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

Forums - Gaming - Notch: EA methodically destroying gaming

adriane23 on 04 May 2012
20happyballs said:
The more I hear from Notch the more I dislike him. He needs to get off his high horse. IMO, he just got lucky with Minecraft. He needs to come out with another successful game for his opinions to even matter. It makes me mad that people even care to write articles on what he thinks. He does not deserve the attention.

But seriously, what is he so mad about? What's wrong with EA releasing an Indie game bundle? How does that ruin gaming? Indie developers want to make money too. Isn't it a good thing if a publisher decides to help distribute an independently developed game?

The problem with him is that he thinks so highly of himself and his own opinions. Ultimately, the consumers shape an industry. EA is just giving consumers what they want. Notch probably thinks mainstream games don't properly reflect what gaming is about, and so big companies like EA are ruining the industry with these games. But that's just his opinion. He needs to accept the opinion of others. I personally prefer mainstream games. I've tried many highly acclaimed indie games and I get bored fast.






Ah so you've also played Braid.



I am the Playstation Avenger.

   

Around the Network
adriane23 on 04 May 2012
zarx said:
adriane23 said:
zarx said:
adriane23 said:

The definition of an Indie anything isn't concrete/specific enough to be a real definition. All of the examples of what makes an indie game can be associated with several games that don't carry that label. And who decides what size a company has to be to still be considered Indie? It's too vague a definition.

All CAPS means yelling, italisizing means to add emphasis. I thought you were being a dick when you used all caps, so I took your post the wrong way.

I'm following the thread just fine, but I know you didn't mean that. Your feelings were just hurt. Heres a kitten, feel better?


How about this definition?

"it may refer to: Indie art, fine arts made by artists independent of commercial fine arts establishments"

or this one whic is more specific to games

"Independent video games (commonly referred to as indie games) are video games created by individuals or small teams without video game publisher financial support"

They are both pretty clear indie art/games is content that is not funded and/or supported by commercial entities. So by very deffinition the games that EA are selling as indie, aren't as almost all were funded by EA. 

Specifically talking about the indie label for games, the definition is too vague and subject to varying interpretations. What is the limit on team size? If Microsoft self publishes a game that has a team size of six people, does that make the game indie?

If you make a videogame, you're out to make money, because all games are commercial products. It's a good to be sold. Even free games get money from advertising.

Bolded, obviusly not as it's development was funded by MS which is a videogame publisher. 

it's not about intent to make money tho, the label is for games that are created without the backing of a publisher, what happens once they game is finnished has no baring. The part about small teams or individuals is more due to the fact that traditionally it is virtually impossible to make a game with a large team without the financial backing of a publisher, now that is changing with things like kickstarter but is still mostly true. I don't think there are any examples of any indie games created with with a team the size of a AAA game (which is 100+ this gen) anyway so that part of the definition doesn't really matter. So we are left with games that were not funded by a publisher which rules out games like Shank 2 which was commissioned by EA.

So if a small company self funds themselves, they're indie. If Microsoft self funds themselves, it's not indie event though they did it independently, because Microsoft publishes other games?

So if I bought an acre of land with my own money and used it to grow corn to sell at a marketplace, am I an indie farmer? Is the only think differentiating me from a mega farm the fact that I put up my own money? Am I not still doing the same thing, but at a smaller scale. And if I'm successful enough to expand my land to the size of a mega farm, am I then not considered indie because I'm too big???

Conlusion: The term "indie" is pointless.



I am the Playstation Avenger.

   

happydolphin on 04 May 2012
adriane23 said:

I'm not missing the point at all. The point that people are trying to make about indie games is pointless because they're no different from any other game.

"As badly...." Up to interpretation.

"Usually" Open to exceptions with said exceptions subject to interpretation.

"Really just want to" If you have to first figure out an author's intent before giving the lable, then the label has no meaning. Who decides on the author's intent. If a rep from TreyArch said they "really wanted to" bring something unique and new to gaming, are they on their to becoming indie? Shigeru Miyamoto really wanted to bring something unique and new with Mario and Zelda, does his intent make those games indie?

Like I said, there are exceptions to the rules and alot of my opinion (and that of some others here it seems) are based off of generalizations. Of course the exceptions you bring up are valid, but it doesn't discredit the truth in our generalizations.

You keep bringing up the exceptions and mentioning there is legroom for alternatives, but nobody here ever disagreed with that.

All we're trying to say is, in the big picture, EA seems out of place doing this.

Nothing complicated.



adriane23 on 04 May 2012
happydolphin said:
adriane23 said:

I'm not missing the point at all. The point that people are trying to make about indie games is pointless because they're no different from any other game.

"As badly...." Up to interpretation.

"Usually" Open to exceptions with said exceptions subject to interpretation.

"Really just want to" If you have to first figure out an author's intent before giving the lable, then the label has no meaning. Who decides on the author's intent. If a rep from TreyArch said they "really wanted to" bring something unique and new to gaming, are they on their to becoming indie? Shigeru Miyamoto really wanted to bring something unique and new with Mario and Zelda, does his intent make those games indie?

Like I said, there are exceptions to the rules and alot of my opinion (and that of some others here it seems) are based off of generalizations. Of course the exceptions you bring up are valid, but it doesn't discredit the truth in our generalizations.

You keep bringing up the exceptions and mentioning there is legroom for alternatives, but nobody here ever disagreed with that.

All we're trying to say is, in the big picture, EA seems out of place doing this.

Nothing complicated.

I already came up with my conclusion man. It's over.



I am the Playstation Avenger.

   

KungKras on 04 May 2012

Seriously, why are so many hating on notch for that comment?
It's spot on!

Haven't you guys seen the EA graveyard of great game studios that they destroyed?



I LOVE ICELAND!

Around the Network
happydolphin on 04 May 2012
adriane23 said:

I already came up with my conclusion man. It's over.

By all means.



WiiBox3 on 04 May 2012
BasilZero said:
Who cares? The best way to "fight" against the company is to stop buying their products, if it keeps getting sold, oh well move on with life.


Yup. Agreed. Also don't just stop buying the products, don't play them period. ie. Don't rent the game, buy it used, or dl illegally. Doing any of those things does not "fight" against the company, it just shows that you are not willing to pay the full price they are asking for the game.



zarx on 04 May 2012
adriane23 said:

So if a small company self funds themselves, they're indie. If Microsoft self funds themselves, it's not indie event though they did it independently, because Microsoft publishes other games?

So if I bought an acre of land with my own money and used it to grow corn to sell at a marketplace, am I an indie farmer? Is the only think differentiating me from a mega farm the fact that I put up my own money? Am I not still doing the same thing, but at a smaller scale. And if I'm successful enough to expand my land to the size of a mega farm, am I then not considered indie because I'm too big???

Conlusion: The term "indie" is pointless.


Is there such a thing as an indie farm? I don't think anyone is calling any farms "indie farms".

Anyway as the term indie by deffinition the term is a game not funded by a publisher, so no a publisher like MS or EA can't make an indie game, if they could every game would be indie. The who point of the label is to make the destinction, that the game is not funded by a publisher, I don't see why you can't grasp that other than to try and make a point. 

So using Mojang for example Minecraft was an indie game, Notch made it on his own time with his own money, meaning he made it "indipendently from a publisher. But Mojang doesn't make indie games anymore because they are now a publisher themselves since they decided to publish Cobolt.

The term indie is largely arbitary but only pointless if companies like EA can call their own games indie, which is just an oxymoron. 



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

happydolphin on 04 May 2012
zarx said:

The term indie is largely arbitary but only pointless if companies like EA can call their own games indie, which is just an oxymoron. 

Wow, not much more needs to be said imho. Hit it smack on the head.



Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 on 05 May 2012

Ea is just a cash whore company in my eyes. Im sorry but thats how I see them.



Yay!!!