Why is there such a kneejerk reaction to "indie games"?

[veloper]

I'm not seeing all those knee-jerk reactions to indie games. That's an uncommon thing and that goes for the Escapist too.

Where is the TS looking?
Even hipster games like Dear Esther don't receive alot of negative criticism. There's always some, including from me, but not much.

The more succesful indie games and low budget games like Amnesia and Super Meatboy are usually judged by normal standards, except where it comes to $ presentation(GFX, music, etc).

 

[peruvianskys]

I feel like "pretentious" is often just a code word for "having even a sliver of artistic value," which is of course something most gamers hate. Any game that has the balls to actually tackle a tough subject or explore a theme in any way other than a black and white, cliche hero/villian narrative gets branded as pretentious.

You hear the same thing when teenagers in English class have to read something that isn't Song of Ice and Fire. "Oh, it's so pretentious! It's so boring! It's so self-indulgent!" Bullshit. It just has something to say - and when you're like the majority of gamers, heaping praise on boring platitudes and cookie-cutter power fantasies like they were the second coming of Shakespeare, anything that isn't easily digestible and mindlessly flashy is going to get attacked.

 

[omegawyrm]

I feel like "pretentious" is often just a code word for "having even a sliver of artistic value," which is of course something most gamers hate. Any game that has the balls to actually tackle a tough subject or explore a theme in any way other than a black and white, cliche hero/villian narrative gets branded as pretentious.

You hear the same thing when teenagers in English class have to read something that isn't Song of Ice and Fire. "Oh, it's so pretentious! It's so boring! It's so self-indulgent!" Bullshit. It just has something to say - and when you're like the majority of gamers, praising on boring platitudes and cookie-cutter power fantasies like they were the second coming of Shakespeare, anything that isn't easily digestible and mindlessly flashy is going to get attacked.

I imagine I'd have a hard time agreeing on examples of what games are good or bad with anyone, but I definitely think you've made a strong point there.

 

[skywolfblue]

Because Indie games aren't (for the most part) as successful and therefor worthy of sympathy.

It's just more Underdog worship, nobody would put up with them for a minute if it looked like they would actually be successful or their development team no longer fitted on a park bench

Agree completely.

If some of the more pretentious indie developers were in charge of EA for example. They'd be just as bad (or in some cases even worse) then the guys who are currently in charge.

Yet that is somehow endearing to some people...
"But they're small time, the underdogs!" - That should never be an excuse to be snobbish or a prick.

 

[mediarulestheworld]

Honestly, it's sometimes the fans who are the bigger problem. I went searching for some glimmer of hope that amnesia would be out on consoles at any point a while back, and I uncovered a load of bile and hatred from frictional games fans saying amnesia would be somehow instantly ruined by being on consoles. They said it'd be dumbed down, but why would we want that? If something is in demand on the consoles, clearly we want that, not a dumbed-down version of it.

...And exactly how does one "dumb down" Amnesia, one of the simplest horror games in existence?

I'm pretty sure it involves getting rid/changing their mechanics to be able to pick up things and freely move them. I imagine it'd be a lot harder to do that on a console.

 

[Doclector]

Honestly, it's sometimes the fans who are the bigger problem. I went searching for some glimmer of hope that amnesia would be out on consoles at any point a while back, and I uncovered a load of bile and hatred from frictional games fans saying amnesia would be somehow instantly ruined by being on consoles. They said it'd be dumbed down, but why would we want that? If something is in demand on the consoles, clearly we want that, not a dumbed-down version of it.

...And exactly how does one "dumb down" Amnesia, one of the simplest horror games in existence?

Exactly. I think they thought frictional would suddenly take an axe to the intelligence and shove a bunch of guns and a horde mode into it, because apparantly, consoles have that effect on developers.

 

[mronoc]

Every artist is at least a little pretentious, every artist feels like what they do is important. That's why they do it. If they didn't feel as though what they were making mattered, they wouldn't be making it. The only reason this pops up in indie development more than AAA development is that there isn't the same level of personal investment that comes from being involved of every facet of working on an idea of your own conception.

 

[Iron Lightning]

You can create something without having your head up your own arse.

This tends to be apparent as soon as an indy dev opens their mouth. Not all of them, of course, but then again, the humble indy dev never gets any screen time.

Jonathan Blow, Phil Fish and Notch Persson are just a couple of examples of devs who made decent games, but then act as if they're the saviours of gaming, protecting us from the evils of triple A titles.

Make a good game?

Great!

Doesn't mean you can be an arse though.

That's judging the art by the artist. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, in which case, get back on topic.

If Jonathan Blow went out and cockslapped a kitten's head off would that make Braid worse? Of course not.

 

[Don Savik]

I play anything from indie to triple A as long as its good. I don't see the need to justify the importance of games I play. You play indie games? Cool, but news flash, you aren't any more of a special artsy snowflake as the guy who plays CoD all day.

If an indie dev is a snarky fucker then I'll still play his game if its good. An indie dev being evil isn't going to swindle me out of my money, just 5-10 dollars. Whereas EA being evil will suck the life force from my wallet. Jonathon Blow hating Gears of War doesn't make Gears of War less fun. I'll play em both because I can and I don't care about his opinion.

So many people see it as a "us or them" situation when its not. Play all games of any genre as long as its good.

 

[RaikuFA]

You can create something without having your head up your own arse.

This tends to be apparent as soon as an indy dev opens their mouth. Not all of them, of course, but then again, the humble indy dev never gets any screen time.

Jonathan Blow, Phil Fish and Notch Persson are just a couple of examples of devs who made decent games, but then act as if they're the saviours of gaming, protecting us from the evils of triple A titles.

Make a good game?

Great!

Doesn't mean you can be an arse though.

What has Notch done thats so bad compared to Blow and Fish?

 

[Unsilenced]

I don't see why someone would judge a game based on the attitude of developer or, even more strangely, the attitude of it's fans.


Not wanting to play something because you think pretentious douchebags play it is kind of a pretentious douchebag thing to do.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

You can create something without having your head up your own arse.

This tends to be apparent as soon as an indy dev opens their mouth. Not all of them, of course, but then again, the humble indy dev never gets any screen time.

Jonathan Blow, Phil Fish and Notch Persson are just a couple of examples of devs who made decent games, but then act as if they're the saviours of gaming, protecting us from the evils of triple A titles.

Make a good game?

Great!

Doesn't mean you can be an arse though.

That's judging the art by the artist. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, in which case, get back on topic.

If Jonathan Blow went out and cockslapped a kitten's head off would that make Braid worse? Of course not.

It's on topic because a lot of gamers take issue with the attitude of the devs.

I'm not going to not play a game just because the creator is a douchebag, of course not, that would be silly, but I can certainly see how their attitude might rub people the wrong way.

 

[Scrustle]

'Lo Bob. Where's my pie?

Ehem, I mean, I kind of see what you mean. A lot of people do hate on indie games for being pretentious, but it doesn't really seem to phase me. I have no problem at all with plenty of the indie games I like being labelled as pretentious, but I'm kind of in two minds as to whether they are actually. To me something is pretentious when it doesn't really have any substance under it's allusions to being artistic or thought provoking. I would argue that games like Braid, Bastion or Fez do have more substance to them. They're not really pretentious at all, yet I wouldn't mind at all if someone did call them that. Yet there are also indie games I admit are pretentious but I still admire, like Dear Esther, although I don't categorise that one as a game. I still don't really have a problem with that game being pretentious.

But there are some games which are very pretentious which I do have a problem with. Like this fixation that so many indie games seem to have recently of using silhouettes. It's been done so many times. It doesn't need to be done again, it's just re-treading old ground, and adds nothing in terms of depth. It's just trying to look moody. It even sometimes makes me think that the developer has just done it as a way out of doing all the work of creating textures for things but still get the credit for creating something artistic, when in actuality they have done is the equivalent of using the "fill" button on MS Paint.

 

[him over there]

I would say because once the Indie scene took off people began using the term indie itself as a credential. Even if a game was sort of lackluster it's still regarded as great because it was made by about 1 to 10 people which makes some people upset. Indepentent creators are using the fact that they are a small team or 1 person to support why their game is great instead of the game.

People become dubious of indie games because they feel that they're using the indie label to pick up undeserved cred. Bastion is a fantastic indie game and it would still be a fantastic game if it was published by Activision or EA, but some indie games aren't and just ride the wave of "look guys I did this all by myself!" for praise.

 

[TrevHead]

As someone who likes indie games mostly for the fact that they are focused in what they want to achieve, something that I feel is lacking in some AAAs. However I can't stand the snobbery, imo some of the more successful "indies" should take notes of how Japanese indies act (aka doujin devs) I don't think i've seen any that act like Fish.

I suppose all this snobbery is part and parcel to the hypetrain of how the industry works over here, all because ppl tend to be sheep and won't like something unless they are repeatedly told to, or that its cool.

Like anything that was once underground but becomes mainstream, it slowly becomes the thing that pioneers hated, just like some music genres.

Personally think some of the games are over rated and arn't as good as the classics of that genre. Bastion is one of them, It looks good and has a great story but the combat is slow and subpar to the arcade era. Castle Crashers is dire compared to Guardian Heroes and Streets of Rage, hell even Double Dragon

 

[TheCommanders]

I usually am more bothered by the pretentious bigots who insist all indy games are jesus in disguise sent down to bring hope to those suffering under the heel of the satanistic AAA industry (if desired insert own religious/mythological figures here). To make no mention of the fact they they are incredibly oversimplifying the issue (although I just did anyway) they are actually alienating potential customers (who could help bring many of the good ideas and concepts that the independent scene is such a good place to develop into the mainstream) by insisting it's a realm of gaming fit only for those gods among men who are its connoisseurs. That and just because a game has a good idea, doesn't mean it's good. The independent market is a good place to try things out, and I love the fact that it exists because it can lead to the popularization of good ideas. Sadly, not all the games that pioneer these concepts are good.

Oh, and one more thing that I just remembered. It really busts my biscuits when reviewers praise indy games for NOT DOING THINGS. They don't seem to think about the fact that it probably wasn't an artistic choice, but rather one of limitations placed on their design process that lead to it. Or praising the simplicity when that was just a result of short development times.

To sum up, we need Indy Games to come up with ideas, and the AAA industry to execute them. How do you think Portal happened? A group of students (tantamount to an indy developer, and also from my school) made a game with a cool idea. Valve (a AAA company) saw the cool idea, hired the students, gave them a budget and resources and voila: Portal.

 

[Luca72]

It's possible and even desirable to have the ability to make a great game and still be a cool, humble person.

But it doesn't work that way usually. It's the same as any other art form. Stanley Kubrick is one of the greatest directors of all time. And he was supposed to be neurotic and kind of a dick in person. Jim Morrisson was an alcoholic lunatic at times. Mental imbalance, insecurity, trouble expressing oneself normally, these are all things that have driven artists throughout history to make great art. It's just that after they're gone, we remember the art, not the person.

Yes, Johnathan Blow is pretentious. But he's one of those people that's fascinating to me because he's talked himself up so much at this point that he literally can't make a mediocre game anymore - whatever project he approaches is going to have to be groundbreaking or a catastrophe.

On the other hand, I've heard Cliffy B on non-gamer podcasts where he isn't trying to pump up his products, and he sounds like a really nice, friendly guy. However, his games are very mediocre. Gears of War is certainly a well-produced game with a lot of playtesting and it delivers everything it promises to deliver - but at the end of the day it's still just another violent space marine third person shooter. It isn't pushing anything other than the use of cinematic elements in video games (which in itself is important, but I don't find it that exciting).

So I think you need unbalanced pretentious artists, because if your head is far enough up your ass, you're bound to produce either a unique and original gem, or an epic failure. And both are exciting in their own way.

 

[Vault101]

blaaaaarrgghhh

I'm probably an awful person or whatever but I hate indie games with their "quirky" cartoony crap

the AAA experience is why I game....most of them just arnt my thing

 

[Vault101]

I think this is just a temporary hiccup. Currently, the most popular independent games are also a combination of self important developers and "it's retro/art" excuses for low quality. However, there are a lot of upcoming titles with quality equal to or better than AAA games that will hopefully shake up the stereotype.

like what? just out of interest

 

[TrevHead]

I think this is just a temporary hiccup. Currently, the most popular independent games are also a combination of self important developers and "it's retro/art" excuses for low quality. However, there are a lot of upcoming titles with quality equal to or better than AAA games that will hopefully shake up the stereotype.

like what? just out of interest

It's mostly on PC which imo is mostly down to the Steam store and it's pricing structure and also Free 2 play. Consoles with their digital DL stores not so much.