It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionThe sad truth about indie games (IMHO)...(103 posts)(103 posts)
(103 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
clarry: Neither indies nor AAAs are brave enough to try something different and ambitious.
This is relatively close to my position when talking about the overall landscape of indie gaming and gaming as a whole. However, I don't know that my gripe is so much with wanting something different, as it is with wanting something more ambitious. That statement may not make sense at face value, but for an example of what I mean, I have been saying for years it is time for indie devs (if able budget-wise) to move beyond 2D pixel art and start making stuff resembling at least, say, games of the early Playstation console era both in graphics and content. So, if everyone started taking my suggestion, they would eventually no longer be doing much "different" from one another (since the majority would now be making Playstation era style stuff rather than the majority making 2D pixel stuff), but it would be more ambitious than the majority of titles we get so far.
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
clarry: Neither indies nor AAAs are brave enough to try something different and ambitious.
avatar
rjbuffchix: This is relatively close to my position when talking about the overall landscape of indie gaming and gaming as a whole. However, I don't know that my gripe is so much with wanting something different, as it is with wanting something more ambitious. That statement may not make sense at face value, but for an example of what I mean, I have been saying for years it is time for indie devs (if able budget-wise) to move beyond 2D pixel art and start making stuff resembling at least, say, games of the early Playstation console era both in graphics and content. So, if everyone started taking my suggestion, they would eventually no longer be doing much "different" from one another (since the majority would now be making Playstation era style stuff rather than the majority making 2D pixel stuff), but it would be more ambitious than the majority of titles we get so far.
That's not exactly the kind of ambition I'm after though. Like, I think the vast majority of indies are just remaking something that exists already, with their own shade of paint and a gimmick or three. I don't care if they do that with PS1 or PS2 or 90s PC games or whatever, I will still be bored with them.

I'm more after things like asking what made Deus Ex so revolutionary for its time and what could you do to take it to the next fucking level? Unfortunately indies and AAAs alike are unable to think along these lines so I'd expect yet another totally mediocre mainstream & console friendly power fantasy game where you can crawl in vents and sneak around or shoot people if you like. With augs. That's not ambitious, that's not next level, that's just rehashing the same and even failing to recognize many (if not most!) of the remaining elements that made the original Deus Ex revolutionary and more than just a vent crawling game.

For me, part of ambition should also involve taking risks and playing with elements that aren't "tried and true." AAA is really allergic to that, for obvious reasons; indies are in a much better position. If only they first climbed out of the pit of rehashing their childhood...
Posted July 04, 2023
*whispers* some of the best games in the last few years have been more than $10 indie titles

But if you choose to wait for deep deep discount then that's a skill of a type, but I do think the idea of if it's indie it should be super cheap is a little short sighted
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
Sabin_Stargem: I consider indie games to be just as valuable, if not moreso, than AAA games. Lobotomy Corporation and La-Mulana deserved a pricing of $60 at release, and should have been considered the GOTY of their time.

Let's be clear: AAA games are at the price they are at, not because of their creativity or craftsmanship, but simply because they are backed by corporations that have reputation through sheer fiscal strength. What you are paying for is the chance to say "I played that", and to be able to talk with other people who share that common experience.

This isn't to say there are no great AAA games. Rather, I think that people mistake their opportunity to connect with society as an inherent quality of the game, when it is actually the power of FOMO at work.
AAA games also cost a bucket-load more money to make.

They usually have a small army of people working on them. Those wages do pile up.

Obviously, the companies often make an healthy profit off them, but I don't think they could afford to charge what a lot of indie games are charging. They'd go under.

Making things ultra realistic costs money and makes you move slow.

avatar
myconv: Furthermore, too many indie titles brag about "pixel art" which is just low res regular art. And their fan base loves it. But I'm sick of it. Come on developers. Get to modern times and use a proper resolution. You can still hand draw the art if you like, but use MS paint , GNU image manipulator, or something. Just something where you aren't struggling to even read the text sometimes. Sometimes I suspect it's just catering to nostalgia.

Is there anyone at all who agrees it's time for less low res art in modern games?
The funny thing about that is that it is pretty time intensive to make.

My wife is into drawing, art and design and I sometimes show her games asking her "can you do something like this?" and whenever it is pixel art stuff, she tells me that it would take way too long.

It gave me a new level of appreciation for the people that do it.

avatar
SpaceMadness: Developers are largely undervalued for their work
avatar
clarry: Isn't what the market is willing to pay the best indication of value? How else would you assign value to the work?
I think game devs have it worse than devs in a lot of other industries. For equal amount of skill and work, you can usually find better pay elsewhere and that's why I would never work under someone else as a game developer.

Fact of the matter is that too many developers want to work on games and that plays against them in the labor market.
Post edited July 04, 2023 by Magnitus
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
Magnitus: My wife is into drawing, art and design and I sometimes show her games asking her "can you do something like this?" and whenever it is pixel art stuff, she tells me that it would take way too long.

It gave me a new level of appreciation for the people that do it.
Then all the more reason to not do it like that, since it looks terrible IMO. Like some of it is OK, but it never looks good to me. And again the text like that is much harder to read. Using nonpixlated text takes no extra effort. It seems they do this because some people are convinced it's like fine art or something. Though again I think it's more nostalgia. Also sometimes feels a bit snobbyish.
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
myconv: Then all the more reason to not do it like that, since it looks terrible IMO. Like some of it is OK, but it never looks good to me. And again the text like that is much harder to read. Using nonpixlated text takes no extra effort. It seems they do this because some people are convinced it's like fine art or something. Though again I think it's more nostalgia. Also sometimes feels a bit snobbyish.
It's not snobbery, I find a lot of it pretty... I just genuinely appreciate good looking pixel art without anybody having to agree or disagree with me that it looks good, it pulls at my heart strings.

I did grow up with NES and SNES/Sega Genesis games so in all likelihood, my upbringing also conditioned me to like those games like you alluded to with the nostalgia factor.

However, I do appreciate other kinds too.
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
SpaceMadness: Developers are largely undervalued for their work
avatar
clarry: Isn't what the market is willing to pay the best indication of value? How else would you assign value to the work?
THIS

Most wish for more pay for their work, but the market will decide a fair price... not the worker. If you are making an essential or unique product or providing an essential or unique service, the market will certainly provide you with a higher market price. If you are providing a common or non-essential product or common or non-essential service, the market will tend to not allow higher prices.

(Where this gets wonky is when the markets are manipulated and are not allowed to act naturally.)

I think a lot of people currently in game creation -- unfortunately -- miss this point. And having been in an associated creative industry, I understand completely the general lack of basic business knowledge (I've been there!). Unfortunately, I also see a lot of ego and entitlement in both industries -- a belief in deserving high return / value for their products or services, even when the creators are new to the market and / or their product or service isn't unique. The reality that most small businesses fail in the first year is a foreign concept.

It will be interesting to see if the game markets start deflating as consumers scale back purchases... and... this is where I have compassion for the indie devs who are coming to market with a fair price but may have to lower that due to larger recessionary pressures.
Post edited July 04, 2023 by kai2
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
NuffCatnip: I have to disagree, I personally think many indie titles offer way more enjoyment compared to most AAA titles.
I played Stardew Valley for 300 hours, Enter the Gungeon for 30-50, Binding of Isaac for 50-70 and the list goes on and on and on.
Most AAA games I play I either rush through just to be done with the game or I abandon a playthrough after a couple of hours.
Understood... and don't get me wrong, I've played some good indies...

... but...

... would you pay average $60 USD for a day one indie release?

In the past AAA would usually have been a good indicator of the general quality of the release product... and potentially the size of the experience (hours of playtime)... but... both of those have fallen into the gutter as of late. Personally, I wouldn't argue that most current AAA games are worth their price either.
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
kai2: (IMHO)

I like to support indie developers who take pride in their work and who show a willingness to correct mistakes and improve their games (and those who communicate with myself or their communities)...

... but...

... I rarely will pay over $10 for an indie.

Why?

Most times it's because of the limited gameplay and / or features. However technically proficient, if I see a price tag above $10 USD I'll often forego the experience... until the price has fallen. For instance... Kingsblood -- a game I definitely want -- just released elsewhere for $14.99... but the gameplay doesn't look like I'll get the full enjoyment for that price. The same for Dark Quest 3 -- another title I definitely want to play; the gameplay just doesn't seem robust enough to pay more than $10 USD.

Now, on the other hand Alaloth has come down (on sale) under $10... and it's been updated and added a Dragon DLC. That seems about right... or...

... I've been looking at Spiderweb's games ie (Avernum)... which all -- except the newest -- are under $10 on sale and all are quite hefty, long-playing, feature-rich experiences (albeit in an old style).

I may be unfairly de-valuing Lost Eidolons... Wartales... Wildermyth... (well-reviewed indies that I definitely want to play) and others by demanding a lower price point -- and I do once in awhile pay near full price for a game like Solasta -- but...

... at the same time...

... the fact that so many recent indies are on my wishlist shows me that the indie space is over-crowded and probably over-priced... especially in the current world market. Even on GOG -- which doesn't get every release -- my indie wishlist is backing up, but if I can buy a classic fully-realized AAA game of the past on GOG, I'll often tend toward that...

... unless...

... that $10 threshold is broken. Then I'll seriously look at the indie game(s).
10 dollars seems to be a bit on the low end of the spectrum, at least from where i'm standing. I have several indie titles with multiple hundreds of hours of play time each. I would be ashamed to verdict any new indie release on 10 dollars knowing from experience there might be dragons hiding
Posted July 04, 2023
Personally, I'd like to see more small releases, particularly in the RPG genre.

Not every game needs to be a 20+ hour marathon with tons of content and a significant price tag. Games with less content can be made faster and cheaper, are less tiring to play, and can be sold for less while still potentially making a profit. Then, if the first game does well, more games can be made in that style.

There's a strong tendency for developers to put too much into the game, and that's the sort of tendency that, in my opinion, indie developers should try to avoid.

There are certainly examples of games where the developers tried to do too much, and ended up not releasing at all, or the resulting release was a mess.

(Another example is mini-games. Many mini-games tend to be worse than the main game, and if mandatory tend to be quite frustrating; if they would exclude the mini-game and instead focus on making the main game better, or just saving the resources and releasing sooner, it would be better.)
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
kai2: Most wish for more pay for their work, but the market will decide a fair price... not the worker. If you are making an essential or unique product or providing an essential or unique service, the market will certainly provide you with a higher market price. If you are providing a common or non-essential product or common or non-essential service, the market will tend to not allow higher prices.

(Where this gets wonky is when the markets are manipulated and are not allowed to act naturally.)

I think a lot of people currently in game creation -- unfortunately -- miss this point. And having been in an associated creative industry, I understand completely the general lack of basic business knowledge (I've been there!). Unfortunately, I also see a lot of ego and entitlement in both industries -- a belief in deserving high return / value for their products or services, even when the creators are new to the market and / or their product or service isn't unique. The reality that most small businesses fail in the first year is a foreign concept.

It will be interesting to see if the game markets start deflating as consumers scale back purchases... and... this is where I have compassion for the indie devs who are coming to market with a fair price but may have to lower that due to larger recessionary pressures.
I think it is important to make a distinction here between self-employed devs and devs working for a company.

Some self-employed indie game devs can be underpaid, because their games undersell (direct market pressures from competition with other games) like you indicated.

Many devs working for larger companies can be underpaid, irrespective of how well the game sells, because you have shareholders/owners and top-management controlling the allocation of profits and remunerating devs based on leverage (ideally, they'd pay the devs nothing, but the devs will not work for nothing and then its a matter of how badly they need a particular developer compared to other developers who also want the job). Unless you are a rock star, you probably won't have much leverage as a lot of devs want to go into game development. Personally, I'm more than happy to reduce that pressure from the employee side of things by going elsewhere.
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
Magnitus: I think it is important to make a distinction here between self-employed devs and devs working for a company.
I'd agree. A large part of game making is marketing.... and larger businesses or corporations have teams and budgets for marketing prior to bringing a game to market.

A big hope was that the internet -- or social media -- could somewhat democratize marketing. Did it? Maybe a bit
Posted July 04, 2023
I also beg to differ, but I don't tend to associate a game's value to its number of mechanics, features, or even length. For me value resides for the most part on a game's given creativity, depth (emotional and intelectual), message, and engagement. It's a gross generalisation but also a fact that it's been within the indie space where I've found most of those aspects throughout these last years. Anyway, at the end of the day, each one of us attributes value differently, but in my humble opinion, we're shooting ourselves in the foot if we propagate the idea that indies should be dirt cheap even when more often than not, their polish and quality exceeds that of 70$ titles made by big corporations (some of them being blatant tax evaders to boot).
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
myconv: Then all the more reason to not do it like that, since it looks terrible IMO. Like some of it is OK, but it never looks good to me.
That's a "you" problem though. Since developers can't please everyone, they should do what they think works best for the game they're doing, and plenty of people like pixel art.
Using nonpixlated text takes no extra effort.
That depends on how the game is implemented. Some games are made at an actual low resolution that's simply scaled up to full screen, in which case it's not possible to have non-pixelated text. Some games are made to run at the native monitor resolution and the individual sprites and so on are scaled up, in which case you can have non-pixelated text. But in that case you then have complaints about the inconsistent pixel grid, which some people find unpleasant. I've seen a few games where there's an option to have pixelated text or not, which is a nice solution, but is hardly "no extra effort".
Posted July 04, 2023
avatar
Wirvington: (some of them being blatant tax evaders to boot).
Big publicly traded corporations are wh*res for money by definition. They are literally bound to do everything in their power to maximize investor revenue and if they don't do it, investors can sue and will win. They have some leeway to decide between shorter-term and longer-term profits when there is a conflict there, but that's about the limit of the amount of self-determination that they have.

In that sense, it is helpful to think of them as profit optimizing automatons. Within the limits of the creativity and foresight of the people at the helm of the company, if one decision involves making more money than the other, that's the route they'll go.

Assuming they don't go to jail or pay fines higher than the amount saved, evading taxes will equates to more profits so that is what they'll do.

Honestly, their behaviour is so deterministic that I'm not even all that mad about it. I'm more annoyed at people who delude themselves into thinking otherwise. But all things being equal, I much prefer to support individual indie devs than larger publicly traded corporations too. It is better for the gaming ecosystem overall.
Post edited July 04, 2023 by Magnitus
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionThe sad truth about indie games (IMHO)...(103 posts)(103 posts)
(103 posts)