| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (16)

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 7:25PM That Burning Sensation said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
It would seem pretty simple. Does your 'indie' developer make millions of dollars and release big budget games? Yes? Then you're not an indie developer.

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 7:41PM MystileArmor said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Here, this is what the Oxford dictionary defines as independent:

"free from outside control; not depending on another's authority "

Having tons of money and/or releasing big blockbusters has nothing to do with anything.
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 7:48PM That Burning Sensation said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@MystileArmor

That would be called an independent developer. When people use the words indie, it is implied that a developer does not have the finacial backing or involvement with a major finacial contributor. Like an indie, record label, film maker, band, and so on. Saying that someone is free from outside control; not depending on another's authority just described what most 3rd party devs are. That's why Kotick is making a contest out of it. That's why there is no game called "Who wants to be a Millionare. . . again."
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 7:52PM That Burning Sensation said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's almost like you're accepting their use of the Bill Clinton defense. "It depends on how you define alone…"
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 11:07PM arkweld said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Epic are one of the first and last modern "indie" game developers. You can count Valve in there too.

Money is irrelevant, it's being in control of what you do and how you do it that has always counted. If you consist of one company and enjoy being just one company then you are independent.

Most companies these days are becoming pretty happy to sell up to EA. When you get big enough to exert power over another company and buy them for just for their IPs or sell out to a bigger one, that's when you know it's over.
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 7:29PM That Burning Sensation said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No offense, Chris Taylor, but not being ridiculously successful does not qualify indie. Then all developers who don't release blockbusters are indie?

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 7:33PM leemahi said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
where can i get the joystiq font letters? i remember some dude winning that contest where is that guy.

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 7:51PM Assmar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I saw Epic and GPG at Coachella last year, man have they sold out.

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 7:57PM Acosta02 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail203.html

Relevant to this conversation!

Not that there's a lot going on in here.

Note that the views expressed in this are not necessarily those of... me.

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 7:59PM Assmar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Don't worry, if we don't agree with those opinions, I promise you won't be Acostad.
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 8:13PM Acosta02 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That's better for you than it is for me; I've got some pretty powerful connections. Mess with me... well,


That's gon Acosta.
(it works so much better in spoken format :/)
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 8:39PM Assmar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No quieres decir "don Acost"?
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 8:04PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Really, making a lot of money doesn't automatically stop you from being an independent developer. All independent developers do it in hopes of gaining some monetary compensation, or at least a future career in the industry. Yea, some will claim that it's all about the art, but look at there sites and automatically you are pelted with a barrage of Adsense ads and, "Hey, wouldja buy a t-shirt with my indie game character on it? It's only 29.99 and would make you look super cool and indie! I mean look at it, HE'S SAYING SOMETHING CLEVER!!". Honestly though, can you blame them.

Simply put, if you make a game with a small team funded with your own time and money you are more than likely an independent developer. No publisher's paying you to develop the game.

I believe being 'indie', however, is more an idea. The belief that you are only 'indie' when you are a 1, maybe 2, man team tirelessy working in your off time to grind out your vision with no want of monetary gain. To be 'indie' you must be living off of ramen in your parents basement to work on something so mind-bafflingly unique and artistic that people will cry rainbows at the realization of it's greatness. Usually, this means a slightly modified Bejeweled or some tower defense game.

I would like to put away with this idea of being 'indie', because it ultimately leads to tons of people thinking 'indie' people are self righteous douchebags. When really, we just want to make the kinds of games we want to play. With unique art styles and gameplay that generally would be frowned upon by the higher-ups of an corporate entity because it doesn't stick to the "tried and true" idea of what sells. And if we start making money to fund our next projects, and ultimately make a living making our own games full-time, don't look down on us and say we sold out. We just achieved what we were working for all along.

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 8:15PM Cheesus Crust said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I want those too!

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 11:11PM ceptri said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's actually really hard to define. I like to think the best formal definition would be something along the lines of everyone who works on the game is being paid a share of the revenue. So basically, if anyone gets a salary but doesn't "own" the game, you aren't indie. Someone might try to break my definition by mentioning profit sharing at even big companies like EA, but I think you guys understand what I mean.

Posted: Feb 19th 2010 4:06AM Giroro said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
True definition of indie game:
http://www.bobsgame.com/

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW