Support NeoGAF

[DryvBy]

Indie games, for the most part, are concept games to me. Terraria and Minecraft are the few exceptions where I've actually enjoyed the indie game enough to pay more than a few bucks for them. Overall, no. Indie is not better.

And some indie games even have bad support. Wasn't Dungeon Defenders an indie game? The PS3 version broke trophy syncing for players forever and nothing was done about it. I know people love giving Activision and EA bad reps for not fixing their crap in a timely manner, but this is just one example of an indie game (if it was actually indie) not supporting their game.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

See I like mark of the ninja a lot but does it count as indie since it was published by Microsoft? I get confused as to what counts as indie with some of these games.

I pretty much count all games under 20 bucks as indie (if they're new) I know that's wrong, but I don't differentiate beyond that.

Had my most fun last year with those games actually. Mark of the ninja is THE BEST. FTL is also THE BEST.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

I pretty much count all games under 20 bucks as indie (if they're new) I know that's wrong, but I don't differentiate beyond that.

Had my most fun last year with those games actually. Mark of the ninja is THE BEST. FTL is also THE BEST.

I do this also which is why I was a bit confused about how to make the distinction between indie and AAA. If we are going with the "smaller game > AAA" option, then they easily win. Some examples:


Super Meat Boy - best platformer this gen, mechanically speaking
Mark of the Ninja - possibly the best traditional ninja game ever made
FTL - the first game to really make me feel like I was the commander of a space quest
Amnesia - savior of the horror genre. once it hit and was popular, it was like a mini renaissance.
Chivalry - the developer support shames 99% of AAA studios. I feel sick buying map packs now.
Hotline Miami - outclasses nearly every other shooter in terms of heart in mouth intensity
Hawken - the resurrector of good mech combat.
Bastion - a fairly innovative (?) use of narrated storytelling in games. helps that the core game is actually good on top of that.
Trash Panic - Tetris for the 21st century as far as i'm concerned
PixelJunk - too much bite sized casual variety to name
Costume Quest - the most magical game to play on Halloween
Jamestown - so good it got me into SHMUPs, then I found that it's still the only one I like
Torchlight & Path of Exile - shit on Diablo 3
Natural Selection 2 - arguably some of the best multiplayer gaming ever
Legend of Grimrock - got me into old school dungeon crawling games. now willing to try Etrian games.
World of Goo - a very inventive and intriguing use of physics with a ton of personality
Minecraft - the granddaddy of indie games. digitized Lego-esque crack that even the AAA boys are now aping.
The Walking Dead - I guess this counts. set a new benchmark for engaging characters. one of the best games of 2012.
ARMA - also technically indie. extremely in-depth simulation beyond anything a AAA game could hope for (since it also includes a lot of jank by proxy, something not allowed in 'streamlined' AAA releases). also gave us the DayZ sensation.
Project CARS - another high profile indie title (which will need a publisher on consoles, but only by necessity on there) which has produced some staggering results already using the crowdfunding model. Already murders GT and Forza in cold blood.


... and a cavalcade of other titles like Kickstarter games, AaAaaAA!!, Trials and Joe Danger, Snapshot, Limbo, Capybara Games, Machinarium, echochrome, Shatter, thatgamecompany's games, The Unfinished Swan, Trine, Closure, Braid, Double Fine's games, Jonathan Mak games, bit.trip, Flight Control, Angry Birds, the Playstation CAMP initiative and the pandora's box that is iOS/Android. Aaaand i'll stop, as i'm now doing precisely what the OP is describing.

Basically, what I associate with a small/indie game is often something really unique to that game, like for example FTL is "that perfect Star Trek game", Costume Quest is "that game I play on Halloween", Flight Control is "the air traffic control game", or Hotline Miami is "the awesome unofficial Drive game". You don't often get to make little distinctions and associations like that in the countless AAA games, which are essentially graphics tech demos with some cover shooting thrown in, QTE set pieces, maybe a lite crafting system, and some play-it-safe story fleshed out with ad-hoc text logs scattered everywhere. People complain that small games are just proof of concept titles, but so what? I'd rather play a game completely based around a single inventive idea that is just perfectly executed to its maximum potential, than a game which is a jack of all trades and a master of zilch.

 

[Htown]

I do this also which is why I was a bit confused about how to make the distinction between indie and AAA. If we are going with the "smaller game > AAA" option, then they easily win. Some examples:

Jamestown - so good it got me into SHMUPs, then I found that it's still the only one I like

Jamestown plays an awful lot like DoDonPachi, if you can find a way to play that.

 

[Rainy Dog]

Just wanted to say thanks to the OP for making such a fantastic, passionate thread. As someone who's only just got back into PC gaming, this along with the linked threads on the first page are really opening my eyes to less exposed games.

 

[Newblade]

Seems interesting, but it's really not what I'm looking for. Mouse controls? Bleh. Doesn't help that it bizarrely runs like shit on my PC.

Mouse controls may seem weird at first but work really well with the flow of the game. It's really something else. A pity it doesn't run well on your PC, that would be Game Maker's fault.

 

[BocoDragon]

These days, I couldn't agree more.

Even as recently as two years ago Indie seemed strange and foreign to me... these were not "real games", right?! I didn't want some amateurish jank!

But I've done a paradigm shift. Not only have indies delivered some amazing surprises to me recently, but corporate games have shifted so much. I don't dislike corporate titles, but they are not exactly for "me" anymore. Indie games deliver a lot of the qualities that have gone missing from most mainstream games: introspective artistry, appreciation for old school game design, the wierdness and beauty of an "auteur" delivering a unique vision - rather than the focus-tested "largest common denominator" blandness of a modern mainstream game.

 

[szaromir]

We are getting hung up on the distinction. To me, this thread is more about the overall visibility of games not AAA or immediate media darlings on this forum. Even when an Indie is succesful it still isn't a game the forum or this player base talks about often.

Which just confirms that money thrown at marketing by big companies is not wasted.

 

[Toma]

Just wanted to say thanks to the OP for making such a fantastic thread, passionate thread. As someone who's only just got back into PC gaming, this along with the linked threads on the first page are really opening my eyes to less exposed games.

Yay, the thread had a purpose!

 

[Weltall Zero]

Pfft, puzzle platformers are old hat. The new bandwagon for indies are roguelike influenced games. The days of having to actually design your own levels for games is over. Leave it all to RNG!

The fact that you believe that designing your levels by hand involves more work than developing a level generator that is consistently able to put together beatable yet challenging. non-trivial levels, not to mention test it extensively to make sure it always does so, kind of tells me that you don't have a lot of experience with software development in general.

No, because Streets of Rage, Final Fight, etc are brawlers. There's obvious genre differences between Brawlers and Character action. Yes, one of those is 2d/3d, but character action also has a focus on much larger movesets, varied enemy attacks, combos, etc. They're close to fighters than they are brawlers.

You are 100% right: character action (first time I hear the term, but it happens to be one of my favorite genres, with DMC3 and Bayo being probably my 2 favorite action games of all time) is a genre really underrepresented in indie games. In fact, I don't even know about the "crappy ones" you mention (although I probably don't want to, either ). This is not surprising because it's a very difficult and costly genre to develop in, and more so to make right (I can count the number of truly good games, even mainstream, with both hands), which hits especially hard for the limited resources of the indie scene.

There's not much to add here, really; you're probably not going to find many if any games in this genre in the indie scene. But is this really the ONLY genre you're interested in? With even the 'AAA' market's current output, it seems to me you will be a bit starved...

I love it. Isaac, Spelunky, FTL, Teleglitch, Towerclimb, Super House of Dead Ninjas. Excellent, excellent shit.

And those are just the highly visible ones! Tip of the iceberg, I'm telling you.

I am FUCKING ADDICTED to roguelike-likes. I had a truly scary Spelunky junkie phase last year (my GF even joked about it), and I've had an even worse one with FTL these christmas (was homebound after complicated wisdom tooth surgery and playing 6-8 hours a day distracted me from the pain like nothing else). I also got myself both Isaac and Tower Climb, but I didn't get into them nearly as much for some reason. Will definitely Google Teleglitch and House of Dead Ninjas as soon as I click Submit, thanks a lot!

Oddly enough, I'm not nearly as much into roguelikes proper, at least not traditional PC ones, although I loved Chocobo's Dungeon back in the day and ZHP more recently. Perhaps it's the visual candy?

This is an issue for me. Toma's indie games thread is a nice idea, but it has too many games. I just don't buy that many. For big games, I rely on GAF going crazy over something and keeping a few big threads on the front page long enough for me to notice. For smaller games I basically rely on Steam sales threads, for lack of better options. If a game goes on sale and everyone freaks out about how great it is, I pick it up.

Aaaand you just gave me even more reason to believe that my feeling about a "best indie games ever" ballot being sorely needed is true. Fuck it, it's decided: I'm making one as my first thread ever on GAF later in the evening. Watch it get three replies and quietly fall off in minutes.

 

[buhdeh]

More people need to play Natural Selection 2.

 

[Derrick01]

I pretty much count all games under 20 bucks as indie (if they're new) I know that's wrong, but I don't differentiate beyond that.

Had my most fun last year with those games actually. Mark of the ninja is THE BEST. FTL is also THE BEST.

Yeah that's usually how I end up viewing them too. Or on consoles pretty much anything new that releases on PSN or XBLA only. It's just easier for me to do it like that instead of saying this is indie but not this because Sony/MS published it, but at the same time it was developed by an indie studio.

 

[Macmanus]

Are the people that are adverse to indie titles simply strict console gamers?

Large budget titles have lost all appeal to me. The creativity is almost nil, and I'm able to escape the whole DudeBro Franchise Rehash grind mill. Recent new releases include Another Tomb Raider, another God Of War, and a milked Starcraft iteration. Neat.

Someone was asking how a person could get into FTL. For starters, I haven't played a game like FTL one million times previously. In addition to the fact that I have to use thought and critical thinking, and most importantly I can get a full experience of an entire game in which I control the narrative in under three hours time.

It's a pretty refreshing experience to be honest.

 

[Tain]

The fact that you believe that designing your levels by hand involves more work than developing a level generator that is consistently able to put together beatable yet challenging. non-trivial levels, not to mention test it extensively to make sure it always does so, kind of tells me that you don't have a lot of experience with software development in general.

Depends on the levels. Only someone that has no experience with the classics would say that Spelunky's stages are great 2d action game stages, but if the hand-placed stages we're talking about are just boxes and hallways, yeah, writing a generator is in most cases harder than placing them manually.

 

[charsace]

I would think most hardcore gamers who grew up with 80's and 90's gaming would be into the indie scene.

 

[AcceptableGhost]

The fact that you believe that designing your levels by hand involves more work than developing a level generator that is consistently able to put together beatable yet challenging. non-trivial levels, not to mention test it extensively to make sure it always does so, kind of tells me that you don't have a lot of experience with software development in general.

"Non-trivial" and "challenging" are not words I would use to describe those levels. The sheer dullness of the levels in Spelunky and co. is only masked by the novelty of the randomness. Come back to me when these games generate levels like these http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLB_WmUNnCk.

 

[Macmanus]

I would think most hardcore gamers who grew up with 80's and 90's gaming would be into the indie scene.

You're probably on to something. Though I'm about as far removed from hardcore now as ever. My most frequently played game is Draw Something.

 

[Thai]

There's good and bad in both categories.....

 

[Weltall Zero]

"Non-trivial" and "challenging" are not words I would use to describe those levels.

Even the bare minimum of "challenge" and "non-trivialness" (i.e. not being able to beat all levels by doing the exact same) is way harder programatically than just making them. If you were to take two levels of the same quality, one generated and the other hand-made, the generared one would have taken much more effort than the hand-made one. In fact, as you yourself point out below, there simply is no generator that can match the quality of the best designed levels in non-random games. If you had stopped for two seconds to consider it, you would realize that supports my argument, not yours.

The sheer dullness of the levels in Spelunky and co. is only masked by the novelty of the randomness.

It's interesting that you mentioned novelty, because (in an entirely different sense that you imply) that's exactly the purpose of generated levels: to provide different experiences each time, ones that you can't memorize and must adapt to. The tradeoff is indeed lack of "intent" or "design" (again, an indisputable fact). None is "better"; each approach makes an entirely different kind of game with a vastly different focus. It's very clear that you dislike randomly generated games, which is fair enough. However, comparting them to non-generated games is simply backwards; they have very little in common. Going from that to accusing developers making randomly generated games as lazy, well... just comes across as grossly ignorant.

Come back to me when these games generate levels like these http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLB_WmUNnCk.

At no point whatsoever did I say randomly generated leves are, in general, of better quality than designed ones (that would be a freaking moronic thing to say). I said they are HARDER TO IMPLEMENT.

But yeah, by all means do make an entirely different argument that nobody in their right mind would dispute, and put me as the strawman that does just that.

 

[RedSwirl]

Indie games, for the most part, are concept games to me. Terraria and Minecraft are the few exceptions where I've actually enjoyed the indie game enough to pay more than a few bucks for them. Overall, no. Indie is not better.

And some indie games even have bad support. Wasn't Dungeon Defenders an indie game? The PS3 version broke trophy syncing for players forever and nothing was done about it. I know people love giving Activision and EA bad reps for not fixing their crap in a timely manner, but this is just one example of an indie game (if it was actually indie) not supporting their game.

The developers of Dungeon Defenders pretty much gave up supporting any version other than the PC version, likely because patching certification on consoles got in the way of what they want to do with the game. On Steam, the game seems to be getting a new patch or content update every other day.

That's part of my point: indie game design seems to be really held back on consoles right now compared to what it's become on PC. Restrictive cert processes are part of the reason.

 

[AcceptableGhost]

Even the bare minimum of "challenge" and "non-trivialness" (i.e. not being able to beat all levels by doing the exact same) is way harder programatically than just making them. If you were to take two levels of the same quality, one generated and the other hand-made, the generared one would have taken much more effort than the hand-made one. In fact, as you yourself point out below, there simply is no generator that can match the quality of the best designed levels in non-random games. If you had stopped for two seconds to consider it, you would realize that supports my argument, not yours.

It's interesting that you mentioned novelty, because (in an entirely different sense that you imply) that's exactly the purpose of generated levels: to provide different experiences each time, ones that you can't memorize and must adapt to. The tradeoff is indeed lack of "intent" or "design" (again, an indisputable fact). None is "better"; each approach makes an entirely different kind of game with a vastly different focus. It's very clear that you dislike randomly generated games, which is fair enough. However, comparting them to non-generated games is simply backwards; they have very little in common. Going from that to accusing developers making randomly generated games as lazy, well... just comes across as grossly ignorant.

At no point whatsoever did I say randomly generated leves are, in general, of better quality than designed ones (that would be a freaking moronic thing to say). I said they are HARDER TO IMPLEMENT.

But yeah, by all means do make an entirely different argument that nobody in their right mind would dispute, and put me as the strawman that does just that.

I know that is difficult to make randomly generated levels. I have been programming for a good while. As a programming challenge - the idea of making a randomly generated game DOES intrigue me. I can understand why people would make these games. The game-playing portion of me can find no enjoyment in actually playing these games though, given that the generated levels are so poor. There are definitely developers out there who believe that randomly generated levels are the holy grail which is a belief that I cannot disagree more with.

My comment is more about me disliking fully randomly generated levels than discussing programming complexity. Although the effort in actually programming & designing & making & iterating & maintaining levels has its own set of complexities. I don't think that it is really directly comparable.

 

[Weltall Zero]

My comment is more about me disliking fully randomly generated levels than discussing programming complexity.

But that was not actually your original comment, hence my discussion. It's perfectly OK to dislike them; heck, most of the people I know do so. In any case, we seem to agree in the end.

Anyway, I've ended up making a thread for people to vote on their favorite indie games; if enough people vote, I feel it could be a really useful resource for people getting into the indie scene. I half expect it to drop to the bottom with a handful of replies, if any, but let's hope I'm wrong.

 

[Mavromatis]

I think somebody at Greenmangaming was reading GAF. They have started an Indie weekend.

Too bad it is Facebook related, somehow.

 

[Toma]

I think somebody at Greenmangaming was reading GAF. They have started an Indie weekend.

I think someone on GAF was reading GMG. They have started an Indie Weekend sale thread:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=524526

 

[Family Fry]

You mind if I pimp my point n click 2013 thread? For PnC fans who have maybe not noticed it. I try and update as much as possible and have some great posters who keep it running, highlighting offers too.

Most titles could be classed as indie and it's pretty much the reason I own a PC.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=506077

Will be checking out the GMG thread asap! Quite fancy Kairo after playing the demo.

 

[Mavromatis]

I think someone on GAF was reading GMG. They have started an Indie Weekend sale thread:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=524526

Allow me to express myself with a picture.

 

[Toma]

You mind if I pimp my point n click 2013 thread? For PnC fans who have maybe not noticed it. I try and update as much as possible and have some great posters who keep it running, highlighting offers too.

Most titles could be classed as indie and it's pretty much the reason I own a PC.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=506077

Will be checking out the GMG thread asap! Quite fancy Kairo after playing the demo.

Actually, you should post that in that thread over here:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=517647



I'll add your thread to the OP later.

 

[Mavromatis]

After this thread I hope indie game related threads won't wither right after two posts.
Yes, I'm talking about my failed attempt of posting about Indiefort back then.

 

[Toma]

After this thread I hope indie game related threads won't wither right after two posts.
Yes, I'm talking about my failed attempt of posting about Indiefort back then.

Ouch. But yeah, there are more Indie threads on GAF right now than I have ever seen. I call that progress, but it would be too easy if this thread already solved the whole issue.

 

[Renoir]

I really liked the OP.

on topic. it sucks that things are this way, but we need things to be this way.

indy need to there to bring new ideas to the table. and the big guys to come in to steal theses ideas and make them main stream, giving birth to triple A.

it's like phone. take wireless sync. android did it. but the main populace don't give a fuk about Android. when they put that tech in an apple device then people are offering they're daughters virginity as thanks for coming up with the idea.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Euo_maS5cAM&feature=youtube_gdata_player


wish there was a way to bring games to the forefront. I was following this game for the longest. nothing came of it.

 

[DocSeuss]

I know that is difficult to make randomly generated levels. I have been programming for a good while. As a programming challenge - the idea of making a randomly generated game DOES intrigue me. I can understand why people would make these games. The game-playing portion of me can find no enjoyment in actually playing these games though, given that the generated levels are so poor. There are definitely developers out there who believe that randomly generated levels are the holy grail which is a belief that I cannot disagree more with.

My comment is more about me disliking fully randomly generated levels than discussing programming complexity. Although the effort in actually programming & designing & making & iterating & maintaining levels has its own set of complexities. I don't think that it is really directly comparable.

I find myself enjoying the top-down Teleglitch, which approaches procedural levels in an interesting way. I generally know the basic pieces of each section of the first level, but the way it's structured has enough difference that each level feels fairly fresh.

A while ago, I discussed how one might approach a procedural game with some friends. I suggested a ruleset that builds an entire 2D RPG from scratch based on one simple factor, the main quest, and extrapolating it from there. I designed a fairly complicated ruleset for this, which basically demonstrated the hierarchy from the main quest all the way down to how that would affect individual towns (and the populace within those towns), and quests.

I thought it was really cool, but the only friends I told it to were fairly new to programming and thought it sounded like a tough undertaking. When I described the basic functionality in pseudocode, they warmed to it.

But, yeah, I think the hardest part (which I'm well-equipped to handle ) is actually in creating a huge set of quests (main and side) themselves, to be picked at random (as well as creating the coupling system that identifies quests as being playable based on the selected endgame). It's not like top-down RPGs tend to have what one might call great level design.

--

Mavromatis, I thought there was a whole thread dedicated to ALL the bundles.

 

[Tash]

The whole "Indie" term has to go, seriously or we need a god darn official definition of what it means.

So what does indie mean anyway? Here are a few definitions and ideas I heard over the past few month/years:

• No backing of a publisher
• Needs to be quirky and weird
• No big budget
• No insane polish or pushing graphics
• Small unknown team

All of these get mentioned and then they can be used in combination with each other by whoever you talk to. I have seen tons of games being marketed as indie yet some of the biggest names out there are clearly against the "no backing of a publisher" part. Not to mention it's pretty clear that with above list there is no way indie can be defined.

I am not judging the above list as right or wrong - just using it as a starting point.

Take indie game the movie: Is that really the definition of indie?

Now, I am part of an indie studio, we have no ex-big names of EA or Bioware who make up our studio (even though we have an ex funcom programmer). We do not make quirky indie darlings that would get the attention of the media and our game was actually deemed not indie enough to enter an indie competition here in Norway because it looked too polished (wtf?).

Also, we are currently trying to talk to publishers because we want to make a more ambitious game. Something we are passionate about yet according to quotes in IGTM you are basically a sellout and not passionate enough (oh also, according to them it's not about money). Yet we are willing to give a Publisher some rights and lose out on money BECAUSE we want our vision to come to live at least in some way.

So, is that indie thinking or not?
I think a big problem here is that there is a lot in between AAA and the normal indie darling that is considered funky/quirky in mechanics and uses old school graphics. Yet, that's the niche that is currently a total limbo to be in (pun intended?)..

And since it's hard to make an indie game with a proper budget it's hard to combine the whole "being creative like an indie" and "push the graphics like a bigger studio" part without any proper backing.

But it's the gamers who actually need to proof to the guys with money that there is a market for that too..

 

[Tash]

I do this also which is why I was a bit confused about how to make the distinction between indie and AAA. If we are going with the "smaller game > AAA" option, then they easily win. Some examples:


Super Meat Boy - best platformer this gen, mechanically speaking
Mark of the Ninja - possibly the best traditional ninja game ever made
FTL - the first game to really make me feel like I was the commander of a space quest
Amnesia - savior of the horror genre. once it hit and was popular, it was like a mini renaissance.
Chivalry - the developer support shames 99% of AAA studios. I feel sick buying map packs now.
Hotline Miami - outclasses nearly every other shooter in terms of heart in mouth intensity
Hawken - the resurrector of good mech combat.
Bastion - a fairly innovative (?) use of narrated storytelling in games. helps that the core game is actually good on top of that.
Trash Panic - Tetris for the 21st century as far as i'm concerned
PixelJunk - too much bite sized casual variety to name
Costume Quest - the most magical game to play on Halloween
Jamestown - so good it got me into SHMUPs, then I found that it's still the only one I like
Torchlight & Path of Exile - shit on Diablo 3
Natural Selection 2 - arguably some of the best multiplayer gaming ever
Legend of Grimrock - got me into old school dungeon crawling games. now willing to try Etrian games.
World of Goo - a very inventive and intriguing use of physics with a ton of personality
Minecraft - the granddaddy of indie games. digitized Lego-esque crack that even the AAA boys are now aping.
The Walking Dead - I guess this counts. set a new benchmark for engaging characters. one of the best games of 2012.
ARMA - also technically indie. extremely in-depth simulation beyond anything a AAA game could hope for (since it also includes a lot of jank by proxy, something not allowed in 'streamlined' AAA releases). also gave us the DayZ sensation.
Project CARS - another high profile indie title (which will need a publisher on consoles, but only by necessity on there) which has produced some staggering results already using the crowdfunding model. Already murders GT and Forza in cold blood.


... and a cavalcade of other titles like Kickstarter games, AaAaaAA!!, Trials and Joe Danger, Snapshot, Limbo, Capybara Games, Machinarium, echochrome, Shatter, thatgamecompany's games, The Unfinished Swan, Trine, Closure, Braid, Double Fine's games, Jonathan Mak games, bit.trip, Flight Control, Angry Birds, the Playstation CAMP initiative and the pandora's box that is iOS/Android. Aaaand i'll stop, as i'm now doing precisely what the OP is describing.

Basically, what I associate with a small/indie game is often something really unique to that game, like for example FTL is "that perfect Star Trek game", Costume Quest is "that game I play on Halloween", Flight Control is "the air traffic control game", or Hotline Miami is "the awesome unofficial Drive game". You don't often get to make little distinctions and associations like that in the countless AAA games, which are essentially graphics tech demos with some cover shooting thrown in, QTE set pieces, maybe a lite crafting system, and some play-it-safe story fleshed out with ad-hoc text logs scattered everywhere. People complain that small games are just proof of concept titles, but so what? I'd rather play a game completely based around a single inventive idea that is just perfectly executed to its maximum potential, than a game which is a jack of all trades and a master of zilch.

I think this post wins the thread
Also, very handy summary of titles by non AAA studios.

 

[Weltall Zero]

The whole "Indie" term has to go, seriously or we need a god darn official definition of what it means.

So what does indie mean anyway? Here are a few definitions and ideas I heard over the past few month/years:
[...]
All of these get mentioned and then they can be used in combination with each other by whoever you talk to. I have seen tons of games being marketed as indie yet some of the biggest names out there are clearly against the "no backing of a publisher" part. Not to mention it's pretty clear that with above list there is no way indie can be defined.

I am not judging the above list as right or wrong - just using it as a starting point.

Definining "indie" is incredibly hard, and each and every one of those definitions has serious issues.

- Needs to be quirky and weird

There is no relationship between this and being indie; if I make a Mario-like platformer in my spare time, that's indie. Parappa the Rapper, on the other hand, is not.

- No insane polish or pushing graphics

Same here. Graphical quality is not only subjective, it's simply not fair to punish indie developers who have achieved great visual quality by scratching them off the "indie list", or similarly reward games with poor quality with "indie" status.

- Small unknown team

"Small" is the closest thing that I can get behind, and it's the metric I use the most. The problem, as always, is the cutting point. For me, twenty people or so is about the limit, but I realize it's an arbitrary limit: what makes a studio with 20 people "indie" and one with 21 "not indie"? Mojang is currently 31 people strong, is that indie or not?

As for "unknown", that makes no sense at all. First of all, "unknown" by who? Derey Yu is pretty well known, does that make him "not indie"?

- No backing of a publisher

This is more debatable, but I still disagree. Particularly, while I could concede that being backed by a publisher makes by definition a developer less independent, there is a huge spectrum of developers from 1 to 1000 employees that are not backed by anyone. Does that make them all indie?

- No big budget

This is a pretty good measurement as well: the problem is that budgets are very rarely, if ever, released to the public, so it's not a measurement WE can use to classify them, either.

 

[Tash]

Definining "indie" is incredibly hard, and each and every one of those definitions has serious issues.

- Needs to be quirky and weird

There is no relationship between this and being indie; if I make a Mario-like platformer in my spare time, that's indie. Parappa the Rapper, on the other hand, is not.

- No insane polish or pushing graphics

Same here. Graphical quality is not only subjective, it's simply not fair to punish indie developers who have achieved great visual quality by scratching them off the "indie list", or similarly reward games with poor quality with "indie" status.

- Small unknown team

"Small" is the closest thing that I can get behind, and it's the metric I use the most. The problem, as always, is the cutting point. For me, twenty people or so is about the limit, but I realize it's an arbitrary limit: what makes a studio with 20 people "indie" and one with 21 "not indie"? Mojang is currently 31 people strong, is that indie or not?

As for "unknown", that makes no sense at all. First of all, "unknown" by who? Derey Yu is pretty well known, does that make him "not indie"?

- No backing of a publisher

This is more debatable, but I still disagree. Particularly, while I could concede that being backed by a publisher makes by definition a developer less independent, there is a huge spectrum of developers from 1 to 1000 employees that are not backed by anyone. Does that make them all indie?

- No big budget

This is a pretty good measurement as well: the problem is that budgets are very rarely, if ever, released to the public, so it's not a measurement WE can use to classify them, either.

Great break-down and exactly what I tried to say. I agree with the size thing especially.

I seriously think we have to drop the term indie and come up with something new. Right now it's more of a Marketing term or it's being used by someone to make a point within the definition THEY think is indie. The whole thing about not being "indie enough" to be considered for that "indie competition" still sits really wrong with me, for example.

 

[Toma]

Great break-down and exactly what I tried to say. I agree with the size thing especially.

I seriously think we have to drop the term indie and come up with something new. Right now it's more of a Marketing term or it's being used by someone to make a point within the definition THEY think is indie. The whole thing about not being "indie enough" to be considered for that "indie competition" still sits really wrong with me, for example.

I definitely agree,but there is no term I can think of that would still encompass all the developers we currently are able to get under the umbrella term Indie.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

I just like games. Could care less if their Indie or AAAAAA as long its fun to play I will but it.

 

[Spectacular Dr Dawg]

Yes, obviously. Please, I'm not as naive about game development as you seem to imply, I just expected, well, more. I mean, Cthulu saves the world sure isn't a looker, but at least it makes good on what it has with some decent art. I'm aware the only reason Grimrock looks good is because there is a relative dearth of assets, but hey, they managed it.

I'm not blaming anybody here or trying to say that these games are bad. I suppose that I'm one of those people, in my chosen genres, that needs a certain baseline of polish equivalent to mainstream games from...I dunno, 15 years ago? The indie scene merely isn't the place to go for folks like myself, particularly since the "big indies" seem to be discounted. Lucky at least there's kickstarter now.

Fallout cost 3 million to make and Final Fantasy 7 cost 45 million to make, both came out in 1997. You can't expect small independent developers to compete with that.

 

[Tash]

Yes, obviously. Please, I'm not as naive about game development as you seem to imply, I just expected, well, more. I mean, Cthulu saves the world sure isn't a looker, but at least it makes good on what it has with some decent art. I'm aware the only reason Grimrock looks good is because there is a relative dearth of assets, but hey, they managed it.

I'm not blaming anybody here or trying to say that these games are bad. I suppose that I'm one of those people, in my chosen genres, that needs a certain baseline of polish equivalent to mainstream games from...I dunno, 15 years ago? The indie scene merely isn't the place to go for folks like myself, particularly since the "big indies" seem to be discounted. Lucky at least there's kickstarter now.

So for you indies means not enough graphical polish?

 

[Radogol]

- No backing of a publisher

This is more debatable, but I still disagree. Particularly, while I could concede that being backed by a publisher makes by definition a developer less independent, there is a huge spectrum of developers from 1 to 1000 employees that are not backed by anyone. Does that make them all indie?

Yes. That's literally what independent means. There's no one to answer to.

Graphical quality is not only subjective, it's simply not fair to punish indie developers who have achieved great visual quality by scratching them off the "indie list", or similarly reward games with poor quality with "indie" status.

The "indie" status is neither a seal of quality nor a reward of any kind.

 

[PsySal]

[deleted]

 

[Weltall Zero]

Yes. That's literally what independent means. There's no one to answer to.

Then, is Nintendo "indie"? After all, they self-publish. So do Electronic Arts, Activision Blizzard, Square Enix, Capcom, Konami... are all of them indie?

The "indie" status is neither a seal of quality nor a reward of any kind.

Many companies act as if it was, probably because it lends them a certain rebellious air of "keeping it real"; people also tend to make a bigger effort to support indie studios (whether that's warranted or not, I won't go into).

A key to understandin roguelikes, including FTL, is that only with experience can you learn the different random events (good and bad) that can happen. So at first the RNG can feel incredibly punishing and it can seem like a strategy is impossible.

However that isn't actually the case. I would say with FTL you can't guarantee that you will win on a given run but (depending on what you pick as starting ship) if you understand the game you can likely make it to the final boss most of the time. This is still more randomness than some roguelikes but my hunch is the reason for the divided opinion has more to do with experience. Without a lot of experience the randomness seems much more pwerful (and consequently strats far weaker) than is actually the case.

It's funny because I've been in some really heated arguments with a GAF member regarding this. He simply could not accept that being more skilled at the game reduced the impact of the RNG drastically.

 

[More_Badass]

Got into PC gaming a few weeks ago, and I wanted to add my opinion on the Indie-AAA comparison. Thanks, Toma, for the link. Maybe we can rekindle this discussion
---

My first indie game (and really my first PC/freeware game) was Facade. I was 13 back in 2005, I had read about the game in a short article in EGM I think, and as an avid reader and writer, I was instantly intrigued

Of course, after a few focused attempts, my time with the game devolved into just fucking around and typing in inane comments (I was 13, what do you expect?) but the seeds for my interest in lesser known experimental games had been planted

For years, I followed the indie scene, mainly as an observer save for freeware games like Warning Forever and Iji. Now I've become addicted to PC gaming and can finally experience the indie games that had interested me for so long, now more than ever

Except for the upcoming GTA V, I don't think any AAA games interest and excite me more than the myriad indie projects I've seen and read about. I still enjoy great graphics or a fun third person shooter or FPS but what I looks for nowadays is innovation and originality. The freedom and experimental nature of indies allow for innovative and original ideas and concepts that aren't just possible or wouldn't be attempted on consoles. Devs can focus on creating and honing their wildest or most creative ideas without compromises or being forced to appeal to the general gaming crowd. And thanks to the wonders of Kickerstarter, Greenlight, Indiegogo, etc, devs can appeal directly to fans and makes games that appeal to any crowd, no matter how niche.

Of course, some "indie" sensibilities have touched the AAA market as well. Mirror's Edge, developed by Dice and EA but definitely not pandering to the general gamer, or the monumental success of Minecraft. Games like Journey and PixelJunk, Xbox's Live Arcade and Indies, etc...indie ideals and support has become to touch the console and AAA audience as well. But for the most part, it's confined to PC. IMO, unique and different experiences like Receiver or Surgeon Simulator just wouldn't be possible without the vast control possibilities inherent in a KB/M.

So in conclusion/ tl;dr: my passion for indie game was sparked by a desire for innovation and originality in games, and that desire couldn't sated by the AAA market

 

[Zweisy1]

Majority of AAA games are just incredibly uninteresting these days, stuff like Rockstars or Naughty Dogs games.. Call of Duties or Battlefields just bore me to death.

There is still plenty of good stuff being made by bigger developers/publishers but most of the blockbusters I could do without.

The Swapper is better than any AAA game I've played this year and that was made by a tiny team with a tiny budget.

 

[fantomena]

Indie >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>AAA

 

[Magic Mushroom]

I love (certain) indies, but The Last of Us was brilliant as well. They can happily co-exist.

Wonderful 101 looks like the true GotY. I guess that falls under the AAA moniker right?

A good game is a good game. The end.

 

[Toma]

I love (certain) indies, but The Last of Us was brilliant as well. They can happily co-exist.

Wonderful 101 looks like the true GotY. I guess that falls under the AAA moniker right?

A good game is a good game. The end.

Yeah, the problem is that the perception isnt aligning with that. As I said in the OP, I am not even saying that big budget games are bad games per se. Its just that the games industry positioned themselves into a spot where its very hard for them to innovate and push new concepts, whereas the Indie scene is filling up that niche quite nicely. A good game is a good game and should be treated equally, right? Yet big budget games see millions of purchases, while far cheaper Indie games that are definitely great games as well arent even getting 1% of the size of the same playerbase.

Indie >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>AAA

I used the title of the thread to polarize, but I definitely agree that Indies have merits over big budget games that make them worth checking out, and I do think most are way too ignored. Personally, I also prefer Indies lately due to the price, variety AND risen quality in the past years, but I can definitely see how someone might personally disagree with that overall.

 

[Audible Phonetics]

This is really discussing small budget vs big budget games.

They can both happily coexist. There are some GREAT small budget games such as Super Meat Boy, and FTL.

But this year saw some great Larger Budget games such as Bioshock, Tomb Raider, Last of Us.


These two types of games can both coexist with no issues.

 

[Acheteedo]

Indie games are more important and inspirational than ever, but they complement AAA, they don't compete with them. I don't see the point in saying which is better, they are radically different. Next gen hopefully sees the gap between the two being filled with games like the Witness - a developer who saw success with a low budget indie game, using their status and funds to produce a higher budget game with more ambition. Those mid-tier games will have freedom from AAA archetypes while having greater ambition than the typical indie game.

 

[Toma]

This is really discussing small budget vs big budget games.

They can both happily coexist. There are some GREAT small budget games such as Super Meat Boy, and FTL.

But this year saw some great Larger Budget games such as Bioshock, Tomb Raider, Last of Us.


These two types of games can both coexist with no issues.

Indie games are more important and inspirational than ever, but they complement AAA, they don't compete with them. I don't see the point in saying which is better, they are radically different. Next gen hopefully sees the gap between the two being filled with games like the Witness - a developer who saw success with a low budget indie game, using their status and funds to produce a higher budget game with more ambition. Those mid-tier games will have freedom from AAA archetypes while having greater ambition than the typical indie game.

Sure they can coexist and thats how it SHOULD be, but I am still encountering opinions like "2D games are all shit" and the other complaints I listed in the OP way too often. People also vote with their wallets and some great games I found on Desura during the past months are hardly a commercial hit. I am not necessarily blaming the people either, there are many problems that lead to that, missing visibility being one of the most important. But thats the reason why I am annoying people to no end on GAF about it I guess.

Random aside: I also consider The Witness definitely an Indie game, but that discussion is just turning in circles because no one actually has a clear and working definition of that term.