pokoko said:
Lafiel said:
pokoko said:
It's a false dichotomy and most people who believe it are only hurting themselves.
What does "indie" even mean? By the literal definition, Insomniac is indie. So is Bungie.
A lot of people think it means team size. Where, then, is the dividing line? 20 people? 50 people? 100 people? Seems kind of silly.
I've got a better dividing line: games that interest me and games that don't. I don't give a rat's ass about the size of the team that made the game, I don't care if people call them "indie" or "AAA". All of that is completely irrelevant.
Some games from smaller studios are good, some are bad. Some AAA games are good, some are bad. I've spent over 100 hours in This War of Mine and would take it over Assassin's Creed any day of the bloody week.
If people want to base what they play one these little labels, that's fine with me. Don't blame me for chuckling, though.
|
a "pure" definition of the term "indie game" would probably be a game which is self-funded and self-published by a developer independend from any publisher
by that defintion Insomniac or Bungie afaik never did an "indie game", although they are "indie developers"
|
The trouble there is that quite a few games that many would consider as "indie" have used outside publishers.
|
The trouble is "indie" is a meaningless label. XBLA had a "indie" channel which many cite as being the perfect example of how poor so many indie games are, but then it was filled 99% with homebrew software.
Like you say, people call Child of Light indie. It was funded and published by one of the biggest publishers in the industry. 2D or "retro" themed aren't necessarily indie. Nor is low budget. But indie also isn't restricted to a single genre or style.
