The future of gaming lies in indie developers?

[Tragedy's Rebellion]

I've been thinking about this for a while now, since I've only bought indie games for the past 3 years, maybe more. The only exception is Warlords of Draenor and we all know how well that turned out. I just find the spark of creativity and talent in indie games lately and they've been able to do things much better than AAA developers. I think Grim Dawn, for example, is a much better ARPG than Diablo 3 could ever hope to be. It has better art design, deeper RPG elements, no always-online DRM, the developers are always in touch with players, better writing, I could go on. Another example is Larian Studios. Their continued efforts on D:OS (now with the EE coming out, good thing I have it on GoG) is great to see. I think D:OS is the best RPG to have come out of Kickstarter (Shadowrun is second) and now they are kickstarting D:OS 2, which I have no reason to doubt that it will be as awesome if not even better. They managed to work on the EE, adding tons of new stuff and improving graphics, systems and pretty much everything else AND at the same time working on D:OS 2. While Dragon Age: Inquisition still has performance issues on PC, let alone new content FOR FREE. A THIRD example is, of course, CDProjekt RED. I personally don't like the Witcher games, but that doesn't mean they aren't always amazing to players and their efforts on GoG are always appreciated. Other examples include Path of Exile, which I think is better designed than Diablo 3; Age of Wonders 3 which is a great strategy game, I really could go on.

ALL this while AAA developers are piling shovelware in the trough to be gobbled up, while trying to extort as much cash from you as they can. I find this degrading and is beneath gaming in general. AAA games also almost always tend to veer into design-by-committee for the maximization of quarterly revenue territory, with no creativity, talent, imagination or anything else. We all know EA's, Ubisoft's (AssCreed, the french one) and Acti-Blizzard's signature escapades. They always treat us like criminals with obtrusive DRM, overpriced DLC, microtransactions and general anti-consumer decisions and designs. Somehow indie developers manage to be awesome to customers while providing amazing quality games with tons of support FOR FREE. I also think indie developers have a lot more freedom concerning the games they make and they can push boundaries that AAA studios can't, mainly because of trying to justify spending 100s of millions of dollars on their games and trying to get back that huge amount of money. I think indie developers is where the future lies. What do you guys think?

 

[G00N3R7883]

These kind of generalisations tend to annoy me. You can't critisise AAA developers and just ignore the many examples of Steam greenlight and early access games from indie devs that are simply broken trash.

At the end of the day the truth is that some AAA games are good and some are crap, while some indie games are good and some are crap. I just want to play good games, and I don't care what the development model is.

 

[Tragedy's Rebellion]

These kind of generalisations tend to annoy me. You can't critise AAA developers and just ignore all the Steam greenlight and early access games from indie devs that are simply broken trash.

At the end of the day the truth is that some AAA games are good and some are crap, while some indie games are good and some are crap. I just want to play good games, and I don't care what the development model is.

Oh, yeah, many steam greenlit games are shit, no doubt about it. Most of of the indie games are shit, my idea was that indie developers somehow manage to make better games than AAA developers. I went into a rant there without realizing it, for which I apologize. But I also think that it's fairly obvious, from my examples, that I'm not talking about ALL indie games.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

I doubt it. Because guess what happens to indie devs when they become mainstream, popular and make tons of money?

That's right! The call is coming from inside the gaming community.

 

[Zontar]

These kind of generalisations tend to annoy me. You can't critise AAA developers and just ignore all the Steam greenlight and early access games from indie devs that are simply broken trash.

At the end of the day the truth is that some AAA games are good and some are crap, while some indie games are good and some are crap. I just want to play good games, and I don't care what the development model is.

Oh, yeah, many steam greenlit games are shit, no doubt about it. Most of of the indie games are shit, my idea was that indie developers somehow manage to make better games than AAA developers. I went into a rant there without realizing it, for which I apologize. But I also think that it's fairly obvious, from my examples, that I'm not talking about ALL indie games.

I have to disagree with the idea that indie games are better then triple A games. Now I'm the type of guy who doesn't really pay either, I tend to stick to second tier games that are in the space between the two and feel that those have the better balance of all elements as they have the size needed to make large games with the limitations which force maximizing return on resources put in.

If anything's the future of gaming, it's the second tier game development.

 

[Tragedy's Rebellion]

snip

Which games are these "second tier"? What does "second tier" mean in relation to the AAA-indie spectrum?

 

[Zontar]

snip

Which games are these "second tier"? What does "second tier" mean in relation to the AAA-indie spectrum?

2nd tier is a pretty nebulous term to be frank (though so is Triple A or indie), but in my mind it's games which are using the more traditional publisher/developer formate which cost below 55$. Think games like Sins of a Solar Empire, Spec Ops: The Line, X-com: Enemy Unknown or Dark Souls 1. Games that are clearly smaller then a big budget Triple A game, but also definitely larger then an indie one.

 

[Tragedy's Rebellion]

snip

Which games are these "second tier"? What does "second tier" mean in relation to the AAA-indie spectrum?

2nd tier is a pretty nebulous term to be frank (though so is Triple A or indie), but in my mind it's games which are using the more traditional publisher/developer formate which cost below 55$. Think games like Sins of a Solar Empire, Spec Ops: The Line, X-com: Enemy Unknown or Dark Souls 1. Games that are clearly smaller then a big budget Triple A game, but also definitely larger then an indie one.

Oh, yeah, definitely those as well. Though it's a bit hard to explain, isn't it? All the games you listed are also quite well made. So, basically the future isn't in the AAA industry?

 

[Zontar]

Oh, yeah, definitely those as well. Though it's a bit hard to explain, isn't it? All the games you listed are also quite well made. So, basically the future isn't in the AAA industry?

Pretty much. There will likely always be Triple A games, but I think the focus of the industry will be more concentrated on the range of games which can be made for less and still sold for a fair price.

 

[Tragedy's Rebellion]

You do know that it's not either indie or AAA, right? A lot of games are made by medium sized developers, AAA are the big companies with vast budget and indie is usually a very small developers.

OT, not really, once you make the differentiation what indie developers are, they usually kinda suck, a lot of games which are either uninspired nostalgia for man-babies or uninspired gameplay (survival-roguelike-zombies which can actually constitute a genre of it's own by now), indies had a golden couple of years around Braid, Bastion and the like but by now I look at most of what comes up now and it seems just bland.

Yes, we covered that already. It's just kind of hard to explain , since "indie" literally means independent. I.e. independent from publishers? Which the games I mentioned are, as far as I know. Either way you name them, you know what I mean, I gave plenty of examples.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

It's the way it goes, really. Something starts small, gains a following and a couple compatriots, gets bigger and has more exposure, genre then goes mainstream.

Classic "Punk is dead" moment. Is most of it 'crap'? Well sure, but so are most AA or AAA games. Sturgeon's Law in action.

 

[Redryhno]

It's the way it goes, really. Something starts small, gains a following and a couple compatriots, gets bigger and has more exposure, genre then goes mainstream.

Classic "Punk is dead" moment. Is most of it 'crap'? Well sure, but so are most AA or AAA games. Sturgeon's Law in action.

To be fair, you can at least be guaranteed the majority of AAA games to be a consistently decent experience, indies are much more hit or smack your head off they missed so hard. I mean, at least you can get a day one patch for AAA(not defending it beyond this or a pitiful number of specific situations), indies sometimes go for months without fixing their game-breaking shit.

 

[Something Amyss]

I doubt it. Because guess what happens to indie devs when they become mainstream, popular and make tons of money?

That's right! The call is coming from inside the gaming community.

Basically this. I've seen it happen quite a bit in music, too. Also, entire indie labels will get snapped up once popular enough. Kinda like what happens to indie studios that are popular but not huge.

It's almost like this is not an inviolable wall.

 

[Nazulu]

I reckon the only chance of getting any great titles will lie with smaller teams. As long as they're doing their own thing, big or small, that is where the real quality will come from. Just like the old days when more things were allowed, a whole lot of shit constantly came out and flooded the market, but under that stench were some amazingly creative powerful gems.

I hope it gets as great as the 70s music scene anyway.

 

[elvor0]

You do know that it's not either indie or AAA, right? A lot of games are made by medium sized developers, AAA are the big companies with vast budget and indie is usually a very small developers.

Being a medium size development team doesn't make you not indie. Indie: Independent. It has nothing to do with the size of your studio or budget. Luckilly we've avoided the music trap of having an indie "genre" (because that makes sense right?), but indie is anything from 1 guy to 100 guys as long as they're short a publisher.

 

[Amaror]

Not entirely. Theres good and bad in both. It's true that there have been a lot of great indie games recently, but there have also been lots of great published games. Paradox and Bethesda are two examples of publishers that tend to make good games. Maybe it's because they are not only publishers but also developers of their own?

 

[SKBPinkie]

No, not really. There's one thing that indies don't do well - scope.

Some of my favorite titles are games like Forza Horizon, Monster Hunter, Halo, Destiny, Far Cry, and so on. And honestly, I don't think an indie company is capable of doing games on the same level. Games with as much content, depth, and most importantly - good and smooth controls.

Most of them are small, albeit interesting little games that I play for a couple hours and I pretty much always go back to AAA titles. These are the 200+ hour games that always feel fantastic to play thanks to sublime controls and satisfying gameplay.

It's not even an issue of quality or quantity. I've found AAA to satisfy both requirements, and to a better degree than an indie game ever could.

 

[FreeRunner]

I don't know if the FUTURE of gaming lies in the hands of indie developers, but I will say that I've enjoyed a lot of indie games more than games made by AAA developers.