Note: I have adjusted my opening post for clarification. I was of the opinion that I communicated my opinion in a completely wrong way to the target group. Now it should be clearer what I am referring to.
I will briefly try to express what I mean.
- All games can somehow be called art, both technical/graphic/writing or in depth. There are more indiegames (not all) that respect games as an art form more than games from big publishers. Here I mainly mean depth and the authentic gaming experience.
- A large part of the large publishers increasingly lose the urge to create unique experiences. They prefer to go after successful games. Indiegames are in most cases more willing to innovate.
- An indie game is usually more personal, more authentic and much closer to the designer. This personally ensures that indiegames have more charm and "soul". I find less charm in games from large publishers that focus on photorealistic graphics (although technically/graphically fantastic), also because it relies more on resources such as pre-existing textures, motion capture etc.
- I miss the pre-HD days when there was less distinction between indie and big publishers. Back then both parties were more willing to innovate. Now big publishers play it very safe, with very large budgets and marketing campaigns. Indies can't compete with them in the current time.
- I think it's an unfortunate trend that games are betting more and more on GAAS, micro-transactions, lootboxes and similar ways to ensure a longer playing time. It may have advantages, but in my opinion, this is not part of an authentic gaming experience.
- Unbounded hypercapitalism strives more for mainstream and gives the products less breathing space for a more limited target group. However, I hope the latter will continue to exist.
- To clarify: I don't want to put all the games of major publishers and independent developers in a certain category. Of both types there are games that are more authentic and focused on artistic experiences both and also games that focus less on it. Moreover, I respect the subjective meaning behind these two words. It was absolutely not my intention to generalize.
- The above is my personal opinion, be free to disagree with it.
Forgive me for the bad opening post of the past. Normally I don't make the mistake to pass on the wrong message: here you will find a topic of which it was clear what I wanted to achieve. If you're interested in seeing my old opening post, open the spoiler.
This is my personal opinion, be free to have another opinion.
I will briefly try to express what I mean.
- All games can somehow be called art, both technical/graphic/writing or in depth. There are more indiegames (not all) that respect games as an art form more than games from big publishers. Here I mainly mean depth and the authentic gaming experience.
- A large part of the large publishers increasingly lose the urge to create unique experiences. They prefer to go after successful games. Indiegames are in most cases more willing to innovate.
- An indie game is usually more personal, more authentic and much closer to the designer. This personally ensures that indiegames have more charm and "soul". I find less charm in games from large publishers that focus on photorealistic graphics (although technically/graphically fantastic), also because it relies more on resources such as pre-existing textures, motion capture etc.
- I miss the pre-HD days when there was less distinction between indie and big publishers. Back then both parties were more willing to innovate. Now big publishers play it very safe, with very large budgets and marketing campaigns. Indies can't compete with them in the current time.
- I think it's an unfortunate trend that games are betting more and more on GAAS, micro-transactions, lootboxes and similar ways to ensure a longer playing time. It may have advantages, but in my opinion, this is not part of an authentic gaming experience.
- Unbounded hypercapitalism strives more for mainstream and gives the products less breathing space for a more limited target group. However, I hope the latter will continue to exist.
- To clarify: I don't want to put all the games of major publishers and independent developers in a certain category. Of both types there are games that are more authentic and focused on artistic experiences both and also games that focus less on it. Moreover, I respect the subjective meaning behind these two words. It was absolutely not my intention to generalize.
- The above is my personal opinion, be free to disagree with it.
Forgive me for the bad opening post of the past. Normally I don't make the mistake to pass on the wrong message: here you will find a topic of which it was clear what I wanted to achieve. If you're interested in seeing my old opening post, open the spoiler.
I've played older games with younger children from the 16-bit period. First we played Sonic and Street Fighter II on a Sega Mega Drive. My fellow player didn't understand it at all and didn't like it. After that, we played Streets of Rage II together and he had more fun because he often "accidentally" attacked me. However, he missed his Playstation 4, which he found "much more fun". Another day I played on my SNES with another younger child. We played Super Soccer and in the end he enjoyed it too. He did complain about the "ugly graphics" and said he liked FIFA much better. The other SNES games were less of a success with him.
I didn't grow up in the NES/SNES/Master system generation and was too young to really experience the Playstation 1/Nintendo 64/Genesis/Saturn generation. I grew up with Game Boy (Advance) and Playstation 2 games. However, as time went on, I became more and more fond of older games, perhaps because of my previous hobby as a video game programmer. I miss the charm and diversity that games used to have and consider a very large proportion of today's games to be "soulless" and "monotonous".
I find it very unfortunate that today's children may never appreciate the classic games. They are used to micro transactions, lootboxes, very expensive skins, GAAS and boring photorealistic graphics. AAA games are increasingly difficult to distinguish from each other, don't want to innovate and are chasing trends and other games. One of the few games that, in my opinion, still have the soul and charm are those of independent developers.
Thank God they exist! The independent developers are now the only ones who understand that games should be an art form. Inside, Journey, Gris, Undertale and so much more... I really respect the indie developer who has to survive with few resources and compete against giants who get the biggest successes with huge budgets and marketing campaigns. There are also games with a larger budget that pursue artistry, such as Death Stranding, but unfortunately these are very scarce.
Until the HD generation came along, there was hardly any distinction between large publishers and independent developers among consumers. They could compete with each other and both experimented with unique games. But since the major publishers needed ever larger budgets and were striving for ever better graphics, the independent developers had to take a subordinate position. The big publishers played it safe and refused to really experiment. Their games are often only really innovative in terms of technical and graphic performance. Their range of games is becoming increasingly homogeneous and similar, both in terms of gameplay and art style, which was not the case in the past. Money comes first at the big studios.
I think it's a real shame that most self-proclaimed "gamers" mainly play the, in their words, only "AAA games" and call indie games "overrated". Yes, I used to pay too little attention to indie games in the past, because the games of the big studios get all the attention. However, I'm beginning to lose interest in the medium because of the lack of unique experiences. Indie-games can make me love gaming in general again.
With unchecked hypercapitalism, there's no room for art in general.
Change my mind: Find a recent game from a major publisher that you consider to be art. There is also room for discussion.
I didn't grow up in the NES/SNES/Master system generation and was too young to really experience the Playstation 1/Nintendo 64/Genesis/Saturn generation. I grew up with Game Boy (Advance) and Playstation 2 games. However, as time went on, I became more and more fond of older games, perhaps because of my previous hobby as a video game programmer. I miss the charm and diversity that games used to have and consider a very large proportion of today's games to be "soulless" and "monotonous".
I find it very unfortunate that today's children may never appreciate the classic games. They are used to micro transactions, lootboxes, very expensive skins, GAAS and boring photorealistic graphics. AAA games are increasingly difficult to distinguish from each other, don't want to innovate and are chasing trends and other games. One of the few games that, in my opinion, still have the soul and charm are those of independent developers.
Thank God they exist! The independent developers are now the only ones who understand that games should be an art form. Inside, Journey, Gris, Undertale and so much more... I really respect the indie developer who has to survive with few resources and compete against giants who get the biggest successes with huge budgets and marketing campaigns. There are also games with a larger budget that pursue artistry, such as Death Stranding, but unfortunately these are very scarce.
Until the HD generation came along, there was hardly any distinction between large publishers and independent developers among consumers. They could compete with each other and both experimented with unique games. But since the major publishers needed ever larger budgets and were striving for ever better graphics, the independent developers had to take a subordinate position. The big publishers played it safe and refused to really experiment. Their games are often only really innovative in terms of technical and graphic performance. Their range of games is becoming increasingly homogeneous and similar, both in terms of gameplay and art style, which was not the case in the past. Money comes first at the big studios.
I think it's a real shame that most self-proclaimed "gamers" mainly play the, in their words, only "AAA games" and call indie games "overrated". Yes, I used to pay too little attention to indie games in the past, because the games of the big studios get all the attention. However, I'm beginning to lose interest in the medium because of the lack of unique experiences. Indie-games can make me love gaming in general again.
With unchecked hypercapitalism, there's no room for art in general.
Change my mind: Find a recent game from a major publisher that you consider to be art. There is also room for discussion.
This is my personal opinion, be free to have another opinion.
Last edited:
