Should we give indie games a break?

Written by: Olivia Grace (@oliviadgrace) | January 18, 2013 12:30 pm

21 Comments

Reddit user Hivezz recently asked this question about indie games on Reddit, and I thought it was a really interesting question, so wanted to pass it over to the expert eyes of the Gamebreaker audience.

Should we give indie games a break because they’re indie? The question seems to me to revolve around a few different viewpoints.

As I mention in the video, I don’t really consider the price point of games when I’m playing them, I simply consider whether or not I’m enjoying myself, and that’s it. I don’t look at the cost of a game so much as the gameplay itself, and don’t consider the graphics so much as some others might, which probably makes me likely to be an easy appreciator of indie games! But the key to my view is that I’m not really thinking “this game cost me $5, so it should be this good, while this game cost me $50, so it should be proportionately better than the $5 game.” I’ve paid $50+ for enough terrible games in my time to know full well that they can be far worse than $5 indie games!

So, what do you expect from indie games? Do you lower your expectations from them as a nod to their undoubtedly lower budgets, or do you judge them on the same scale as games produced by companies with millions to play with? One redditor asserted, not unfairly, that you get what you pay for, and that you shouldn’t expect the same game from an independent studio.

So then, in order to cater for people like me who judge all games on the same yardstick, what should indie games compromise on to maintain their quality? It seems to me, and to several reddit users, that indie game developers should look to create a great game, but perhaps a shorter one with less content than a big budget blockbuster, but to keep the quality high. Quality over quantity!

But what do you think? Do you give indie games a break because they’re made on smaller budgets? Do you consider what you paid for a game when passing judgement on it? Or is a good game a good game, and a bad game a bad game, regardless of where it came from? Do let us know what you think!

3:10

Casual or Hardcore?

Are you casual or hardcore? And what does that mean anyway?Read more »

19 comments
4:52

Chat Bubble

Why Did You Pick Your Class?

In this chat bubble I'm wondering about your class choices: what is the best MMO class for you?Read more »

32 comments
5:06

Chat Bubble

Your TESO Expectations

You may have recently seen a little footage of up-coming MMO The Elder Scrolls Online, that didn't show the game in its best light.Read more »

72 comments

http://twitter.com/Apollus91 Will Price

Yes and no. I think you should lower your expectations on SOME levels. The obvious ones being graphics and sound/music (to an extent on both). But in terms of enjoyability, creativity, quality of gameplay (i.e. controls, ease of use, etc) then no, definitely not. Every game should be judged in the same light in that aspect and if you’re making a game that you want people to play you should aim to make it as enjoyable as other games. In fact I have enjoyed indie games more than some AAA games this past year so the Indie market is definitely holding stiff competition as it is. I will say however that I do take money into consideration for things like length of expected play time and cut it some slack in those areas. I think games like Amnesia and Slenderman have set the bar in terms of the minimum expect level of graphics but have set the bar for enjoyability and gameplay life.
http://twitter.com/FishBaitism Fish Bait

I`m a fussy old git when it comes to games, hoping for something that`ll last, look/sound good.
I`ve bought games like F.E.A.R.3 which was awful, BF3 which probably cost them a few million to make & was a linear piece of *expletive*, yet I`ve bought Indie games like Amnesia, Giana, Penumbra, Terraria, Botanicula etc which I`ve played to silly extents & really enjoy.
I think the Indies have more leeway & that the bigger firms just stick with the old games as chances are, folk will still buy them.
Vive le Indie!
http://www.facebook.com/rob.somers.16 Rob Somers

Being an indie game should not be an excuse for being bad.

That said, the only things that I really expect from my games (no matter the price) is enjoyment and replayability.

A game needs to have a fitting visual style and audio. A creative or original style is much better than bland HD graphics or bad sound. What looks and sounds realistic now will be terrible in 5 years, but creativity will still be creative 50 years down the line. With that in mind, it does not matter to me whether the creativity is 8-bit or 1080p.

Even more important, a game should have decent gameplay. When I’m not having fun, I wasted my money. When I am having fun, I tend to play a game more often and keep an eye out for sequels or other titles made by the same people.
A fun 30-minute game is always better than a bad 10-hour game.

Finally, the price is definitely a deciding factor for me. I do not want to have ‘X amount of entertainment per Y amount of money’ but I am much more likely to try something new when it only costs me $5-10 instead of $50,-

Unfortunately, many blockbuster titles these days are very disappointing. At least with a bad indie title the disappointment didn’t cost as much.
- http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1653322492 Kevin J. Redmond
  
  I agree completely, especially about graphics. Final Fantasy VII looks awful now, but I just played through it again and had a blast.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1653322492 Kevin J. Redmond

Another interesting topic! I have a few points I’d like to add and drone on too long in the process, as usual:

For me, the deciding factor for any game is whether it is fun. Sometimes I do drool at the fancy graphics in some games, but if the game isn’t good that quickly wears off and I move on. In the end I always judge based on whether the game is good or not, but I can’t lie… I do give a little bit more leeway to Indie games. I can’t help it. They are cheaper, for starters, and it’s usually a very small development team trying to do the best they can to make a fun game. It’s quite easy for me to be more patient with them than I am with the massive corporation making zillions of dollars and nickel and diming me for even second of gameplay. But if an indie game is really bad, I will still walk away from it.

Sometimes I think we gamers are trying to be hipsters, though. We tend to give indie games a break because they are the “underground” of gaming, while the EA/Ubisofts and other companies are “the man” trying to squeeze money out of us for a sub-par product. In EA’s case, this is quite often probably true.Having said all that, let me turn this on it’s head. Maybe we should give the big companies a break instead. Even if they make huge mistakes, don’t they try hard (sometimes)? Do we really think Bioware just played around the office while making ME3 or SWToR? No amount of money or passion can save you from missing the mark sometimes, regardless of whether you are big daddy production company or three guys in the basement.

I will say this, though: it has been an indie year for me. I have, sometimes belatedly, played so many more good indie games this past year than good AAA games. Just thinking off the top of my head, I can remember with fondness games like Bastion, FTL, Primal Carnage, To The Moon (which had awful gameplay, in my opinion, but the story was so good it stuck with me), Limbo, and the incredible PSN title Journey. Journey resonated with me more than any game I’ve played in years. Yet, I can only think of two AAA games that I even put any significant hours in, much less left a lasting impact on my brain this year: Guild Wars 2 and XCOM: Enemy Unknown.

So… I guess I would say we don’t need to give indie games a break, because from where I am sitting… they are doing better than AAA titles lately when looking at enjoyment, longevity, and ability to resonate on a personal level. Funcom has already said that they are going back to smaller games, after TSW not meeting expectations. Perhaps this is a good thing, because maybe it will act as a type of catharsis for the company so that they can get back to their “indie” roots and remember what it was to make a good game because you love games… rather than come up short trying to make the next “big thing.”
http://twitter.com/dethki86 Jacob

If we look graphic wise we have come a long way, so some might gripe in that regards and the music. We now have this nice sounding music compared to the 8 bit days. So some will look at that. Roll these items in to one, some wont got for it. Its not pretty and all that stuff. But when we look past the graphics as long as it not that bad, worse then Atari some will come out ok others will not.

Big budget games have come to suck at times, so big money doesn’t always = good game all the time. And we look at little budget might = good game or bad game. I’ll use FF VII as a expample, still have not beat it, on the final fight on the old Playstarion system. (Using PS2 for this.) I have had fun now graphic wise as I think mentioned would suck to what we see now. But the game play is fun.

So as mentioned game play, replay value, and the important fun factor, if this is lacking in a AAA game or a little below this, or Indie games they will = a crappy game and experience.

So we should not automatically assume a top tier game will be great, and a low cost game will suck, for it doesn’t work out that way. Its a mix between the two.
http://profile.yahoo.com/RWIT5R23ILQZE2UU55R2ERBP2E Michael

I feel that it doesn’t matter who makes the game, how much money goes into a game, how much time it takes to make a game, if the game is voiced or not.

What matters is, is the game fun? Do you like the story? Do you like the game play? Do you like the (insert other area here)? If so, then the game is great and the money (whatever amount it was) was worth it.

If I were to rate a game like Minecraft or Super Meat Boy, I would use the same scale as I would use towards games like The Sims or Super Mario.
http://twitter.com/olov244 Jason D Williams

I look mostly at the pricepoint:enjoyment ratio. If I rent a movie for $1 and it’s not great but worth a dollar, then I’m happy. After being burnt by high dollar games that don’t deliver equivalent enjoyment, I’m pretty stingy with my gaming dollars. I’d rather buy something a year old and get value out of it than buy the newest things and risk wasting the money. Lots of indie games are reasonably priced so I don’t mind them, but if an indie game releases at AAA release pricing, it better be good
http://www.facebook.com/people/Chris-Keller/100000218559506 Chris Keller

this series is getting dull, most of the topics could be summed up as :”poll question, talk in chat” with little extra info. can we please start getting more real content in these?
- Toypop
  
  I’d like to see more of the video filled with Olivia’s opinion – preferably with no attempt to be diplomatic or sit on the fence.
  Going on a Totalbiscuit style rant if necessary. At the moment Olivia sets out both sides of the argument and then gives a small bit of opinion on tip toes almost as if she doesn’t want to be seen to be taking sides. I suppose it could end up like a one-question version of Lore’s PST but I don’t have a problem with that. I tune in more for the presenters opinions than the comments underneath.
  - http://quintlyn.com/ QuintLyn Bowers
    
    The point behind the chat bubbles is to ask viewers opinions on a topic. That’s how they’re designed.
    - http://twitter.com/Spitynko Spity
      
      then its kind of a bad design or the questions are bad, the answers are obvious…
      - http://quintlyn.com/ QuintLyn Bowers
        
        Not really. There are not right or wrong answers. And people have varying opinions on everything. An answer seems like the “obvious” one to you because it’s YOUR opinion.
http://twitter.com/Lunarath Lunarath

I judge a game by the price to content and enjoyment ratio. I can sometimes get a game for 5 dollars and spend 10 hours+ just playing through the game, and maybe over and over. (Faster than light, and super meat boy comes to mind). Then i can pay 60 dollars for a AAA game with a 4 hour campaign and very dull multiplayer. Only paying for the name of the developer and the mostly impressive graphics most games have… The last game i bought for 60 dollars was Starcraft 2 i think… With the free to play market growing bigger and better, i don’t think we should just sit down and pay 60 dollars for good graphics anymore. Thats just me tho

Most big games will have a 33-50% sale on steam after a short time aswell
http://profile.yahoo.com/FPXO267IVAHL3MK4HRRNRQPNDA Bush Swanson, The American Dre

my mom always said, if you buy five dollar ham you’re gonna eat five dollar ham
Azuri

Path of Exile is one of the best ARPG’s I’ve played and puts D3 to shame IMO (Indie vs multimillion developer). It seems that some games are better designed by a developers who are passionate gamers rather then passionate accountants who can bleed as much money out of game. Just saying.
http://twitter.com/AisarGaming Aisar

I don’t give them a break. If I enjoy the game I play it. You have to consider the fact that the average price is around 10 bucks, so if it sucks, so what. I have to agree with the post below about these Chat Bubble things being really boring. Just saying
http://www.facebook.com/FireravenHollowheart John Fireraven Barnett

Personally, I see no reason to give indie games a break. Certainly production staffs an be a lot smaller, as re the resource pools but that doesn’t make for bad design, at least not as an immediate given. There are a few great indie games out there, and several more less than spectacular ones.
sheduur

The declaration indie is enough to make a normal thinking person understand that this game was made on a low budget and thus automatically falls into a category that does not compete with regular boxed games.

Its great when some of those titles “make the cut” and feel like something more than just the regular indie title, but this is something you should not expect.

I would not say give them a break on review but rather adjust the review format so that it fits the genre, and try to make it perfectly clear to the reader that this is a game made on a low budget and not by a multi million dollar company who can afford to hire 50 artists and world builders, to make games that look pretty but have no substance.
Deadnstien

A game is a game is a game. All that matters is if I have fun playing it. If it is good or bad has nothing to do with the budget of the game and I will judge it accordingly after I have played it.

The only time I judge a game in any way where indie or not plays a roll is in the decision on whether or not to buy it. I will give an indie game more leniency simply because the purchase price is less of a hurdle. I am more willing to try an indie game that I might not be sure about because $5, $10, $15 is a lot less of a gamble than $60-$100.
http://twitter.com/MiZTiiX MiZTiiX

i see what you did there

Should we give indie games a break?

Casual or Hardcore?

Why Did You Pick Your Class?

Your TESO Expectations

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Sign in to your account