I doubt I would go to this Festival if it was on my doorstep and the entry were free.

For a long time now, AMAS has lost its bearings In my opinion. This festival is not a true reflection of current films being made, or the quality of the directors making them.

The AMAS festival has always heavily favoured certain platforms, and unless you create something outstanding in something else, you tend not to get a look in.

How can a film festival call itself reflective of the creative talent out there when it has the following breakdown.

Films made using either WOWC, Halo, Second Life and Half Life.

32 Films, 54 Nominations

All others, any platform.

18 films, 36 Nominations 16 nominations were for 3 films that deserve it. Without those it would be 20.

To make it appear that talented people are only making excellent films in one of 4 platforms (64% by films accepted, 60% by nominations) is almost insulting to the rest of us.

To argue that more films are made in these platforms than any other (Ergo: therefore producing more quality) is wrong, because that is simply not true. Even if it were the case there are far more Indian and Mandarin films made each year, so should Hollywood go and make those ?

To argue that these films got better viewing figures is probably correct. But since when have viewing figures dictated how many nominations a film gets in a festival. Oscars would simply be given to films with the biggest audiences (which they are certainly not).

Are these films better than those made on other platforms ? well, judge for yourself when you see the entries, I do not think so.

Are only the good directors using these platforms ? obviously not from the quality of some of the films seen on this site.

So, what is the logical justification for this bias ? No idea, you tell me. Maybe one day, Hugh or Jonnie could explain to me why this is the case.

A film festival should be fair and balanced, and reflect the quality of the films and the talented filmakers out there, whatever their background. AMAS does neither of these.

Far too many excellent films are being given no recognition whatsoever in favour of some extremely poor films, simply because AMAS happens to lean that way. There are some very excellent films up for the awards (most are not from the 4 platforms mentioned above), and some terrible ones (most are).

Sorry, but I have very little time for AMAS and Machinima.com/org because of this so blatantly obvious bias.

EDIT: It has been strongly intimated that Hugh Hancock resigned from the board of directors of AMAS because of this, although he strongly denies this rumour.

hi blackace,

i am wondering, what your rage is about?

first, i personally don't care, which game is used for creation... as long as the outcome is fine.
for that, i must say, that i find many of the nominees very excellent (as posted in another thread).
you might be right by asking, if the nominees are any better than others, not nominated. would be more convincing, if you link to those others - for the comparison, you ask for.
the same goes for director-comparisons. i don't understand, why you put this 'better' on without any 'than'?

then, it seems no surprising to me, if more video is created with those games, which are played most. purely statistically.
also the mentioned games are probably amongst the most useful for creating own content. which games do you think, should be represented more?
you say, that would not be true... so what is true? name the other games and link to the video made from it.
your 'hollywood vs india' is probably a good comparison, however that was not the argument. the argument was, that opportunity gives the chance - your answer is, that pleasing the audience gives the win. you might be right... you just lack any evidence.

i don't see any conclusion drawn between the games, which not appear for use, and creators using these games. it might be, that there is a bias to popular game-engines, but nothing hints the other way round.
in that regard, which examples of cretive output would you mention, which should have been nominated?


i don't know your engagements. i am very sure, there is always bias as soon as success comes into the game.
however, you sound like exaggerating...
i found quite a lot impressing content amongst the nominees and i haven't seen much more impressing elsewhere. which doesn't mean, that there is - perhaps you are right by all means.
just your post appears flaming, without examples at least.

Deepo.

My point is that AMAS, far from being an impartial film festival, is now more commercial than ever.

It costs a lot of money to organise a festival on this scale, you don't have to put 2 and 2 together to realise that these companies have bought out the festival.

If you wish to believe that this festival is clean, then please go ahead and do so. Many who have had doubts in the past are not so confident.

And if it is not clean, then does it not deserve to be questioned ?

hi blackace,

i understand your point, and you may be right by saying, that there is a chance of money being involved.

however, i am not sure, if the advertising-effect is that high... the attraction for the target 'gamer' wouldn't be more than the grafics shown. the gameplay has nothing to do with machinima! i doubt, gaming companies will see that different and i don't think, they will 'support' a preference of videos made with the respective games with a notable amount of money.
so, the question is, will it be enough for the festival take the risk of damaging their image?
imo, if there are preferences made at all, they are made by the festival itself - just for the belief, that with some productions they might catch the respective audience.

in any way, that was not the reason of my former reply.
as i said, i got your point... but by your post i couldn't find anything to support it. instead you just named the most used games and stated as kond of a conclusion, that the videos made by them are not the ones, which should be nominated.

i don't think, it appears like 'only' with these games talented videos are made. i think, with these games i have seen quite a lot good videos there, showing great talent.

i don't think, your comparison of used game-engine and holly- and bollywood is just inappropriate: you compare production with content there, which is not the question you raised. i think, that high availability results probably in more output - followed with higher chances in more quality amongst the quantity (as well as more chunk, no doubt). that doesn't mean, exotic games can't be used for extraordinary content, but that is not what you said.

i don't know, if the films shown are better than those not-shown. i think, those shown are between average and excellent (matter of taste) and for comparison, i'd like to see 30 better ones which are not shown (maybe you could provide some links).

i don't understand your somehow rhetorical question about 'good directors' - i'd guess, that also bad directors use those games. i guess also, that not only 'good directors' are using other games... still i have limited knowledge about not-shown productions.


please forgive me this reply - much is only repeated from the one before.

i still think, there are not many 'extremely poor films' (i haven't seen any so far, but i have hardly seen all yet) on the list of nominees.
as i said, you may be right with bias, but you may also provide us then with examples of 'far too many excellent films' been missing, for comparison?
i just know, that i don't trust any organisation from a certain point on, and the 'academy awards' are in no means any more excluded of bias than the 'machinima festival'! however, i have mostly seen great movies in both their nominees - for the 'academy awards' i know far too many excellent being left out though, for 'machinima' i still hope, that you point me to them.

BA, I've posted my thoughts over at the Moviestorm forum as I am interested in hearing what is being said over there by one of the Judges.
http://www.moviestorm.co.uk/forum/posts/list/3018.page
Copied here too:


Well, BA, I do agree that there are some pieces in the nominations that are odd, but on the other hand there are many excellent and creative movies in there as well.

Personally, I wouldn't jump to any conclusions based on partial statistics. To see if there is any trend we would have to know the breakdown of all the movies submitted, but even then the range in quality would be enormous to actually get down and make any accusations. You would also have to look at the distribution of any movies related to the sponsors – Beepa, Adobe and Reallusion.

However, the way I see it is that there is no accepted definition of what good machinima is, and a lot of subjectivity will guide the choices of nominations. I'm not sure who the actual judges are for the festival, unless I'm missing it on the website? Can someone point me to the names? I'm hoping that there is a wide enough range of tastes to hopefully compensate for too much subjectivity.

It's just a matter of fact that any creative work will be seen as fantastic by some people, and rubbish by others. I know there are some movies that I thought were really good but haven't appeared as a nomination. It's highly likely that a different set of movies will be recognized at the Machinima Expo based on the different judging panel there. Then again, the next OMFF will surely bring some surprises.

All in all, there are too many variables to be able to draw solid allegations. AMAS has come up with their own unique set of nominees and without a doubt there will be some excellent winners. I would rather support the event and accept my own personal reservations. It is more important that the international machinima community can push the art form forward together. That's no easy task when they are already clear fractures, but good luck to them.

Deepo, two good pieces I know were submited and didn't get nominated:

Faith, Hope and Charity (of course) and something very different Tom Jantol's "Wizard of OS: the Fish Incident" http://www.machiniplex.net/?id=24

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Joe-90,

hi joe,

i know tom's work quite well, and it is outstanding in it's own! well, in whatever mood i am, sometimes even not watchable

there is quite a lot of, let's say 'virtual' artwork around, and probably many are worth a nomination at some festival - maybe the 'machinima' festival.
which goes for fh&c as well, it is worth a festival nomination, imo... i hope, i could make myself understandable in the regarding thread.

for 'machinima'... that term is on the crossway to be taken serious.
for me it still means:
- done with game-engines exclusively (at least in main parts)
- getting their unique, individual idea and achieving their expression either by the usage of game-engines, or despite them limitations
- short movies
the last is not a necessarity, but for me it results from the limits of game-engines and their scripting possibilities. means, machinima can be long, but hard to keep it interesting that way (only few exceptions i know)

it seems though, that this genre is already fast mixing with others of the 'virtual' kind.
like jantol does, who uses nearly nothing from games anymore. same goes for those done with the appearing tools on the market.
in that regard, i don't consider jantol creating 'machinima', which is not lowering his quality in any way.
the same goes for 'fh&c'... although purely and masterly made with a game, it is too near to cinema in photography, story and score. hard to explain, but fe. 'the entertainer' was much more 'machinima' for me.

well, but that is just my view and not directly related to this topic - more a personal comment to jantol, whom i really like a lot.
in my opinion, 'machinima' won't be for much longer a genre with defined borders. the idea of using mixed tools for creating 'virtual environments' has already has already spread far beyond game-engines, and the results are nothing to complain about.


having said that, i won't insist in no way, that the 'machinima festival' has nominated pure 'machinima' (although still most of it is) and i also don't think, that there is not much being missed by them (from the festival's view-point, 'fh&c' should have got a nomination for sure). i also find some contributions well made, but not exactly worth a festival (like some 'halo' videos... nicely done, but kind of be seen before).

however, in general i think, the list is not bad and many is excellent in art, idea or entertainment (and to be found amongst all used game-engines). that way, i give it to the board to chose. the bad takes are not that many as blackace thinks there are, imo. and by far not without pointing to those pieces which he wants to see there.

therefor thanks a lot for your link, only by chance i knew jantol, and that site has some more to discover!

I get you, Deepo.

"Machinima" is slowly being established as either all the stuff you find on machinima.com which is as you say game videos, or it is more a collection of different tools like a game, Moviestorm (which you'll see in Jantol's work), and other 3d apps. This is sometimes called "Anymation", especially by Tom Jantol.

He is quite outspoken in the other Machinima community - not the machinima.com community and not the AMAS community, but the community which takes a lot of direction from Overman.

Hear's Tom's comment on the MFF nominees at Overman's blog:

http://z-studios.com/blog/2008/10/10/machinexpo/#comments