NOT Sour Grapes

First, and to re-iterate my comments in other threads, a hearty CONGRATULATIONS to *every* winner in the First Annual MA Awards. The variety of winners shown, and the fact that not all arcs were five star popular, shows that there are as many opinions out there as there are noses, and good stories aren't all dictated by the number of runs an arc has.

That said, am I the only person that submitted an arc that's really curious about what went on behind the scenes? For instance, there were several technical aspects to the submissions -- making certain certain files were submitted, for example. Were arcs immediately rejected because a file was missed, or files weren't sent in directories? Were close contests won simply because the images a person submitted were bigger or crisper than others? What was the elimination process for arcs that weren't rejected on technicalities, and what was the voting process.

I doubt we'll get answers -- and I'm not trying to sound critical if we don't -- but I can't help wondering if my arcs, or other quite capable arcs, didn't even make it to the starting gate because of a technicality, even though the authors did their best to comply with the submission process as they understood it.

Really, this isn't sour grapes. As an author who's arc didn't make the cut, I'm simply very curious. Anyone else?

I was actually kind of hoping for a bit of description of why each arc was chosen to win in each category - though it's possible they might have done this at the banquet when they announced them (Remember that our information on the winners was just what people who were present posted - so they might have just posted the winners and left out the discussion because hey! Way too much typing for a cell phone). I think that kind of information would be helpful to everyone, because like Dr. Aeon's "I'm going to run one random arc and review it" thread, it shows us what the professionals look for in terms of quality.

Well to assuage one of your questions, I can tell you that sending your files all together rather than in their seperate directories didn't disqualify you outright, because I didn't include directories in my submissions.

I'd settle for seeing the criteria used to decide the winners from among the nominees.

Agreed on all points. As for myself, I'm sad, but I'm not bitter. When I get around to playing Sabrina's Tale, I will definitely be playing it with an extra critical eye. And I would very much like to hear the reasoning for why the devs chose what they chose over what they didn't. And hopefully it's not something along the lines of "these people are prominent in the forums, so they already have a lot going for them."

I would absolutely love an explanation, too. Especially since at least one of the arcs (I haven't played all of them) breaks rules that are in the "How to make dev's choice" thread. I'm just not sure how that works.

Anything that streamlines the process is a good thing, DC has been such a disappointment in how rarely arcs get added to the list.

I'd kind of doubt the devs had any sort of list-able criteria they could tell us about. I'm guessing they just sat down and fired up the arcs and then wrote down how they felt about it afterward, noting the obvious errors (grammar, etc) that might disqualify them. Other than that, we were all prey to their very personal and subject feelings at the time they played them. If RednameX had an upset stomach the day he played your arc, then it might not go so well for you.

You know, the way it always goes for arc ratings.

a) It was clearly stated IIRC that the Arc of the Year would be chosen from the winners of the other categories minus Best Faction.

b) If the devs have two brain cells to rub together, they will walk away from this without a word. Absolutely nothing good will come from explicating the process.

I don't even care who won the thing as long as all the nominees get their respective arcs promoted to Dev Choice. That's the real prize and they all seem worthy of it.