Digital Trends

Now nearly 10 years old, the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences (AIAS) is the best kept secret videogame enthusiasts have never heard of.

Operating similarly to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the non-profit professional organization is composed of thousands of individuals who work in the interactive entertainment biz. The goal of the collective artists, musicians, programmers, publishers and game designers who make up its membership: To promote awareness of the art and science that goes into creating the countless digital diversions we all hold so dear.

Enjoying the support of executives at Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, Electronic Arts, Atari and other industry leaders, the institution funds several annual initiatives designed to raise public awareness of gaming. Not to mention, that is, shine the spotlight on outstanding developers such as Valve and id Software, plus deserving individuals including Sid Meier (Pirates!, Civilization), Will Wright (The Sims, Spore) and David Jaffe (God of War II).

For example, regular gathering the D.I.C.E. (Design Innovate Communicate Entertain) Summit, which brings game creators together to share ideas and discuss the state of their craft. The annual Interactive Achievement Awards, wherein special commendation is afforded to the most deserving games and personalities by an elite group of peers. And, of course, who could forget Into the Pixel, the E3 art exhibition (making its European debut this October at the GameCity festival in Nottingham, England) which showcases masterpieces by gaming's top visual talents.

Next up: A televised awards program arriving in Q1 2007 that's being built in conjunction with Dick Clark Productions, plus a new system for specially promoting prize-winning games as movie studios would Oscar-winning films. Given the big year ahead, we touch base with AIAS president Joseph Olin to see where the Academy's come from, where it's headed, and why it'll soon be at the forefront of everyone's mind:

Q: For all the readers who might be wondering, please enlighten us – why does the gaming industry need an institution like The Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences?

A: Well, I think that the Academy's mission is really to broaden the awareness, to people at large, of the craftsmanship that goes into this business. And about some of the other aspects of the biz that come out of that, such as the artistic contributions it makes to society. That's why we run exhibits like Into the Pixel and hold events like the Interactive Achievement Awards (our 10th edition of which will be held in February 2007).

We've managed to achieve some major milestones given the relative youth of our industry, especially given the leaps and bounds gaming has taken over the last 5 to 10 years. Things have changed since the late '70s and the days when you could play Lode Runner on an Apple II. Gaming is now part of pop culture and entertainment in general. And the 150,000 – 200,000 people who create this stuff, they should be recognized for their excellence. That's the message we try to get across.

It's taken a decade for the Academy to come close to fulfilling this mission. The challenge partly comes from the fact that our members aren't the sort of people who really like to applaud each other. The field is incredibly competitive. It's unusual: You don't see film score composers hacking off or ragging each other on blogs like people do in our business. Go to magazines and blogs and you'll actually see flame wars going on about what's a great game and what isn't. It's definitely a unique situation...

Q: When did the organization first form?

A: Things really came together around, oh, September 1996, I'd say.

Q: That's what we suspected. But gaming was huge even before then. What was the catalyst – the advent of CD-ROM finally bringing the topic to mainstream computer and console users' attention, or…?

A: I think having a more stable medium. The ability to put more assets into the consumer's hands via plug and play technology (which Windows 95 and PSOne brought to the table) changed the dynamic of what creators could offer someone who wanted an interactive experience. Unlike with disk-based product, the industry was suddenly delivering much richer content, on par with anything other mediums could offer. And it's not like people weren't trying to get something like the Academy together beforehand.

As with any new medium, the struggle was to determine what should be publicly recognized as deserving of acclaim and what shouldn't, and for what reasons. Plus, even as little as five years ago, game development wasn't as compartmentalized as it is today. A handful of friends could still get together over the course of 12 to 18 months and create something. Now, you could take 18 months alone just in the planning phases to come up with a product before you convince someone to spend $20 million on making it.

Anyhow, so back then, game makers weren't necessarily interested in recognizing what they did. All they were focused on was making the game. Today, as gaming has become more of a dominant institution that people spend increasing amounts of leisure time and spare dollars on, people are finally deciding they want to be recognized for doing a good job. They care what their peers think.

It doesn't matter if they sold 200 copies of a title at retail or 6 million. I think Katamari Damacy is a perfect example of a game that wasn't particularly commercially successful, but was considered critically to be one of the best games published in the last 2 years. So we try to recognize people's artistic vision and risk-taking, and simultaneously hope that by having that recognition, you can convince more people that it's a great game to play.