I don't hate them I just don't buy their games because they are not on physical media lol.
Seriously all three console makers shoudl be publishing monthly indy collections on discs. Then i would.
Why do you hate indie games? | |||
Too few graphics. | 19 | 18.10% | |
Because Sony has them. | 22 | 20.95% | |
I have no soul. | 5 | 4.76% | |
I am Bobby Kotick. | 11 | 10.48% | |
I don't hate your mom. | 48 | 45.71% | |
Total: | 105 |
I don't hate them I just don't buy their games because they are not on physical media lol.
Seriously all three console makers shoudl be publishing monthly indy collections on discs. Then i would.
Torillian said:
|
Same genre then : Castle crashers 82 metacritic, and Sacred Citadels 61. Of course Sacred Citadels is not the best of the genre, but castle crashers is far from it too.
For the price, how are people supposed to know the game with worse review is worth the money if it has lower score than the one twice cheaper with better score ?
forest-spirit said: It doesn't make sense to me how you can hate or love indie games. Indie games isn't exactly a genre, it's just games made by independant developers. And there are a bajillion of them out there. And I don't like how "indie" have turned into such a buzz word. It's not exactly a feat to become an indie developer. Get RPG Maker and make something with it and you're indie. Pretty much. There's way too much focus on the word indie, almost to the extent that the actual games have become low priority. |
Best post in the thread so far and I'm surprised people have taken so long to say it (even I completely missed this point).
Indie isn't a genre. It's a mis-mash of... every genre, really. There are indie games that can look as good as a lower-budget retail game and there are indie games that at literally ported flash titles. To say you hate all of them (or even nearly all of them) is covering far too wide a scope.
RenCutypoison said:
For the price, how are people supposed to know the game with worse review is worth the money if it has lower score than the one twice cheaper with better score ? |
'fraid I don't know enough about Sacred Citadels to argue on that one, but Castle Crashers is a fairly wel loved game so I'm not surprised at all by its meta.
Not sure I'm getting the statement here, obviously the cheaper game with the higher score is more worth the money than the more expensive game. Are you arguing that price should not be a factor when determining how to score games?
...
to be honest some of my favourite games from the last year where indie games.
But the indie games that suck, really suck
Torillian said:
Not sure I'm getting the statement here, obviously the cheaper game with the higher score is more worth the money than the more expensive game. Are you arguing that price should not be a factor when determining how to score games? |
Yup, why would you buy the expensive game getting mixed review ? There is absolutely no reason except indies are new and most gamers people on the forums tend to claim their hate about new things.
RenCutypoison said:
|
I'll be honest, this debate is confusing me a bit.
Obviously I think any value considerations in a review should be done with price as a consideration since that's a factor in how much value you get for your money (how much money your spending) so instead I'll consider the idea of taking cost into account for the non-value scores.
I think presentation is the big thing, people have higher expectations when they spend 60 bucks than when they spend 15 on what the presentation is going to be like. This is most likely because for the most part those 15 dollar games cost less to you because they cost less to develop so there's this intent to level the playing field when it comes to game development budget. This is an incredibly imprecise way to go about that, but we don't really know how much games cost to make on an individual basis usually, and even if we did I'm not sure it should be a consideration. The fact that Mugen Souls obviously has a lower budget than Tales of Xillia does no mean that it should automatically get a boost in its presentation score.
However, I think there's some merit in differentiating between full retail and smaller downloadable releases because there are more differences than just the budget, like the fiele size that you can reasonably expect. So in the end, I think the difference you see is mostly in whether something is a digital cheaper release over a full price retail release and not whether or not a game is indie, and I think that's a perfectly legitimate line to draw with differeing expectations on either end. I don't think that a 10-15 dollar downloadable title should be reviewed on the same scale as a 60 dollar retail title any more than a 3DS game should be reviewed on the same scale as an XBone game.
...
1) Indie games are for 90% shovelware games.
2) The novelty of Indie games has worn off, 'basically the time that we all got excited for a 2D platformer that looks amazing because it has an amazing artstlye is finished'.
3) Their are hundreds of new free indie games every week and they started to look all more the same'..
4) Sony at gamescom is possible the big contributor to the new hate against Indie games, when you are at the point of releasing
a incredible powerfull gaming console that will us experience games like we never have experienced before....and you then end up showing gamers games that
could be possible on PS2 well no surprise that it gets hate though..
The only thing I'm worried about with indies is over saturation of the market.
Besides that, a game is a game. Some of my favorite games last year were indies. Unfinished Swan and Journey.
The Rapture, Rime, Shadow of the beast, etc. all look utterly amazing. Those are the games I'm looking forward to the most.