Indie Game - The Movie

Quote from Mclogenog

It's not just the studio or developer though. "Weird" games like Dear Esther or Journey aren't going to be made by large teams unless commercial viability is guaranteed. With the dev costs for AAA games, it's no wonder that progress is in steps (e.g. adding and removing weapons and levels in each CoD), but it's frustrating for people who want to progress in leaps instead.

Yeah, kinda the point about small teams, if you don't want the game to be a huge collection of everyone's ideas and dreams then it's all good. There is absolutely nothing wrong with people making something completely different and exciting. My problem, like MIno is the activist type who truly believe the industry is a corrupt mess

I love indies in the sense that I can freely apply my ideas into a full game, testing concepts that I find to be innovative without that boring obligation to convince a mindless director/ lead that the game proposal is worthy.

There is indeed that type of "blind" people who think that indie game scene is the salvation for the games industry. I don't see it that way. I think indie games and AAA games are two separate things and they are not mutually exclusive. There are people working in AAA games who also has their personal indie game projects, right? I think Bram is a great example (look at that cool procedural fps).

Indies provide more freedom and people tend to be able to show their vision and personality in their own creation.

Quote from 2d-chris

Yeah, kinda the point about small teams, if you don't want the game to be a huge collection of everyone's ideas and dreams then it's all good. There is absolutely nothing wrong with people making something completely different and exciting. My problem, like MIno is the activist type who truly believe the industry is a corrupt mess

The mainstream industry is capable of some great things (e.g. Psychonauts, HL2, Mass Effect) and the indie games that stand out are those which, somehow or other, have AAA level of polish. But there are definitely unacknowledged problems in mainstream games that indie games are trying (with varying success) to fix. This isn't apparently the purpose of Fez or Super Meat Boy (though it is a purpose in McMillen's Aether and Blow's Braid), and that might be related to their wider reception.

In short, I wish more indie games were AAA quality and/or mainstream games appealed to wider audiences with deeper ideas.

Quote from Al Anselmo

I love indies in the sense that I can freely apply my ideas into a full game, testing concepts that I find to be innovative without that boring obligation to convince a mindless director/ lead that the game proposal is worthy.

Well that's a bit of an over generalization. Just because you are not working on small games in your basement it doesn't mean you won't have any freedom. To be honest most of the game designers I know in the industry (from many different studios) enjoy a great amount of freedom - of course inside the scope/proposal of the game. As a rule of thumb you are being paid to do a specific type of game, not to be brilliant or genius. It's pretty much the same for artists, we usually enjoy a lot of freedom inside the art direction of the project.

I also find it a bit weird how a lot of people with zero industry experience (looking at you brazilian developers) generally just hate the industry and despise anything backed by a major publish. These same guys are always trying to show how brilliant they are, even though they have zero industry experience. Everybody wants to be the next Jonathan Blow or Notch while having never worked on anything more complex than angry birds clones.

Experience is key, and no better place to get it than surrounding yourself with talented/more experienced people than you. I just think the major goal of those dudes should be to try to get a job in a proper game studio, anywhere in the world, gain production experience and only after that try the indie route. I know a lot of guys who started on the indie scene and are gonna be stuck on it forever, because they are pretty much always doing the same things locked in their rooms being super grumpy about the industry.

As I said once in that same mailing list, the only difference I see between AAA games and indie games is the scope and budget. At the end of the day they are both game products and the production methods should be pretty much the same.

Yeah, I didn't say that the freedom doesn't exist in non-basement game devs. Just that in indie is happens more easily and in every aspect of the project. It's good to note that there are indeed director/ leads who are fine with testing new game ideas.

Not only Angry Birds clones. There's a company who clones like every game that shows on top 10 (I think you know which one it is). Change the graphics, and "it's done". I don't think that is attractive in anyway, and it makes me want to vomit.

I agree that in a studio with talented developers the experience gained is a lot bigger that when you stay alone banging your head in a wall constantly trying to beat your own problems.

You guys are getting me worried, working pretty much alone on a game with no real experience is exactly what I want to do starting this summer.

Not that I want to clone anything or expect to be the next notch/blow/team meat.

I hope it's a platformer where you cannot lose.

Quote from Taylor

I hope it's a platformer where you cannot lose.

Pushing the industry ahead. In leaps.

Quote from Taylor

I hope it's a platformer where you cannot lose.

The inability to lose in Super Meat Boy (as defined by running out of lives and having to restart the entire world or game) is distinct from the challenge of winning. Most interesting gameplay occurs in the space between win and lose conditions. Besides, there are zones where traditional life systems are applied.

Quote from Erratic

Pushing the industry ahead. In leaps.

Assuming this is sarcasm, I agree that Super Meat Boy and Fez aren't the indie games pushing the industry ahead. By design, they're "retro." But as a whole, indie games are capable of taking risks that would be too great to justify in the mainstream.

Quote from Mclogenog

Assuming this is sarcasm, I agree that Super Meat Boy and Fez aren't the indie games pushing the industry ahead. By design, they're "retro." But as a whole, indie games are capable of taking risks that would be too great to justify in the mainstream.

I wasn't talking about super meat boy which I like a lot.

Pushing the industry ahead is a big empty shitty way of thinking about things. Anytime a game does do something extraordinary it rarely impacts other games and if it does it takes awhile to settle in and no one really notices right away usually so the whole feeling of progress becomes kinda nebulous but whatever I like playing endless iterations of battlefield and cod instead of climbing on vines really goddamn slowly which is not fun at all. But I only played like 10 minutes of the trial so what do I know.

I was aiming to be as generic as possible. I don't know why you thought I was specifically talking about Super Meat Boy. The indie scene is not devoid of me-tooism, just as mainstream games are not devoid of innovation.

Quote from Mclogenog

I agree that Super Meat Boy and Fez aren't the indie games pushing the industry ahead. By design, they're "retro." But as a whole, indie games are capable of taking risks that would be too great to justify in the mainstream.

I would like to see this point made with examples.

Quote from Taylor

I would like to see this point made with examples.

Four that come to mind (and why):

Dear Esther explored the gameplay-narrative limits of the medium and it provokes a different set of emotions than are typical to mainstream games.

Limbo avoids the platformer and adventure game trends of whimsy and explores nihilism. The tendency to die is the only real gameplay support of this theme, though.

Bastion's narrative is based in regret and questions of dealing with it. This tends to be irrelevant to the hack-slash gameplay, though.

The Marriage explores the complexity of relationships, and how they change over time. This only relies on gameplay, not narrative, to express its point.

None of these examples are perfect, but they are trying (and sometimes succeeding) to explore the wider emotions and ideas than most mainstream games. I mentioned some exceptions in a previous post, but it's worth mentioning them again with explanations. Valve games are some of the industry's best at portraying female characters. The Mass Effect games have more character depth than most games, including many of Valve's, but are lacking for being one-sided, responsive, and number-based rather than actual social skill. In both cases, most of the gameplay (the shooting, or puzzle solving in Portal) is irrelevant to the meaning because fun is an essential priority for the game to sell.

More often when mainstream developers try to make something meaningful beyond shooting (and there is a place for shooters), there's some dissonance. In the latest Max Payne, to effectively tell its narrative of a drunken sociopath's redemption, gameplay should have been affected. But as soon as gameplay reflects something unpleasant, or requires delving into untested mechanics, there's a risk. That's what it takes to make something meaningful through this medium, and its something indie games have more flexibility to do.

Psychonauts is a particularly good example. Its gameplay and level design are used to address the complex issues of repression, self-criticism, facing inner demons, and coming-of-age. As a mainstream game it was unsuccessful, and it's hard to judge exactly why. But it was a big risk. Many of the individual levels in Psychonauts could be an indie game of smaller scale than many of those I already listed, and for the development costs it would have been a more acceptable risk. For example, Costume Quest, as a smaller (low-risk) project with some thematic overlap from Psychonauts, was a commercial success.

There is a place for the mainstream shooter. I've designed community levels for them and enjoy playing some of them, after all. But when the selling point on the majority of mainstream games is the number of weapons or the improved dismemberment technology, rather than the quality of characters, stories, and emotions, I think it's good that there are also indie games that can afford the risk to try something different.

Dear Esther is described by many commentators as not being a game at all and I would be inclined to agree with them. The Marriage is an interesting idea and I concede there is no way this could have a mainstream equivalent. Limbo’s shallow gameplay of being spat out of a checkpoint to memorise a Simon Say’s sequence should not reasonably sustain anyone after 2 minutes.

While I cannot comment on Bastion because I haven’t played it, I do know Derek Yu vetoed it as being an indie game after it was picked up by Warner Brothers. Going back to previous post you also mentioned Journey, which was backed and funded by Sony. thatgamecompany have only just (in the last week) become independent.

Everything about Psychonauts was fantastic except the actual game part, and I think there’s your answer.

Quote

But when the selling point on the majority of mainstream games is the number of weapons or the improved dismemberment technology, rather than the quality of characters, stories, and emotions, I think it's good that there are also indie games that can afford the risk to try something different.

And the majority of indie games are just retro-sylised Cave Story clones with chiptunes and too many save states, right? If you're going to reduce the whole mainstream down to Call of Duty 18 and ignore titles like Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Heavy Rain, Rez, Katamari, Noby Noby Boy, Killer 7, Persona, etc. then this is just a huge straw man.

Quote from Youme

You guys are getting me worried, working pretty much alone on a game with no real experience is exactly what I want to do starting this summer.Not that I want to clone anything or expect to be the next notch/blow/team meat.

No worries, you can totally come up with something solid and fun on your own (provided you can code and create assets ect ). I just joined an indie crew of 2, and now we are a crew of 3. It's a bit nerve racking but I'm really excited about it, and I'm sure we'll turn out something fun. Don't get too concerned with this banter; if the content of the film doesn't scare you off I think you have what it takes, its just getting started that is the hardest part. That and scope, don't get too crazy with the size of your project.

Quote from Taylor

While I cannot comment on Bastion because I haven’t played it, I do know Derek Yu vetoed it as being an indie game after it was picked up by Warner Brothers.

Bastion is absolutely an indie game, I don't think that because they received funding it excludes them from what indie development is. They created this game as a team of 4 if I remember correctly, one artist, one designer, one programmer, one sound designer. Bastion feels completely like a product that was created because they wanted to make it, not because they wanted or necessarily needed to make money. It really comes down to your definition of indie; and I think it comes down to making what you want to make, and not making income your primary purpose/ outcome. That isn't to say that a developer in a large team at a Ubisoft studio can't enjoy what he's doing or be making something he wants to; but fact is that when it comes down to it these larger companies are typically the ones that compete on solid ground: proven game design, genre and story telling styles. For the larger companies the promise of income is essential to stay afloat and thus they are somewhat forced to 'mainstream' development. The one larger/ well known company that notably defies this is Valve. Valve creates games with an indie game developer attitude, providing free content and support for their games for no particular reason, and take their time with creating new titles (mostly; L4D 2 may be an exception).

Quote from Erratic

Assuming this is sarcasm, I agree that Super Meat Boy and Fez aren't the indie games pushing the industry ahead. By design, they're "retro." But as a whole, indie games are capable of taking risks that would be too great to justify in the mainstream.

I do not however entirely agree with this. While it is more likely for indie developers to take risks with their game designs; this is largely because it is financially feasible. I agree because, like I mentioned above a company like Ubisoft really can't afford to risk everything and try a game design that doesn't have ample merit. They employ an immense number of people to make AAA quality games, and because of that they have to make a ton more profit so that they can pay all of there employees to make the game and so that they can continue to pay them all to make another! Their great need to profit well from these titles forces them to create sequels, and reside largely inside of popular genres like the shooter. I disagree because of great games like Taylor mentioned, I mean whats not risky and great about games like Heavy Rain, Katamri, or Killer 7 (every one of that guys games really). This may simply speak to the great flexibility and resource power of medium to small sized studios of 10 - 60 people.

Quote from Mclogenog

Psychonauts is a particularly good example. Its gameplay and level design are used to address the complex issues of repression, self-criticism, facing inner demons, and coming-of-age. As a mainstream game it was unsuccessful, and it's hard to judge exactly why. But it was a big risk. Many of the individual levels in Psychonauts could be an indie game of smaller scale than many of those I already listed, and for the development costs it would have been a more acceptable risk. For example, Costume Quest, as a smaller (low-risk) project with some thematic overlap from Psychonauts, was a commercial success.

timing is very important and a very underestimated part of (indie) marketing. while i don't think this is the case for what happened to psychonauts, i do know other examples where similar games have been released with as little as a 6 month interval, where the latter succeeded while the former didn't. a game with any grip and little hype (something along the lines of minecraft) needs to be released into the public at the right time. who knows, maybe if minecraft was released earlier it wouldn't have the same amount of backing as it came to have now.

Quote from Marvin.Star

Bastion is absolutely an indie game, I don't think that because they received funding it excludes them from what indie development is. They created this game as a team of 4 if I remember correctly, one artist, one designer, one programmer, one sound designer. Bastion feels completely like a product that was created because they wanted to make it, not because they wanted or necessarily needed to make money. It really comes down to your definition of indie; and I think it comes down to making what you want to make, and not making income your primary purpose/ outcome.

You don't get your own definition. It means independent, it means not relying on a publisher for "funding" and having nobody external calling shots. This lack of restraints mean you could potentially make something truly original that a publisher wouldn't want to touch and this is what makes indie games so exciting. However, this does not mean if you work somewhere "mainstream" you will never work on something original, you have sold your soul, you have no creative power, and you cannot be passionate. I'm having a hard time putting into words how staggeringly off-base this whole depiction is.

First, since this was based on the definition of an indie developer, and I seem to have caused you great stress based on my prior definition, here is a revised one:

Indie game developers are individuals, small teams, or small independent companies creating video games separate from a publisher.

Note: my prior definition was formed based on multiple discussions of various developers trying to define indie game development, and I just like Bastion (read below for my thoughts specifically on Bastion). I do however see the sense in the name 'indie' being independent, and I recognize that the 'indie games' I own are typically, to my knowledge, not associated with publishers. Thoughts on Bastions claim to indieness below.

Quote from Taylor

You don't get your own definition. It means independent, it means not relying on a publisher for "funding" and having nobody external calling shots. This lack of restraints mean you could potentially make something truly original that a publisher wouldn't want to touch and this is what makes indie games so exciting.

Second, I will concede that by definition an indie developer is one without backing from a publisher. Which makes more sense as I begin to consider my own situation; working in a small team with no funding . However, Bastion fits the bill almost entirely. They had been developing the game since some time in 2009, until early 2011, before getting the publishing support of Warner around March 10, 2011. They released 4 months later on July 20, 2011. So the game was largely developed without a publisher. The game was advertised and pushed into multiple markets by Warner; but given the circumstances surrounding Bastions development I believe it is an indie game at heart, if not officially. They market themselves as an indie game, which may just be smart marketing, but I can understand that the developers probably want Bastion to be considered indie as well.

Quote from Taylor

However, this does not mean if you work somewhere "mainstream" you will never work on something original, you have sold your soul, you have no creative power, and you cannot be passionate.

Finally, I agree completely, I never meant to imply otherwise.

snip

I think minecraft is a fantastic example of indie game, not for it's success (most indie games don't earn a living for their developers) but for it's continued support, and simple idea as foundation. good ole' notch did something simple, and he was selling it 3 + years ago as a"pre-alpha" with super discount, and continued to work on it sans-outside funding.