next »

[2mass]

The question is in the topic.. I have seen a few games tagged as indie on Steam, despite being published by mainstream medias and being backed by heavy funding etc., here's one I just stumbled upon by Activision..



Tagged as indie by some user, and it made me wonder: When should we cease to call something 'indie', how many buckaroos or customers does it take, or what definition do you go by?

[neutonm]

Emotinally, when game gets million-moneys-fund qualities.
For me, Amnesia was an indie and now Soma has some AAA bits.

Besides, if you see pixel art graphics today then it's definitely Indie

[2mass]

Emotinally, when game gets million-moneys-fund qualities.
For me, Amnesia was an indie and now Soma has some AAA bits.

Besides, if you see pixel art graphics today then it's definitely Indie

Yes. I think the term 'indie' becomes a bit loose, once it's defined as 'outside mainstream', because what the heck is mainstream really? Minecraft used to be indie as I know it, and now it's more mainstream than an EA game or something.

I think we should establish a fixed point where things are no longer indie, and that's when the money put into marketing is enough to open your very own mcD in your country. The Big Mac Indiex. There. I fixed it.

 

[ｂ∀ ｋｋｕｓａ]

you can report false tagged games on steam .

Bubsy two-fur was a post-apocalyptic Gore game for a long time.


btw it can be used to your advantage to get more visibilty on steam, as long as you're not reported , you'll keep the tag hence visibility.

[ProgramGamer]

I would argue that indie is short for independant, and the moment your game's design is influenced significantly by a publisher or investor for the sake of profit, then it ceases to be indie in my book. Then again, that's just my personal definition, and I definitely tend to argue about meaningless semantics (screenshot Saturday).

Here are some examples.

pure indie: Cave Story, Spelunky, Minecraft(originally)

pure AAA: anything with boobs, fanservice or vestigial features from previous entries in a series, like DOA volleyball, Hyrule Warriors and Assassin's Creed.

These are loose examples though, so take them with a grain of salt.

[chances_r]

I disagree with these definitions based on marketing, content, or profit motive.  None of those make the game any less "indie", IMO.

If a developer works alone, uses his own money for marketing, and makes lots of profit, he's still indie (independent).  Even if his game has the same style as typical AAA games.

There's no reason indie developers can't also be good businessmen and marketeers (and make big profits).

[Capntastic]

It is an entirely subjective term to be used as shorthand for a constellation of ideals and is useful for that but pointless to pin down and absolutely silly to try to use as a mallet to accuse someone of "not being"

[2mass]

It might be impossible to avoid semantics altogether when trying to define a terms limits, dunno, I would however feel that it lost its entire point as a term, if Ubisoft and Codemaster called themselves indie alongside modern 20mb pixel art games with zero funding for marketing. So I guess that's my way of viewing it. By the extremes. And then the lines blur in the center.

[Shine Klevit]

Indie has always been a promotional label. Nothing more, and nothing less. As long as it brings the attention to smaller truly independent teams and developers, I have no problem with it being abused to sell a product that really isn't.

[JWK5]

When turning a profit outweighs creating an experience.

[s0]

Indie has always been a promotional label. Nothing more, and nothing less. As long as it brings the attention to smaller truly independent teams and developers, I have no problem with it being abused to sell a product that really isn't.

agreed

but also from that standpoint it's understandable why "real" indie devs would be peeved about the AAA industry "infringing" on their turf.

but tbh indie-esque games from AAA publishers tend to not be that well received anyway (exceptions like thatgamecompany notwithstanding). i mean this white night game from the OP is a blip on the radar compared to e.g. binding of isaac.

[ProgramGamer]

When turning a profit outweighs creating an experience.

[Shine Klevit]

but tbh indie-esque games from AAA publishers tend to not be that well received anyway (exceptions like thatgamecompany notwithstanding). i mean this white night game from the OP is a blip on the radar compared to e.g. binding of isaac.

Well, that's kind of also another big part of it. I mean, these games will inevitably come off as a cheap imitation as they are more cash-ins on whatever the popular indie aesthetic is at the moment. Therefore, they'll always inevitably be a step behind. I mean, even if AAA publishers got wise to what makes indie games(at least the good ones) actually good rather than just what they appear to be, that wouldn't be a bad thing either. It would probably just mean better AAA games. So, for the most part, it kind of works out.

[Oddball]

Small independent developers want to be taken seriously, but they don't want to have to compete with better quality titles. So they try to create their own genre and define it to somehow exclude any developers who outclass them in terms of quality. The problem is they can't find a definition that doesn't include at least some high quality dev studios so they instead complain that indie has lost all meaning.

There'll always be high quality small teams who fit your idea of 'indie', and you'll have to learn to accept them as a part of your 'indie scene'.



EDIT: After writing this I think it might come across as me being bitchy when that isn't my intention. What I'm trying to say is don't worry too much about who is calling themselves indie as the term has never really meant anything in any real way.

[thundercroak]

I think that indie is no more indie when they lose independence from publisher, and then they become some sort of outsourcers.

[2mass]

Small independent developers want to be taken seriously, but they don't want to have to compete with better quality titles. So they try to create their own genre and define it to somehow exclude any developers who outclass them in terms of quality. The problem is they can't find a definition that doesn't include at least some high quality dev studios so they instead complain that indie has lost all meaning.

There'll always be high quality small teams who fit your idea of 'indie', and you'll have to learn to accept them as a part of your 'indie scene'.



EDIT: After writing this I think it might come across as me being bitchy when that isn't my intention. What I'm trying to say is don't worry too much about who is calling themselves indie as the term has never really meant anything in any real way.

This suggest that 'indie' means the exact same as 'sdu9ifhbsdiujf456': I just made another 'sdu9ifhbsdiujf456 game'.. Surely we can do better than that, despite that some people abuse or misunderstand the term 'indie'? Google gives a pretty clear definition: Free of the mainstream media. But ofc, what does mainstream then mean, and where is the limits.

[s0]

Well in the music industry there are corporate major labels and their subsidiaries and there are independent (indie) labels that exist outside of that system.

[2mass]

Well in the music industry there are corporate major labels and their subsidiaries and there are independent (indie) labels that exist outside of that system.

Nono, you're indie if you're not VEVO signed on youtube.. Surely that sums it up well enough, making Mozart indie

[Pfotegeist]

When indie becomes a mainstream marketing term it doesn't mean indie.

Like this suggests

Google gives a pretty clear definition: Free of the mainstream media. But ofc, what does mainstream then mean, and where is the limits.

[Oddball]

This suggest that 'indie' means the exact same as 'sdu9ifhbsdiujf456': I just made another 'sdu9ifhbsdiujf456 game'.. Surely we can do better than that, despite that some people abuse or misunderstand the term 'indie'? Google gives a pretty clear definition: Free of the mainstream media. But ofc, what does mainstream then mean, and where is the limits.

It's not even that people abuse or misunderstand it. It's more that the traditional mainstream publisher/developer relationship is disappearing. Valve make and sell games completely independent of the mainstream system. No one can say that they are making Half Life 3 any other way than their own way. Double Fine are similar. They have opted out of the publisher system. King are making a millions and I don't think they've ever made a game for a publisher. The mainstream is dead, everyone is indie now.