By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Chazore said:

It doesn't suit me. I'm not taking jabs at anybody. Its just that I am fully aware of a huge amount of Nintendo fans who did it.

Indie games are usually crap in my opinion. Most of them wouldn't fly in the face of consumers had they been 4 times as long at $60 because the quality isn't the same as AAA games in terms of presentation, graphics, story and most often gameplay. There are some like Furi that are amazing, but even then they can't reach AAA top dogs like Rockstar.

I care of the product I get, I don't give away money for pity just because they are a small dev. Rockstar's games are such that I feel they should be rewarded for their efforts when nobody else makes those type of games. No indie game is worth a quarter of a Rockstar game. Some sell for more. Its freeing when you're platform agnostic, I'd feel you if I was PC and Switch only gamer, and probably have the same bias as you do. Get a PS4, get an Xbox, get something and free yourself from loyalty towards a platform.

And you must also be aware of the Sony fans that do it back at Nintendo fans with MHW (But in this instance I'd say you don't).

Well that's what it is, in your opinion, which isn't a fact, and going by what the internet, general media and sales have to say, indie games are actually quite good and even quite popular to purchase and enjoy. 

I'm not sure what length of play and price has to do with indie titles, because we've had a plethora of indie games that have ranged from costing £10-40, with some even containing DLC after or even for launch day (like AAA has done so many times before), and said games have either lived or died by popularity (like AAA games have since they were even a thing). Quality is subjective and not objective, so your point about all indie games being inferior to all AAA games is unfounded and baseless. To further iterate on that point would just further derail the topic at hand. Also, story and gameplay are also subjective elements when looking at games. 

I care about the games I love and the devs that put their all into said games. There is absolutely nothing wrong with showing a desire to support the smaller guy in this rather large industry. Looking down on all the smaller guys however is rather narrow minded, petulant and what I would consider disgusting, because it shows a lack of empathy towards those that struggle and strive to making games they want to make and those that make games people want.

Claiming to be platform agnostic, but showing far, far more faith in another console isn't truly being agnostic. Every fence sitter has their preference, like those that do not sit on the fence half the time. Don't think of yourself as higher than me because you are not, but that could very well be an ego related issue, one that you would need to work on. You claim to be unbaised yet you are already baised by damning and spitting on indie games. I truly pity you, for you have nothing but clouded bias of your own. 

Free your own mind and chain down that ego mate, it's not helping you. 

I'm aware of Sony fans taking jabs post MHW success, its just a retort to what was spewed earlier. I'm aware of Sony fans being dicks as well, post TLOU release and for Naughty Dog games they can't take any criticism, but its not related to this so why would I bring that up?

Yep some of its my opinion, but indie games objectively lack in terms of presentation.

I've seen people willing to spend $15 on a 2 hour indie game like Journey and the same people criticising a AAA game for being 8 hours long, while also costing 4 times as much. They wouldn't accept anything below 30 hours for a AAA game, and with far better presentation, voice acting, graphics and sounds than indie games. AAA games are judged more harshly, which is unfair to all the devs who spend years making these games, while most of its profits go to the publisher. Indie games success sends money directly to the bank account of those devs while their director takes on a project of a much smaller scale and with fewer employees to manage.

To say that AAA devs, such as Rockstar don't put equal or even more effort and love into their games is disrespectful to the some 8 years of development RDR 2 has been while having state of the art graphics, sounds, and a lot more ambition. Its devs like Rockstar that take the industry forward. Also, all devs should be judged on equal terms, and their merit rather than their status quo as a fledgling developer. My $15, $20, $25 on an indie games could be $15, $20, $25 put towards a AAA game, that's basic economics. Also helps that you can get many older but still amazing AAA games at the same price as most of the unimaginative indie games. I'm not saying indie games are all bad, but apart from Furi, Rocket League, Pubg, Journey, Resogun, Death's Gambit and Dead Cells I don't feel most are worth playing.

I'm not quite as platform faithful to any platform as you are. I have PC, Switch and PS4. I have played gems on all 3. This gen, the gems I've played:

1) PC - Forza Horizon 3, Pubg, For Honor

2) Switch - TLOZ Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey

3) PS4 - Bloodborne, Infamous Second Son, God of War, Horizon Zero Dawn, Dark Souls 3, Titanfall 2, Batman Arkham Knight, Nier Automata, Doom

I upgraded my PC last year which is why that has such few games. Switch is new so its unfair to expect many gems from it, but apart from these 2 gems I feel its games are lacking. That said, I'll point to any bs I hear from any side. You may have never seen me complaining on Naughty Dog being overrated as fuck, but that's not my problem.

Not sure what this has to do with my ego. I have nothing against smaller devs as I treat them on the same plane as AAA devs. Its just that they have never blown me away and their general quality feels far lower than the AAA devs.