Do Games Need Award Ceremonies?

A couple of months ago in the UK, there was an Award ceremony for Games which was meant to be 'quite important' but instead...

It turned out to be a MASSIVE joke :(

The BAFTA Video Games Awards was shown pre-recorded on TV and has been hugely criticised in every single games magazine in the UK as one of the worst piles of crap ever witnessed. It really was a joke. Badly presented, badly hosted, bad winners, bad everything, everything, everything...

There have been discussions in other Games Forums which I wanna bring over here. Quite simply... do games even NEED Award Ceremonies?

Some would say that, sure, it is good for games to get recognition for the sheer hard work that developers put into them. They deserve recognition in the way movies, music, books and other stuff gets awards, because hard work needs to be celebrated.

The counter argument is that it's nonsense to say one game is 'The Game of the Year' because worldwide, the video games industry chucks out so much quality that it is foolish to say one Game is far better then the rest. Example for this year? Okami, Twilight Princess, Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion, Guitar Hero 2, and many others are sheer quality games. How can you pick one game as the best above all others? They are ALL amazing!

What do you think? Do Games need Award Ceremonies? Or is it a waste of time?

Discuss Plz.

Well, it's not like they're just games, despite the name. They are meant for enjoyment, but they have gone into a realm where there is much more to be respected about a game than just "fun", similarly to movies. So if movies get award ceremonies, why not video games?

Because movies don't need award ceremonies, either. >_>

It's just a big waste of money to give certain people who happened to be good at directing a nice feeling. But I'm sure their money already did that. <_<

Simply? No.

THE JACKEL

They always pick the wrong game for each award, and there way too predictable too. Not that theres anything wrong with them, I'd just rather not bother with that crap.

Well, I don't think anything really "needs" to be awarded, but I really do love a good comparison competition to see what people who are more knowledgable than I have to say.

I think it is a good idea, especially since video games are so misunderstood.

Who knows, it might be the only time people who aren't gamers get to see Resident Evil 4 or Final Fantasy XII.

I'll note that we don't need games themselves, so 'needing' an awards ceremony is pretty much a joke.

Is it a good idea? If done correctly, by people who actually know the industry, then yes.

What foa and MILF said, basically. They are not necessary, but no award ceremonies are. Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them if they're done well.

We don't NEED them but having an awards type thing that is actually equal in stature to the Academy Awards or the Emmy's is a long way off...mainly because reviews fall one of two ways.

Overly positive like the game has done no wrong or the game is overly bad and has done everything wrong. The journalistic integrity of the videogame world is complete :skull::skull::skull::skull:.

If you look at RottenTomatoes.com you can see what I am talking about. Look at movies. They come in this huge array of scores each week while videogames(also on the site) are very skewed. 112 games on just the PS2 have scores of 90% or above. There are not that many good games.

There are also not that many good sources for games. You have a few big websites for the most part and then a handful of magazines. Where are the weekly newspaper reviewers?

Nope. Gamers do

most people only reward games for graphics :(

and I heard this rewards ceremony was godawful as it was rewarding in that respect.

Well the Spike tv videogame awards are coming up in a few days. If you watch those, you'll have no problem answering this question.

Ugh. Now THOSE are a joke.