So amusingly, not ten minutes after I had finished writing yesterday's blog entry on a subject related to Zak Smith, it was announced that he'd won four ENnies: two gold, two silver, winning in every one of the categories his Red & Pleasant Land was nominated for.
It seemed pretty amazing, impossible really. Even Zak thought so, as on his own blog the day before, he predicted he would win exactly zero awards.
I quote:
"The math here is fairly simple and I've explained it before: there are 3000 print copies in existence, Enworld.com's Ennie awards had 20,000 voters and--barring some egregiously quick pdf sales or egregious lack of enthusiasm for the well-distributed and promoted mainstream products, it can't possibly win."
Now, let me make it clear that I give Zak heart-felt congratulations on every good thing that's happening for him. He made what everyone unbiased has said is a great product, and he deserves praise, and none of what follows is about denying him any of it.
Congratulations Zak, in winning the only thing that matters, which is exactly what you expressed in your pre-win blog entry. Not even the money, but the making of your opus. That's what matters above all else.
But the money matters a fuckload of a lot more than the popularity contest of the ENnies.
And as you did in fact just win Best Writing, you've just proven that the ENnies are a sham, absolutely. Because your math still stands. By all rights, your win there proves there were people who voted for you as BEST WRITER who never actually read the writing of R&PL.
Again, all congratulations to you and you deserve it, but you've also just managed to prove that the ENnies are a meaningless popularity contest that's hopelessly flawed.
The important prize is making the exact game you wanted to make, and then selling it.
But of course, there is in fact one other award that's worthwhile, much much more worthwhile than the ENnie itself. That's hearing the lamentations of all the Swine and Pseudo-activists in the Outrage Brigade who are currently tearing their hair out in disbelief at the awards that they thought belongs to them being snatched away from them by one of the people they most hate. The Making Assholes Cry award: that's one delicious prize.
RPGPundit
Currently Smoking: Castello 4K Collection Canadian + Image Latakia
Nail on the head . Anyone with a fan base can stuff the ballot box. Popularity contests don't really do anything for the hobby.
ReplyDeleteTo be clear, I'm not claiming Zak's writing is bad. It's probably very good. I honestly don't care if he wins or not. It's no skin off my teeth.
DeleteMy comment was more about how the ENnies don't really do much as an industry award. But there's no equivalent to a Screen Actors Guild for RPG writers, so it's not like a true industry award could be created.
Perhaps some voted for him just to annoy his detractors.
ReplyDeleteHugo Awards all over again. Spectacular. :)
ReplyDeleteOh look, more crying assholes!
ReplyDeleteZak, we both know my personal opinion of you, so no need to expand on it.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, RaPL was by far the best of the 5 finalists in every category it was listed. Hell, I told folks to vote for it over at The Tavern.
That is with my personal bias when it comes to you :)
Of course the math doesn't add up. The only way for the best product to win was to game the system.
The ENnies have been flawed for years, and it's a sad state that the ballot box has to be stuffed to get the best product as a winner.
for what it is worth, I _did_ read through (the PDF, finances haven't allowed me to get the hard copy yet) RaPL, enjoyed it thoroughly, and it was my first choice for the 4 categories it was nominated in as a result.
ReplyDeletethe fact that it winning would make the swine cry, was a bonus.
Why is this 3000 number still being floated as the "reason" for "ballot stuffing"? I really didn't get it when Zach S mentioned it before the win and I don't get it now. There were a LOT of PDFs sold I am willing to bet and when you blook at how the votes are done this isn't supriseing in the least!
ReplyDeleteI think "ballot stuffing" is a very poor choice of terms. It would suggest people voting more than once, or something like that.
DeleteThis wasn't ballot stuffing, it was a completely TYPICAL practice that happens with the ENnies, of people voting for people or stuff they felt they like whether or not they've actually read that stuff.
It's super easy to vote a kabillion times in the ENnies voting. I'm not saying Zak S or his fans did that. Each of his fans may have voted just once if he put the word out on his blog, as he has far more fans of his blog than actual consumers of his writing, and that's fair according to how the ENnie voting system works.
DeleteHowever, the ENnie voting system doesn't prevent ballot stuffing at all. It's super easy to vote as many times as you want. Anyone who knows a little about how web browsers work can do it.
I don't own a copy of R&PL but I did borrow a copy and it was so obviously impressive that this happening was no shock to me. Also look at how many voters didn't have any experience with other games on the ballot so they went with that across the board.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlso, quite a bit of it is available for free on Zak's blog in a form that's not too far from what got published. If you follow his blog closely, you've read probably like a third of R&PL, which I think is enough to judge fairly, even if you've never seen a physical or pdf copy.
ReplyDeleteDo you guys not realize many awards are like this? Academy Awards voters don't have time to watch all the various films they vote on. Google around and you'll likely find numerous tales of this as well as for the Grammys, Emmys, and so on. Winning or not winning doesn't necessarily have much to do with whether anyone actually experienced what they're voting for--or sometimes voting against.
ReplyDeleteMatt -- Not entirely accurate. Academy voters have to go to special screenings and can only vote on the categories in which they viewed all the nominees.
DeleteNow, it is true that some of the very important Hollywood types get their films special delivered to their homes for viewing instead of going to one of the monitored screenings... so there is some room for possible shenanigans.
But they do have certain controls on Academy voting.
How long have they been doing it that way, back in the 90s they used to send out videos with Academy Screener across the bottom of the screen. I saw one once. I can see with pirating that they might have changed that.
DeleteMarty, sounds like you mean screenings of the nominees. I'm talking about all the films up for consideration to be nominees. They don't watch the hundreds of films up for consideration in all the various categories. I doubt anyone ever does.
ReplyDeleteSo this vote proves there are more anti-SJWs than SJW RPG fans on the Internet? Or just that this was a good product?
ReplyDeletea bit of both I'd say.
Delete