[S.R. Krol]

Saxon said:
You are right, I am looking at this and wondering if indie games can be a successful business.

There’s no question that indie games can be a successful business. When Shrapnel was formed in 1999 you could count the number of indie publishers/developers on one hand. Fast forward to 2007. To see the state of indie games all you have to do is look at the number of entries this year in the IGF competition, and of course that’s just a fraction of what’s out there.

Now, how does one define success beyond the obvious? That’s going to vary from person to person, but as in my earlier post success in the indie world should never be compared exactly with what defines success in the mainstream world. It’s two different business models, and one in the mainstream world that keeps changing. It used to be if you sold 100K units that was doing good. Now the goal posts have been moved to pushing 1 million units. Meanwhile in the indie world the goal is where ever you set them.

Saxon said:
However, I did write that I think Shrapnel is going down the hobby route, like people who build their own planes. You have essentially confirmed that.

My apologies if that’s how it came off, although we may be simply discussing semantics. People who do anything as a hobby are doing it out of personal satisfaction, and not because they’re expecting a return on their investment. In the world of gaming the open source crowd is the perfect example of hobbyist gamers. Shrapnel and its developers are ultimately doing this for a profit, although the reasoning behind achieving that profit is different from the mainstream developer.

So let me rephrase me earlier comments about the drive that indie developers have. They’re the folks who create games out of passion, not because they’re simply products. To use your art museum analogy, indie games are the pieces you see exhibited in the museum. You may not always think they’re pretty, but all of them were crafted out of a true desire to see them come to life and be shared with others. Mainstream titles are the mass printed, Thomas Kinkade lithographs that can be found for $10 a pop at the local department store. Sometimes they look nice hanging on the wall, but ultimately for most there is nothing special about them.

It is also important to point out that Shrapnel, like 99% of all folks doing indie games, do niche titles. Even something as popular as Dominions is ultimately a niche title in the today’s overall world of gaming. Our games are created by developers who have a specific enthusiasm, for audiences who share a similar taste.

A perfect example of this is the upcoming Galley Battles, a turn-based historical ancient naval wargame. A title like this is a niche within a niche. How many folks out there are into naval wargaming? Then ask those same folks to raise their hand if they’re into ancient naval wargaming and see how the pool shrinks. Now, if a mainstream publisher was approached with the game they would sink the idea in a heartbeat. Not enough of an audience. But why should the folks who do enjoy ancient naval wargaming be denied that? So, tying in with the first part of the post, here’s a case where success will be measured on completely different terms than how many units Halo is able to sell.

Saxon said:
Writing a game for pride is admirable. Asking me to pay for it, at market prices, is ballsy. If you can get away with it, more power to you! More seriously, why someone chooses to write a game is important to them, but not to me as a game player/buyer. I argue from my point of view.

Regarding pride, see comments above about clarification of indie development philosophy. Regarding market prices, it’s not ballsy, it’s fair. Why should an indie developer undervalue his game? Ultimately it *is* up to you as a game player/buyer. If you think a game is too much money, it’s your prerogative to not buy it. One thing that peeves me (and I know you’re not saying it, but this is something I see often) is that all indie games should cost $19.95 for no other reason than they’re indie games. What rubbish, especially in light of the number of games that sell for triple that which are absolute crap.

Saxon said:
In any case, I will keep an eye out here for the rare gems. But I will also be more actively trolling the internet for other rare gems and I will be looking back at the mainstream. With the general growth of gaming, the large number of titles on the market and the range of ideas, there are winners out there. As the gaming population ages, we are seeing a maturing of the market and more serious games are being made.

No one is saying that all mainstream titles are shallow and devoid of real gameplay, so yes, I agree there are real winners out there. For most people there is room for both indie gaming and mainstream gaming, although it sounds like you’re approaching it as an either/or proposition.

And that’s the interesting thing about this discussion. You’re the first person I’ve encountered who decided to swear off indie gaming because they got tired of the visuals and push headlong into mainstream gaming. For most people it’s the exact opposite. The indie ranks are swelling every day due to the folks who are tired of weak gameplay masked by million dollar graphics.

Saxon said:
Before we had to go to the ghetto to get good and serious games, but no longer. A big budget version of the game Diplomacy? With faces that show the reactions of the AI? Impossible a few years ago and, per received wisdom, something that the big companies would never do. Graphics made that possible, and the big companies tried out the serious game and put the money into it. In the end, I did not like the game, but as an example, it shows what is already happening and what is coming.

Is Diplomacy really a good example? Every single version of its computer incarnation has been panned. From Eurogamer:

“If you are looking for a multiplayer version of the classic board-game you're almost certainly better-off going to community sites like www.diplom.org and exploring some of the free Play-By-EMail options (bewilderingly Paradox have chosen not to include a PBEM or a hot-seat mode).”

So yeah, someone sank big money into it and ended up with folks recommending a hobbyist PBEM site like www.diplom.org. But I agree with you, graphics made it possible because if they spent money on developing an AI instead of shiny graphics it might have been worth the money. Instead it probably ended up in the bargain bin within a couple of weeks from release.

Obviously when all is said and done every gamer makes his or her own choices on what to spend money on, and everyone can respect that. It’s a shame that you’re casting off indie games, but I understand where you’re coming from. The indie world will still be here when you start getting frustrated with the blandness of the mainstream world.