Forget Innovation From The Indies 98
spidweb writes "RPGVault has an article from a long-time indie game author about how people who want innovation in games shouldn't look to the small developers. It is his view that innovation in games will come from big companies, if at all. From the article: 'Indie developers have a real purpose in this world. They make little niche products for markets too small for Activision. They make many new puzzle games for the casual audience. Or, at least, the same old puzzle game again and again. They rewrite Asteroids... because someone has to.'"
Jeff Vogel rocks (Score:2)
"The Indies" ? (Score:1, Insightful)
Guess I need another cup of coffee.
Re:"The Indies" ? (Score:5, Funny)
I think we need to make the terms "Indie Developers" and "Indie Studios" the standard to prevent confusion with terms like "The East Indies." Then again, with the current state of common geographical knowledge in the US today, perhaps it doesn't matter.
Re:"The Indies" ? (Score:1)
I think we should, you know,freakin write it out! Such as "Indiependant", using whatever spelling system (ubiquetous-collective-)your "innovative" grade school teacher encouraged you to use.
Re:"The Indies" ? (Score:2)
-Rick
Are you kidding me? (Score:2)
what? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:what? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:what? (Score:2)
Re:what? (Score:1)
What about... (Score:3, Insightful)
Never underestimate the ideas that indie developers can come up with.
Re:What about... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What about... (Score:2)
(I love those games and most of the Sim titles rock, just trying to make a joke)
Re:What about... (Score:1)
Re:What about... (Score:1, Offtopic)
Woefully uninformed (Score:1)
~ Wizardry Dragon
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:1)
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:1)
Richard Garriot's first titles, called 'Akalabeth' and 'Ultima' were packaged in ziploc bags, with a map, cassettes, and a page or two's worth of manual. Such humble beginnings...
~ Wizardry Dragon
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:1)
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:1)
To say that there aren't innovative Independant developers out there today is to show a gross ignorance of the Independant games industry.
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:2)
Rob
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:1)
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:2)
Rob
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:1)
~ Wizardry Dragon
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:1)
Re:Woefully uninformed (Score:1)
Not even close... (Score:2)
Publishers and large companies are so focused on establishing themselves and grabbing the biggest slice of the pie as possible right now... innovation is damn near a dirty word when millions could be made on yet another FPS/Homie Sim
Re:Not even close... (Score:1)
How do you know they were innovative if they didn't come out? A lot of games look innovative on the drawing board but when they come out they're contrived and cliched.
Re:Not even close... (Score:2)
Re:Not even close... (Score:1)
Re:Not even close... (Score:2)
Kind of funny how you bash the guy when your thesis statement supports him entirely. If you'd actually RTFA, you would've realized that.
Rob
Re:Not even close... (Score:2)
He states indie developers are held back to ripping off 30 year old games because they don't have the money or resources to be original... that is TOTAL bullshit.
Project Offset, Doukutsu, Gish, Devil Dice, Katamari Damacy, are just a few examples. Now especially Project Offset... I'd LOVE to hear his justification for that to fit into his narrow view of indie developers. Oh, and Doom... or about a thousand other indie titles gone
Re:Not even close... (Score:2)
Cave Story: Fun, but not really innovative.
Gish: Incrementally innovative regarding its physics engine, as Vogel said.
Devil Dice and Katamari Damacy: THQ and Namco are indie?
The rest of your post makes it clear that you didn't read the article very carefully, so I'm not going to reply to it.
Rob
Re:Not even close... (Score:2)
Rob
Re:Not even close... (Score:2)
Re:Not even close... (Score:2)
And if Sony hadn't picked it up, then what would've happened? Surely you don't believe that the game would've ended up just as well-realized without Sony's support.
BTW, it should be noted that the original build of Xi (the Japanese name of Devil Dice) was designed as an entry for a contest that Sony held. If not for the contest, do you think that the game would h
Re:Not even close... (Score:2)
Rob
Sure there are tons of indie clones but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Nethack (or, originally, Rogue) is made by an independent group and it's one of the most innovative RPGs made in the past two decades. True and groundbreaking innovation doesn't necessarily have to involve technical innovation. Yes, most of the innovation at this point in the industry will be technical, but there is a large amount of game design space left to be mined.
VGA Planets was a hugely innovative 4X game in the BBS era that spawned a number of indie clones, but it itself was produced almost completely by one developer.
A Tale in the Desert is an independent MMRPG with no combat, only a completely new system based on sociology, economics, and politics.
The reason we see less and less innovation in indie games currently isn't because they aren't being made - it's because the studio games being made right now are so good and are taking up so much of our time. I agree with the author that innovation doesn't necessarily make a good game, and the best games out right now, like WoW, are built on other models. But since this works so well, I don't see why studios like EA are more motivated to innovate than independents, who will keep innovating behind the scenes no matter how many Tetris clones are produced.
nethack innovative??? (Score:2)
Innovative??? Innovative??? What the heck makes nethack innovative? Its been the same character based RPG I've known since I took computer classes on a mainframe back in the early '80's. It was based on an even earlier game called Rogue. Lemme guess, nethack pioneered copying computer game themes!
Re:nethack innovative??? (Score:1)
I mentioned that it was based on Rogue, but it doesn't follow that it isn't innovative. Nethack is groundbreaking because you can do almost anything you can think of with the items in the game. It is innovative gameplay -- you've made the assumption that innovation necessarily requires the game t
Re:nethack innovative??? (Score:2)
It is not groundbreaking until you can use a flask of oil to light your head on fire and proceed to head-butt a troll. There might not be much tactical benefit to that maneuver, but until that style of actions can be implemented, Nethack cannot be groundbreaking.
Also, in Nethack, the use of items is still limited to what the developers have thought of. It was a few versions ago where saddles were ava
Re:nethack innovative??? (Score:1)
Strange criteria...
Almost every game is limited by what the developers think of, the only exceptions are truly successful simulations that have AI's that create situations the
Re:nethack innovative??? (Score:2, Funny)
If you're saying what I think you're saying... well, you have rather high expectations, don't you?
You say Nethack cannot be groundbreaking at all, unless you have total and complete freedom of action, and arbitrary combinations of objects interact r
It comes down to what "innovation" means (Score:2)
But yeah, it isn't "truly innovative" in the sense that isn't similar to something we've seen before in some way. Black and White i
Re:It comes down to what "innovation" means (Score:2)
Rob
this can't be reconciled with the facts (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed! (Score:2)
Vendetta Online [vendetta-online.com] is our game, and it is already an excellent twitch-combat space-sim. It's also already a decent RPG (solo and group missions of various sorts, character-building, etc). Unlike most game's, though, VO will not reach its intended feature-se
forgot to mention (Score:2)
Re:Indeed! (Score:2)
Darwinia is a perfect example (Score:2)
Let's get into specifics. The fir
try the inverse... (Score:4, Insightful)
No innovation by indies?! What utter BS. Seems to me indies have the most potential to innovate since they don't have to convince a room of 70 year old suits how great their wacky ideas are.
Re:try the inverse... (Score:1)
The group is called das produkkt and kkrieger was in no way innovative. It was a tech demo but not a good or innovative game.
Wrong (Score:2, Interesting)
More gripes (Score:2)
Lockout chip business model (Score:1)
This [independent] game would look 10 times less cheap if it were run at 300x200.
Problem is that the only popular platforms with a resolution close to that are handheld video game systems and mobile phones. Handheld video game systems are under Nintendo's and Sony's lockout, and too many mobile phones in North America are under the carrier's lockout. What handheld platforms are left that are not completely niche?
What a load (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What a load (Score:2)
Re:What a load (Score:1)
Wanted to mod story +1 Funny (Score:4, Insightful)
Then, let's look at the other side of the spectrum: Blizzard/Vivendi and World of Warcraft. Innovation? I don't see it. Sony and Star Wars Galaxies? Yeah, real innovative there. EA sports and the endless rehash of yearly pro sports games? Astounding! (not)
Big companies with big investors do the forumlaic thing because that is what they do best. They execute well in an area already explored and declared "safe" and "profitable" by the small guys who already took the chance and risked it all on "innovation". Why? Because they didn't have near as much to lose as "The Man".
Sure, indie developers do a lot of rehash, too; often it is because they are cutting their teeth and playing it "safe" for their first title or two before they jump in and start work on that "dream game" they have always wanted. They also do a lot of niche games. Nothing wrong with that. Indies are often small, and do smaller projects because that's what they can do to fill out their portfolio. However, that doesn't and shouldn't paint the rest of the independents out there currently working on cool, unique games that ARE truly innovative as being without the very quality they are (and have always been) providing to the industry.
Maybe he is referring to something a little more grandiose, like maybe coming up with a completely new genre. Even still, the vast majority of innovation in that regard has come from independents, not mass corporate powerhouses. There are always exceptions, and I won't say that no megastudio has ever done anything innovative, but it certainly is not the rule.
Sorry, but this indie game developer isn't buying it.
Re:Wanted to mod story +1 Funny (Score:1)
Re:Wanted to mod story +1 Funny (Score:2)
UO coming out was a forgone conclusion considering the types of discussion we were having on the hardcore developer mailing lists at the time (you'd be suprised just how many people cut their teeth on network and games prog
Natural Selection (Score:1)
What? (Score:2)
The last innovative game from EA that I can think of off hand was probably MULE. And that was, what, twenty years ago?
Re:What? (Score:2)
Re:What? (Score:2)
Mutant League Football - Interesting take on football, i think they should bring it back
MOH:AA - WWII is tired now, but MOH was the first to do it well (and i guess you could call that innovation)
Beetle Adventure Racing - This was an interesting take on the racing genre back in the n64 days. I still have a copy and bust this out every now and again, still good times to be had there.
EA puts out some
I sympathise, but times are changing for the bette (Score:2)
What you dont often hear about is the bitter infighting in the indie-gamer community about the whole 'casual puzzle game clones' and the effect they are havi
Re:I sympathise, but times are changing for the be (Score:1)
What's The Sims, then?
Re:I sympathise, but times are changing for the be (Score:2)
Re:I sympathise, but times are changing for the be (Score:2)
BTW, I played Democracy recently. Fun game, though I wouldn't call it innovative (The Hidden Agenda pops to mind as a very similar game) and it was quite buggy (a problem that plagues indie developers that Vogel didn't mention). Keep up the good work.
Rob
Erm... (Score:1)
No innovation from indie games, eh?
Re:Erm... (Score:2)
Its not innovation its influence... (Score:2)
Indie? (Score:2)
Percentages (Score:2)
Re:Project Offset proves him WRONG (Score:1)
Since hardly any of you RTFA (Score:2)
1. He's talking about games made recently, as in the 21st century. Mentioning games like SimCity, Ultima, and Tetris damages his argument not a bit. The reason he focuses on recent games is because his argument is that man
A note from the author. (Score:5, Informative)
I appreciate the examples of innovative games from Indies. Even if many of them came from the days when dinosaurs ruled the Earth. SimCity and Doom are not relevant to a discussion about the world Today.
But I'm still right. A huge chunk of the really innovative stuff is coming from the big studios. I'm thinking of The Sims/Sims 2/Sims Online. (EA) The Movies. (Activision) Spore, if it works. (EA) Guild Wars. (NCSoft) And I didn't even mention any console games. (I should get 2 bonus points for not bringing up Katamari Damacy.)
Because of space limitations, I regret I couldn't mention Darwinia. (Incremental innovation in quality visuals.) Or Tale In the Desert. (Which is one valid argument against my point of view. I hope one day to see another.)
I'm not saying Indies suck. Obviously. I am one. But I am saying that people shouldn't fetishize them. They're people with small budgets and bills to pay. And that's why they write 50 retro-arcade games and puzzle clones for every one game with any claim to creativity. Because they have to.
- Jeff Vogel
http://www.spiderwebsoftware.com/ [spiderwebsoftware.com]
Re:A note from the author. (Score:2)
a good example (Score:1)
Hah. (Score:4, Insightful)
Before I continue, one of the underlying points Mr. Vogel was trying to make here is definitely true. Independent game developers and studios are by no means a fountain of innovation, and are in my opinion more likely to reproduce a popular model rather than innovate in order to get their foot in the door. That way, their chances of success are much higher, because they've taken something that was already good and at least reproduced - if not improved - it. The big studios don't have to worry too much about money lost to experiments, and are thus more likely to try new things - and damn the consequences of failing to find a niche in the market if they do. Furthermore, he made it very clear that innovation tends to occur gradually, in a sense of evolution, rather than rapid mutation. Most indie studios that are replicating something that's been done before do try to add their own twists to the model - this is what makes them stand out enough for people to pay attention.
However, Mr. Vogel is quite wrong about a few things, too. This is the kind of commentary I'd expect out of a cynical independent ripoff artist in action, really. You know, the kind of person who is too afraid and closed-minded to try anything new, partly because he doesn't want to lose his money or reputation - a sound judgement - and partly because he just doesn't seem to want to try. You can deny all you want that the Exile and Avernum series aren't blatant ripoffs of Ultima - personally, I loved Exile regardless, if only for the story - but they are. Avernum, a polished up Exile, is Ultima in new clothes. This man and his studio have been responsible for very little noteworthy innovation, and well, like they say, Pot, meet Kettle.
Huge innovative leaps on both a technical and gameplay level occur in the field of gaming from time to time, and it's really a 50-50 chance of those innovative leaps coming from a big studio or an independent developer. Just like any creative field, innovation can either occur incrementially, as he implied that it always does, or it can occur massively and with outstanding results. (Sim City, anyone?) Mr. Vogel, who clearly suffers from a serious case of cranial-anal inversion - not to mention chronic defeatism - is satisfied to simply replicate the old time and again, and tells us to get used to it. He tells us that only people with money can afford to make new ideas work. He's dead wrong, but you can't expect a man with no other skills outside of game publishing to care about anything besides money when it comes to games, considering that it's the whole of his livelihood. Just because big titles carry big budgets doesn't mean that new ideas can't take root in the independent side of the playing field. Money isn't really the huge factor here, it's the ideas themselves and who has them.
In other words, nothing to see here. Just near-mindless droning from another cynic with a rather skewed and defeated view of the gaming world. The reality of it is, even if no new and huge genres are going to emerge any time in the near future, significant and more than incremential innovation can, does, and will take place, and it won't just be from the big names. People working for big name studios have more money to throw around - but the big names are only concerned with meeting the status quo, to make ends meet. The independent developers are likely to follow the popular models to get themselves established, or much like Mr. Vogel, they just don't have many good ideas. Big leaps are and have almost always been rare, and it's hard to tell just where they'll come from. Much like Haley's Comet, though, just because you only see it once in a lifetime doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
The Future is Now (Score:1)