next »

[Mark Mayers]

IMO Game Development now days is broken up into a 'tier' system, based on both talent and money flowing into the game.

Hobbyist Tier
i- The Random: "I like video games and want to make video games so I posted on r/gamedev asking how to do it."
ii- The Amateur: "I've made a few clones and original prototypes, but none of them are very good. I'm still learning."
iii- The Apprentice: "I have a game I've been working on for a while, it has potential but I have no commercial plans."

Professional Tier
I- The Journeyman: "I've been making <Rising Indie Title> for at least a year and am working on it full time with commercial plans."
II- The Studio: "I've/We've released fairly successful game(s) and have enough money to work full time on others."
III- The 'Indie' Brand: "We have well known and very successful titles with lots of cash flow. We may have won IGF or similar awards for our games."

No Longer Indie Tier
A- The Business: "We have funding from large publishers and develop successful IPs."
AA- The Giant: "We launch multi-million dollar titles with established international brands."
AAA- The Goliath: "Our marketing strategy consists of Mountain Dew, Doritos, and crappy Paul McCartney music videos."

[joseph ¯\_(ツ)_/¯]

I think almost all of you are oblivious to how much money (and credit, and access to loans, and assets) 'large' companies actually have, and how much power that gives them. Comparing some baby 2mil in game sales or kickstarter to the kind of access to funding that a big publisher sized company has is ridiculous ~

[Pfotegeist]

independent
indie
indeep
indept
indepted
indeptendent
inmpedmninent
inddeptiment
indeepdeptimminent 
independs 
indiapends
indemnified 

[JWK5]

If you're not indemnie get the fuck out!

Indemnies for life!

[Tuba]

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.

We have stuff like Devolver, Adult Swim and Versus Evil. Indie publishers are a thing now and Devolver in special has quite a fanbase now, I've seen a lot of people associating Hotline Miami more with Devolver than with Cactus.

Anyway, to developers indie might mean one thing, something related small budgets, authorship, independence from a publisher, making games as a hobby or stuff like that but the general public and the media seem to have turned "indie" into a genre. Much like what happened with indie music.

Journey and Hohokum were funded by Sony and developed with the help of the same studio that made God of War, still everyone calls them indies. Tim Shaffer calls Double Fine indie but it's a pretty big studio afaik with games published by EA, SEGA and others. Child of Light was developed by Ubisoft and I've seen people calling it indie or saying it's "indie-like".

So, I guess the definition for the main public is: "If your game doesn't look like something from a AAA developer and it's not from Japan, it's indie".

[Mark Mayers]

So, I guess the definition for the main public is: "If your game doesn't look like something from a AAA developer and it's not from Japan, it's indie".

I think the 'indie' visual style means something entirely different from 'indie' developed games.
Ex. all these games have 'indie visuals' but are very different.

---

Did one man/woman make this game in his/her apartment in their spare time?



It's an indie game.

---

Did a publisher or studio invest at least $500k into a title made by a small team?



Well, you're talking about fringe indie, now probably III.

---

It looks like an indie game. Is it still 'indie' when Microsoft bought it for $2 billion?



Hmmm, well it started out as an indie game but isn't anymore.
It's an international brand. The visual style is irrelevant.

Most of the 'general population' still thinks Minecraft is an indie game.
Actually that's a lie. The general population doesn't even know what an indie game is.

[Tuba]

Most of the 'general population' still thinks Minecraft is an indie game.
Actually that's a lie. The general population doesn't even know what an indie game is.

Yep, that's true. I have a bunch of friends that play video games but are not "enthusiasts", they have consoles but don't read gaming websites, watch videos or anything like that, they just want to play FIFA and GTA and they have no idea about indie games. One of them told me a few months ago that he was getting tired of games because there wasn't much variety, I told him to go play some alternative games like FEZ, Gone Home or something and he had no idea of what I was talking about.

But even for people that are one step above that, people that read Kotaku and watch let's plays, for most of those people (even to some journalists) indie games are just games with pixel art and some quirky gameplay elements.

[Mark Mayers]

One of them told me a few months ago that he was getting tired of games because there wasn't much variety, I told him to go play some alternative games like FEZ, Gone Home or something and he had no idea of what I was talking about.

But even for people that are one step above that, people that read Kotaku and watch let's plays, for most of those people (even to some journalists) indie games are just games with pixel art and some quirky gameplay elements.

5 years ago I didn't know Indie Games existed either.

In 2011 I met Phil Fish at PAX East.
I walk up to his booth. He says, "You've heard of FEZ, right?"
I said no. He frowns.

5 years later, now indie games take up most of my life.
I'm the person at PAX East showing off my game, which even fewer people have heard of.
Funny how things work out. 
 

[absolute8]

When it is published by EA. Sorry Brad Borne.

[GarBenjamin]

We've had this discussion a fair amount over at the Unity forums.

It seems the general idea many game devs have is this is simply a term like Indie in the music industry and all it means is someone (or even 100 people) developed a game without any support from a publisher. Or at least a big publisher.

I don't share that opinion and this is why... when I think of Indie I think of the guy who spent years making Stardew Valley, the guy who spent nearly 8 years making Axiom Verge and all of the many other games created by lone devs and tiny teams of 2, 3 or 4 people. I think of the many people who are creating dev logs and otherwise showcasing their games and development here. I'm not exactly sure where the line stops for me... I just know there is a line someplace.

Why does there have to be a line... a limit? Because Indie definitely is perceived in a certain way by the end gamers. And that basically comes down to "did it on his/her own", "making due with far less" and so forth. So basically we have these two completely different definitions of Indie going on and I go with the one that gamers (including myself as a gamer) subscribe to the most which is this second definition.

And I think even the press tends to often see Indie games in this second way. Certainly they seem to go out of their way to make a big deal about recognizing games created by a single person or a very tiny team. And rightly so. Because it is obvious such a micro team (of one or a few) has a much greater limit on their capacity than a group of 50 people calling themselves Indie.

I think the idea of "support Indies" also support this. I like to support Indie game devs. Well the ones I see as truly being Indie which again means a micro team. The teams of 15, 30 and 50 or more people making Kickstarter videos showing off their fancy dev equipment and office space... honestly that really turns me off quick. My first thought is "with all of those people and all of that gear why do you need my support?" That's not the kind of team I want to support. It's us "little people". The normal folks.

Indie makes me think of the days when a micro team created games and used the shareware model. Hobbyist reminds me of the time when a micro team created games and released into the PD. And I think this is where some of the confusion comes from. For older folks (such as myself) we've seen Hobbyists and Indies decades ago. And we have a very distinct view of what those things mean as a result.

Just my two cents on it. And hello by the way I am new here. Came over yesterday from the Unity forums.

[Mark Mayers]

Because Indie definitely is perceived in a certain way by the end gamers. And that basically comes down to "did it on his/her own", "making due with far less" and so forth. So basically we have these two completely different definitions of Indie going on and I go with the one that gamers (including myself as a gamer) subscribe to the most which is this second definition.

I definitely agree with the definition of, "making due with far less."

The mantra being, "I am doing the best I can with the scarce resources I have." Resources meaning money, time, or people.
Although everyone ostensibly is trying to do the best they can, most indie developers can't acquire more 'resources' at a reasonable cost.

Ex.
"I can't quit my day job to work on the game full time, because I wouldn't be able to pay rent."
"Evolving health problems are preventing me from continuing to work more than 60 hours a week."
"We can't afford to hire any more people because we don't have the money."
"A publisher offered us a deal, but with the cost of giving up IP ownership and cannibalizing our creative work."   

Fortunately there are opportunities available to help people in those situations, but they are few and far between.

[Pfotegeist]

An indie doesn't usually impress me by calling itself indie.


A small team can be really good, the actual product they make can be superior to a popular product, but they can't generate demand in order to sell for more than a competing average product. Communities have a real impact on a company like this because the popular product could be exactly the same, or very different, and it's hard to tell sometimes.

In contrast, a giant company pays people to spread the word, places huge billboards on the side of a road, or advertise wherever people will see it. They can fund public campaigns to improve appearances and establish who needs it, and who buys it. They can generate whatever demand they want and cut costs while maintaining a profit. When a company like this calls itself indie, it's just evidence the indie label sells.