Indie games 'vs.' retail

[Ashley]

The topic of indies has come up in a few places recently and we do have a great thread to discuss indie games themselves, but this is more focused on indie games as an aspect of modern gaming, and how it 'compares' to retail games.

 

Some people have argued that indie games are not "proper" games and don't compare to retail, or that they don't buy a console for indie games.

 

I personally find that a bit offensive because there are people actually working on these games; they pour their blood, sweat and tears into it, so it feels rude to belittle them simply because they are released via a different avenue. Also seems like an arbitrary division when you consider many studios are formed, or feature, people that formerly worked in big studios (Hello Games springs to mind, but there's countless more).

 

Personally I'm really digging the indie scene right now. There's so many unique and interesting ideas that are coming out due to the fact they (typically) aren't looking to push millions of units and can be a bit more experimental. Plus as someone who would like to get into the creative industry, it opens up a lot more opportunities as getting a game to market no longer requires a huge budget, knowing the right people etc.

 

So anyway, opinions on indie games as a form of gaming? Do you play many indie games? Do you think the new consoles are opening up the floodgates for new experiences? Am I asking too many questions? Why does nobody go and keep Thomas company?

[Happenstance]

I think we give it another year and hopefully the term Indie will start to fade out. Once digital only titles start becoming more of the norm the distinction will just mean less and less. These days I get just as much enjoyment out of "Indie" games as I do a big budget title so I am looking forward to them getting the recognition they deserve from gamers that might not play them otherwise.

[Serebii]

The amount of indie games coming out is brilliant, and they're among the more innovative and imaginative games coming out compared to the "major" publisher. They're the saving grace in the monotony that is gaming at the moment.

 

Problem is that they don't get much exposure. This is starting to change with Nintendo and Sony both giving them big pushes, but as they're download only, and not retail, the exposure will never be large and they'll be ignored by the majority of the consumerbase

[The Peeps]

The indie scene is the most exciting aspect of gaming right now - for me at least.

 

Most of the games I've bought recently are indie titles and they seem to offer more unique and innovative gameplay than retail titles. The last retail game I bought was Dishonoured (still playing it though) but I've bought many indie games between then and now.

 

I don't think the term 'Indie' needs to fade out at all. It's just a distinction between games backed by publisher finances and those released off the back of the people that made it. You have indie films and indie music and there's no stigma attached there and I don't think there is in gaming either.

[Cube]

If Humble Bundle and Sony keep throwing them at me, I'll gladly lap them up. They make for a nice and different break in between big games.

 

but as they're download only, and not retail, the exposure will never be large and they'll be ignored by the majority of the consumerbase

 

After Minecraft, which was a colossal mainstream success, I really don't think this is the case - the same applies to games like Amnesia and Slenderman (non-gamers were talking about this before I had even heard of it).

 

Digital games have allowed these games to become much bigger, and much more known to the consumer base, than they ever could have been as retail games without a big publisher.

[Rummy]

Is 'retail' the proper counterpoint to Indie? Mainstream? Retail is about distribution, not games! The blur makes me want to talk about digital distribution, but I know it's going to be going off topic.

[Ashley]

Is 'retail' the proper counterpoint to Indie? Mainstream? Retail is about distribution, not games! The blur makes me want to talk about digital distribution, but I know it's going to be going off topic.

 

I don't think there is actually a counterpoint to indie, but other people seem to use a "available in shops"/"[only] available online" divide so I went with that.

 

Start another topic then!

[Rummy]

But...but...i r too not smart to articulate point

 

I think 'indie' is brilliant, as has been said it tends to yield more creative experiences and products. I find the term itself a bit too broad/undefined, but going with what it generally refers to there's some proper gems out there. There's the doubled benefit of not only are they good games, but they're usually digitally distributed and much cheaper.

 

Not sure what the last 'indie' title I played was(I buy a lot digitally now, via steam, humble bundles, indie bundles, indiegamestand etc but don't actually play half of the them) - but some have given me really good/more memorable experiences.

 

I'd say Terraria, for one, is one of my most played games of recent times clocking in at more than 150 hours. I also remember Little Inferno on the other end of the scale - just a few hours in term of playtime but a pretty unique experience to my mind. PixelJunk Eden on PS3 is a brilliant little title, it's just so...lovely.

 

But, I can mention all these and some/most won't have played them. 'Indie' has the good and the bad, but it's a huuuuuuuuuge field as it were, it's almost ambiguous in itself. I think that somewhat holds it back...some games make the big time and manage the big breakthrough(ie minecraft), some are even still successful, but even with that they are still easily lost in the big sea that is 'indie'.

[Ville]

Well, I haven't bought too many indie games, but the ones I have have been quite good.

 

-Minecraft (awesome)

-Terraria (awesome)

-Cave Story (free download but just stunning)

-Hot Line Miami (old skool brutal)

-SteamWorld Dig (pretty good)

 

They certainly have their place, and are a great thing for new developers as there are so many channels to publish in nowadays. I really am not that interested in most of them, but every now and then there emerges a gem that I just have to buy. So far, haven't been disappointed.

[The Peeps]

I find the term itself a bit too broad/undefined, but going with what it generally refers to there's some proper gems out there. There's the doubled benefit of not only are they good games, but they're usually digitally distributed and much cheaper.

 

The thing is, Indie isn't a genre so it's not a definitive term but a collective one. Any game that is published independently is an indie game.

[MATtheHAT]

I think the term 'Indie' has taken on a new meaning in the gaming world. Yes, in the literal sense it means self-published. But most gamers now associate Indie with small downloadable games with often innovative gameplay or riskier mechanics. Take Journey for example, made by thatgamecompany and published by Sony - yet it is still classed as an Indie title.

 

Minecraft transcends what it means to be Indie, it started out as this little voxel based curio made in the spare time of an eccentric Swedish man, but even Notch himself has admitted he doesn't think Minecraft is Indie anymore.

 

Personally, I love the Indie scene. I really can't be arsed anymore with sprawling 60 hour story driven RPG's. I bought Rogue Legacy, Sir, You Are Being Hunted and Divekick today. These games are much more appealing to me now than say, Skyrim.

[Tales]

I have a few indie games on steam and a couple from PSN. I don't mind the "genre" and the ones I have played are good, it is just that I worry that some people view the genre as one of the game's qualities in addition to story, gameplay etc and not as the genre it is, meaning that if it is a indie game it is also an awesome game. Being indie in itself makes it a better game and if it is published by a major company it is crap and would never hold to up any indie game. I could point at least one person here that thinks like that.

 

I think indie games are proper games, but due to their size and content they naturally have(well except for a few I guess) they won't convince me to say buy a WiiU, even if it had like a dozen of great indie titles. Bring on Mario 3D and I'm on board.

[Oxigen_Waste]

Indie is kicking retail's ass, as far as I'm concerned.

 

This gen has been incredible, as far as Indie games go... Journey, Super Meat Boy, Fez, Amnesia, FTL, Braid, Minecraft, Hotline Miami, Dear Esther, Osmos, World Of Goo, the list goes on and on (mark of the ninja, thomas was alone, Limbo, Lone Survivor, castle crashers, Superbrothers EP, there are just too many to name, lol) and the community just keeps delivering, this year we've already been trated to some gems like The Swapper, Monado and Gone Home...

 

As far as retail goes, the plan seems to consist of essentially releasing the same game 3 times. In one gen, we got 4 gears of war, 4 halos, 4 zeldas, 4 god of wars, 4 marios, 5 assassin's creed, 7 call of duties (the 8th is on the way) 3 elder scrolls, 3 mass effects, 3 uncharted, 3 resistance, 3 dead space, 3 batman, you get the point, yeah? Everything is sequeled into irrelevance, and most games feel exactly the same, no matter how different they are. Sure, we get the occasional unique gem, but they are few and far between. The same tired old concepts over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

Indies, on the other hand, are bursting with creativity and inventiveness. Everything has it's unique charm, and gaming's boundaries are being pushed like never before. You can feel the games are a product of love and labour. Where as in retail, the whole process is segmented and games are made to fit a certain format... the creative process is way more automated and devoid of feeling.

Creation is best when left at the hands of the creator. I preffer indies because devs make games they genuinely want to play, instead of focusing on what sells.

 

As with every other form of culture, the mainstream is flashier but emptier.

 

I'd blame the publishers/devs, but we, the audience, are to blame. We're the ones who are dictating these dumbass trends, not them.

Edited August 22, 2013 by Oxigen_Waste

[drahkon]

Indie games are great.

Games like CoD, Battlefield and all that other 'generic crap' are great, too.

 

Yes, every year another installment, but there are people who enjoy that. I am one of them, partly.

 

I enjoyed the Uncharted games, I enjoyed the Elder Scrolls games, I enjoyed (to a degree) the two Mass Effect games I played, I enjoyed the God of War games, I am enjoying Battlefield 3 (singleplayer) right now. And hell, I pay full price for Fifa almost every year.

I also enjoyed Minecraft, Terraria, Journey, Hotline Miami, Gone Home, The Binding of Isaac.

 

There are people who like to play both 'group of games' and there are people who prefer either one of those.

 

All this "gaming needs innovation talk" is annoying. There is a lot of innovation out there, mainly coming from indie developers.

Why can't we just let the other, bigger companies make games that appeal to the masses?

I think 'indie' and - what people cynically call - 'the generic crap' can live/already are living in coexistence.

[Fierce_LiNk]

I've not really got into the indie gaming scene, yet. I'm pretty selective about what I do buy and play, only because of time and money, though. If both of these were more disposable, I'd probably have gotten into it much more by now.

 

It's something that I'll probably look into more now. Can only be a good thing for gaming.

[Sméagol]

I don't think there is actually a counterpoint to indie, but other people seem to use a "available in shops"/"[only] available online" divide so I went with that.

 

Start another topic then!

It’s commercial. Occasionally, an indie game will make it into retail, even if it’s limited and/or local. I know the Penumbra games were available on disc somewhere, to give an example.

 

I personally don’t make a “real” distinction between indie vs commercial. Fun games are fun games. But in practice, there’s a slight distinction. Mainly in how I find out about them, indie games get less exposure. That said, I actually don’t visit big gaming sites anymore, I get most of my news from forums, so this has leveled out a bit, but not totally. I learn about new indie games from our indie game thread, or browsing the Steam greenlight section, or sometimes from other sources. The Penny Arcade Report also has some nice reviews sometimes.

 

Then there is the fact that “indie” is classed as a genre. In theory it shouldn’t be, but in practice it is, just like animation is classed as a genre in film. Although I don’t find this a problem, since it can be convenient.

[Oxigen_Waste]

Indie games are great.

Games like CoD, Battlefield and all that other 'generic crap' are great, too.

 

Yes, every year another installment, but there are people who enjoy that. I am one of them, partly.

 

I enjoyed the Uncharted games, I enjoyed the Elder Scrolls games, I enjoyed (to a degree) the two Mass Effect games I played, I enjoyed the God of War games, I am enjoying Battlefield 3 (singleplayer) right now. And hell, I pay full price for Fifa almost every year.

I also enjoyed Minecraft, Terraria, Journey, Hotline Miami, Gone Home, The Binding of Isaac.

 

There are people who like to play both 'group of games' and there are people who prefer either one of those.

 

All this "gaming needs innovation talk" is annoying. There is a lot of innovation out there, mainly coming from indie developers.

Why can't we just let the other, bigger companies make games that appeal to the masses?

I think 'indie' and - what people cynically call - 'the generic crap' can live/already are living in coexistence.

 

Hey, don't get me wrong, I like retail games just as much as indie games... I just hate this sequel mentality. Why must every successfull ip be replicated ad infinitum!?? It makes no sense from a creative POV.

I'd much rather have had the Ass Creed team work on a new IP after 2. They delivered a great experience, and subsequently exploited it shamelessly. Same for Uncharted. They should have stopped at 2. If your game representes the peak of what it set out to do (like Ass Creed 2 or Unch 2), either move on or change it dramatically. More of the same is worth alot less to me than something new. TLoU is a great example. Obviously meant to be one single game... as soon as it became successfull, immediately the sequel talk begins. Why do we need a sequel if it's just more of the same??? Mainstream videogames are like blockbusters... absolutely no respect is given to the product. If it sells, give them more, at all costs.

 

Sequels make sense when you're still perfecting the formula, but once you hit gold... just move the fuck on, if I want more of the same, I'll replay the game!

 

They would also make sense if they were spaced out correctly. We should be getting a Zelda/Metroid/Mario/whatever every 5 years, not every 2.

 

It's a joke that some developers want to be taken seriously as artists whilst not even respecting their own work... It's milking. Shameless milking. And fuck you (j/k), but imo that's wrong.

 

That obviously doesn't apply to stuff like Street Fighter, F-Zero or even Fifa, like you mentioned... that's pick up and play, ain't no other way to do it.

 

I've not really got into the indie gaming scene, yet. I'm pretty selective about what I do buy and play, only because of time and money, though. If both of these were more disposable, I'd probably have gotten into it much more by now.

 

It's something that I'll probably look into more now. Can only be a good thing for gaming.

 

If you go the PC route for indies, it's quite cheap and affordable. And considering most games aren't demanding at all, you can pull it off on just about any old laptop you might have hanging around.

[drahkon]

Hey, don't get me wrong, I like retail games just as much as indie games... I just hate this sequel mentality. Why must every successfull ip be replicated ad infinitum!?? It makes no sense from a creative POV.

 

If it bothers you that much, ok. Nothing for me to say :p

 

I actually do not give a single fuck if developers - indie or not - want to make a piece of art or the 800th installment of a series. For me, everyone who makes games (movies, music, writes books) cannot hide the fact - not even with the incredible pretentiousness, some of those 'genius developers' show - that they all want to make a shitload of money.

And if the game is fun (single game or sequel) I'll gladly pay the money. And if it's the most artistic piece of entertainment, fine. If it's a brown, generic FPS and I enjoy it, fine.

 

It's a joke that some developers want to be taken seriously as artists whilst not even respecting their own work...

 

Yeah, it's a joke, but you don't have to take them seriously (which I assume you do).

 

It's useless to rant about all that.

As I've said, they all want to make money. Some of them truly put everything they have (creativity, time, effort, etc.) into whatever they are creating and some just put in a lot of money.

If the result is good..hurray!

 

Right now, the gaming industry and what it has to offer is amazing. At least for me, and I don't understand why so many people talk so much shit about it.

Edited August 23, 2013 by drahkon

[Ville]

Well, I really don't care if it's an indie game, a yearly sequel or whatever. If it looks interesting and fun to me, I'll buy it. And probably check the reviews before that too, not interested in wasting my money on crappy games.

[MoogleViper]

I think we give it another year and hopefully the term Indie will start to fade out.

 

Not at all, it's just one step in a repeating cycle.

 

Mainstream games become stale, indie games get more popular, mainstream adopts indie styles, indie becomes mainstream, mainstream does well, mainstream becomes stale...

 

Rinse and repeat. We've seen it before with films, we'll see it again.