Why I Am Patient With The VGAs

ScottyMuser

New member
Dec 17, 2010
10
0
0
Thought I'd post my two cents on this issue, as reading through the article I couldn't help but think it was deliberately contrarian.

1) Firstly, your comment about alternatives. Like some have said, no, it's not necessarily the job of some, whilst criticising how a specific product is delivered, to show another product and how they do it better. Thats the entire purpose of the criticism - if you were to say "the spike VGAs spent too much time simply concentrating on getting money of various publishers to show their trailers exclusively a matter of hours before theycould be found on the web, rather then actually spending the time to award the work of many by honouring the devs/actors/etc in a true awards style" you ARE inherently offering an alternative/solution - that of having the show honour the people in the undustry more. And that's exactly what most criticism I have seen does (not to mention the vast majority I have seen DO mention the GDC games, DICE, etc as examples of how an awards show can work).

2) The perception of the "gaming culture" WILL be influenced by a show such as this. Its just a fact, just like those tuning in to watch the Academy Awards do have their perceptions over films changed. Ttake for example the year when Avatar (a film I find partcularly mediocre, but thats a topic for another time) lost out to the great (indie) film The Hurt Locker) - during the build up to the awards, and after the awards themselves, the reven ue the Hurt Locker got was WAY more than their revenue just from film being seen when itcame out. Why? Because there is the perception from the public that the only films they will ejoy is the big budget Hollywood popcorn flicks, be it with poorly written "romance ("Sex and the City"), mediocre comedy (anything with Adam Sandler/Eddie Murphy/Judd Apatow etc) or massive explosions (Michael Bay, most other Summer Blockbusters). This is because thats where all the big PR and marketing money goes, into getting mainstream media to show the ads, to hype them up, and people follow like sheep. yet every year, when the Oscars comes around, you get a more refined, intelligent discussion of films in general, and in specifically the films nominated, and it DOES drive the general public to go outside their usual media-driven "taste" and go out and watch these films they wouldn't have watched, and, shock horror, usually they like them. To pretend that gaming is somehow different, that a similiar movement towards the games intelligently discussed, is unfortunately just the attitude that will keep games from achieving a more mainstream "acceptance".

3) Which leads on to my 3rd point - that of cost, and why Spike "have" to do the style of show they do in order to make ends meet. Even if an awards show is as expensive as you seem to think it is to produce for a national audience, we're NOT talking about a small, niche interest anymore. Not when games like MW3 SHATTER "entertainment launches" (as inMW3 has made more money than any film, ever - FACT) - and even so-called "less mainstream/bro" games like Skyrim make more than a THIRD OF A BILLION DOLLARS!!! The money is clearly there, when you have 10 million people on the FIRST DAY something is out queueing to purchase it, you should have zero problems finding enough money, from sponsors and advertisers, to produce an 1-2 hour long telecast. Suggesting that people will only watch an Video Game Awarts show to see C-list celebraties acting stupidly/talking with no knowledge about an issue (see Hulk Hogan, Charlie Sheen, etc), or people who ,ake games get treated poorly. is just fallacious. Unless you really are being *that* insulting about the general public, and the SpikeTV audience. When you have devices like the Wii, DS, PS3 and XBox, between them with global sales (in units) of upwards of 200 MILLION, even if a fraction of these consider themselves as gamers, you know there *is* interest of a show talking about artistic achievement on them.

4) As some on here have said, the Spike VGAs are *not* a step in the right direction towards the mainstream more accepting of gaming - in fact, it couldn't be further from the truth. All "the mainstream" have to do is to turn it out, see some guy who worked for months, nay years, on bring his artistic vision to a wider audience, get tea bagged by some idiots, or just treated like members of a niche hobby who should be outcasts, and the appeal of games to the mainstream *instantly* takes a hit. It does nothing but reinforce negative stereotypes (ones which we as a community tend to speak out against when the likes of the Daily Mail, Fox News, etc come out with them - unless you are saying we shouldn't do that either). Someone who doesn't see the appeakl of games will switch over, see this, and think "oh, I was right to not take this seriously, and maybe look into it. I won't enjoy this form of entertainment, Fox News/Daily Mail were right, all gamers are ". Having nothing on Spike TV would be better. Another network WILL notice the gap in the market (which there currently isn't, thanks to the VGAs), and WILL realise there is money to be made by having an awards show - and honestly, save maybe Fox, there really isn't a network out there who could do a WORSE job than Spike.

5) As some have said, maybe gaming is hampered by the fact that there isn't an industry wide academy, like there is in Film, which the mainstream media as a whole can get behind. Or at least, not in America. Over here in the UK, BAFTA (the British equivalent of the Academy in the States, who do an annual Film and TV awards show, again much like the Oscars, and ARE taking as seriously as the Academy, doing much good for film) realised a few years ago that gaming was an industry that they felt should be represented, and set up a subsidiary of themselves specifically for the promotion of, and judging of games. The result? The BAFTAs do each year award a series of awards, in much the same way as they do for film, and the mainstream press *do* cover these in much the same way as they cover the Oscards/BAFTAs ifor films. They don't feel like they need to play up the stereotypes, or spend more time advertising for companies their newest products, but they cover the awards, they note what excellence has meant to people. And as a result gaming gains more mainstream acceptance. What the VGAs do is both exactly the opposite of this, they discourage a body, whether it be the Academy, or not, to set up such a critical cross-industry panel, and they do set gaming acceptance as a result. Are what the Gaming BAFTAs do/arte perfect? No. but nor are the Oscars (especially with the move to 10 film shortlist for Best Picture, which has simply resulted in more mainstream, lowest common denominator films, like Avatar, being recognised in the nominees). But its a step in the right direction.

6) Looking at the content of the show - the absence of the awards themselves, save 1/2; the roping of celebs that clearly look disinterested; the pandering to the worstof stereotypes; the fact thaT 80% of the coverage is ADVERTS for gaming companies newest and biggest products, acting as hype generators - is this really what we want the public to think of when they think of games, and how the gaming industry *treats* the products they put out and their customers? Because thats what the VGAs do, and thats what the average Joe *will* think, when seeing such a charade. We instead *should* be criticising the awards for the sham they are, and showing that gaming should be taken more seriously, more artistically. We had a stpe forward with the Supreme Court's agreement with their take on whether Games are works of art, and as such artistic freedom given to (usually considered) more serious artforms should also be given to games. Let's embrace this, not shackle ourselves with the attitude of "gaming isn't seen by the mainstream to be artistically interesting enough to promote as a serious artform, and having it portrayed on tv as infantile and crass is therefore better then no coverage, which we would get if these stopped happening".

Thats it, rant over, sorry for the length.
 

orangeapples

New member
Aug 1, 2009
1,836
0
0
Dennis Scimeca said:
The job of a good journalist, at least as I understand it, is to find the angles to make anyone interesting.
I'm sorry, what did you mean by that? I thought the job of a good journalist was to report and distribute news in an unbiased nature. What you described is how tabloids and shock magazines work, but real journalism? really? I've seen facebook statuses with more credibility than this crap.

That would have been enough for me to stop on any other article, but this is about the VGAs.

My biggest problem with the VGAs is not the lowbrow stunts they pull. Yes it is A problem, but not THE BIG problem.The problem with the VGAs was that a majority of the award winners were announced during the return from a commercial break, or during the pre-show. An awards show should be a look back at the year and find the best. Why is most of the time spent looking at trailers for games that don't exist yet? To make it even worse they invite nominees and don't even show them on camera. Lets not forget the idea of having celebrities on because they play video games. Lots of people play video games, big deal (sarcasm I feel I have to make that clear because you do not know how words work based on your definition of "Journalism"). Charlie Sheen even said he did it because he got paid, even if it was in jest. I'd rather have no nationally televised award show than a bad nationally televised award show. When you settle for crap, they will just give you more and more crap. Sadly Spike is the master of giving people crap. If we want a real and respectable awards show it cannot come from Spike. Spike's big connection to video games is that they are partners with Gametrailers, as if that makes everything okay. It is the same as a person saying, "Oh, I can make fun of black people because my best friend is black." That is not a legitimate reason. And their trophy is a blue monkey? really? What does that have to do with video games? I'll tell you: about as much as the VGAs.

What we want and what we should be getting is a televised version of the Game Developers Choice Awards. Voted for by their peers; people in the industry. It is a stretch, but G4 might be willing to partner with broadcasting the GDCAs. They do still broadcast stuff that has to do with video games, right? We would watch that.
 

McNinja

New member
Sep 21, 2008
1,510
0
0
This article is wrong. Just flat out wrong. The VGA's are a step backwards in every respect. Teabagging? WTF?

Were the Oscars this retarded when they first aired? What about the Grammys? Golden Globes? No. None of them were this awful. The Spike VGA's needs a complete overhaul before anyone will take it seriously. This is a multi-billion dollar industry, not some hobby some people have, and deserves more respect than the VGA's give it.

Also VGA's or nothing.... nothing wins, hands down, no contest, at all. Would you rather have a pile of ass or nothing? I'll take nothing any day.

Also, giving a free pass to shows such as the VGA's would be a terrible thing to do if you ever wanted this show to be decent at all. I do, I think this show could work, but not if they keep catering to the lowest common denominator and teabagging people. Also, Felicia Day shouldn't even be close to a show like this. I would figure she has too much self-respect, although I guess it did help faise funds for a charity.
 

AxelxGabriel

New member
Nov 13, 2009
175
0
0
Everyone in these comments said everything that needed to be said. I'd rather watch ten times the nothing then the VGA's
 

putowtin

I'd like to purchase an alcohol!
Jul 7, 2010
3,452
0
0
Sabrestar said:
You touch briefly on a point I'd like to see debated: Given the criticisms of the VGAs (which, as you say, may or may not be justified), how many of us would rather see these VGAs than none at all?
I'm in the UK we get nowt and bugger all when it comes to video games on TV (award shows, review shows) Some people moan about it, but at the end of the day, most award shows are a joke (regardless of what the award is for) it's normally just a bunch of showbiz tossers congratulating themselves on making more money than, you the little people, would ever see in a life time of saving.

If I want games advice I come here to the Escapist, if I want to see showbiz tossers I watch the news!
 

MisterDyslexo

New member
Feb 11, 2011
221
0
0
I like the article, but the VGAs aren't for gamers, they're just not. Realistically, a videogame awards show would be too expensive to have a big shiny one any one with real integrity. I mean, do you really think Madden beat Wind Waker and KOTOR because it was better? If you do, I'd love to live in that naive little bubble you do.

Integrity, is not announcing 1/3 of the awards pre-show, 1/3 of them in a twenty-second graphic before a commericial break that doesn't even have a voiceover, and 1/3 during the actual air-time.

I think its also pretty obvious its not for real gamers because of the channel its own. Manswers, really, that channel? I'm not saying I hate the channel, but its not a channel for gamers. G4 is one, but not Spike TV. Its like host the Tony Awards on Food Network.

I would rather have nothing, I really would, at least my intelligence wouldn't be insulted. The only reason any core or hardcore gamer would ever watch the show is if they've never seen it before, or if they want to see the announcement trailers. Thats it.

Where's the stuff that actually appeals to gamers?

I don't see anything entertaining. How about you get two Street Fighter champs to play each other live on stage? Or how about you have an impromptu Counterstrike match? No, instead you have humour targeted at people who aren't old enough to buy a T-rated game yet.

Its not made for gamers, it never has been. It just hasn't. Get over this thought about "fixing the VGAs" and start asking somebody qualified to do it.
 

Rack

New member
Jan 18, 2008
1,379
0
0
If I wasn't a gamer ad I saw something like this then I would expect gamers to villify it. If they didn't I'd assume this was the kind of thing they like.
 

Tsaba

reconnoiter
Oct 6, 2009
1,435
0
0
Aren't there awards that go out to game designers that aren't televised? I'm pretty sure they are a lot better than the crap on spike. Seriously, why defend that trash.
 

GoodApprentice

New member
Apr 27, 2010
122
0
0
And some guys believe that having sexual "relations" with that fat, ugly creature who haunts the local bar is preferable to having no "relations" at all.

They're wrong. They're very, very wrong. So is Mr. Scimeca.
 

SL33TBL1ND

Elite Member
Nov 9, 2008
6,467
0
41
The thing that I don't get is, why don't people just ignore the VGA's? I haven't seen a single one.
 

ThunderCavalier

New member
Nov 21, 2009
1,475
0
0
I'm not well-versed in the VGAs. The only scenes I've seen from it are AngryJoe's clips from what he's shown in his criticism of the show on That Guy With The Glasses.

However, from what I've seen, the show is obviously more of a cash grab than it is an actual award show. It appeals to big budget names and titles, reels in celebrities that are famous without any real connection to video games, and sometimes has awards that are OBVIOUSLY plugs for advertisements.

I can understand what you mean. Shows will REQUIRE advertisements, or they're simply throwing away money. However, at the same time, these shows either need to go full out with their ridiculousness and just appeal to gaming humor and logic instead of the most douchey and stereotypical bits of gamers and online gaming in general.

For example, I'd be touched if the Cake showed up as a joke (as tired as it is). I'd be willing to stab someone if they decided to use teabagging as a joke (which apparently they did). If you're going to make fun of gaming, exemplify the stuff that makes it funny and unique, or play it straight, but if you're going to make it funny, try to mix up the humor. Gaming has humor and jokes from all spectrums, from family friendly to crass and obscene. However, the crass and obscene is all that's shown, and is also the reason why I can't stand most comedy shows nowadays (as all of the jokes mostly rely on crass and obscene humor). Inject more life to than the lowest common denominator, and maybe I'll consider watching it.
 

remnant_phoenix

New member
Apr 4, 2011
1,439
0
0
Angnor said:
Having no show is better than the VGA's. It's not even a tough choice to make.
I agree.

I've never understood the "SOMETHING is, by default, better than NOTHING" line of reasoning. No, no, no. If that particular something sucks, and does more harm than good, then it's better to have nothing until something worthwhile comes along.

It's the old Other M argument. Defenders of that game will say that the characterization that Other M gave Samus is better than no characterization at all. Any Metroid fan of discerning taste who has played that game will tell you that that line of thinking is is rubbish.

I can understand the "chew off the meat and spit out the bones" approach that the writer is trying to endorse regarding the VGAs, but there is a potent collary to that idea: if something is more bones than meat then it's not worth your time unless you're starving.

And we're not starving. For video game related honors, there are better places to go: such as reading up on the IA awards, or the GDC awards, or even checking out the 12 Days of Christmas feature or Yahtzee's inevitable Top/Bottom 5 vid right here on the Escapist.

The VGAs are borderline pointless and do nothing good for the industry
 

Dooly95

New member
Jun 13, 2009
355
0
0
If anything I think Mr. Scimeca is an elaborate troll.

Like those on news sites that troll for hits, this seems like an article to generate conversation. Or thread posts. Or whatever.

Because this doesn't seem to be something that's there to be argued about. Cancer of the gaming community that plays on every bad stereotype vs no cancer at all, I think I know what I'd go with.
 

Dagda Mor

New member
Jun 23, 2011
218
0
0
Dastardly said:
Dennis Scimeca said:
Why I Am Patient With The VGAs

Ease up on the VGAs, people.

Read Full Article
Agreed.

People go to SpikeTV for a small number of things. Nuance, class, or respectable journalism are not among them. It was started to cater to a particular audience in a particular way, and they've made quite a bit of money doing so. They're not going to bite the hand that feeds them.

At the same time, we can expect that people who are looking at respectable outlets to provide information on forming a well-constructed opinion of the video game industry (and culture) are probably not looking for it on SpikeTV. When I want a good steak, I don't go to Burger King. At the same time, if Burger King started serving steak, I would be understandably skeptical of its quality.

But above all these concerns is the larger issue: There is no "gaming culture." That is to say, there is no single set of culture norms that define it. Gaming is a medium in the same way a hammer is a tool -- it can be used many different ways, none of which are (necessarily) more valid than the others.

Apply this logic to film, and let's assume there's a "movie culture." Do we really mean to group feature films, documentaries, kids' cartoons, and porn into one broad heading, and assume that all such headings are united simply by virtue of the medium they use? Even the Oscars divide things up quite a bit (and don't show all of the awards on TV). Interestingly, they also completely disregard certain uses of the film medium (still no "Best Screenplay in a Pornographic Film" caption, for instance).

And arguing against the Spike VGAs because it doesn't represent the "industry" or the "culture" in the right way would be like the folks behind the Academy Awards protesting the existence of an awards show specifically for porn. It may not represent out preferred view of the gaming industry, but it represents the views and values of a pretty large section.

"Gamer" is no longer a meaningful and unifying label any more than say, "vertebrates." You can't expect one show to be all things to all people.
But not everyone has this in mind,and people may see the VGAs and make up their minds on video games as a whole.They might not be actively searching for opinions on games,but they'll find them,alright.People are concerned about the VGAs because of the image that they represent,though I'm sure you've noticed.
If it sounds like I didn't read everything you said,I didn't,because I am balls-crushingly tired.
 

Zom-B

New member
Feb 8, 2011
379
0
0
Dennis Scimeca said:
Why I Am Patient With The VGAs

Ease up on the VGAs, people.

Read Full Article
Well, Mr. Scimeca I respect your opinion, but it pre-supposes that awards shows of any sort are a benefit at all. Most awards shows are nothing more than self-congratulatory back-patting by industries that are desperate for validation. Movie, TV and music award shows prove this time and time again. Even the hallowed Oscars are usually little more than a popularity contest. We see over and over how when it comes down to it, the "best" of an industry is ignored in favour of lauding the most popular or those that were able to curry the most favour with the voting members of whatever entity decides who wins.

And because awards shows by definition are the most boring thing in the world except for the nominees and their comrades. That's why real awards ceremonies in which people and groups of people are honestly honoured by a group of peers are so rarely televised. And that's why awards ceremonies that are televised rely on terrible bits of scripted comedy, movie and game trailers, musical acts and silly skits, because without those things awards shows would be dry, boring processions of people going up to a podium, spending too long thanking god and parents, crying and then going back to their seats to enjoy the free drinks.

Awards shows are boring and pointless and the sooner they die out, the better.
 

unacomn

New member
Mar 3, 2008
974
0
0
"but it's not the job of a cable network to change anyone's perception of video game fans"

Why not? It's OK to profit off them, but not to try and set an example for the better? My mentor thought me to always to set an example, something the reader can aspire to. The VGAs are starting to do that with that piece they did with Shigeru Miyamoto, but that only made the gap in quality all too obvious.

The show has improved over the years, it's less insulting to everyone, but it's still a disappointing mess of marketing that panders to popularity rather than quality. I get it, they need to make a profit, but honestly, Spike doesn't have the best track record for making quality programing. As you've said, they cater to the lowest denominator, and that is just lazy. I've done my best over the years to make better shows, and I'm doing it with less resources than 5 second of Spike program has. All I want to see is an effort to make something better, but that won't happen on Spike.
 

Ashley Blalock

New member
Sep 25, 2011
287
0
0
Not really the place of a critic to have to run down all the alternatives for me. If Uwe Boll makes a horrible vampire film then all I expect out of Movie Bob is for him to say the film is bad, not provide a list of good vampire films.

I'm also going to have to agree with the people who say no show is better than the VGAs. The show is just really bad even by the rather low standards Spike TV has for some of it's shows. This is the same network who can give us science while chopping an ax into a ballistics gel dummy on Deadliest Warrior so it's not like Man-swers is the best Spike can ever do.

Without the VGAs games would still get made and the big titles would still make money so it's not the death of gaming if we didn't have an awards show until something better than the VGAs could come along to take advantage of all the gamers looking for a good show honoring the games they love.
 

weirdee

Swamp Weather Balloon Gas
Apr 11, 2011
2,634
0
0
Well then, they should really invite the people we love to the GOOD events then. I don't know how they manage to drag them out to Spike every time. It's easy to blame everybody else in order to appear to be a higher moral authority, but that's exactly as bad as blaming Spike, which is to say, neither side is going to act without the other acting first.