Indie Games Suck!

Indie games are worthless

I'm sick of indie games being shoved in my face all the time. I don't want to buy low budget pieces of crap. They are overrated and ****.

You know what indie game I enjoyed playing? Maybe Limbo, maybe. The rest of them though, are absolutely terrible and have lame ass designs that people have to call artistic because they didn't have enough money or resources. Boo hoo excuses, excuses. There's no excuse for poorly designed video games and that's exactly what all indie games are in my opinion. If I wanted to play a game that looked like it was developed in the early 90's I'd dust off my old Super Nintendo. Indie game humor is crap too, Divekick? How was that funny. Please explain this ironic hipster humor to me because I just don't get it.

Honestly what is the appeal of Indie Games?

I'll be honest some are more fun then big named games. Really A Hat in Time looks amazing

I agree, i like some indie games more than the big games people produce nowadays.

Indie game developers never have the budget or the ammount of people to make a huge game like Blizzard or Nintendo, but they can still make great games which are enjoyable to play.
Its like a old looking game with today's mechanics.

Okay that game you mentioned "A Hat In Time" actually has decent graphics for an indie game which is a surprise. But it also looks like a Lego/Windwaker rip-off so there's no originality which is meant to be the only redeemable quality of indie games in the first place.

Kickstarter projects in the video game industry make me sick! Why would I invest my money into a game that will be generic in terms of gameplay and extremely dated in terms of graphics. I wouldn't donate money to mainstream developers either but at least they don't have the nerve to ask for handouts!

As someone who likes indie games in general but also finds their fans obnoxious at times, I'll try to give a full answer to this question.

1. Honestly, the hipster factor. Knowing about something before it's famous - if it ever gets there - can be quite validating.
2. Because their developers are generally less concerned with money and aren't tied to restrictive publishers, indie games tend to be much more creative. There's little incentive to stick to what sells.
3. Moreover, there's a disincentive to stick to what sells: indie developers usually don't have the software, budgets, or staff sizes that major developers do, so if they try to make the next Call of Duty, no one will play it because it's just like Call of Duty, but worse. This forces them to find their own niches.
4. Because of the domination of a few old companies, indie developers are more likely to have entered the market recently, and thus are more likely to share cultural experiences and humor with new players.

One thing I don't like about indie game culture is the proliferation of attempts to create the next Cave Story, when that wasn't even that great or original a game to begin with, but again, this type of thinking is much more prevalent in mainstream games.

as a future developer i hope i can make you a good game sometime :P lol

The problem with most Inide games is that 80% of them either try too much to be different and go into levels of pretentiousness or are a generic clone of Cave Story or Minecraft. Also if graphics really matter to you then just play a game like Battlefield or Ryse which focus on the looks of the title over the actual gameplay.

I'll admit that alot of indie titles are rather dull. The market is saturated in puzzle platformers after the success of Braid.

However, to dismiss a game on "oudated" graphics is a bit...idk shallow. Alot of older art styles can look good as long as the art direction is decent. I think a good indie title is decent when it tries to do something new in a good way. Either that or take and old concept and give it a fresh take. Games like Bastion and The Stanley Parable that try to tell a story in a unique way. Games like FTL , Naitu Love 2, and Super Meatboy that take a simple premise and really nail it down with good level design/concepts. I can admit it's not everyone's cup of tea, but to say that all of them are bad simply because "indie" is a great way to miss out of some pretty cool stuff.

When I read the title of this thread, I thought you would be discussing about the XBLA game "I Really Hate That Indie Game." But it looks like you're expressing your sheer hate on Indie games in general for catering to old-school gamers with their designs, which is ironic due to your hate on post-Gen II main Pokémon games and white knighting against people who call out Genwunners and people who are blinded with nostalgia. I'm starting to think you have a love/hate issue with the game industry.

Like the more-expensive AAA titles, indie games can be a hit or miss depending on their execution and the attitude of the indie developers themselves. Some of the best examples for good indie games were Minecraft, Cave Story, and Amnesia: The Dark Descent. A Hat in Time looks promising, because it's suppose to pay tribute to the N64 era, with a bit of Wind Waker on the cel-shaded graphics, so you really can't accuse it for being a rip-off if that's what the developers intended it to be.

Introvert said:

The rest of them though, are absolutely terrible and have lame ass designs that people have to call artistic because they didn't have enough money or resources.

Click to expand...

You haven't played too many Indie titles, have you? Giana Sisters, The Touhou Project Fighters, Astebreed, DynaMarisa3D...look any of those up, then come back and tell me that they're low quality because of their limited funds. Heck, I could give you any number of indie titles that look just plain fantastic. Even for the ones that don't, they've managed to be fun regardless. Two Brothers, Long Live the Queen, Super Meat Boy, Fez...they don't have the most stunning graphics, sure, but they do a heck of a lot with what they have (though, to be fair, there is a lot of detail in the art for Two Brothers). I might even argue that if these games did go for a different aesthetic, they'd be ruined. You could consider the intended tribute aesthetic (or art styles of similar intent) an excuse, but heck, if Super Meat Boy looked like Crysis 3, I doubt it'd be as enjoyable as it already is.

But see, here's the thing about all of this: I don't think that indie games need to be defended. Not at all. I've explored indie games, and I've found executed ideas that simply don't exist in published gaming. Some of these games are so fun that I'd say that they exceed the aforementioned. Spelunky is one of the most interesting and addictive takes on a Roguelike I've ever seen. Takkoman is one of, if not the top favorite Action-Platformer (another example of a fantastic looking Indie title). Then there's Bastion, one of the most original Action games I've seen in years, Another World/Out of this World, one of the most oldest classic indie games, Shadowrun Returns, which brilliantly revives an old classic...and I'm just barely into all of them.

The real problem is that you're lumping all Indie games together, as if they're all similar with minor differences here or there, but let me tell you, Skullgirls isn't The Stanley Parable. Limbo isn't Starbound. Surgeon Simulator isn't Unepic. Indie games are as vast and varied as the Published game industry, and I've come to find that it even has the potential to spread much farther much faster. Sure, there are crap ones and clones, but the same can easily said for the Non-Indie industry (and how). It doesn't take much searching to find truly creative, different, or just plain fun Indie games. If you don't want one that's artsy, you'll find one that isn't. If you want a story-heavy one, you can. If you want one so unique that no game could even come close to touching it, it's there. All you need to do is take a look.

uh I know what its about,
there are indie games that are like poorly developed like repeating sounds or doors that wont open, I've seen a few :\
I watch Markiplier and he plays a lot of indie games, some pretty good, but others not good developed

You're correct about the style of certain indie games, but you fail to mention indie games that have absolutely amazing graphics. If you've seen some games on Steam you should know what I mean. Indie games are not necessarily designed on a small budget, but they are however designed without a publisher or any support from one. There are pros and cons with this. The cons are that even if you have a decent budget, there won't be any additional money given for development of your game unless you get it on your own. Another thing is that if you are an unheard of company and the game is much different than most games today, you might have trouble attracting customers. The pros on the other hand are that there are absolutely no time constraints and I think that's a big one. There are way too many games, usually sequels, that were very popular and demanded, therefore big time publisher rush the developers to get the game done by a certain time, generally a holiday season. These games tend to lack certain intended features and there are usually bugs. There are big complaints from fans and sometimes it kills the series, yet game publishers continue to do this year after year. Give indie games a chance. There are A LOT more games that are considered indie games that can be found on Steam that have very detailed 3D graphics, not just the ones you're thinking of.

Pinkie-Dawn said:

When I read the title of this thread, I thought you would be discussing about the XBLA game "I Really Hate That Indie Game." But it looks like you're expressing your sheer hate on Indie games in general for catering to old-school gamers with their designs, which is ironic due to your hate on post-Gen II main Pokémon games and white knighting against people who call out Genwunners and people who are blinded with nostalgia. I'm starting to think you have a love/hate issue with the game industry.

Like the more-expensive AAA titles, indie games can be a hit or miss depending on their execution and the attitude of the indie developers themselves. Some of the best examples for good indie games were Minecraft, Cave Story, and Amnesia: The Dark Descent. A Hat in Time looks promising, because it's suppose to pay tribute to the N64 era, with a bit of Wind Waker on the cel-shaded graphics, so you really can't accuse it for being a rip-off if that's what the developers intended it to be.

Click to expand...

You might wanna google white knight because I don't think you even know what a white knight is. It's someone who gets off on coming to the defense of a woman for the sole fact that they are a woman. I just call out people who mindlessly hate on gen 1 for no reason. If I were apart of any Pokemon forum a few years ago back when it was cool to hate on the newer gens I'd be calling those people out too. I don't like it when people jump on the bandwagon just because it's trendy and hate things without stating their actual reasons, it has nothing to do with a sense of righteousness or helping others out. And I don't hate post gen II Pokemon games, I should sue you for defamation of character for even saying that! The only gen I hate is gen 5. And yes I do love the first two gens the most, but if Gamefreak were releasing their new gen games in the same graphics as their 90's games under the guise of being retro or for whatever reason then I wouldn't hesitate to criticize them either. Get your facts straight and your head out of your ass if you're going to accuse me of things. Half of what you said about me was 100% false!

At the end of the day I think the moral of crappy indie games is that rich people simply make better products. Period. More money + more resources = better product. Soz truth hurts don't get mad at the facts. The writing is on the wall guys! Are you so blinded by your indie love that you cannot see?

The problem with indie games is that "indie" isn't a genre at all. Indie used to mean independent(as in self published, self financed), but it's been mutilated to mean "pretentious 2d puzzle platformer that purposefully looks bad". I'd definitely disagree that indie games suck, but I wouldn't hold it against you if you thought all "indie" games sucked.

Pinkie-Dawn said:

When I read the title of this thread, I thought you would be discussing about the XBLA game "I Really Hate That Indie Game." But it looks like you're expressing your sheer hate on Indie games in general for catering to old-school gamers with their designs, which is ironic due to your hate on post-Gen II main Pokémon games and white knighting against people who call out Genwunners and people who are blinded with nostalgia. I'm starting to think you have a love/hate issue with the game industry.

Click to expand...

Most indie games don't appeal to old-school gamers, they appeal to posers and hipsters who think they're industry veterans. Many indie games merely take the appearance of looking retro by being ugly and pixelated(which is a ridiculous "art style" and stereotype), but their designs don't reflect old-school games at all.

Introvert said:

At the end of the day I think the moral of crappy indie games is that rich people simply make better products. Period. More money + more resources = better product. Soz truth hurts don't get mad at the facts. The writing is on the wall guys! Are you so blinded by your indie love that you cannot see?

Click to expand...

Blatantly false. Extra money does sometimes help, but the AAA game industry shovels out the same trash that "indie" developers do, so there's no direct relationship between the two. Extra money can also be harmful to the development process, because after a certain point your niche audience won't be able to produce a net profit. Many developers have to CODify their game to try and make up for their inflated development costs. Moreover, creative limitation is a thing. A lot of developers have the potential to produce something great, but there's no point in doing something great when people will accept whatever trash is shoveled out from them.

Introvert said:

At the end of the day I think the moral of crappy indie games is that rich people simply make better products. Period. More money + more resources = better product. Soz truth hurts don't get mad at the facts. The writing is on the wall guys! Are you so blinded by your indie love that you cannot see?

Click to expand...

No, just...no. There are countless terrible games with high budgets and publisher backing, and I'd be damned if I were to put Spelunky on the same level as Ride to Hell or Sonic 06.

Introvert said:

Divekick? How was that funny. Please explain this ironic hipster humor to me because I just don't get it.

Click to expand...

It started out as a joke about how divekicks are typically ridiculously overpowered in 2D fighters (Wolverine in vanilla MvC3 as the most recent infamous example, where his divekick borderline became a meme at that time), and since it's the FGC, it caught on and became something bigger than that. They ended making a game that is all about playing footsies, and FGC (particularly SF4 players) eat that stuff up.

Nothing hipster about it. Just typical FGC.

Introvert said:

At the end of the day I think the moral of crappy indie games is that rich people simply make better products. Period. More money + more resources = better product. Soz truth hurts don't get mad at the facts. The writing is on the wall guys! Are you so blinded by your indie love that you cannot see?

Click to expand...

Are you aware of all of the games that big budget producers forced developers to finish in a very short amount of time simply because they want the game out by Christmas 2014 for example? These huge game companies are so obsessed with having their games be released at the same exact time as games published by other companies no matter what the cost. They would rather release a game with missing levels, characters, features, etc. that is full of bugs just so the customers can play it on the same day as other games instead of giving the project a few more months or more to perfect the game. I've heard plenty of people say they won't buy a game they know was rushed or heard was bad, but would have if it had more production time. Yet these publishers continue to use the same business model. Having a lot of money can help a lot with production of a game, but these mega publishers have issues of their own. They go by quantity over quality and that is a major flaw.

pokemasta92 said:

Are you aware of all of the games that big budget producers forced developers to finish in a very short amount of time simply because they want the game out by Christmas 2014 for example? These huge game companies are so obsessed with having their games be released at the same exact time as games published by other companies no matter what the cost. They would rather release a game with missing levels, characters, features, etc. that is full of bugs just so the customers can play it on the same day as other games instead of giving the project a few more months or more to perfect the game.

Click to expand...

And yet most mainstream games are STILL superior to indie games. Even with all of those handicaps that you mentioned. What does that say about the indie video game scene? Name one indie game as good as The Last Of Us or Bioshock Infinite please. I'll wait. See you can't think of any, no one can. Because those are the gold standards of our video game industry and no indie video game developers will ever be able to measure up to the big leagues. Even Call of Duty, a franchise that's a shell of its former self is still far more enjoyable to play than most hipster indie games. You get what you pay for.

Luck said:

The problem with indie games is that "indie" isn't a genre at all. Indie used to mean independent(as in self published, self financed), but it's been mutilated to mean "pretentious 2d puzzle platformer that purposefully looks bad". I'd definitely disagree that indie games suck, but I wouldn't hold it against you if you thought all "indie" games sucked.



Most indie games don't appeal to old-school gamers, they appeal to posers and hipsters who think they're industry veterans. Many indie games merely take the appearance of looking retro by being ugly and pixelated(which is a ridiculous "art style" and stereotype), but their designs don't reflect old-school games at all.

Click to expand...

I don't know if I agree with you completely, not in January 2014. While I do agree that indie is not a genre and shouldn't be seen as such, I think we're at the point in the indie revolution where the stereotype for indie games to look a certain way is outdated, and isn't shared by the majority anymore. In fact, most big names that actually look quite nice, (Astebreed, Spelunky, Giana Sisters). Generic Old-School callbacks are exactly that: Generic Old-School callbacks. Their aesthetic alone isn't enough anymore, and they depend on actually being unique to succeed.

I've mentioned Two Brothers before, and I think that's the perfect example of a game that chooses an art direction and tries to appeal to Old-School gamers while still making an experience that's engaging and truly unique. It's a Gameboy game for the PC. In every way, it feels like a gameboy game, but the art's attention to detail and the game itself don't make it feel like a callback, it makes it feel like a genre-saavy Gameboy game.

But I think one thing to consider is that, with indie games, part of the deal is the drive to execute one's ideas. I think you said it well when you said "A lot of developers have the potential to produce something great, but there's no point in doing something great when people will accept whatever trash is shoveled out from them." With indie games, there are no restrictions, and a lot of people make games simply because they have an idea. Maybe they don't have the talent to execute such an idea to its fullest. Maybe they're not an artist or they can't make the greatest music, but they try their hardest with what they have, and I think that that's respectable. Having the drive to execute what one feels is a great idea despite their insecurities definitely isn't easy, and for that idea to become popular is unreal, but it happens.

I'm not saying that one shouldn't try to make their game that looks good by gaining the skills themselves or building a team of individuals, but I wouldn't say that they're trying to appeal to some sort of "pretentious hipster demographic" by hiding under the guise of a callback and calling it artsy. That may have been the case in the Post-Voxel (aka Post-Minecraft), Post-Braid period of the revolution, but it's barely the case now, for reasons I've stated above. Their aesthetic and "callback concept" aren't enough anymore, indie games become popular because of merit and execution rather than simple on-the-surface concepts alone. I'd say that there are a number of titles that do accurately callback to retro days (and many others that don't).

Introvert said:

And yet most mainstream games are STILL superior to indie games. Even with all of those handicaps that you mentioned. What does that say about the indie video game scene? Name one indie game as good as The Last Of Us or Bioshock Infinite please. I'll wait. See you can't think of any, no one can. Because those are the gold standards of our video game industry and no indie video game developers will ever be able to measure up to the big leagues. Even Call of Duty, a franchise that's a shell of its former self is still far more enjoyable to play than most hipster indie games. You get what you pay for.

Click to expand...

Takkoman, Touhou Project, The Stanley Parable...and why do keep mentioning Hipsters? Do you even know what hipsters are? Hipsters aren't even a prominent thing anymore, certainly not in the eyes of indie devs. Maybe 3-4 years ago it could possibly...maybe...start to count as some sort of convincing argument, but they just aren't relevant anymore.

Pinkie-Dawn said:

Some of the best examples for good indie games were Minecraft, Cave Story, and Amnesia: The Dark Descent. A Hat in Time looks promising, because it's suppose to pay tribute to the N64 era, with a bit of Wind Waker on the cel-shaded graphics, so you really can't accuse it for being a rip-off if that's what the developers intended it to be.

Click to expand...

Just because they intended to rip-off already well known and successful video games doesn't make it okay. It's not like you can call it a homage when they are blatant rip-offs and poorly imitated carbon copies of more established and popular video game franchises. It's just an excuse to be less creative which is supposed to be one of the main attractions of indie games in the first place. And that's why all of those games you mentioned fail at being creative.

I bet the only reason these indie game devs don't get sued is because they have no money to take in the first place. {XD}