BAFTA Sillies

[RustyBroomhandle]

We have this never ending quest for the general populace to accept gaming as a legitimate... something. Art, maybe, or maybe just anything other than a thing that people frown at when they hear it's your hobby.

So now we have a games event at the BAFTAs. This is great news, or at least it should be. The BAFTA awards are generally quite well regarded. Yay, we're all prestigious now! Or not... yeah, they cocked it up.

I used to work in advertising. Specifically, I worked at an agency that prided itself on being one of the most awarded agencies in the world. This sounded impressive at first, but eventually one starts to realise that it's all a load of crap. You pay to enter your work for nomination, and the people doing the judging was often full of planted people all lobbying for specific pieces to win.

But it does create a good show for those who don't know any better. And the BAFTAs would have been a good place for such a good show, if not for the glaring ick.

I won't pick the whole thing apart, just going to focus on one thing.

EXHIBIT A: The nominees for the Strategy category for 2012.

Total War: SHOGUN 2 (winner)
Dark Souls
Football Manager 2012
Deus Ex: Human Revolution
From Dust
Ghost Recon Shadow Wars


The immediate mistake here is that only two of the nominees are actually strategy games. In 2013 it got worse:

EXHIBIT B: The nominees for the Strategy category for 2013.

Total War Shogun 2: Fall of the Samurai
Dark Souls: Prepare To Die
Football Manager 2013
Diablo III
Great Big War Game
XCOM: Enemy Unknown



Ok, half the nominees this year are actually strategy games, so that could be an improvement, but one is an expansion for last year's winner. We got Football Manager again, with a shiny new "2013" to set it apart from last year's entry. The Dark Souls "Prepare To Die" edition makes an appearance this year, as if it's a whole different thing from just plain Dark Souls.

And yeah... Diablo III. I bet everyone's favourite strategy is the one where you go click click click click click click click click click click click.

While I realise there can't be categories for every genre and sub genre of game, some of these are just too much of a stretch.

Anyhoo, peace.

[Nalano]

I read the title like, "we need gaming to be respected like movies are at the Academy Awards!"

And then I gagged a little.

[Kaira-]

We got Football Manager again, with a shiny new "2013" to set it apart from last year's entry

This is bad, because...?

[JohnD]

This is bad, because...?

Because it's football related.

[RobF]

Not that it's worth much in the grand scheme of things but when you're punting your game through the nomination form you get to pick your own categories.

Obviously, it's up to BAFTA to then cull down anything erroneous but either way it's all a bit munt. But generally, yeah, don't really see the point in them so moaning about them isn't fairly high on my agenda (got halfway through submitting a game myself then came to the conclusion that even on the vague off chance I did win, I didn't actually want one so that'd be awkward)

[trjp]

Anything remotely related to gaming and BAFTA leaves a sour taste in my mouth - I have no interest in this mutual backslapping and club-cliquey shit at the best of times and their approach of 'reaching out' feels like a weird form of charity and the behaviour of a dirty-old-man.

If gaming wants to be taken seriously, it needs to have it's own 'Oscars' and 'Baftas' which are more suited to the medium. None of this "friends club" stuff which is so prevelant in movies, we have plenty of knowledgable and literate writers, we should be able to do our own thing (and stop copying the 'Sundance' and 'Oscar' models which are all about 'who you know' and not 'what you do').

[NathanH]

We have this never ending quest for the general populace to accept gaming as a legitimate... something.

No we don't.

[dnf]

Not worth the rage. Gamers and developers themselves often don't know how to properly put their games in a logical genre category, so why bother if BAFTA don't do the same?

[RustyBroomhandle]

No we don't.

If, by this throwaway comment you are suggesting that my use of "we" is wrong because it presumes to speak for everyone, then yes, you are correct. Some care about this, others do not. But by this same measure, your own use of "we" is equally wrong.

The "we" that I proxied myself to for sake of this post, do care though.

"we" have lengthy arguments about whether games are art.
"we" wonder why games soundtracks do not get the same recognition as film soundtracks.
"we" argue about narrative in other media vs games.
"we" (well, I) get annoyed that our company content filter blocks games news sites, but not sports and celebrity gossip sites.
"we" want the industry to grow the hell up for too many fricking reasons

And I have to stop talking about "we" now, I need to go to the bathroom.

[NathanH]

I more meant that not only we but you don't have this quest. Don't worry about what people who don't follow your hobby think about it. They're irrelevant to your hobby. Don't worry about them. You don't need them to grant you legitimacy. It's not their place to do so.

[Berzee]

Press "L" to pull up another person's quest log.

[Nalano]

You don't need them to grant you legitimacy.

If you want to look like anything more than a quasi-racist sociopathic crank, you do.

Be glad for the ten million bros who buy AssCreed and BlOps. They're making what you do look almost socially acceptable.

[MoLAoS]

If you want to look like anything more than a quasi-racist sociopathic crank, you do.

Be glad for the ten million bros who buy AssCreed and BlOps. They're making what you do look almost socially acceptable.

Its ironic that the games most focused on visible violence and murder are the most socially accepted non casual games.

[NathanH]

Be glad for the ten million bros who buy AssCreed and BlOps. They're making what you do look almost socially acceptable.

I have no interest in looking socially acceptable. I'm not 13 any more. Normal adults do not, in my experience, make significant judgements about you based on a single hobby.

[Nalano]

I have no interest in looking socially acceptable.

You know who are interested in looking socially acceptable? Adults. Tweens at least can say they have underdeveloped prefrontal cortexes.

[Drake Sigar]

I have no interest in looking socially acceptable. I'm not 13 any more. Normal adults do not, in my experience, make significant judgements about you based on a single hobby.

Oh so you're the loon who came into my office looking for a job interview with a tribal tattoo over your face.

[LTK]

You know who are interested in looking socially acceptable? Adults. Tweens at least can say they have underdeveloped prefrontal cortexes.

I see where NathanH is coming from. It would be nice if our hobby wouldn't be dismissed as frivolous time-wasting in the majority of cases, but the fact that it is, isn't going to stop me from enjoying it. Society can take its notion of acceptable use of free time and stick it.

[NathanH]

Oh so you're the loon who came into my office looking for a job interview with a tribal tattoo over your face.

Of course one doesn't want to be outright dismissed in social situations. But that's typically caused by behaviour and (in extreme cases only) appearance. The type of social acceptability we are talking about here is the relatively minor sort based on your hobbies, job, interests, hairstyle, and so on. You'll rarely get significantly judged on those matters by most people (the sort who do are usually worth avoiding anyway), it's just about whether they'll think you're "normal" or "a bit weird". I don't think you should really worry about looking a bit weird, it doesn't really make much difference.

[Berzee]

Yeah, those BAFTA genre classifications are pretty silly.
I'm listening to Three Moves Ahead archives these days and a couple of the guys try to convince people that non-strategy-games are strategy games just so they can talk about them on the podcast...these lists are like that, times 1000.

[trjp]

Oh so you're the loon who came into my office looking for a job interview with a tribal tattoo over your face.

I wonder how that would make them unsuitable for a job - unless it was advising people on suitable locations for tattoos perhaps?