Nuvendil said:
What people consider a thing is irrelevant, what a thing *is* does not change with the whims of people's arbitrary definitions. The point of indie as a concept is that one is independent: free of the restrictions imposed by working in the traditional publisher-developer relationship. Freedom, in other words. That can be a reality with 10, 20, 30, even a 1000 developers. The only limitation is how big a team you can assemble and how much in the way of funds you can raise. Relegating the "indie" concept to rag tag groups of 25 or less working on weird games or retro games is a silly and completely baseless restriction. In short, "indie" is not and was never meant to be a "genre" of games. |
There isn't even a canonic definition of indie games.
Size obviously matters because there comes a point where a company becomes big enough to self-publish their games (digitally or at retail).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indie_game
And like I said, no one considers a studio of more than 100 men an indie developer. What's the point of a definition if nobody adheres to it?
"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" - Thoukydides
