Was that a response to Paul or me?

Depends on what you mean by "did well". I don't know what the various games have earned, but off the top of my head I believe these games got a lot of publicity without the developers seeking to provoke controversy:

Braid
Blueberry Garden
World of Goo
Zeno Clash
Machinarium
Alien Hominid

Now I'm actually curious if there are any indie games that did well as a result of the developer(s) provoking controversy?

I think our opinions differ in that I believe that controversy is fleeting, while quality and respect is permanent. A controversial game or personality may be getting a lot of attention at first and some of that attention might translate into a few extra sales, but in the long run, the game developers and publishers we keep coming back to are those that have a proven track record of quality and take themselves and their potential customers serious. It takes respect to build up a loyal fanbase and indie devs need that to keep afloat. Using controversy to drum up publicity for a game is a hit-and-run tactic.

regardless, controversy does sell games. and it's really the only way indies have to sell games.

I think the best way for indie developers to get publicity is to set up a development blog from day 1 and slowly build a following through regular updates, interesting articles/thoughts on game development in general and YouTube videos with "behind the scenes" stuff. And also being respected members of various indie communities.

Or maybe, you know, a developer could just make a great game instead of trying to trick people into downloading a turd.

Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but are you implying that setting up a development blog is also "trying to trick people"?

Regardless of that, the point is that even if you make a "great game", potential customers still need to hear about it in order to buy it. Paul Eres was implying that the only way for indie developers to get the word out about their game is through controversy. I disagree with that.

When I click on "About", I get this:

This site is not designed to support non-standard compliant browsers such as Internet Explorer 7 or lower. Attempting to do so is a waste of time. Instead, you should get a browser that actually works, like Mozilla Firefox.

And I'm already using Firefox...

[and it's really the only way indies have to sell games.]

regardless, controversy does sell games. and it's really the only way indies have to sell games. it doesn't have to be antagonistic controversy, one can be talked about and both loved and hated while being a perfectly polite person, but it has to be controversy of some sort or another.

I respectfully disagree. It's like the force: getting publicity through controversy is the quick and easy path, but you lose your soul/respect in the process. I think the best way for indie developers to get publicity is to set up a development blog from day 1 and slowly build a following through regular updates, interesting articles/thoughts on game development in general and YouTube videos with "behind the scenes" stuff. And also being respected members of various indie communities. The JForce guys had the website and YouTube videos on their side -- it's just a pity they decided to go the controversy path and act like jerks. It became more about them than the game. Bob at least tied his "controversial" personality into the game's story -- there was a reason for his acting out. He was just less of a marketing genius for not actually having a finished game to sell when his publicity peaked.

http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk276/lurkies/brawlers.png
http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk276/lurkies/stronglist50.png
http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk276/lurkies/weaklist50.png

Did you draw that character art? It's awesome!

Woohoo!

Yay!

Exactly. Now look up "comic":

1 : of, relating to, or marked by comedy <a comic actor>
2 : causing laughter or amusement : funny <a comic monologue>
3 : of or relating to comic strips <the newspaper's comic section>

I can see why you'd want a different term for that if you'd want to tell "serious" stories in that medium. But "game" is fine.

The problem with the comic -> graphic novel comparison is that the word "comic" carries in it a descriptor of the "seriousness" of the content (comic = humorous). The word "game" doesn't.

I'm baffled by how Passage is neither art nor a game? I'd say that those exact two words are what describes it best. You can make up all the words you want -- I think I'll just stick to those that have an appropriate and already well-defined meaning.

For some reason this reminds me of a dog chasing its tail...

Personally, I always thought that the term 'artgame' is pretty shortsighted and stupid, cause it pretty much says that some games are art whereas others aren't - anyway, hope that clears things up a bit.

But, wait, isn't your entire point that some games are art while others aren't and that's why you think we need a different term for those games...?

I'd go with a shareware model instead, then. I can't think of a freeware game other than Dwarf Fortress that brings in steady donations.

[Target aim:]

Hope you find what you're looking for and good luck with your game. I'm just curious about this:

Target aim:
Freeware

Compensation:
No upfront payments will be made but when we get some funding,  some of it will be used as payment.

How are you going to find funding for a freeware game?

If the funniest, most entertaining movie of the year is not concidered one of the best films of the year I don't know what is. 

What do you base your judgement on, and what are some of your favorite films of 2009?

If you say Avatar chrknudsen, I will go raegmode. 

Haven't seen Avatar yet and probably wouldn't rate it as one of the best movies of the year even if I had (might rate it as best moviegoing experience for me, but that's something different). My point is that my favorite movies of the year won't necessarily be the same as those I would rate as the "best of the year". My favorite movie of all time is probably Raiders of the Lost Ark, but I'd never call it one of the best movies ever made. Just like I had a great time with Star Trek this year, but wouldn't call it one of the best movies of the year. I think a "best movie of the year" should be in the upper levels in pretty much all the art fields that make up a movie: screenwriting, directing, acting, cinematography, editing (and possibly music/soundtrack, as well). And it should affect me emotionally in a way that I'm not able to shake off just after having seen it. Somebody mentioned Shawshank Redemption a few posts back and I'd say that a movie like that would certainly qualify as being one of the best movies of 1994 and probably also one of my favorite movies of that year.

Anyway, this is going off topic (though it seems that people often just mention their favorite movies/games in this thread and the "games have terrible writing" thread).

I haven't seen it either and it may very well be entertaining and two hours of pure fun. But I believe I can say with confidence that calling it one of the best movies of the year just means you haven't seen enough movies this year...

I believe I can say with confidence that if you're making that claim without actually having seen it...

It's a zombie movie. I have nothing against those -- I often enjoy them -- but one of the best movies of the year? I wouldn't think so. Most entertaining? Could be. The funniest? It might. Most enjoyable? Perhaps. But I personally don't judge "best movies of the year" by those standards. Maybe we're just using different standards, since "best" doesn't really say much?

Most definitely so.

I haven't seen it either and it may very well be entertaining and two hours of pure fun. But I believe I can say with confidence that calling it one of the best movies of the year just means you haven't seen enough movies this year...

I believe YouTube supports 1080 HD, and I'm not sure you can get better quality than that elsewhere...