jonscrambler
Member
people can refuse to play certain games for whatever reason, really none of your business, stop telling me what I "should" play
-
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
Captain Zyrain
Member
I don't actively seek out indie games.. and I think I'll admit I have some sort of bias against trying them, at least initially, mostly due to their perceived 'uglyness' and/or lack of quality production values.
This is a broad and incorrect view, but I think it's still ingrained for whatever reason.
I don't have a lot of gaming time, so I usually spend it on flashy big titles I "know" I'll like.
I've tried a number of smaller games (maybe indies?) when they're given away with Xbox Gold, and I have to say I have not enjoyed the majority of them for varying reasons.
This is a broad and incorrect view, but I think it's still ingrained for whatever reason.
I don't have a lot of gaming time, so I usually spend it on flashy big titles I "know" I'll like.
I've tried a number of smaller games (maybe indies?) when they're given away with Xbox Gold, and I have to say I have not enjoyed the majority of them for varying reasons.
More_Badass
Member
It's a discussion and a question, not a directive
taizuke
Member
I have more of a problem playing mobile games since most are basically time wasters as opposed to a traditional console game. Think I've played less than 5 mobile games my entire life and I'm 34.
While I don't paint every indie game the same I think most of us can tell when an indie isn't worth it. This is the case with Playstation Plus. Most of us got excited to see Fury as PS Plus game. He'll if they gave us Firewatch or Hyper Light Drifter I'm sure a lot of people here would be thrilled. But, when they give us games nobody asked for that's when I think all indie games get lumped together and get a bad reputation among gamers.
To be fair I've had plenty of games I wasn't originally interested in only to be surprised by how much I enjoyed them later and that's something you gotta be aware of but when quality of those free indie games suffer they all do.
While I don't paint every indie game the same I think most of us can tell when an indie isn't worth it. This is the case with Playstation Plus. Most of us got excited to see Fury as PS Plus game. He'll if they gave us Firewatch or Hyper Light Drifter I'm sure a lot of people here would be thrilled. But, when they give us games nobody asked for that's when I think all indie games get lumped together and get a bad reputation among gamers.
To be fair I've had plenty of games I wasn't originally interested in only to be surprised by how much I enjoyed them later and that's something you gotta be aware of but when quality of those free indie games suffer they all do.
Turin Turambar
Member
But precisely because they are so many of them, even if only 10% of them are good, you have dozens per year of good indie games. Games that aren't as you have described.
I like indie games because they can sometimes resurrect sub-genres we all miss or create games we've all been wanting but none of the big publishers will fund anymore.
I have a friend who really adores the Harvest Moon series but won't touch Stardew Valley because of his stigma towards indie games. He also has the worst buyer's remorse with his Vita because he wanted more AAA games and didn't buy the system to play a bunch of "indie" games. I'm over here thinking that this dude could be playing Trails in the Sky, Ys, Dragon's Crown and a bunch of other stuff that isn't even really that "indie". I'm starving for a handheld system with a trophy system too but it's too late in the game for me to get a Vita.
I like AAA games too but I'm a little frustrated with some folks who seem to only like games that are heavy on story scenes, linear and relatively easy to beat. I get why you'd want that kind of game every now and then but I would have absolutely no interest in playing games if they were all like Uncharted or Tomb Raider. I practically hated myself after I beat Shadow of Mordor recently, but maybe that's normal since not everyone loved that game. While the same friend had a lot of praise for that game. I just feel like there's a lot people are missing out on because they only want the games with huge budgets.
I have a friend who really adores the Harvest Moon series but won't touch Stardew Valley because of his stigma towards indie games. He also has the worst buyer's remorse with his Vita because he wanted more AAA games and didn't buy the system to play a bunch of "indie" games. I'm over here thinking that this dude could be playing Trails in the Sky, Ys, Dragon's Crown and a bunch of other stuff that isn't even really that "indie". I'm starving for a handheld system with a trophy system too but it's too late in the game for me to get a Vita.
I like AAA games too but I'm a little frustrated with some folks who seem to only like games that are heavy on story scenes, linear and relatively easy to beat. I get why you'd want that kind of game every now and then but I would have absolutely no interest in playing games if they were all like Uncharted or Tomb Raider. I practically hated myself after I beat Shadow of Mordor recently, but maybe that's normal since not everyone loved that game. While the same friend had a lot of praise for that game. I just feel like there's a lot people are missing out on because they only want the games with huge budgets.
TheVoidDragon
Member
Posts like this really suggest people absolutely no idea what an Indie game is. An Indie game is a game that isn't tied to a large publisher; it's an independent game. Saying something like "They're too short" or "I don't like Pixel art" or "They aren't real games" or "They're mostly bad* is just completely absurd and i think pretty ignorant. Indie games cover a massive amount of games with all sorts of different styles, genres, quality levels and sizes, just like non-indie games from the large publishers aren't identical and you can't lump all of those together.
When you've got games that fall within the indie category (that being they aren't associated with a major/separate publisher who defines budget and things like that) like Star Citizen, Planet Coaster, Elite Dangerous, Rocket League, The Witcher series, Rimworld, Factorio, Kerbal Space Program, Subnautica, Minecraft, The Talos Principle, The Witness etc many of which rival or even surpass games from the big publishers any sort of generalization about the quality, quantity or art style of indie games just becomes even more absurd. Are those not "Real games" to you?
I think some people complaining about game lengths may be confused by how rouguelikes, a popular indie genre works. For instance, a game like Tumbleseed is technically only under an hour, however the games difficulty essentially requires that you play the game for several hours to get good enough to do that. Also with roguelikes randomness is a huge part of the genre. So 30 mins to complete does not equal 30 mins of gameplay.
Not sure what indie means tbh? I have played inside and sexy brutale recently, which i both really enjoyed. Im assuming these ae classed as indie? Played a ton of smaller games which just like AAA, can be hit or miss.
And what is the defenition of a AAA game? I always thought it was reserved for games with the highest budgets, large dev teams and highest levels of promotion,?
So where do games like Nier Automata get classed as?
And what is the defenition of a AAA game? I always thought it was reserved for games with the highest budgets, large dev teams and highest levels of promotion,?
So where do games like Nier Automata get classed as?
TheVoidDragon
Member
An indie game is one that is made without assistance/budget provided by a publisher, the game/team and publisher are independent basically. Both those games you mentioned count as indie, they don't have an outside publisher who funded them or anything like that. Indie doesn't have anything to do with the quality, or scope, or team size etc it's just the publisher side of things.
AAA games are those that have the highest budgets and highest quality. Usually these are require a publisher because otherwise getting the funding to reach the level of AAA would be difficult.
I don't think something like Nier: Automata would count as Indie as it's made and published by a major publisher with their in-house development team (at least that's what it seems like, i don't know too much about it), but it's AAA quality. It's a similar situation to when EA uses their own studios to make games, it's a publisher that's responsible for overseeing the development side and providing budget and things like that, so it's not Indie. The line is a bit more difficult when you look at something like The Witcher 3. It's definitely AAA, but it could also be seen as Indie because CD Project Red are not a publisher that publishes other team's games, they've only published their own so from what i've seen they're a developer first, then a publisher. There's a difference between a publisher developing in-house, and a developer publishing their own games, basically.
So if a game doesn't have a publisher going "Make us X, you can have this amount of money, do it by this time and we'll handle the publishing and marketing" and it's a developer independent of a publisher (e.g. self publishing or without a publisher having any control over their game) it can could as indie, but that and AAA are not mutual exclusive so you can have a game that's both, such as Star Citizen.
Unaha-Closp
Member
I only play games that interest me. Don't care what label they are. Likewise I don't play games that don't interest me. It's a very nice way to pick games to play.
Been burned too many times. Nothing quite like that feeling of paying money for an indie game, only to find out it's less fleshed out than some of the free flash games I played on the internet over a decade ago.
Unless it gets an ungodly amount of praise, I won't even consider an indie game.
Unless it gets an ungodly amount of praise, I won't even consider an indie game.
thesonovabeach
Member
It's interesting because I could litterally say the exact same thing about AAA games (except the flash games part I guess).
When I play an AAA game there is a good 95% chance of me not remembering it the week after it because they all look like each other. It's way more likely I remember an indie game because they are ofter very audacious and sometimes original.
But that being said, if you try 5 different random 16-bit styled indie games from the PSN, I can understand you just give up. Sometimes, picking up a great indie game is simple luck, like the time I randomly bought Kick & Fennick on Vita and had an absolute blast with it, but the week after I played Torque L and couldn't believe how uninteresting it was (at least for a Vita game, maybe as a mobile game it is okay I guess).
archreaper93
Member
A big thing for me is I hate downloading games. Most indie games are download only, so I don't play too many of them.
I thought Id bump this thread rather than create one due to a post on another thread that mentioned graphics on an indie game.
For me personally I dont care whether a game is indie or AAA. The biggest turn off for me is the way a game looks. I know its shallow but if I dont like how something looks I wont even explore it further. So Ill just never purchase an indie game that looks a certain way.
I look at something like Shovel Knight and I cant get past the way it looks, I then see Hollow Knight and it attracts me. I know this retro style, pixelated look seems to be in but I personally hate it and wont buy any game that looks that way. Its a shame more games dont have an option to switch between the two styles.....
For me personally I dont care whether a game is indie or AAA. The biggest turn off for me is the way a game looks. I know its shallow but if I dont like how something looks I wont even explore it further. So Ill just never purchase an indie game that looks a certain way.
I look at something like Shovel Knight and I cant get past the way it looks, I then see Hollow Knight and it attracts me. I know this retro style, pixelated look seems to be in but I personally hate it and wont buy any game that looks that way. Its a shame more games dont have an option to switch between the two styles.....
Chairmanchuck
Member
But why Shovel Knight? I mean it looks the most similar to real NES games, while a lot of "8 Bit games" look like total shite.
I just cant get past that art style. Its the same reason I wont contemplate buying Golf Story or Stardew Valley. I really dont like those retro graphics.
Its a shame as many of the highest rated indie games actually look like that, not all of them I know but that look is a major turn off for me.
Wulverblade is a recent example of a game that came out that is visually appealing. Now they could make the exact same game but with retro graphics and Id switch off immediately....
Now you could argue that Im a graphics whore, but if were being honest the likes of Hollow Knight ( a game that I like) isnt really what a graphics whore would like surely.
LordRaptor
Member
I mean... thats as valid a reason as any to skip a game, but most titles that deliberately pick that aesthetic play pretty fast and loose with the actual constraints that forced developers to use those techniques originally, so its less "Retro" and more "retro inspired".
Personally I'm a sucker for some really nice pixel art, but I can usually overlook an aesthetic I dislike in favour of gameplay unless its an aesthetic I really find displeasing (like A Valley Without Wind)
geordiemp
Member
I have limited time to game, and have a backlog including Last creed game, Horizon, MGS5..the list goes on. Heck I never got through more than 1 hour of Witcher 3.
So why would I look at other lower budget games when I have allot of AAA large budget games in my backlog.
Also I played so many 2D Amiga, spectrum, Ps1 games for so many years I have no interest in that genre.
Also 3D, first or 3rd person, graphics normally 1440p or above on my Pro, Mo cap, voice acting - its so much more immersive than an 8 bit Defender.
Bringer Of Bacon
Member
I bought star dew based on the hype and the love I have for animal crossing and was willing to give it a shot. I dont buy indie games very often, but thought what the heck. Unfortunately, my suspicion was right, it still feels like an indie game and I set it down after 20mins. Wont play it again. Feels too derivative, art style seems my first video game and the insane amount of bugs is annoying.
Reinforced why I havent and wont play indie games. They arent worth my time. Even for one heralded as a game of the year. What a joke.
Are you suggesting that most AAA games don't feel derivative?
LordRaptor
Member
I mean, if you bought "Indie Harvest Moon" because you wanted Animal Crossing, I don't think its fair to place the blame on anything except your own (incorrect) assumptions
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
I generally do but there are specific reasons for it and I'll pick up indies that don't hit upon my personal pet peeves.
- NES graphics. I know why they do it, but it leaves me cold.
- Tiny sprites
- Rougelike
- LOL hard because hard is cool
- Procedurally generated anything
- Survival game
Since indies tend to gravitate towards a lof of stuff on that list of things I dislike (any of which I consider a deal breaker) I tend to pass on a lot of indies.
Whether something feels derivative or not largely depends on your interests. If you like what AAA games do, then you're not going to be upset by more games featuring elements you like.
Crooked16th
Banned
About 95% of all indie games are garbage so i can see why people choose not to play them. But when a game like Cuphead or Shovel Knight comes out and they still refuse to play it just because it's indie then they are just being stubborn.
adversarial
Member
I've always had a weird relationship with Indie games.
They are okay to play while watching TV or something, but I've never, ever been actually invested in an Indie I played. I suppose Indie game means less money / time able to be spent crafting a world, but I don't think I'll ever have a connection to an indie game like I did with Mass Effect 1, for example.
They are okay to play while watching TV or something, but I've never, ever been actually invested in an Indie I played. I suppose Indie game means less money / time able to be spent crafting a world, but I don't think I'll ever have a connection to an indie game like I did with Mass Effect 1, for example.
Greatest Ever
Member
This guy knows what's up.
CyberChulo
Member
I wouldn't mind playing indie games if they didn't have that pixelated look on most of them. I realize I may be missing out on some quality gameplay, but I just can't play a game looking like that on a 4k 75" HDR TV. I need me some graphics.
PhantomThief
Banned
Why? Games are about gameplay dawg.
EYEL1NER
Member
I'm not an "I won't play any indie games" person but I rarely play any and don't buy any. I just don't care for Digital Distribution as a business model and value having a physical copy, which is something the majority of indie games don't have. I played Gone Home when it became free as a GwG title at the beginning of this month and thought it was absolutely amazing, one of the only games I can think of that has ever made me feel any kind of emotion other than excitement/eagerness to play. I recognize that there are a lot of good indie games out there and a wide variety of different types or genres that indie games are made in, but I can't play everything out there, so indie games that are DD-only are very very low on my priority list.
During the initial rise of indie a few years back there was this kind of insular "high culture" attitude from indie fans as though indie games were somehow superior and more important just for being indies that kind of drove me off from looking into non-corporate games. Over the years as indies became more mainstream that largely settled down and I began looking into indies the same as any other game, but for a while it was awkward.
Oddly I find that I have the opposite problem from the bump: most non-pixel indie games have artstyles that either bore or disturb me, so the few purchases I make in the indie department involuntarily gravitate towards the 8- and 16- bit styled ones.
Overall I'm a strange mix of super finicky about what games I buy and just legitimately not caring how polished a game is as long as I can have fun with it. Old games, new games, new games that look like old games, it's all games to me, just don't try to shove me into playing it or I'll dig my heels into the ground.
Oddly I find that I have the opposite problem from the bump: most non-pixel indie games have artstyles that either bore or disturb me, so the few purchases I make in the indie department involuntarily gravitate towards the 8- and 16- bit styled ones.
Overall I'm a strange mix of super finicky about what games I buy and just legitimately not caring how polished a game is as long as I can have fun with it. Old games, new games, new games that look like old games, it's all games to me, just don't try to shove me into playing it or I'll dig my heels into the ground.
Im as big a fan of indie/alt games as anyone, but nah, games arent about anything. People come to them for a multitude of valid reasonstheres no right way.
More_Badass
Member
Most of them? You should check out threads like these
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1445654
http://www.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1443860
SirNinja
Member
Ugh, really?
Either you've somehow exclusively played only the very worst indie games ever made, or you're grossly exaggerating. There's so much good indie stuff out there beyond the two games you mentioned. For example:
And that's nowhere near close to a complete list of great indies.
This is like those who won't watch black and white movies or ones with subtitles... I mean, I guess it's a preference, but it's a narrow way to think IMO. Also, if anything, this thread is proof that graphics matter to many, even though everyone wants to believe that gameplay should be the only thing that does.
There are lots of great indie games- from most of the revived CRPGs lately to Divekick. I only play the ones that strike me though- no interest in yet another psudeo-8-bit metroidvania or any kind of roguelike.
Its also rare that I actually buy them, since Sony gives them out like candies, and they constantly pad out $1-2 bundles.
Its also rare that I actually buy them, since Sony gives them out like candies, and they constantly pad out $1-2 bundles.
Gravy Boat
Member
I would have stopped gaming years ago if indie games didnt exist.
Kain-Nosgoth
Member
i wouldn't have stopped, but it sure helped a lot maintaining my love for games in general, some indies game are my favourite of all time easily!
Using indie as a genre is even more illogical than using AAA as a genre because at least most AAA follow some guidelines and design shortcuts to ensure more return from the audience. Indie can be (and most are) literally any niche, even ones you have no idea that existed. So handwaving the entire indie catalogue makes no sense. You're dismissing stuff you don't even know it existed.
I play indie games but not really that many. If I had to guess why it's because
1) The kind of genres I gravitate towards are under-served
2) There is a lot of shit that, from a gameplay perspective, gives me an intense "been there, done that" feel. You take any 25 indie games that are leaning into a retro/nostalgia angle and maybe 3 will bring something new to the table. 10 will be as good, but not significantly different from "okay" retro examples in the genre, and the other 12 will be bad wannabes
Though honestly, the quality:crap ratio isn't that different from what you get with AAA titles.
1) The kind of genres I gravitate towards are under-served
2) There is a lot of shit that, from a gameplay perspective, gives me an intense "been there, done that" feel. You take any 25 indie games that are leaning into a retro/nostalgia angle and maybe 3 will bring something new to the table. 10 will be as good, but not significantly different from "okay" retro examples in the genre, and the other 12 will be bad wannabes
Though honestly, the quality:crap ratio isn't that different from what you get with AAA titles.
I hate to say it, but indie games still have a stereotype of being simple and cheap looking. It doesn't help that many games attempt to mimic Atari/NES style visuals, which I never liked, even as a kid. The ones that don't try to imitate that style and try to have something more complex tend to have this very bad flash quality to the animations, which is also quite unappealing to me.
Plus, it's just harder to trust a small group of designers and programmers over established professional development studios.
Plus, it's just harder to trust a small group of designers and programmers over established professional development studios.
ToxicPhantom
Member
Some people simply rather not play indie games. Simple as that.
Not sure I agree with that sentiment. If anything the indie developers tend to have closer contact with consumers, more open to feedback, and more likely to implement it.
A large corporation has a lot of process in place, and usually too stubborn to listen to feedback unless something massively effects sales.
SMOK3Y
Generous Member
Ya tbh 95% of my favourite movies not big budget. What i hate is when a movie is cheap but excellent then Hollywood gives it a budget & ruins it..