Originally posted by hercules Indie companies always bring out the best ideas. Roma victor had one of the best ideas in the last ten years but lacked the skills or funds to makd it a reality.
Nah .. Avenger is a great movie. Avatar is a fun movie. The Dark Knight is a great movie. Indie can't do those movies.
Its not about creativity or lack of it. The bigger game companies have hundreds of employees and likely hundreds of families depend on the success or failure of its product. With that kind of resposibility you can't do something with a whim and you have to have a damn good reason to do what you do - and some kind of proof that it will work.
A small indie company makes a mistake, its a no biggie. They rise and fall all the time. Their risk is small by comparison. When a big company makes a mistake, it impacts a lot of lives. 38 studios anyone?
Was 38 not an indie company? Albeit one with strong funding.
I also don't think that the people involved in indie dev projects see any failiure as 'no big deal'. The investment indie devs make in their product, both physically and emotionally, is huge.
38 studios had around 300 emplyees. They don't exactly fill the indie qualification even if the company itself is very young.
Sure it does.
'Indie' simply means not being owned by a 'major' or being part of a larger group. I also believe that 38 had a definite 'indie philosophy' of game design behind them, despite their solid funding.
But, nm, I accept you define it differently. Not like we will change each other's opinion on whats 'indie' here
If you have 300 employees, then your not indie.
"Independent video games (commonly referred to as indie games) are video games created by individuals or small teams without video game publisher financial support. "
according to your logic, if i had a team of 500 people, and 100 million dollars, but i didnt have a major publisher or owner i would be an idie game dev, simply not true.
Your seriously using Wikipedia as a source for your defintion? I am sorry, but no.
Look, I have said already I accept we define it differently. I had no interest in debating it further, simply because Their is nothing in the term 'indie' that says numbers, merely that you are independant.
The Independant Games Festival defines it simply as; "Independently Created: The Nominating Committee must be confident that the submitted game was created in the 'indie spirit' by an independent game developer"
Vague eh? Which is kinda my point... like many buzz words on the internet, it means different things to different folks and really has no definitive established meaning, even if one of those folks put his own definition on to Wikipedia.
It's pointless to argue the definitions here TBH. I think though that we can probably agree that a creative free thinking spirit and a focus on gameplay over pure profit are major elements, and that they are a good thing to have around.
Fez, Terraria, Binding of Isaac, Minecraft, Spacechem, Gemini Rue, Legend of Grimrock, Botanicula, Lone Survivor, Super Meat Boy, VVVVVV, Journey, LIMBO, Amnesia, Dungeon Defenders, Bastion, Trine, Braid, Orcs Must Die!, Frozen Synapse, World of Goo, Dustforce, Realm of the Mad God, Pixel Junk , Dungeons of Dredmor , Jamestown, Defense Grid, Sequence, SPAZ, Sanctum, Bit.Trip, Path of Exile... I can go on and on.
Absolutely phenominal games made by indie teams. Teams that aren't afraid to think outside the box and deliever unique experiences to gamers.
I personally spend more time with Indie games than any other AAA title.
Its not about creativity or lack of it. The bigger game companies have hundreds of employees and likely hundreds of families depend on the success or failure of its product. With that kind of resposibility you can't do something with a whim and you have to have a damn good reason to do what you do - and some kind of proof that it will work.
A small indie company makes a mistake, its a no biggie. They rise and fall all the time. Their risk is small by comparison. When a big company makes a mistake, it impacts a lot of lives. 38 studios anyone?
Was 38 not an indie company? Albeit one with strong funding.
I also don't think that the people involved in indie dev projects see any failiure as 'no big deal'. The investment indie devs make in their product, both physically and emotionally, is huge.
38 studios had around 300 emplyees. They don't exactly fill the indie qualification even if the company itself is very young.
Sure it does.
'Indie' simply means not being owned by a 'major' or being part of a larger group. I also believe that 38 had a definite 'indie philosophy' of game design behind them, despite their solid funding.
But, nm, I accept you define it differently. Not like we will change each other's opinion on whats 'indie' here
If you have 300 employees, then your not indie.
"Independent video games (commonly referred to as indie games) are video games created by individuals or small teams without video game publisher financial support. "
according to your logic, if i had a team of 500 people, and 100 million dollars, but i didnt have a major publisher or owner i would be an idie game dev, simply not true.
Your seriously using Wikipedia as a source for your defintion? I am sorry, but no.
Look, I have said already I accept we define it differently. I had no interest in debating it further, simply because Their is nothing in the term 'indie' that says numbers, merely that you are independant.
The Independant Games Festival defines it simply as; "Independently Created: The Nominating Committee must be confident that the submitted game was created in the 'indie spirit' by an independent game developer"
Vague eh? Which is kinda my point... like many buzz words on the internet, it means different things to different folks and really has no definitive established meaning, even if one of those folks put his own definition on to Wikipedia.
It's pointless to argue the definitions here TBH. I think though that we can probably agree that a creative free thinking spirit and a focus on gameplay over pure profit are major elements, and that they are a good thing to have around.
Independent is a general term, but I agree it should not be defined by numbers alone. For example, a studio that takes on a large cash infusion (or investors) generally is tied to those investors in some way. By definition, this makes them less independent. Not necessarily in game design, but certainly in obligation.
Single player games? Sure. Plenty of good indie games.
Normal multiplayer / co-op games? Can also find some good ones.
Lobby multiplayer games? Yeah. Same as above. Some insanely succesful and indutry defining even (LoL or WoT).
MMORPG? Aside of EVE I have yet to find any good indie mmorpg. One that would not be ridiculoosely bugged, underdeveloped, understaffed and not providing most of features they promised. + takig ages to add anything new or fix things. Forever alpha state.
One good, succesful indie mmorpg in last 10-15 years?
Hardly a saviour for a genre and future to look for.
This. A few days ago, I posted that "The Repopulation" looks like just another overambitous & underfunded indie sandbox doomed to fail. The next day:
"You have been issued a temporary ban by one of our moderators."
WHAT? Apparantly, there's something wrong with stating that opinion, but, yeah... the "indie sandbox" genre has imo become almost as cliche and predictable as the "WoW-clone" genre, and I'm just as tired of it. Indie sandbox developers stubbornly try to do the same games with the same impossible feature lists - how many turned out a success?
The scope of games like Minecraft, Terraria, LoL, or DayZ sounds reasonable. Trying to reinvent SWG on a tiny budget, not so much.
The state of gaming right now is showing that gamers are truly sick and tired of playing the same exact thing in different worlds with the same exact gameplay.
Also, what about the layoffs from Bioware? Tor did piss-poor performance and is dragging all of EA with it? As for why? Well, it wasn't because they were taking a lot of risks.
Innovate or die.
Following many posters on this forum the definition of "innovative" is not necessarily new or inventive but something they specifically like. Usually some recurring feature from an age old game such as open world PvP or "this game is not innovative because it has quests."
It is really quite sad to read how they rape the word and make it mean whatever their preferences are.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
The state of gaming right now is showing that gamers are truly sick and tired of playing the same exact thing in different worlds with the same exact gameplay.
Also, what about the layoffs from Bioware? Tor did piss-poor performance and is dragging all of EA with it? As for why? Well, it wasn't because they were taking a lot of risks.
Innovate or die.
Following many posters on this forum the definition of "innovative" is not necessarily new or inventive but something they specifically like. Usually some recurring feature from an age old game such as open world PvP or "this game is not innovative because it has quests."
It is really quite sad to read how they rape the word and make it mean whatever their preferences are.
People playing games with semantics is hardly specific to this forum, although I admit I haven't seen it used much at all, much less in the ways you describe.
That being the case I can't really see it being used to mean "clone", "same","money grab", etc.
Also, what about those layoffs from Bioware?
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
Its fairly simple really. Like I've said in another thread some time ago, there's two ways to compete in the market:
DIfferentiate yourself from your competition
Lower your prices (lower manufacturing costs, logistics etc.)
SWToR didn't do either of these. It must be one of the first things they teach you in an economics class and somehow they forgot. Their product wasn't different enough to set itself apart from the competition (changing the milieu is just not enough) and the cost of development was record high so lowering prices was out of the question.
Third thing they did was they released an unfinished product, but since everyone does it what the hell, eh?
Did you see when Rift was being developed, it was first called Planes of Telara. Then they must have thought "Shit, we have nothing original in our game. We must think of something." Then it was called Rift: Planes of Telara maybe because they added rifts in. And finally just Rift, 'cause it was about the only thing setting itself apart from other MMOs. "Yes, yes, its a new thing, we'll roll with that. Sounds fresh! Lets put some marketing behind it."
I obviously made that up but it sort of looks that way from the outsid. Funny.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity. I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
People say they want new and innovative but are perfectly content saying the same thing over and over again in a forum.
Lol, perfect.
The irony with boutique studios is that gamers want to support them emotionally, but rarely financially. I absolutely agree that boutique studios tend to be more creative with gameplay and mechanics. The problem is that gamers somehow expect these studios to deliver the same quality and varied features out-of-the-gate.
Exactly I have played the most innovative, and mind numbingly fun games ever, but they always were suffering from the same problems. Low population seems to be the number one killer. I ask people why they don't want to play these games that have every feature that they ask for and more. The number one response is that the graphics are bad. Well what did you expect? It's a handfull of people usually with little to no budget. It's hard for them to hire decent graphics artists in the first place because anyone who is decent doesn't need to work for the chump change the indie studio can afford to pay.
People need to pull their heads from their asses, and accept the fact that no AAA developer is going to do anything different until we prove with our wallets that is what we prefer. Start paying for those indie subs, and cancel your SWTOR and WoW accounts. Buy a few shares in a company and bring up the sandbox markets at investors meetings. DO SOMETHING besides complain on this forum allday.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
Its fairly simple really. Like I've said in another thread some time ago, there's two ways to compete in the market:
DIfferentiate yourself from your competition
Lower your prices (lower manufacturing costs, logistics etc.)
SWToR didn't do either of these. It must be one of the first things they teach you in an economics class and somehow they forgot. Their product wasn't different enough to set itself apart from the competition (changing the milieu is just not enough) and the cost of development was record high so lowering prices was out of the question.
Third thing they did was they released an unfinished product, but since everyone does it what the hell, eh?
Did you see when Rift was being developed, it was first called Planes of Telara. Then they must have thought "Shit, we have nothing original in our game. We must think of something." Then it was called Rift: Planes of Telara maybe because they added rifts in. And finally just Rift, 'cause it was about the only thing setting itself apart from other MMOs. "Yes, yes, its a new thing, we'll roll with that. Sounds fresh! Lets put some marketing behind it."
I obviously made that up but it sort of looks that way from the outsid. Funny.
Crunched for time so I'll just say, Nice Post
+1
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
Fez, Terraria, Binding of Isaac, Minecraft, Spacechem, Gemini Rue, Legend of Grimrock, Botanicula, Lone Survivor, Super Meat Boy, VVVVVV, Journey, LIMBO, Amnesia, Dungeon Defenders, Bastion, Trine, Braid, Orcs Must Die!, Frozen Synapse, World of Goo, Dustforce, Realm of the Mad God, Pixel Junk , Dungeons of Dredmor , Jamestown, Defense Grid, Sequence, SPAZ, Sanctum, Bit.Trip, Path of Exile... I can go on and on.
Absolutely phenominal games made by indie teams. Teams that aren't afraid to think outside the box and deliever unique experiences to gamers.
I personally spend more time with Indie games than any other AAA title.
Some of those are relatively good. Calling them industry-changing is a bit of a stretch in nearly all cases though.
Almost none of your list are going to change the industry (Minecraft might be the only one?)
Only a trickle are going to influence game mechanics (stuff like Braid...except that Blinx came out earlier, wasn't indie, and had most of Braid's time-traveling tricks.)
Some games are probably just always going to be unique aberrations which are either rarely or never copied (World of Goo's been out for a while.)
But overall you mostly just see "same core gameplay with a gimmick" as the core of indie games (VVVVVV is just another Mario platformer with gravity-changing, Defense Grid is just a well-executed twist on typical TD, Bastion is predominantly just a typical Gauntlet-style slasher.) And with this bracket (which actually contains most of your list) you're actually talking about games which are very similar to non-indie titles (which use familiar core gameplay with a gimmick.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Comments
But they can do these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvoKT481EmU
Your seriously using Wikipedia as a source for your defintion? I am sorry, but no.
Look, I have said already I accept we define it differently. I had no interest in debating it further, simply because Their is nothing in the term 'indie' that says numbers, merely that you are independant.
The Independant Games Festival defines it simply as; "Independently Created: The Nominating Committee must be confident that the submitted game was created in the 'indie spirit' by an independent game developer"
Vague eh? Which is kinda my point... like many buzz words on the internet, it means different things to different folks and really has no definitive established meaning, even if one of those folks put his own definition on to Wikipedia.
It's pointless to argue the definitions here TBH. I think though that we can probably agree that a creative free thinking spirit and a focus on gameplay over pure profit are major elements, and that they are a good thing to have around.
I agree.
Industry changing/evolving indie games:
Fez, Terraria, Binding of Isaac, Minecraft, Spacechem, Gemini Rue, Legend of Grimrock, Botanicula, Lone Survivor, Super Meat Boy, VVVVVV, Journey, LIMBO, Amnesia, Dungeon Defenders, Bastion, Trine, Braid, Orcs Must Die!, Frozen Synapse, World of Goo, Dustforce, Realm of the Mad God, Pixel Junk , Dungeons of Dredmor , Jamestown, Defense Grid, Sequence, SPAZ, Sanctum, Bit.Trip, Path of Exile... I can go on and on.
Absolutely phenominal games made by indie teams. Teams that aren't afraid to think outside the box and deliever unique experiences to gamers.
I personally spend more time with Indie games than any other AAA title.
Playing: Nothing
Looking forward to: Nothing
Independent is a general term, but I agree it should not be defined by numbers alone. For example, a studio that takes on a large cash infusion (or investors) generally is tied to those investors in some way. By definition, this makes them less independent. Not necessarily in game design, but certainly in obligation.
This. A few days ago, I posted that "The Repopulation" looks like just another overambitous & underfunded indie sandbox doomed to fail. The next day:
"You have been issued a temporary ban by one of our moderators."
WHAT? Apparantly, there's something wrong with stating that opinion, but, yeah... the "indie sandbox" genre has imo become almost as cliche and predictable as the "WoW-clone" genre, and I'm just as tired of it. Indie sandbox developers stubbornly try to do the same games with the same impossible feature lists - how many turned out a success?
The scope of games like Minecraft, Terraria, LoL, or DayZ sounds reasonable. Trying to reinvent SWG on a tiny budget, not so much.
Hype train -> Reality
Following many posters on this forum the definition of "innovative" is not necessarily new or inventive but something they specifically like. Usually some recurring feature from an age old game such as open world PvP or "this game is not innovative because it has quests."
It is really quite sad to read how they rape the word and make it mean whatever their preferences are.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
People playing games with semantics is hardly specific to this forum, although I admit I haven't seen it used much at all, much less in the ways you describe.
That being the case I can't really see it being used to mean "clone", "same","money grab", etc.
Also, what about those layoffs from Bioware?
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
Its fairly simple really. Like I've said in another thread some time ago, there's two ways to compete in the market:
SWToR didn't do either of these. It must be one of the first things they teach you in an economics class and somehow they forgot. Their product wasn't different enough to set itself apart from the competition (changing the milieu is just not enough) and the cost of development was record high so lowering prices was out of the question.
Third thing they did was they released an unfinished product, but since everyone does it what the hell, eh?
Did you see when Rift was being developed, it was first called Planes of Telara. Then they must have thought "Shit, we have nothing original in our game. We must think of something." Then it was called Rift: Planes of Telara maybe because they added rifts in. And finally just Rift, 'cause it was about the only thing setting itself apart from other MMOs. "Yes, yes, its a new thing, we'll roll with that. Sounds fresh! Lets put some marketing behind it."
I obviously made that up but it sort of looks that way from the outsid. Funny.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
indie games are run by gamers
commercial games are run by donald trump clones.
donald trump clones don't actually play games.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
Exactly I have played the most innovative, and mind numbingly fun games ever, but they always were suffering from the same problems. Low population seems to be the number one killer. I ask people why they don't want to play these games that have every feature that they ask for and more. The number one response is that the graphics are bad. Well what did you expect? It's a handfull of people usually with little to no budget. It's hard for them to hire decent graphics artists in the first place because anyone who is decent doesn't need to work for the chump change the indie studio can afford to pay.
People need to pull their heads from their asses, and accept the fact that no AAA developer is going to do anything different until we prove with our wallets that is what we prefer. Start paying for those indie subs, and cancel your SWTOR and WoW accounts. Buy a few shares in a company and bring up the sandbox markets at investors meetings. DO SOMETHING besides complain on this forum allday.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
Crunched for time so I'll just say, Nice Post
+1
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
Some of those are relatively good. Calling them industry-changing is a bit of a stretch in nearly all cases though.
Almost none of your list are going to change the industry (Minecraft might be the only one?)
Only a trickle are going to influence game mechanics (stuff like Braid...except that Blinx came out earlier, wasn't indie, and had most of Braid's time-traveling tricks.)
Some games are probably just always going to be unique aberrations which are either rarely or never copied (World of Goo's been out for a while.)
But overall you mostly just see "same core gameplay with a gimmick" as the core of indie games (VVVVVV is just another Mario platformer with gravity-changing, Defense Grid is just a well-executed twist on typical TD, Bastion is predominantly just a typical Gauntlet-style slasher.) And with this bracket (which actually contains most of your list) you're actually talking about games which are very similar to non-indie titles (which use familiar core gameplay with a gimmick.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver