Monaco Takes IGF Grand Prize!
Posted by Rampant Coyote on March 12, 2010
Pocketwatch Games’ new title, Monaco, took the Seamus McNally Grand Prize at the 12th Annual Indie Games Festival at GDC this year. It also won the Excellence in Design award.
Congratulations Andy and Pocketwatch Games!
Competition was at record levels this year, with 306 entries in the main competition, and 172 student showcase submissions. As much as I – usually privately – rail on the judges of this thing, they do have my sympathy – and they’ve been trying to make the process more transparent. But really – how the HELL do you judge from all that?
Other winners included Limbo by Playdead (Excellence in Visual Art, Technical Excellence), Closure by Closure Team (Excellence in Audio), Heroes of Newerth by S2 (Audience Award), Continuity by Ragtime Games (Student Showcase Award), Spider: The Secret of Bryce Manor by Tiger Style (Best Mobile Game), Tuning by Cactus (IGF Nuovo Award), and Max & The Magic Marker by Press Play (D2D Vision Award).
Links and more information can be found here.
What? Where was Dejobaan’s “Aaaaaaaaaaaaa! A Reckless Disregard for Gravity“?!?!? They wuz robbed! Ah, well. Again – the competition was FIERCE this year.
And you can watch the video of the full awards ceremony here. This has proven pretty awesome in previous years, as indies really refuse to take things seriously. Or at least traditionally. It’s in their blood:
Congrats winners!
Filed Under: Indie Evangelism - Comments: 6 Comments to Read
Wavinator said,
Thanks for the link! Have not been keeping up with the state of indie gaming so it was good to see what was out there.
Out of curiosity has there been any traditional bias in terms of what the judges select? I thought the difference in game style between the judges awards and the audience pick (Heroes of Newerth) was interesting, but I couldn’t tell if it signified any preferences (like say against more geeky, involved hardcore games).
Rampant Coyote said,
Really good question, and I don’t know the answer to that. There have definitely been some accusations of bias in the past, and over the last two years they’ve made some effort to show more transparency in the process to react to that.
IMO, it’s felt like the judges had a distinctive bias towards the distinctively novel – the abstract games, the weird stuff that challenge the notion of what a “game” really is, and the stuff that deconstructed the entire medium in some way that seemed funny to the judges but tired by the real indies.
But that may have been a reaction to earlier years where they maybe didn’t give enough weight to innovation and uniqueness.
So I dunno. There are people closer to the competition who may be able to offer a better answer.
Xenovore said,
There are those who think that “different” automatically equates with “good” when in reality, “good” is “good”, “bad” is “bad”, and “different” can be either “good” or “bad”, with a high probability of being “bad”. =P
I’m not at all surprised by some of the choices there.
Rampant Coyote said,
I know that I personally have a bias towards the “different.” If a game tries to break new ground, I’ll cut it a bit more slack than a game that’s simply cashing in on an existing form. Maybe it’s a good thing I’m not an IGF judge.
But I sill won’t give a game a pass just for being original. Original and crappy is still crappy. Originality just provides a multiplier in my mind, I guess.
Xenovore said,
Quote: “Original and crappy is still crappy.”
Exactly! We’re on the same page… =)
Ichiro Lambe said,
> What? Where was Dejobaan’s “Aaaaaaaaaaaaa! A Reckless Disregard for Gravity“?!?!? They wuz robbed! Ah, well. Again – the competition was FIERCE this year.
(grin) I don’t mind losing to Andy. He’s a nice guy with a fabulous game. AND it was his birthday.