 |
 |
The Spud Des Jahres awards celebrate the vibrant and diverse business of designer boardgames. Since 2003, they have become a recognized symbol of achievement in boardgame publishing and designing.
Join us on our annual journey into the rarified halls of excellents. |
|
And the winners are...
| |
The Rather Have Teeth Rasped Award
|
|
|
|
 | Christiane Knepel
(Rio Grande/Winning Moves) | Committee Comments:
- A game of pure strategy. Followed by random draw to see who wins.
- Some fool took a truly great game, ripped out its still beating heart, smeared it with peanut butter and served it up.
- When I had this game described to me, I actually read the rules to make sure the ending was that badly designed.
- This gets my vote because it so totally ruins the original game (Muscat).
Editor's Comments:
Emailed Ms. Knepel at knepel@tecar.com. She has agreed to accept the award. |
The Rather Have Teeth Rasped Award: Games are supposed to be fun. This award celebrates the least fun game or expansion to a game.
See the nominees |
| |
| |
| |
The Play Once, Publish Twice Award
|
|
|
|
 | Anthony Thompson
(Thompson Industries) | Committee Comments:
- I think this is the clear winner as it just fails to work so spectacularly.
- How about renaming this game "Quality Control"?
- One of the few games to garner any kind of consensus among the gaming hobbyists. Unfortunately, the consensus is its unplayable with the ruleset provided.
- This is so bad, I couldn't even give it away. No, really.
- Admittedly, it would actually be somewhat of a shame to give the guy a prize for his game because it might
encourage him to produce more games like it.
Editor's Comments:
Mr. Thompson initially agreed to accept the award and submit a picture of himself with it. It was sent to him, with a copy of The Game Designer's Handbook. Subsequent emails have gone unreturned.
|
The Play Once, Publish Twice Award: Games with apparently little or no playtesting. The game that wins this award will be one whose flaws are quickly identified in the first few plays of the game. These flaws break the game or lead to hurried rule "clarifications", but should have been caught by a simple blind playtesting prior to publication.
See the nominees |
| |
| |
| |
The Money for Nothing Award
|
|
|
|
 | James Ernest
(Cheapass) | List Price: Free
Contents:
Single playing-card size set of rules
Committee Comments:
- I would nominate CheapAss for lifetime achievement in this category.
- Can't get cheaper on the component side, and any price to pay is too much.
- CheapAss steals this award, but InterUrban is a close second.
Editor's Comments:
James Ernest accepting his award:
 |
The Money for Nothing Award: The most over-priced game of 2003. Based on list price.
See the nominees |
| |
| |
| |
The Baroque Blurb Award
|
|
|
|
 | Friedmann Friese
(2F Spiele) | The Blurb:
Fearlessly you searched for the 3 fetishes from the Finnish fjord, using fast and faceted feints to take them away and hurry with them to Prince Fiesto of France to free the fascinating Fee and Freelady Fabula.
But Fieso seems freakishly unfriendly, what a fiasco! Your freedom is infringed in a freezing and frightful fortress with dark corridors. Now you must flee from Fieso's trap. Furunkulus, the castle monster (a ferocious freak) is waiting. Now you must avoid Furunkulus and fly to freedom.
Committee Comments:
- The type of sociopathic personality that could cause someone to write such turgid prose should not go unrecognized.
- FF is friggin' fabulously fitted for this fellowship.
- Furunkulus is reminiscent of Homunculus, a favorite word of mine.
Editor's Comments:
Mr. Friese graciously allowed Spielboy editors to photograph him at the 15th Gathering of Friends in Ohio where he accepted the award.
 |
The Baroque Blurb Award: The silliest or most overwrought descriptive text on a game box. Specifically refers to the marketing language that excites a casual browser into buying the game.
See the nominees |
| |
| |
| |
The Chits & Ass Award
|
|
|
|
 | Roland and Tobias Goslar
(Kronberger) | 
Committee Comments:
- Hooray for boobies!
- Do you think she's got a sister??
- Tough to choose since I'm gay; but if I had to pick one, it would be this one. She looks tight like a man's ah-noose. Do you think she's got a brother?
- Sexy time!
Editor's Comments:
Tobias (left) and Roland (right) accepting their award. Black Forest in the background.
 |
The Chits & Ass Award: Hottest image in a game — includes game components, box cover, player aides, or rulebook. This year's heat includes an abundance of nipples, which is nice.
See the nominees |
| |
| |
| |
The McGuffin Award
|
|
|
|
 | More Info | Committee Comments:
- Not as smart as they think they are. And, you actually have to pay Mensa and give them five copies of your game for them to even consider it.
- Just remember, they aren't necessarily the best and brightest — just the ones who want everyone to know they are the best and brightest.
- The top 2% has never seemed terribly distinguished to me, and neither does this award.
- Mensa has a bizarre selection process and picks more losers than any other award I'm aware of.
Editor's Comments:
Emailed the Mensa organization using their form-based mailer at mensa.org. Asked them to whom I should send the award. Have not heard back. Also sent an email to Matt Crawford at info@mindgames.us.mensa.org. He was kind enough to forward my essage to the national office.
To consider a game for a Mensa Select award, Mensa requires that you send them 6 copies of the game, $175, and 10 sets of rules.
|
McGuffin: The award for the worst industry award. Factors include lack of influence, poor choices, and uniquely unqualified judges. The name comes from the Hitchcock device that was essentially something that the entire plot is built around and yet has no real relevance.
See the nominees |
| |
| |
Each winner receives an inscribed resin statuette of winged victory. Winners are encouraged to submit photographs of their receiving the awards, but if they don't, it's understandable.
About the Awards Committee: The Spud Des Jahres Awards Committee was handpicked from applicants around the world. Each member carefully considers the factors important to the SDJ before making a nomination. Committee members do not know who the other members are, and their identities are not revealed to the general public so that their work can be carried out without influence.
|
