Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3 Eligibility

May 17, 2008 -

Should Activision be eligible to win a "Best of E3" award even though they are technically not a participant in the show?

That's apparently one of the issues driving a reported flareup between the embattled ESA, which owns and operates E3, and the Game Critics Awards, an independent group which makes the annual "Best of" selections.

According to Kotaku, the issue has become "heated:"

[ESA] assumed that the departed companies' games would no longer be eligible for any of the annual "Best of E3" awards, given out by an independent group of Game Critics' Awards judges at each year's show.

However, Geoff Keighley (left),  executive producer of GameTrailers and co-chair of the Game Critics' Awards, told Kotaku that no decision has been made on eligibility. And while several publishers have said they will not participate in E3, the recently-departed Activision and Vivendi apparently will have some sort of unoffical presence outside the July expo's L.A. Convention Center venue. Said Keighley:

The fact that Activision is not a registered exhibitor for E3 has brought to light the issue of how to determine the eligibility of games... A precedent has been set that in the past, judges have voted on games that have been presented off the show floor at hotel suites and across the street from E3. It would be a shame for me if the best game of E3 didn't win the Best of Show award because it was demoed across the street from the show floor...

 

The fact we are independent awards [lets us] define our own rules for eligibility... Our organization isn't for profit. It's a volunteer organization, a consortium of journalists, so we can be pure.

Both Activision and the ESA declined to comment.


Comments

Re: Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3

I also think the best plan is to just change the name of the award.  I agree with the ESA that the "Best of E3" award really should go to a game that was at E3...  but if the award is independant and not connected to E3 then just rename the award and be done with it.


-- mostly harmless

mostly harmless

Re: Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3

Who cares the E3 and the ESA are shells of what they once were.

Hopefully both die as they have more or less become useless.

Re: Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3

My thoughts:

Change the names of the awards and be done with it. The ESA can't make a stink over something that does not have their name on it.

E. Zachary Knight
www.editorialgames.com

 

Re: Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3

I really, REALLY hate to say it, but I actually agree w/ the ESA on this.

How can an Activision game be eligible for Best of E3 when they aren't even part of E3?

Re: Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3

Dissapointing, but easy to follow. The real question here is if the awards presented at E3 are selected and managed by a third party, then why are they called the "E3" awards? Better yet, if certain games are demoed across the street, how can they be considered "Best of Show" if they aren't even in the show?

 

---- There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians.

Re: Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3

More than likely, that is what the GCA will determine.

But the idea that the ESA feels that they can come in and dictate what is and isn't OK for an independant 3rd party to give an award to is not cool. Very presumptive and arrogant on the ESA's part. That issue, I think, is what the real stink is over. It is also indicative of the kind of behavior by the ESA that is probably causing companies like Activision to jump ship.

Re: Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3

I think I can see your point, but I kind of have to see it from the ESA's point of view. They are the ones putting E3 together, and Activision has said explicitly that they will not participate, so how can they be eligable for an award at a show they won't actually be participating in? It's like going to a car show, and not liking the guys who are running it, so you show off your sweet ride across the street. You can't get an award really, even though there is a third party doing the judging. You aren't actually part of the show, inf act, you are a detractor to it.

 

---- There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians.

Re: Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3

"even though there is a third party doing the judging"

Exactly. The show has nothing to do with the award other than in name.

Re: Report: ESA Squabbling with Game Critics Awards over E3

With publishers like EA Games and Activision getting bigger and becoming more independent, what happens when they stop doing well and end up bankrupt?  This is all leading to another video game crash.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightGot that same recommendation on Twitter. So I guess that is a good sign.09/15/2014 - 8:39pm
prh99Portlandia, though I don't watch a lot of sitcoms. Heard it was good though.09/15/2014 - 8:02pm
E. Zachary KnightSitcom recommendations for someone who like Parks and Rec but hates The Office: Go.09/15/2014 - 6:08pm
NeenekoEven if they do change their policy, they can only do it moving forward and I could see the mod/pack community simply branching.09/15/2014 - 12:50pm
Michael ChandraAs for take the money and run, the guy must have a networth of 8~9 digits already.09/15/2014 - 10:33am
Michael ChandraMe, I'm more betting on some form of mod API where servers must run donations/payments through them and they take a cut.09/15/2014 - 10:32am
Michael ChandraEspecially since they want it for promoting their phones. Killing user interest is the dumbest move to make.09/15/2014 - 10:32am
Michael ChandraGiven how the EULA actively allows for LPs, I'm not sure Microsoft is ready for the backlash of disallowing that.09/15/2014 - 10:31am
Matthew Wilsonthey wont do that, the backlash would be too big.09/15/2014 - 10:25am
ConsterSleaker: how is that a flipside? Sounds to me like that's basically what Notch himself said, except rudely.09/15/2014 - 10:18am
MaskedPixelanteOn the plus side, no more lazy Minecraft LPs, since iirc Microsoft has a strict "no monetization period" policy when it comes to their stuff.09/15/2014 - 10:13am
james_fudgeBut it continues to sell on every platform it is on, so there's that09/15/2014 - 10:09am
james_fudgeOh, well that's another matter :)09/15/2014 - 10:08am
E. Zachary KnightNothing against Notch here. I think it is great that he made something so cool. I just can't understand how it is worth $2.5 bil09/15/2014 - 9:59am
InfophileWhat a world we live in: Becoming a billionaire was the easy way out for Notch.09/15/2014 - 9:42am
james_fudgelots of hate for Notch here. I don't get it. Sorry he made a game everyone loved. What a monster he is!09/15/2014 - 9:37am
SleakerOn the flipside, Notch has been a horrible CEO for Mojang, and the company has grown on sheer inertia, DESPITE being mishandled over and over.09/15/2014 - 9:33am
SleakerI can understand Notch's statements he made to Kotaku about growing bigger than he intended, and getting hate for EULA changes he didn't enact.09/15/2014 - 9:32am
MaskedPixelantehttp://pastebin.com/n1qTeikM Notch's statement about the MS acquisition. He wanted out for a long time and this was the easiest way.09/15/2014 - 9:08am
ConsterEh, I can't blame him.09/15/2014 - 9:01am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician