1st Annual Interactive Achievement Awards
American video game awards
The 1st Annual Interactive Achievement Awards was the 1st edition of the Interactive Achievement Awards, an annual awards event that honored the best games in the video game industry during 1997 and the first three months of 1998. The awards were arranged by the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences (AIAS) and were held on the first day of E3 1998 at the Georgia World Congress Center in Atlanta, Georgia. There was not an official host of the award ceremony. All titles eligible for nomination were publicly release in North America between January 1, 1997 and March 31, 1998.
Final Fantasy VII, GoldenEye 007, and Riven: The Sequel to Myst were tied for receiving the most nominations. GoldenEye 007 took home the most awards, including "Interactive Title of the Year". Electronic Arts received the most nominations and had the most nominated games. Electronic Arts also tied with Broderbund for having the most awarded games. Developer Rare won the most awards of the event, while Sony Computer Entertainment and Nintendo tied for most wins as publishers. Rare and Broderbund were the only developers with more than one award-winning game.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “1st Annual Interactive Achievement Awards” is american video game awards. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Annual, Interactive and Achievement, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “american video game awards” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 13, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q109771881. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1997 and 1998.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “1st Annual Interactive Achievement Awards”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow 1st Annual Interactive Achievement Awards primary sources, 1st Annual Interactive Achievement Awards archive and Annual research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “1st Annual Interactive Achievement Awards”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “1st Annual Interactive Achievement Awards” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.