Huge Succeeded
Banned
I can think of an MGS V thread or two that would give this one a run for its money in that regard
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
People who refuse to play Indie-Games - Why?
- Thread starter Chairmanchuck
- Start date
Comments like this make me wonder if, like record scratches, "cheap flash animation" is a concept that has no actual meaning to younger people, but still gets used by them simply because they've seen it used by older people. I know I haven't looked at a flash game in quite a while, so I wouldn't be surprised if most people under a certain age had never seen one. "Cheap flash" refers to a very specific set of qualities, none of which are evident in this gif.This game is good example of what I was talking about:
Not the worst looking game, mind you, but everything about it looks incredibly flat and the movement seems very much like cheap flash.
It sounds like you just don't like pixel art, or a certain type of pixel art, or something... I don't know, which is kind of the problem. If you want to explain your taste to the rest of us (or even just for your own edification) you're going to need to delve a little deeper in order to better articulate what it is you don't like about certain games.
Polygonal_Sprite
Member
I will freely admit that I had this attitude early in the PS4's life cycle. Now I would say that some of the very best games of the generation are indie games.
I'm also extremely burned out on 'cinematic AAA shooters / adventures'.
I'm also extremely burned out on 'cinematic AAA shooters / adventures'.
More_Badass
Member
Its kind of crazy that the indie games are mostly retro pixel art 2D platformers mindset is still prevalent. I thought that had died out like a year or two ago. Not the only recent thread Ive seen that opinion
Not so much content, but competency, I guess? Developers like Nintendo, Sony, Square, etc. have the ability to hire the best of the best designers, artists and programmers. Whereas, many indie games do seem like they can be college course level projects.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
you don't really have to wonder. not when the only other descriptor that poster used was that the game 'looks flat'.
BouncyFrag
Member
I enjoy indies much more on my Vita and hardly played them before I got one.
Teletraan1
Banned
I love all of these games. I have put so many hours into each of them. Between Don't Starve, Factorio and Rimworld I have probably logged more hours than all of the AAA games I have played in the last 5 years combined easily and none of them cost me more than $35 CAD.
Abilidebob
Member
It's less competency and more
"throw hundreds of programmers at this and hope they solve it". Not saying that there aren't incredibly talented people working on AAA stuff, but when a game get that "big", where you need to fuel the hype machine, so you keep having to add features and get the best "graphix" and the best voice acting and the best pre-order exclusives and the "best" anything, it doesn't really matter if you have a hundred Carmacks, the project is going to suffer.
This year I've seen more "quality" and "competent" releases from indie developers than hype-fueled AAA 60$ games. People in this thread are acting like the budget of a game is the most important thing that affects the whole quality of the end product.
friskykillface
Banned
I don't play because I'm cheap af
Limited budget, can't play everything
And when I see indies go to ps+ like 4-6 months down the line I wait
I played some great ones off PS+ though
Limited budget, can't play everything
And when I see indies go to ps+ like 4-6 months down the line I wait
I played some great ones off PS+ though
BioWare/EA with its vast access to resources and insane budgets haven't been able to deliver a great RPG for years. On the other hand you have developers working on a shoe-string budget delivering titles such as Shadowrun: Dragonfall.
A large budget isn't going to hand you quality, and less so when said budget forces you to make design choices because you have to recoup that (insane) cost.
I saw a proper video of the game, and I take back my complaint about it looking like cheap flash. Seems fine on the animation front.
I still maintain it looks flat, though. Or maybe "flat" is not the right descriptor? There's just not a lot of detail going on. Whatever you want to call that, I don't like it. Looks more basic in certain ways than many NES games, imo.
Because no loot boxes, no care
RavageX
Member
Some of you seem to take great offense to others not being interested in a majority of indie games...
I do believe it's 100% OK for people to simply not be interested.
Some of the games are fine yeah, but there's a lot that aren't, and it's easy for good ones to get lost in a sea polluted with the bad and the ugly.
I do believe it's 100% OK for people to simply not be interested.
Some of the games are fine yeah, but there's a lot that aren't, and it's easy for good ones to get lost in a sea polluted with the bad and the ugly.
hououinkyouma00
Member
I dont refuse to play Indie games but I dont really play very many for a couple reasons
1. I dont care for the aesthetic that a lot of indie games go for. I have no nostalgia for the 8/16bit eras (born in 1991)
2. Sidescrollers. No thanks.
3. A lot of them just seem to be the same game with not many ways to stand out.
While Im generalizing to a point those are my reasons. Ive had great time and spent plenty of hours with stuff like Stardew and Rocket League.
Also if I want to play a 16bit side scroller or shoot em up Ill play an actual 16bit side scroller or shoot em up.
1. I dont care for the aesthetic that a lot of indie games go for. I have no nostalgia for the 8/16bit eras (born in 1991)
2. Sidescrollers. No thanks.
3. A lot of them just seem to be the same game with not many ways to stand out.
While Im generalizing to a point those are my reasons. Ive had great time and spent plenty of hours with stuff like Stardew and Rocket League.
Also if I want to play a 16bit side scroller or shoot em up Ill play an actual 16bit side scroller or shoot em up.
petran79
Banned
Flash became cheap with the demise of Macromedia
Merchandise
Member
Generalizing, I don't buy them because they're usually very short and I don't care to spend money on something like that.
Also:
I don't like any pixel art, which throws out a ton of games. In fact, many supposed great art styles (Limbo) just don't do it for me. They're hiding their low budget. We Happy Few looks fantastic for an indie studio - that's basically my standard now.
They seem to get a "pass" in terms of reviews, so I don't trust them as much. EX: Firewatch - shitty ending, Inside - fine? I guess? Not other worldly as some would suggest? The Witness? Puzzle games in general? Nope.
Because of the length it's much easier to just watch a play through in a few hours by someone who is both 1. entertaining by themselves 2. better at the game than I am.
There's a high proportion of side scrollers / platformers / top down whatever, none of which I care for. Walking simulators, as I hinted above, are better watched than played.
I can't buy them physically which is basically a non-starter for me.
There are more than enough "AAA" games out there to satisfy my gaming needs.
Also:
I don't like any pixel art, which throws out a ton of games. In fact, many supposed great art styles (Limbo) just don't do it for me. They're hiding their low budget. We Happy Few looks fantastic for an indie studio - that's basically my standard now.
They seem to get a "pass" in terms of reviews, so I don't trust them as much. EX: Firewatch - shitty ending, Inside - fine? I guess? Not other worldly as some would suggest? The Witness? Puzzle games in general? Nope.
Because of the length it's much easier to just watch a play through in a few hours by someone who is both 1. entertaining by themselves 2. better at the game than I am.
There's a high proportion of side scrollers / platformers / top down whatever, none of which I care for. Walking simulators, as I hinted above, are better watched than played.
I can't buy them physically which is basically a non-starter for me.
There are more than enough "AAA" games out there to satisfy my gaming needs.
Its weird. And hell even defining it is as murky as indie music or film.
Ive only seem people here say it. Maybe thats because I hang in PC circles more and theres not much of that.
That said I dont like pixel art so theres certain kinds of indies Im not interested in.
More_Badass
Member
Considering AAA developers have moved on to their own indie projects, and indie devs have been hired by AAA companies, Id argue that the foundation of the idea that AAA dev = more talented is kind of flawed. More experience perhaps, but stuff like writing, depth, etc. isnt exclusive.
As for college course level projects
PrinnyBomb
Member
I don't know anyone who refuses to play indie games. Doesn't even make sense.
I personally however now completely refuse to buy anything early access. Have been burned too many times on that end.
And 99% of the time, early access games are indie games.
I personally however now completely refuse to buy anything early access. Have been burned too many times on that end.
And 99% of the time, early access games are indie games.
J
JeremyEtcetera
Unconfirmed Member
This is also one of those types of threads where you aren't sure if someone is doing a hot take or if that person is trolling tons of people at a master level. There's also the third and rare option of someone on neogaf being truly ignorant and truly believing that indie games consist of one genre(like 2d sidescrollers).
This is better, but I still don't think it's accurate: Take a look at this comparable scene from Zelda 2. As you can see, it's not a very favorable comparison for Zelda 2. There are ways in which Elliot Quest could look less flat (why no parallax scrolling for the back wall?), but compared to actual NES games it's not even close. Perhaps it's the Cave Story style characters (superdeformed, thin vertical eyes, no mouth, looking directly at the screen instead of side on) that are throwing you off?
I dont appreciate pixel art or top down view perspectives at all (Nostalgia of old games in this format is all that keeps me playing this style videogame), and that is one of the biggest filters you can slap on indie games. What remains are titles in 2D, which are disappointing considering how far we are from what limited the industry to the format, and 3D titles with a limited scope in playtime or neutered 3D models.
Given the plethora of games from publishers who can deliver fun and graphical fidelity, without resorting to graphical throwbacks or styles to ease production values, I would much rather save 3 times the indie game price for a full cost big ticket item.
There is always an exception though, and for me its Cuphead, unless it is not considered indie for some reason.
Given the plethora of games from publishers who can deliver fun and graphical fidelity, without resorting to graphical throwbacks or styles to ease production values, I would much rather save 3 times the indie game price for a full cost big ticket item.
There is always an exception though, and for me its Cuphead, unless it is not considered indie for some reason.
Lord of Ostia
Member
I think it's still only prevalent among console gamers. Most PC-focused genres and developers are indie now. From CRPGs to RTS to Simulation, the traditional PC-centric games are almost all developed by independent companies or small publishers. Big publishers have pretty much left the PC space except for porting over console games. A lot of those games end up ported to consoles as well, but still, if you are a PC gamer and into PC-focused genres, most of the games you play are probably independently developed.
I'm not really a PC gamer, but it's gotten to the point where whether a game is 'indie' or not is largely irrelevant to it's reception on PC.
Most indies I try are just garbage in terms of gameplay. A few gems get through. It won't stop me from trying games that seem interesting but I'm thankful I can get refunds in Steam so I can continue trying them with out worries. I'm sute quite a few negative associations are due ti getting burned more times than not.
Mysterious Stranger
Member
Why most indie games you find for free or cheap for psn, and other systems because only a few of them are high quality like shovel knight?
Not everyone is enamoured with Indie games esp ones with limited focus on a storyline or gameplay.
Not everyone is enamoured with Indie games esp ones with limited focus on a storyline or gameplay.
Lakershead22
Member
I began playing more indie games when I got the Switch. I may get some hate for this but I see games from indie devs as more of a portable experience.
I don't really get the "most indies are garbage" argument for writing off indie games? Like... yes, most indie games are trash. Look at this Twitter bot that posts newest releases on Steam. Yes, most of them are legitimately awful https://twitter.com/todayonsteam
That doesn't take away from the hundreds (if not probably low thousands) of genuinely great indie games that are out there of varying sizes, scopes, and genres. Yes, some or most of even these you might not like for whatever reason. But there's still so much better there to like and enjoy. You don't have to grab a random one off Steam - you have places like GAF and other media outlets to find the good stuff.
Are those of you who say most indies are crap considering only higher profile indie games (stuff that would say, get a Giant Bomb Quick Look) or are you considering EVERYTHING on Steam, the iOS App Store, PSN, etc.?
That doesn't take away from the hundreds (if not probably low thousands) of genuinely great indie games that are out there of varying sizes, scopes, and genres. Yes, some or most of even these you might not like for whatever reason. But there's still so much better there to like and enjoy. You don't have to grab a random one off Steam - you have places like GAF and other media outlets to find the good stuff.
Are those of you who say most indies are crap considering only higher profile indie games (stuff that would say, get a Giant Bomb Quick Look) or are you considering EVERYTHING on Steam, the iOS App Store, PSN, etc.?
minkymuskyslyoldstoaty
Member
This is how I feel - I almost never buy digital games. I make exceptions for games like Ace Attorney, where I loved previous games in the series but physical releases in English have dried up. Few indie games seem to get physical releases, so there isn't much chance of my playing them. I did buy Hotline Miami on Vita when it got a physical release.
Vector Art is the Comic Sans of video game graphics.
I can't even look at Castle Crashers.
You just keep making incredible generalizations about indies and yet the way you talk about them makes it clear that you haven't really played that many.
Anyway, yeah. Indies are great. Especially when you see teams of one, two, or three people get together and put together some absolutely kickass work. This year, I've played Pinstripe (made by one guy), The Norwood Suite (made by one guy), Everything (made by one guy), and Hollow Knight (made by two people), and they're all incredible experiences.
For me, pretty much the reverse trend is true. I find myself being less interested in long, AAA experiences because, as AAA dev costs continue their exponential rise this generation, experimentation within gameplay has become less and less apparent. We're seeing loot boxes introduced to continue to bleed gamers. We're seeing open world gameplay applied to every AAA game in sight, in order to increase it's perceived value proposition. We're seeing development by committee. Then, even when the games that come out are absolutely incredible, such as Red Dead Redemption or The Witcher 3, those that read up about the company culture or the horrific hours...you can sometimes feel like you helped give your dollars to a toxic cycle.
In indies I generally find tighter stories, more nontraditional mechanics, and just some off the wall craziness. The next games on my "to buy" list are Oikospiel, a videogame about a dog opera with music from the composer of Proteus, and ECHO, a midtier indie from ex-Hitman devs where you fight AIs that look like you in a self-replecating mansion.
Regardless, AAA or indie, It's a good time to be alive. 2017 has been such an incredible year.
petran79
Banned
Vector art made sense in the phone dial modem days. I couldnt believe I was watching those things on a 33.6kbds modem. Macromedia Shockwave animations were even better and included even traditional animation. Quicktime video compression with Sorenson and Qdesign was out of this world.
As faster connections became available and advertisements multiplied,all thischarm was lost
momshotdad
Member
I find most of them to be very shallow, hollow experiences. That being said, Cuphead is my favorite game so far this year and is probably in my top 5 of all time. I can be convinced, but I'm pretty picky.
primasaurus
Member
texhnolyze
Banned
2017 GOTY is an indie. Your loss, people.
It's also not a sidescroller, not 2d pixel graphic, and definitely not short.
It's also not a sidescroller, not 2d pixel graphic, and definitely not short.
More_Badass
Member
Technically, Hitman is an indie game now as well
They just don't interest me, like at all. Any of them. I know the argument will be, "But how can you not like something if you've never tried it?" And technically that would be correct. But I've never done drugs in my life having every opportunity to when I was younger and was never interested in the experience. But to keep it gaming related for me it doesn't help that to me, the "best" gaming has to offer is defined in my very very narrow view as series like MGS, FF, Zelda, Mario.. etc.Major franchises with history behind them.
I don't have any taste for them but I'm glad they exist and continue to grow in popularity to please others that do give them a chance and enjoy them. I know a lot of Gaffers will think what they will about those of us that aren't keen on them but hopefully this explains at least my opposition to them.
Edit: Oh but that did jog my memory about one game that was shown off I think during the Xbox 2017 conference with an indie game that resembled something akin to Blade Runner. I'm not sure what the game was called now but I remember it being popular with Gaffers... until it turns out the developer was a jerk or asshole over some of his views. Probably for the best it was forgotten now lol.
I don't have any taste for them but I'm glad they exist and continue to grow in popularity to please others that do give them a chance and enjoy them. I know a lot of Gaffers will think what they will about those of us that aren't keen on them but hopefully this explains at least my opposition to them.
Edit: Oh but that did jog my memory about one game that was shown off I think during the Xbox 2017 conference with an indie game that resembled something akin to Blade Runner. I'm not sure what the game was called now but I remember it being popular with Gaffers... until it turns out the developer was a jerk or asshole over some of his views. Probably for the best it was forgotten now lol.
I tend to like games with interesting characters and narratives, like Japanese adventures games (Danganronpa, Zero Escape, etc) and games with addicting progression loops tied into an interesting world (Titanfall 2, Destiny)
There are exceptions, but most indie games aren't creating these kinds of experiences.
There are exceptions, but most indie games aren't creating these kinds of experiences.
More_Badass
Member
The argument isn't "But how can you not like something if you've never tried it"
It's "what genres do you like and if you like those genres, why would you limit yourself within those favorite genres".
If you like certain games, you like their gameplay, their aesthetic and design, their stories, etc., not merely because they're "major franchises with history"
Oh I don't think anyone here would use the above reasoning but it was a possible outcome that I have heard before with my friends regarding this very subject.
And I'm not sure it's a genre thing because DK's/Mario's platforming is an example of that history I mentioned which defines it and not just the platforming I don't think. Zelda is the same way and same with MGS. The only one I think applies with what youre saying is the RPG genre because in this case my appreciation for something like FF is not limited to just it. Maybe I would say in the RPG case the "history" feels more enhanced then? Not sure how else to explain it but I do agree that RPG's as a genre are enjoyable on many accounts (Chrono Trigger/Cross and Xenoblade examples of amazing rpgs). In that case though, the games of repute and history come from AAA companies like SquareEnix or Nintendo which produce titles that I as a consumer can trust will meet the unreasonably high expectations of thanks to previous past experiences with.
Gravy Boat
Member
Its so weird especially as a knock against indies. People say that all (or most) indie games go look the same but have they looked at the AAA game space? Theres virtually no stylistic AAA games, pretty much all of them just go for realism when it comes to graphics because immersion. I swear people think immersion means this is so realistic I can pretend its real.
This would be a fair point if we didnt have AAA after AAA releasing with serious performance issues, lacking content and constnantly trying to sell us micro transactions on top of the season pass.
Its such a weird mindset I just cant get behind. If a game is good then why do I care how many people its made by?