Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
Indies, Collectives, and an Underdog Manifesto
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
View All     RSS
April 20, 2014
arrowPress Releases
April 20, 2014
PR Newswire
View All





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM TechWeb sites:


 
Indies, Collectives, and an Underdog Manifesto
by Tanya X Short on 02/20/14 12:32:00 pm   Expert Blogs   Featured Blogs

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

 

Tanya X. Short is the creative director for Kitfox Games, a studio in the midst of developing Shattered Planet and Moon Hunters.

 

Developers and publishers are at odds. As Dan Cook would put it, they’re locked in a power struggle that will last for all time. Creators need platforms on which to sell and to promote; platforms need quality content. Platforms want to gain power, and extract money from it, usually as soon as possible.

In case you missed it, the Square Enix Collective is a platform now. I’ve had various people asking for my opinion on its place as a platform. Its role isn’t immediately clear.

At present, it’s a place for developers to gather feedback on their game ideas before deciding whether to launch a crowdfunding campaign or not, and adjust their pitch along the way. 

 

It is not a place to host your actual crowdfunding campaign; it is not a place to sell your game. It’s essentially a platform of distributing ideas. It’s a platform of community building. Its “key application” is the theoretical ability to reach millions of fans normally reserved for Square Enix properties.

 

Moon Hunters. Apparently fans say they want it to be on the Vita?!

I say “at present” because it’s poised to change drastically in the next few months and years. It has tremendous potential as a marketing machine, and if its terms remain as they are at present, it might change the entire relationship between “indies” and “pubs”. Or it might not. Maybe “indies” will always distrust “publishers”* and that’s just the natural order.

Some reacted badly when they heard Square-Enix would put their “hand in the crowd-funding cookie jar”, indignant that they would try to take money from hard-working indies. It’s a best practice to be suspicious of any charitable-looking actions taken by a corporation legally obliged to seek profit at any cost.

Yet, as a team, all four members of Kitfox Games unanimously decided to put Moon Hunters up as a Collective project. Even though we’re not even done with our first game yet, and we knew almost nothing about the value of this platform.

Why? It’s simple. Competition’s fierce. It cost us nothing. We might get something. That’s all it takes.

Fierce competition doesn’t mean we believe in corporate dominance, or underhanded business deals. It’s just the opposite. If we can shed the burden of constantly needing to prove we’re “true indies”, we can use every opportunity to build each other up, and improve our capability as creators.

 

* “Pubs” could also be replaced with “pubs mostly other than Valve, who get special privileges because they consciously expend effort to build up contenders and put them on an even playing field with the goliaths”

 

Building Each Other Up

Game-making enthusiast groups and game jams are no longer the secluded coffeehouses of an elite niche; they’re cheering masses of talented creators, empowered and diverse with voices from across the globe. It’s an amazing time to be an independent developer. Your access to potential game collaborators has never been higher… as well as your comparison to potential competitors.

Some try to bring back the idea of exclusivity, creating “secret forums”, presumably fearing their own loss of credibility and wasted time if they dared to interact with (or, god forbid, praise) new, less established devs. I’ve never been to one of these. I assume their knowledge exchange strives to maximize prestige and efficiency.

Meanwhile, more inclusive groups are flourishing. The last few years have seen groups like the Mont Royal Game Society struggle to find a big enough venue. The hobbyist scene has skyrocketed, fuelled by university programs, AAA layoffs, and general good cheer. Game jam tickets are gone as soon as they’re available. Diversity-oriented initiatives grow the scene laterally into new demographics, with by-design viral effects. Communal game creating workspaces are suddenly sustainable because there is a critical mass of people who are self-employed making games full-time and yet don’t get (and often don’t want) investors to help them afford a “proper” studio office.

Bento Miso, of Toronto

If Dong Nguyen is Kurt Cobain, the indie scene is a million garage bands in a Lollapalooza that’s everywhere, all at once, and it’s never going to stop. Eat the rich.

 

We Are Everyone

 

At IndieCade East last week, Bennett Foddy (QWOP) gave the closing keynote, saying “We’re not on top of a bubble that started in 2008, but on top of a tree that began in 1983.”

The tree grows, and grows, and grows. Insecurities about being a “true indie” are misplaced. Either your team is the size it should be to make the game you want… or it isn’t.

Some indies have savings. Some indies can’t afford the Steam fee. Some indies make art. Some indies make products. Some indies are students. Some indies have grandkids. Some indies are full-time. Some indies have a day job. Some indies haven’t made a game yet. Some indies have a day job at a AAA studio. Some indies will find financial and/or critical success. Most won’t. At least, not for awhile.

Sure, it hurts when this or that competition, festival, or convention decides that you’re not the kind of indie they’re looking for. Our vocabulary hasn’t quite caught up, and we find ourselves comparing Broken Age to Surgeon Simulator, or The Mandate to Howling Dogs. It's like roguelikes all over again. Everyone’s indie and nobody’s indie enough.

Something’s bound to get lost in that translation in this noisy world of ours, and sometimes it will be you.*

But you don’t need to worry about it so much. Words will catch up with us, amazing games with bullheaded devs will find their way, and in the meantime, we can make games and learn from it. Together.

 

* I’m so very, very glad I’m not responsible for curating an indie game collection. Judging a game jam is hard enough, and at least everyone can agree on the definition of a game jam!

 

The Good News

 

The indie superpower, across all budgets and sizes, is that we can always be the underdogs.

 

I learned this first-hand from Rami Ismail, who opens his mind and heart to up-and-comers around the world so often, it's nearly his full-time job. We can be the generous-hearted newbie that has plenty left to learn, no matter how many games we’ve made. We’re all independent and suffering in our own ways. Yet we’ll scrape by, somehow. 

You can be an underdog without being violent. I promise.

 

We are the Contender.

Best of all, when we’re secure in our identity of choice, we can make the decisions that have the most benefit to our games and to our studios, short-term and long-term. Suits call it branding. I call it reality.

And that’s why the Square Enix Collective makes me hopeful. Maybe there’s a place where the top-down ideas and bottom-up ideas can meet. Maybe, with a little bit of borrowed credibility and branding, the internet hive-mind can award AA budgets to non-celebrities. Personally, I’ve had nothing but great experiences working with Phil Elliott, who manages Collective projects at present… and if he stays in charge, I’m optimistic. Maybe Square Enix will be less schizophrenic than most companies, at least for a couple of years, and its mission statement will stay focused.

Now that we’re in the final week, the initial value is clear. We received a few hundred mailing list signups, 80+ fan comments on our project page, and over 10,000 views to our project page in the first 2 days. We feel validated that certain core systems in our concept (personality archetypes, mythology-building) resonate with at least some players, though it's still unclear how many are needed to get any kind of measurable momentum, if/when we decide to crowdfund. We've gotten something out of it. Maybe we'll get more. Maybe others will get even more than we did, over time.

And if not…? If it doesn't pan out, or if Square-Enix turns it into a predatory beast of a platform? Well, here’s hoping we can collectively rise up and form a shadow Collective of our own, because we deserve one, and our voices are growing. We are a global community of intellect, innovation, and passion. We’ll make our way forward, one well-meaning mess at a time.

When a corporation or rag-tag gang comes around offering to show your game/idea to a million players, of course, first read the terms. Assess the value. Is it a good deal? If so, jump on it. Make a good game, and then get that game to the players that will love it. That’s the goal.

You don't need to lose sleep over whether you’re “indie enough”. If worse comes to worse and the nightmarish happens, you’ll know when you’re not indie anymore. Your board of directors will tell you so.


Related Jobs

Treyarch / Activision
Treyarch / Activision — Santa Monica, California, United States
[04.19.14]

Associate Art Director - Treyarch
Treyarch / Activision
Treyarch / Activision — Santa Monica, California, United States
[04.19.14]

Associate Animator (temporary) - Treyarch
Activision Publishing
Activision Publishing — Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
[04.19.14]

Principal Graphics Programmer
Activision Publishing
Activision Publishing — Santa Monica, California, United States
[04.19.14]

Executive Producer-Skylanders






Comments


Gary Riccio
profile image
Gamer communities are an important piece to evolution of this ecosystem, empowerment of creative people, and innovation in the experience economy. To the extent this claim is true, there are interesting connections between this article by Tanya and Mike Rose's article on Feb 10:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/210322/video_games_and_gun_
violence_a_.php

One of the many quotes that are instructive for this continuing public discussion is "It's now about moving past that, into studying it on a much more phenomenological basis -- more of a motivational basis," he tells me. "What is it about video games that attracts people? Why do they play them? What do they get out of it? How is the user a much more important part of that process?" (quoting Ferguson).

Citizen journalism (participatory journalism) can be an instrument to help us delve into these question, and it doesn't require additional funding. A different kind of blogging can help us here:

See e.g., http://www.ted.com/conversations/22958/community_organization_and
_imp.html

This is a TED Conversation I started on Feb 13th to address issues such as those raised in the quote from Ferguson above. Instead of focusing on violence in this conversation, I wanted to understand the community context for gamers within which relationships and interpersonal behavior are visible and have meaning, why gamers play online games. This is the context for open innovation with gamers and game developers.

Feel free to participate in this conversation. We would love to explore the manifestations of a kind of citizen game development in the broader gaming ecosystem.

Thomas Happ
profile image
Admittedly I found it really hard to pay attention to the article once I saw that beautiful Moon Hunters screen.

It's really interesting how various publishers and platform holders are reacting to indies. I hope it continues in such a positive way!


none
 
Comment: