b> <a href="http://www.interactive.org/awards/6th_a ... ual.asp</a>

Nominations for game of the year:
1) Animal Crossing (has 6 award nominations)
2) Battlefield 1942 (has 5 award nominations)
3) Grand Theft Auto Vice City (has 6 award nominations)
4) Metroid Prime (has 10 award nominations, AIAS event record)
5) Ratchet and Clank (has 6 award nominations)

Winners of previous Game of the Year awards:

1998: Goldeneye 007
1999: Zelda: Ocarina of Time
2000: The Sims
2001: Diablo II
2002: Halo

A full list of the nominations can b seen here:

http://www.interactive.org/awards/6th_annual.asp

or just follow the link.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light"; text-align: left; '>Go Rez!</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>It seems like they're saying ahead of time "From the nominations, these are the PC and console games that we consider the best, so they'll compete." It's their contest, and they can do whatever they want, but that doesn't make much sense to me. I think that overall should just be the combination of both PC and console nominations.

This originally struck me when I noticed that Warcraft III has no chance of being considered best game of the year, while it has a chance of winning the best PC game of the year. It's possible for the "best game of the year" to have lost in its respective platform competition. That's just strange.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt Arial; text-align: left; '>...except completely irrelevant.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Explain.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>If Stephen doesn't mind, I'll explain what I think he's getting at: no one cares what they say, so what they say is inconsequential.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Kupek nailed it. Comparing an obscure event like the AIAS Awards to the Academy Awards vastly overstates the importance of the former. Do game companies bother to spend millions of dollars promoting their titles like production studios do for the Academy Awards?</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>If no one cared what they said the event wouldn't be so high profile.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>The Academy Awards of Gaming is how its almost always described as.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>When the Academy Awards nominations come out, I see the results on the front page of the Washington Post.

When these nominations came out, I didn't see them on the front pages of any of the videogame news sites I vist.

Also, you're reasoning is flawed. It certainly is possible that it could be "high profile" (which it is not, not compared to the Academy Awards, or even other big events in the game industry) and yet no one cares. People caring is not a necessary conclusion from the assumption that it is high profile.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>Wait, correction, I saw a story on Gamers.com.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>examine the amount of people that subscribe to that market compared to the movie one before drawing the conclusion. I didn't once say they were as high profile as the Academy Awards, or even hint towards it. Thinking logically you should know that the Videogame industry is not the same as the movie industry. Rationally thinking you should know that the audience is much smaller and younger than the audience for movies. I said "This is sort of like the Academy Awards of Videogames" which is what it is. The most high profile videogame award, nominations and winners selection handled by an academy of many people in the industry based on various qualities discussed on their website.

Remember, you're not going to see them on Cable TV unless you watch some sort of gaming TV show or in game ads. Microsoft put it into their Halo TV ad, as an example, I saw a short mention of it on some news network (maybe CNN, or perhaps it was an entertainment show) a couple years ago. Movies are played constantly on TV, they are a WAY bigger part of television media than videogames are, that's a fact.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '><i>I didn't once say they were as high profile as the Academy Awards, or even hint towards it.</i>

You said it was "high profile" - I was attempting to demonstrate why this is a poor choice of words. The Academy Awards is "high profile" - this is not.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>In order for something to be irrelevant, you need to define a subject for it to be irrelevant to, none had been defined. Since these awards do draw much attention by the Videogame covering media and companies they are relevant to that industry, and therefore cannot be irrelevant.

Also, about me calling it "high profile," obviously I'm speaking within the context of the videogame industry media reports in which it is high profile news, what do you fail to understand about this?</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I do believe that's Stephen's point, Seeker.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt Arial; text-align: left; '>And who, pray tell, calls the AIAS the "Academy Awards of Gaming?" I'd hazard to guess they include the following: a) The AIAS; b) The AIAS's sponsors, if there are any; c) Gaming websites that are fed press releases by the AIAS and its sponsors; d) Game companies who happen to have one of their own titles nominated for an award; and finally, e) dreamers.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Let me put it this way: The AIAS is irrelevant to the vast majority of gamers who don't read "videogaming media" or don't give a shit what the "videogaming media" says. I'd wager that gamers pay more attention to the annual Penny Arcade awards.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '><i>In order for something to be irrelevant, you need to define a subject for it to be irrelevant to, none had been defined.</i>

Please. The meaning should be clear.

<i>Also, about me calling it "high profile," obviously I'm speaking within the context of the videogame industry media reports in which it is high profile news, what do you fail to understand about this?</i>

I understand it. You just think I don't. My contention is that <i>even in the context of the videogame industry</i>, it's not high profile. It's just another piece of videogame news.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I highly doubt it.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>"sort of like" the Academy awards of videogaming, not "exactly like" the Academy Awards themselves. It is highly publicized by gaming websites and magazines, as well as acknowledged my videogame companies as the most important awards. It is obviously relevant to the industry otherwise I doubt they'd get the awards together in the first place and attract big names to the event such as Bill Gates, Shigeru Miyamoto, and Sid Meier. You may not care about them, but that doesn't really matter.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>When this AIAS thing gets four hours of coverage on national television along with tens of millions of dollars of spending, game designers who cry when they get this award, and nice fancy suits, then we'll talk.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt Arial; text-align: left; '>I highly don't doubt it.</div>