But the #1 reason that CRPGs aren't dying...

[Lancer]

Ok... I admit that I could be wrong in this matter but I guess I am simply not aware of all the possibilities...

 

Just one thing.. Can anybody explain to me this "indie developer" concept and just how common does this occur? How feasible is this and would some of them have the resources to make truly good RPGs like the Torments and Fallouts and what not?

[Volourn]

"Well, people count the side games in Baldur's Gate 2 as well...."

 

BG2 has no side games. It has side quests, though.

[EnderAndrew]

Some indie-developers put out titles that are loved, but look amateurish due to lack of art resources. See Spiderweb Software for instance.

 

Some indie-developers however are putting out really impressive stuff. There are also Morrowind mods more impressive than what Bethesda put out.

 

I'm thinking of putting together an article on that as my first big article for RPGDot.

[Yst]

Some indie-developers put out titles that are loved, but look amateurish due to lack of art resources.  See Spiderweb Software for instance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Indeed, paint me surprised that a game with graphics like these got an 80% from PCGamer. I may have to check it (or its successor) out.

[Lancer]

Yes.. I am aware of the Geneforge series.. But Spiderweb Software is the only indie-developer I have ever heard of. Where are all the other ones?

 

I just didn't think that independent developers were that much of a factor in the grand scheme of things...

[Guest Fishboot]

Can anybody explain to me this "indie developer" concept and just how common does this occur?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Two definitions:

 

Indie 1: Not a subsidiary of a publically traded corporation or private media group (or a publically traded corporation unto itself). By that definition Valve, Obsidian, Bioware etc. are indies, and obviously those companies can feasibly make any game they like once they've established themselves. Auteurism is not out of the question here, but these companies are typically compromised (I don't mean that word pejoratively) by dealing with publishers and a culture of desire to generate prosperity in the long term.

 

Indie 2: Like Indie 1, except that the developer also self-publishes (if the term "publish" is appropriate, since this can also be done via shareware, adware or even freeware). This is where your Spiderweb Softwares of the world come in, your Modder companies, and where a lot of the gaming industry used to be in the good ol' days. Also, sneaky ol' Valve wants to be here too, via Steam.

[Lancer]

Can anybody explain to me this "indie developer" concept and just how common does this occur?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Two definitions:

 

Indie 1: Not a subsidiary of a publically traded corporation or private media group (or a publically traded corporation unto itself). By that definition Valve, Obsidian, Bioware etc. are indies, and obviously those companies can feasibly make any game they like once they've established themselves. Auteurism is not out of the question here, but these companies are typically compromised (I don't mean that word pejoratively) by dealing with publishers and a culture of desire to generate prosperity in the long term.

 

Indie 2: Like Indie 1, except that the developer also self-publishes (if the term "publish" is appropriate, since this can also be done via shareware or adware). This is where your Spiderweb Softwares of the world come in, your Modder companies, and where a lot of the gaming industry used to be in the good ol' days. Also, sneaky ol' Valve wants to be here too, via Steam.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Don't you need a lot of money to "self-publish" though? Is there a different venue that small developers like Spiderweb Software go through?

[EnderAndrew]

Spiderweb has no advertising budget and doesn't put out a retail box for one.

 

GTA:SA cost 85 million dollars to make. The average game production right now for a commercially-produced game is supposed to be like 5 to 10 million dollars.

 

So self-publishing is not easy. I doubt Feargie has the capital laying around.

[Lancer]

But it seems to me like indie-developers are a relatively trivial factor. I have played tons and tons of RPGs and haven't heard of anyone else other than Spiderweb.

What other companies are out there?

 

 

EDIT: And more importantly, how easy it is to become an independent developer?

[Lancer]

So by fishboot's and ender's definitions..

 

The only real difference between a "big" developer like Bioware and a true independent developer is that an indie-developer self-publishes? And it is able to do that because it spends no money on advertising or retail box?

[EnderAndrew]

There are ons more, but due a lack of budget you never heard of most of them.

 

Take Digital Tome for example. They decided to sell their title Siege of Avalon in chapters, which didn't work well. Now they're taking Siege of Avalon open source.

[Volourn]

"I'm thinking of putting together an article on that as my first big article for RPGDot."

 

You write for RPGDot? Cool. Can't wait to read your articles.

 

 

 

As for SW games, I think as far as independent devs go, they (or I should say he) is overrated. SW's famous turn base combat is very, very simple.

 

 

"So by fishboot's definition.. The only real difference between a "big" developer like Bioware and a true independent developer is that an indie-developer self-publishes? And it is able to self-publish because it spends no money on advertising or retail box?"

 

Hmm.. That definition of fishboot's as you described seems off to me. Afterall, that would make Bethesda one. I think 'indy developers' are very small devlopers who can't for whatever reason sell their products in stores, and are solely dependent on word of mouth (usually via the 'net).

[Guest Fishboot]

But it seems to me like indie-developers are a relatively trivial factor. I have played tons and tons of RPGs and haven't heard of anyone else other than Spiderweb.

What other companies are out there?

 

 

EDIT: And more importantly, how easy it is to become an independent developer?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The only other one I can think of offhand is Popcap Games.

 

You're right, they are trivial, because the "action potential" of publishing/distribution is that you have to create a box, manual and media, move it across a large % of the planet and convince retailers to make room for it. That takes a lot of clout and gives publishers the means to soak developers.

 

And it's easy to become an independent developer: You make something. Bam, you're an independent developer. Now, making a living wage, that's the hard part, and there's no simple pipeline currently that provides a means for Indie 2s to thrive.

[Lancer]

The only other one I can think of offhand is Popcap Games.

 

You're right, they are trivial, because the "action potential" of publishing/distribution is that you have to create a box, manual and media, move it across a large % of the planet and convince retailers to make room for it. That takes a lot of clout and gives publishers the means to soak developers.

 

And it's easy to become an independent developer: You make something. Bam, you're an independent developer. Now, making a living wage, that's the hard part, and there's no simple pipeline currently that provides a means for Indie 2s to thrive.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So not saying it *will* 100% happen.. But knowing that it is indeed a trivial factor, why are some of you using the "indie developer" argument as if a viable solution to a hypothetical computer RPG apocalypse?

[EnderAndrew]

Yep, I'm RPGDot's newest editor.

[Guest Fishboot]

Afterall, that would make Bethesda one. I think 'indy developers' are very small devlopers who can't for whatever reason sell their products in stores, and are solely dependent on word of mouth (usually via the 'net).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

As far as Bethesda, they're a subsidiary of Zenimax Media, so they're not indies by my definition.

 

Edit - Although realistically based on Beth's behavior I doubt Zenimax chooses to squat on them with any vigor, and I'd consider Bethesda a quasi-indie.

 

I think including smallness as part of the definition is defeatist, because it is biased against success. If Spiderweb Software set the gaming world on fire somehow but still maintained creative and financial independence it wouldn't be any less of an indie.

[Lancer]

"So by fishboot's definition.. The only real difference between a "big" developer like Bioware and a true independent developer is that an indie-developer self-publishes? And it is able to self-publish because it spends no money on advertising or retail box?"

 

Hmm.. That definition of fishboot's as you described seems off to me. Afterall, that would make Bethesda one. I think 'indy developers' are very small devlopers who can't for whatever reason sell their products in stores, and are solely dependent on word of mouth (usually via the 'net).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah. It does sound a little strange to me too.

[EnderAndrew]

Like I said, Digital Tome is an indie developer.

 

Here is another.

 

http://www.emogence.com/news.htm

 

They're out there, but you have to look for them.

[Volourn]

"As far as Bethesda, they're a subsidiary of Zenimax Media, so they're not indies by my definition."

 

Oh? So, if you are a subsidary?

 

Then, by this defintion, BIoware is an 'indy developer'. Afterall, they aren't owned by any other company, they are privately owned, and they actually do pay to make their own games as evidenced that they are financing DA on their own as this time; not to mention the NWN Premium Mods which they are actually selling themselves much like SW does with their games.

 

 

"Yep, I'm RPGDot's newest editor."

 

 

[Lancer]

And knowing that indie- devs are such a trivial factor in the computer RPG industry.. again.. How does this prevent the possibility that console RPGs could help bring the downfall of computer RPGs?

[Volourn]

'Cause they won't. CRPGs aren't going anywhere, and DA, NWN2, and G3 are just 3 examples of high end games to illustrate this.

[Guest Fishboot]

And knowing that indie- devs are such a trivial factor in the computer RPG industry.. again.. How does this prevent the possibility that console RPGs could help bring the downfall of computer RPGs?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sorry, I was just doing an indie-1 indie-2 definition drive-by, I have no interest in discussing CRPG armageddon. I think the landscape is too fluid for me to make quality predictions, so I'll exeunt thread right.

[EnderAndrew]

Console RPGs have been around for quite a while and have been selling well for quite a while. They aren't exactly a brand new trend. I don't see either CRPGs or console RPGs disappearing anytime soon.

[Lancer]

So none of you have any reason that can discount the possibility..

 

Besides... "Nah. It just won't.. OKAYS?." I didn't think any of you did.

 

And all of your responses are in regard to things looking up "NOW." Yes, they are making DA and NWN2 and things look "bright" right *now*.. And everybody seems to think that big developers designing both console and computer games to be such a good thing. But the question is: Is it really a good thing? Not now, but in the *long run?*

 

I admit to not having a definite answer either to the question and fishboot hit the nail on the head that the lanscape is just too fluid to make predictions either way.. But am I the only one that sees this new trend of developers like Bioware and Obsidian trying to appeal to both console and computer RPG gamers to be.. well.. kinda odd?

[jiujitsu]

'Cause they won't. CRPGs aren't going anywhere, and DA, NWN2, and G3 are just 3 examples of high end games to illustrate this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What about Oblivion?

 

R00fles!