Indie games and developers

[KoKo5oVaR]

To follow this discussion of games dubbed down, sorry for thief4, i want to share a game completely unrelated, but shows that there exists games so hardcore and detailled that they are not even fun anymore; what's funny though is that the game is priced something around 70 euros, imagine a big publisher coming up with something like that. Would never happens. Although this is a shame, because a game like that with amazing graphics would be orgasmic to me.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUnp7ME6jr4

 

It's so nerdy it makes you feel ashamed to play it, but still a great wargame, i recommend!!!

[Vilham]

Crytek is entirely self/crowd-funded? I didn't know that, but if it is that definitely counts as indie.

Double Fine is making their adventure game with a pretty big team, but it's entirely self/crowd-funded and very much 'indie-style'. Would you say that counts? What about Sony-funded games like Flower and Journey?

Crytek gets the vast majority of its money itself and is publishing several of its own games. So yeah.

[FMPONE]

I see Crytek as a major studio employing lots of veteran people. Indie? Not really

Edited October 19, 2013 by FMPONE

[-HP-]

Now we're just arguing semantics on what indie really means.

Independent studio is one thing, "indie" is another, and you all know it, lol.

[Erratic]

It should mean publisher and creative independence but if you're not a small team making emotionally empowering games they couldn't make at big studios like medieval toon shaded 4 player coop loot games or first person walk abouts sniffing your sisters underwear while shes gone you're just not fucking indie man

[dux]

This thread has deviated to a large degree. Someone split the indie stuff off into another thread please?

[Vilham]

Now we're just arguing semantics on what indie really means.

Independent studio is one thing, "indie" is another, and you all know it, lol.

That's exactly my point, indie does not mean independent anymore, its a far more specific but at the same time generic for certain kind of games.

[Thrik]

I'll split it when I'm on my computer.

Going back to the original point though, Sentura was just saying that it'd be cool if a load of super-experienced developers got together with a huge budget and made an indie game. Then someone gave an example of a game kind of like that, and someone else started saying that game isn't really indie... but it did fit Sentura's original point, which is what I was saying.

Obviously I'm aware of the different definitions of indie (as silly as it might be), it's just that the point that was made in the first place made it quite clear which one was meant. Unless you're trying to say that above a certain team size/budget you can no longer be considered indie, in which case I guess Sentura's scenario is impossible.

On a personal note though, it delights me to see dens of creativity like Double Fine and the Star Citizen guys controlling their own destiny and making the games they want to. They're the ultimate indie success stories to aspire to IMO and I hope it becomes much more common that developers answer to themselves and their fans.

[Taylor]

Crytek can't be indie because it make games about shooting mans. Team Ico and thatgamecompany aren't (or weren't) really published by Sony because they make arts.

[2d-chris]

I really hope star citizen does well, it seems to be setting an example, if it fails we're all doomed

[blackdog]

Now we're just arguing semantics on what indie really means.

Independent studio is one thing, "indie" is another, and you all know it, lol.

"Alternative"

[Sentura]

I think Taylor hit the nail on the head. By now the term is so hyperbolic and contrived it really shouldn't be used at all. I think an easier distinction would just be AAA games and non-AAA games, or why not even go ahead and use the full spectrum of movie labeling instead of only the top tier? AA games? A games? B games?

 

Nah, indies would probably bitch and whine over all be labeled B games.

 

It seems the general consensus here is that indie games are better because they have more freedom, even if they are missing the necessary funding. I don't think I can argue with that, although it does lower the barrier to entry. Which perhaps isn't a bad thing, but it just means people without experience get put in positions where they don't have the skill to pull things off properly. However my biggest gripe with is people taking the label of indie and using it in ways to justify shitty quality of games (be it art or design). Being that I have seen the inside of at least one indie community, I can honestly say it's way too prevalent.

 

Another thing that is prevalent in the indie community is the focus on idea and execution of idea in a game design context. There's almost no focus on games as a whole, on how e.g. environments and graphics may have influence on games. Nobody dares do 3D indie because they know it will be shit. For people who supposedly are to take people out of their comfort zone, they do little to go out of their own. I don't dig on that at all.