Why There Are No Indie Video Games?
Well, the title of this GSW post is the title of a new Slate article by Luke O'Brien, subtitled "And why that's bad for gamers", and dealing with the state of indie in gaming.
O'Brien has some fair points, such as :"In today's movie business, it's possible for an indie film like Napoleon Dynamite to become a sensation. Saw, which cost a mere $1.2 million, grossed 100 times that amount. That just doesn't happen in video games." Basically true - the barriers to producing and the variable sale prices for smaller budget games seem to have precluded such a major phenomenon as yet.
But other parts of the piece are rather meanspirited - claiming that classic creators are burnt out and solely working for the big boys, for example, with Sid Meier having "spent most of the last decade updating his previous hits at a company owned by Grand Theft Auto publisher Take-Two Interactive" - the acquisition was only recent, and saying Garriott "never produced another breakthrough like Ultima" rather underplays the importance of Ultima Online as a pioneering MMO, if that's not included in the statement.
And so, we reach the same old 'cultural crossroads' conclusion, which is as untrue as it ever was: "If the big studios stay in charge, it may return to its former status: the pastime of teenage boys and middle-aged nerds at gaming conventions." How about Nintendo's Brain Training, the casual game explosion, EA's moves toward developing original IP, the strides with games like Guitar Hero? I'm bored of this article, so why do people keep writing it?
Comments
What about Extend Every Extra ? Didn't that start as a freeware PC game and now its going to be a full on PSP game.
Posted by: Xir | May 26, 2006 8:17 PM
You know why they keep writing it...to get attention! Posting on GSW only encourages future iterations. ;)
Posted by: Dustin Clingman | May 27, 2006 7:43 AM
It's a terrible article for all the reasons you mention.
It's not clear what he means by "indie" gaming if he thinks that Microprose's Civilization counts - the company was one of the most important houses of the time. Meier gets bought out and he's a sell-out, Wright gets bought out and he's still a genius.
If he just means "Why aren't there games that surprise us?", the problem is not with gaming but with the saturation internet press coverage.
And we still get brilliant gifts like Katamari Damacy, Shadow of the Colossus, and the occasional licensed games that do amazing and interesting things, like Lego Star Wars.
Posted by: Troy Goodfellow | May 27, 2006 7:45 AM
Clearly doesn't know much about games. He says that id haven't created any milestones since Doom... well sure, except for Quake.
Posted by: Alc | May 27, 2006 10:31 AM
Indie gaming is all on the PC. Things like Cave Story, La La Land and Seiklus all fit the profile and sit around unplayed. With things like Every Extend getting noticed it is great. You also see a lot of ports to systems of the ABA Games (rRootage PSP) but mostly the large companies ignore them.
Or you could just look at D3 publishers being the indie developers (esp. in Japan) for consoles. Stuff like Maid Uniform & Machine Gun has a tiny staff and is about as close to what could be considered indie as you can get. It may not be good, but has that ever been the question? D3 is now going to start (please!) releasing this stuff in the US as well.
So... I don't see where the problem really is, except for the consumer just not knowing where to look. I think that site's like this, TIG, and Insert Credit (and mine!) do a good job at pointing people in the right direction. Just not enough people care.
Posted by: Shapermc | May 27, 2006 3:50 PM
It is also unclear what he means by "hit". If he means turning a profit, a lot of great shareware games do that well enough to perpetuate themselves as a brand, and also get wide recognition in their way on the internet and otaku culture. Is it like getting the game on "Entertainment TOnight"? No, but that doesn't mean it isn't popular.
The other assumption seemed to be that the "indy" games would want to be just like their big brothers from the studios. This could not possibly be further from the truth. What is actually happening is the exact opposite: companies like MS and Nintendo are begining to realize that micro-gaming is taking over, and are making such games available through their online distribution systems for accordingly micro-payments of $5-$15.
Really, when it comes down to it, any analogy to the movie industry is hopelessly abstracted to make it work.
Posted by: Hambone | May 29, 2006 1:29 PM