what is an indie game?

#1 I think it's simply a game developed with no publisher money, or big game house money. That $200,000 was probably self funded, through getting personal loans, family investment, maybe selling small software packages on the side.

However, if EA had forked over the $200,000 it wouldn't be an indie game.

Some pretty major games have been developed under the indie structure, Final Fantasy up till 7 I believe. Nothing amateurish about that.

#2 Yeah, indie generally just means that no major publisher was involved in up-front funding of the development game.
This is consistent with the indie definition for movies & music as well (and they also have a wide range in the production costs sunk into projects).

As funny as it seems, the Star Wars prequels are technically indie movies because, even though Fox distributes them, Lucas self-funds them up front to ensure he'll have complete creative control over the movies.

#3 Hello, i'd just like to point out that, to the best of my knowledge "Indie" is short for independent, so therefore the above definitions are more or less correct. I find if you actually think of them in terms of independant Games/Films etc. It becomes sort of self explanatory. :) Wasnt sure if you guys realised what indie meant but from the sounds of your post i thought it could use some clarification.

#4 ya Mark, I know that indie stands for independent... I just didnt know what independt ment in relation to games... independent of what? I wasnt sure if it meant you were independent of an established company reputation, independent of a budget, or independent of being associated and funded by the dozen giant game companies and publishers out there

one thing I did learn from this post is that independent simply means that you are independent of support from a publisher(from the comment that lucas arts funded the latest star wars movie, and therefore by not getting financial support from fox, where considered independents despide the previous succes of their company, reputation and bottomless wallet), I was suprised to find out that any game that is made with a companies personal finances is considered indie if they rely on someone else to physicaly publish the game but not support them during developement... I guess a lot of professional game companies are actualy independents then, any company that does not physicaly publish their games themselves, or does not recieve finincial support from the publisher is an independent... I guess game arts was an independent when they created the lunar series... thanks everyone for helping me realize what an independent is and how much succes they can find :)

#5 Actually, Eric, that's an excellent point. While indie films have a definite niche and Sundance, how many Star Wars movies have been shown at Sundance as an indie effort? I would venture (purely by conjecture) to say "none."

So the question then becomes, is there a point where success over shadows the indie label, thereby making the indie less indie-ish? I certainly wouldn't have considered George Lucas to be an indie. Plus, he owns Lucas Arts who pretty much does his production work. So I wouldn't call him an indie any more than I would Bill Gates.

LOL, this is interesting to me, much more than I thought at first. It's tempting to blend the self funding thing with the amateur thing to define "indie." But then we consider GG to be indie and the boys at GG certainly aren't amatures.

Thanks for the post Eric.

#6 I think that LucasGames is the only Indy firm out there...

;)

#7 In the simplest (and easiest to verify) terms, "indie" games are games that are developed without publisher funding.

The wrinkle, I think, is that there is no limitation on "outside" funding, except if it comes from a publisher. So if you can find an angel investor who is willing to put up the budget, you're technically an indie--even with a budget that rivals a retail product.

Of course, in all indie circles, regardless of medium, the indies working and struggling with shoestrings budgets tend to resent the ones who get funding and/or make it big... ;-)

-David
Samu Games

#8 I think of 'indie' as more than just a startup-do-it-yourself connuctation. I see its as more of a standalone 'independant' venture. Its trying to pave its own way rather than just following genre/marketing trends. Its taking the road less traveled.

Example 1: A company that decides to do a game based on ERASERHEAD rather than DUNE is taking a more 'indie' approach simply because DUNE has a much larger mainstream recognition.

Example 2: This company while making ERASERHEAD decides to present it as a FREEFORM SIMULATIONIST game rather than a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER and is taking a more 'indie' approach because no one has ever done a FSim game.

Example 3: This company is self-funding the ERASERHEAD game rather than looking for investment monies and is taking a more 'indie' approach because most successful games are developed and published using monies from outside sources.

Example 4: ERASERHEAD is going to be a pure digital distribution instead of using retailer channels is taking a more 'indie' approach because pure digital distro is simply not popular enough right now.

Independant means that its doing it in an alternative-to-now way, for good or for ill. Most people view indie as good and mainstream/corp as evil but that's simply not the case. One thing that I learned as an art director, is that people buy what's most popular/convient for them. They dictate what is successful and what isn't. They are the end consumers and they make up that bottom line...and they are always looking for an alternative.

-
internalist
www.internalist.com

#9 hey Mac, I think you see why I started this post... when does succes and huge resources overshadow the indie label? apparantly indie doenst technicaly mean small, start up company... although most people associate it with that concept as apparant by this post ( I also associate those words, which is why I started this post in the first place)... its interesting to read everyones responses because they all say very different things about what an indie is, yet all feel like they are true... I guess the concept of indie goes beyond the technical rule definition of not having a publisher... for instance, GG itself has always been an indie game community, However, before the recent license changes the community was bound to publish through GG in return for recieving such a cheep engine, in other words, GG supported our companies and projects with something of value in return for a promise to publish with them... technicaly none of use were indie developers untill the license restructuring... just something for everyone to think about ;)

#10 you know what I just realized right after writting that last post? Marble Blast was made by GG themselves and they are a publisher.... therefore they are not indies... shoudlnt they technicaly be disqualified? perhaps we are wrong about our definition of indie

#11 There are actually at least 2 meanings to each word, one is what is the dictionary definition, the other is what you associate with the word.

Indie can mean not done with a big publisher, or self funded, or it might mean non-professional hobby-like stuff, or going off and using new ideas, whatever the hell you want it to. To stay within safe bounds though, I'd probably think that the "non-big publisher" thing is the best definition. Whether you think it can't be a major production type of thing or not, it's up to interpretation, as everything is.

#12 For me the 'indie' label for games means games made and distributed, that have been made by people as a hobby, or their non-primary work activity (like students etc). Or by people who don't have a regular income from this venture (although technically that could almost be the whole game industry), but generally done by people with little or no financial backing or regular financial support while producing the game.

Indie films are made with little or no capital, and if any it is usually used to hire out equipment, and maybe sometimes pay the odd person a token amount. Taking this to game development would mean that an indie game is one which is made by one or more persons where they are not paid for making the game, but they can spend a reasonable amount to make the game. I guess this would include people / companies that pay $100,000 for the Quake3 (or Doom3 - but that would cost more IMO) engine and use that to make a game, and those that roll everything themselves.

So in Summation, an Indie Game Developer (to me anyways) is someone that:
a) game development is not their primary occupation, i.e. student, hobbyist, etc
b) they do not recieve a regular income during development of the game, i.e. everything that they make is spent back immediately to pay for equipment / tools
c) they do not necessarily plan to sell their game at all, but they do it for the art, statement, experience of it all

#13 Here are some of the responses to the question "What does it mean to you to be an indie developer?" These are excerpted from the Indie Game Developer Survey I posted a few weeks ago.

"To me being an indie developer means that your motivation for creating games comes from the pleasure derived from their creation and the satisfaction that comes from watching your users play them. It's not that indie developers don't care about money, they do, but most are aware of the fact that there are a lot more efficent ways to make money then makeing and selling games. They choose to try and make their living from the games the create because they want to make their own games for a living, not because they want to make money."

"Developing games using my own funding (not that of a publisher), and doing so with the goal of selling them direct to customers myself. Indie games CAN be published, just not funded by a publisher (and thereby controlled by a publisher in terms of design). It gets a little hazy to describe, but I think most people can 'feel' whether a company is indie or not right off. Croteam is about the outer limit of indie, and many would say they're not at all."

"Being able to work on new/interesting ideas, even if they are unconventional and not in line with the direction of the traditional commercial market. Working directly with customers to build a relationship and providing them with games/features they want, and being agile enough to able to meet their needs quickly."

"On one side, an indie game developer is someone that develops games without a publishing deal, in the hope that one day he'll get the recognition he deserves (either by a publishing deal and subsequent sells, or by his own efforts). On the other hand, he's a person that's doing the games HE wants to see, as oposite to the games OTHER people want to see..."

"Working outside the established industry, using alternative development, production and distribution models without the injection of capital from the industry."

Those are just a few of the responses, but indicative, I think.

-David