Tasting Gaming Day Five: Indie Games

I’ve been wanting to do this article for a while and I’ve been taking my sweet time deciding what topics and aspects to address or not address. I’d like to start off by Quoting David D’Angelo, A programmer at Yacht Club Games who said in an Interview with Kinda Funny’s Colin Moriarty that “We don’t make indie games, we just make games.” This blew me back for a moment, I never considered the term “indie game” negative and I still don’t. This brings up a good point, how is it that Shovel Knight, a game that came out last year and is arguably the best game of 2014, only cost $15 USD? Axiom Verge came out this year and is $20 USD and without doubt there are games with much less substance that cost $40+ USD. There’s simple answers to this like the use of 8-bit graphics over modern photo-realistic or cell-shaded graphics or the lack of a physical release and not so simple answers such as some consumers may just refuse to pay more than that.

               

  Let’s first address that the term “Indie Game” doesn’t imply lesser quality, Wikipedia defines Indie game as “video games created by individuals or small teams generally without video game publisher financial support. Indie games often focus on innovation and rely on digital distribution,” and that’s just it, it just implies that the games were independently made. In regards to big publishers Jonathan Blow (Braid’s designer,) said “what those game companies do is create highly polished things that serve as large of an audience as possible,” and I agree with this and personally feel as though indie games are important because they drive innovation, they almost depend on it because you can only cash in on nostalgia for so long. I personally feel in a time where people are becoming more conscious, more aware of bad business practices and are growing tired of mass produced annualized sequels that make little to no improvement on their predecessors, that it is important to have this to distinguish these games from the rest. Should “indie game” be used as a genre, it’s hard to say, genres mean different things to different people so this term may feel appropriate for you and inappropriate to others.

            These terms “indie” and “triple A” may be good from a consumer’s standpoint, where to set our expectations, we expect a certain level of quality and consistency from a big publisher like Nintendo, we’d like to think that if we spend the $60 USD on a “Triple A” title that we’ll receive a game that is not broken. Unfortunately this isn’t always the case, we’ve seen even large publishers distribute games that force you to be online but their servers don’t work until days or even weeks after a game’s release, we see the same breed of publishers having to instate day 1 patches to games that have been in development for years. (Patches that are bigger than most indie game might I add.) In the same vein not all big publishers make these mistakes or practice these bad business habits and not all independent developers provide high-quality, worthwhile games, so like anything else it’s hard to generalize or lump a multitude of groups into a single group and still be 100% correct. We see YouTubers like Jim Sterling make a living exposing the con-artists that exist in both the “Triple A” and “indie” scene, proving that this trust or distrust needs to be situational and not applied to all members of these over generalized groups, and with that rant out of the way time to get to the actual point of this article, are indie games too cheap? Should indie games cost more?

            Let’s start with, why are “indie” games cheap? Simply put, these game are generally created by smaller teams, fewer people and less equipment results in less overhead, leaving more room for profitability. As Wikipedia’s definition suggest these independent titles “rely on digital distribution,” which implies the lack of a physical release but also allows these games to be more accessible on multiple platforms. Without a physical release, developers can distribute their games without the aid of a publisher and allows for more creative liberty. We take our plastic game cases, shiny disc and game manuals for granted but these are expensive to produce in mass quantities and add a lot of cost to the production of games, even “Triple A” publishers has opted for a single sheet of glossy paper referring you to a website version in place an actual game manual. Developers are dependent on publishers to get their games in the hands of the people who put code onto disc and, print flyers and produce game cases, I wouldn’t know but I assume this would be a hard operation to organize for a team of dozen or so people.

~ Having some larger financial backing on your side like the support of a large publisher or console exclusivity does give developers more advertising power so this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. ~

           

Graphics seem to be a consistent factor in both sides of the market while large developers strive for more photorealistic graphics and maxing out the HD capability of modern tech, and a lot of independent developers tend to utilize pixel graphics, whether it be 8-bit, 16-bit or 32-bit. Bear in mind, like all generalizations, no statement holds true for everybody in every situation. This goes back to what I was saying that good “indie” games thrive off of innovation because you can only cash in on nostalgia for so long, like all markets you have to differentiate yourself in the market to stand out and as a market becomes more saturated with similar games, buyers demand more bang for their buck out of a product and higher expectations cultivate an environment of competition which benefits consumers in the end. So generally producing a game with pixel graphics is cheaper than realistic graphic, there’s a very apparent difference between pixel graphics and pixel art, pixel graphics can range anywhere from an original Atari or arcade style to straight up art, images and graphics that invoke emotions and intrigue instead of just existing for utility. This isn’t a shot being fired at games that use super simple graphics, games like Thomas Was Alone utilize minimalism to its fullest to not only be visibly appealing but create an atmospheric experience that shine bright alongside any other well-crafted games. On the other end of the spectrum some developers use the simplicity of pixel graphics to cash in on nostalgia and pump out subpar games, like any art you need creative minds behind your project, passionate people with a vision and the dedication and resources to spend hours on a project and be open minded enough to go through and continually improve their art, it’s not easy for just anybody and everybody to standout, it is especially hard to withstand the tests of time, relevance, desire and playability.

         

   When I think of examples of pixel art I think of the Boss sprites from Final Fantasy 6, The Goddess boss battle in particular comes to mind, where the polygon graphics like the DS port of Final Fantasy 3 and popular titles of the N64 and PS1 era don’t hold up today and can really be visual unappealing, these boss sprites will be beautiful generation after generation, even as standalone still images you can see the labor of love that went into them. Though people may disagree but the world of FEZ holds a special place in my heart I’ve spent hours exploring, admiring the environment and it just invokes these childlike emotions in me that is just a hard thing to recreate. Where this little waffle has been ultimately heading is that even though the use of older graphic techniques can be less cost and time intensive than modern graphics, the titles that exist in the realm of pixel art are just that, art and can be very time consuming and can produce amazing results and people who specialize in this field, these artist are becoming a rare commodity, even developers like Inti Creates have opted for 3D graphics with 2D movement (“2.5D,”) in Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night over sprite graphics, according to Koji Igarashi, the producer of this title, this decision was made because it’s not only hard to find the talent but it’s simply too expensive and time consuming to produce a massive sized game with pixel graphics. So as a consumer I wouldn’t be too dismissive of games using pixel graphics and how hard producing these titles can be and realistic graphics or the lack thereof don’t add or take away any value to or from a game, at the end of the day the value lies in the end user’s overall experience.

          

  So maybe people just don’t want to spend the money on an “indie” game, I’m sure you’ve had the moment, you’re at the store and you see something that you just have to have from a distance, you pick it up you hold it then you turn it over to see it’s price tag and you wind up not going home with it, as a person who works for their money you and everybody else are entitled to spend that money however they please. Saying that there is always going to be people who are willing to support art to the fullest and there is also always going to be people who opt out for a more budget friendly title or will just wait until the game goes on sale, and there is nothing wrong with that. I’ve been hearing a lot more people subscribe to school of thought that believes that specials like the Steam Summer Sale and that free-to-play games have diminished the value of digital games, and I’m not going to touch on the issue of emulation and piracy much more than this, it’s hard to say it doesn’t affect the market at all because it has to be but, I don’t personally believe it’s a very destructive or disruptive force if anything these were people that weren’t going to buy it in the first place and would be hard to consider that money out of the developers pocket, and in a lot of cases I’ve witnessed these things act as though free advertising that lead to future purchases of merchandise that otherwise wouldn’t have happened, say you emulated a game that wasn’t released in your region and this lead to you buying its sequel that did come your way or even lead you to buy official game merchandise giving that game’s brand that much more value.

         

   As far as Steam Sales go, I believe these can open up your games to audiences that otherwise wouldn’t have played them or get an excited customer to finally check your title off their wish list, either way these are capturing sales that I believe for the most part wouldn’t have been there and they should be and are used strategically to reach a wider audience, an audience that if satisfied will spend the money on your future titles. For the Free-to-play model I think looking at its impact on consumer’s willingness to spend money on games is a little too complex to just make assumptions on but despite that I do believe to some extent that they can have a negative effect on the market I believe as this branch of games becomes more and more profitable that publishers will start to focus their efforts there and tie up precious IPs and talent that could otherwise be used on the core gaming market, and I’d really like to talk more about this topic in a future installment. Any way you slice it the customer has the right to spend their money however they desire and there’s no denying that in my book.

            Price, obviously, is a huge factor in our spending habits, we perceive expensive commodities as luxuries, and associate them with higher quality and sometimes we associate a low price tag with inferior quality or a less substantial product. You may see a game for 3 dollars and assume it’d play more like an app or mobile game and would rather just play a cheaper or even free game if that’s the case and like I said earlier you’d like to assume a certain level of consistency, substance and quality when paying 60 dollars for a game There are even products called “Veblen Goods,” like Luxury cars and purses where the high demand for them actually comes from their high asking price. So if indie developers want to be taken more seriously, should they charge more for their games? I hate to say this but yes and no. I recently bought, played and beat Yacht Club’s Shovel Knight (review coming soon!!!) I paid $15 USD for it, after constant recommendations from my friends,  now I’m a Final Fantasy Fanatic, if Shovel Knight were $60 USD, I would’ve never played it at least not until it had a significant price drop, it’d be a risk where I know I’d personally be very happy with Final Fantasy: Type-O Negative and I would’ve bought that over this new title but because of Shovel Knight’s price-point I happily bought it, now do I believe this is an incredible piece of art and the developers deserve whatever money they can get off of it?, absolutely but I wouldn’t know that if it wasn’t for its low cost of admission, I wouldn’t have be able to recommend it to my friends, family, loved ones and colleagues and most importantly, I’m going to definitely buy future Yacht Club Titles and I already can’t wait to get my hands a T-shirt and poster. This accessibility is important to the “indie” market, it is how new IPs and growing developers become household names. When we love something, we like to show it off and here’s where these developers can charge us the big bucks. Now that these new games have our attention, our trust and our money what I’d like to see is games like Shovel Knight and Axiom Verge come out with physical releases, go ahead and charge full price for their product, just add more value to them, full-fledged game manuals, beautiful cover art, maybe a poster and some exclusive in-game content to incentive us to buy them I know I’m not alone in saying that my fellow gamers and I would happily support these artist if/when they decide to go down that route.

      

      Ultimately I’d like to think that Independent games benefit from their lower asking price and that by making a game worth its salt they can eventually really cash in with merchandise, physical collector’s editions and sequels, that these low prices play a large part in their success and why they now exist as such a readily apparent entity in the gaming market and community and by no means should be people assume that they’re of a lesser quality or in the reverse that because a game cost half your paycheck that it is of higher quality and thinking like that can make you overlook some real gems, all of this can be very subjective and I’d like to know what you guys think. Leave a comment below! Be sure to follow my blog if you want to get updates on the Tasting Gaming Series, We'll be introducing game reviews and more article soon, I'd love to hear any feedback positive or negative, keep it decent and feel free to follow and Tweeter at me @Playanexus and remember folks, keep on gaming.