I was just wondering how you people define 'Indie' or 'Big Name' developers? I will add a poll in a minute or two of my general theories but please post your ideas
Feel free to add the poll, but also take some time to explain why does it even matter? If anything, its the game which should matter. Not the fact that it was published by a big name dev or some indie.
Yeah it's just out of interest I know that it's the quality of the game that matters it's just I've noticed sometimes on these forums people categorise developers into these categories and was wondering where the line was.
Most of these don't make sense. Famousness? Revenue? IMHO, ff they're not part of a major publishing house, they're independent. (i.e. not EA, BANDAI/NAMCO, SquareENIX/Taito, etc...)
Tmonine says: was just wondering how you people define 'Indie' or 'Big Name' developers? I will add a poll in a minute or two of my general theories but please post your ideas ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You poster" haven't got listed for what I would believe to be the "line" between the devs. And "other" in the poll is too vague and really, the importance is of the game. So no vote from me. That said I will input by saying the big difference for me to define Big name and Indie devs is by their access for dialog within forums. I'm sure I don't need to point out which that is.
The term 'indie' is thrown around quite casually these days. When referring to people, I associate the term with any game developer who: 1) Gets his primary income from game development 2) Works in a company owned by the employee(s) 3) Primarily works on new original games owned by the company One-man shops do qualify.
Indie refers to "independent", not "individual". As such, I find the most accurate definition to be that indie devs are those not tied to a big studio. Not only not tied to a big studio, but not funded by a big studio. The indie developer can be an individual or a group. The indie dev need not have their primary source of income be game development. The indie dev funds game development either from their own pockets or by finding outside investors not tied to the larger studios (doesn't have to be the "major" studios, but any "large" studio, so in addition to EA, Square-Enix, Sega, Namco, Konami, etc., I'd also count no ties to ng-moco or Gameloft and such which are "smaller" than the "majors" but much "larger" than the indies). Basically, IMHO, indie game developers are not that much different from indie filmmakers. It's all about the lack of ties, financial and otherwise, to larger studios.
an interesting question. venan arcade (space miner devs) are considered an indie dev, despite the fact they have quite a large and professional team. however, EA is considered a "big name" despite the fact their game quality is AWFUL (spore, the sims, command and conquer are all terrible). why is this?
Quality control. Well partly. For EA, the games you listed are brand names and franchises-their success is guaranteed by that fact alone. They may have a QA team and beta testers, but it seems they don't spend a lot of money or time on those. Indie developers-and I mean the ones who make quality games, not those shit out a 99 cent game for the hell of it-do it all, often with a handful of people, so bugs, errors and whatnot may be more apparent to them. The term indie, as I understand it - as it relates not only to apps, but film, music and small press books - is self financing your work, i.e. not being begolden to a studio, publisher, etc to finance the work.
Yeah EA and Konami iphone games are just pathetic compared to their console games. They just don't seem to take mobile gaming as serious. Yet many people still buy their iphone games faithfully because of the big name. I think the reality of it is that big name companies already have the notoriety they need, and they are used to making big $, since they know they'll never get $50-60 for any iphone game they create, even if its near perfect and loaded with content, they'll just continue only taking console gaming seriously. A good indie dev usually doesnt have the notoriety yet, so they'll go all out on making a good game, more for the recognition at first then the money.
A Indie studio is owned by one person or a few. Their employees are only a handful and their budget isn't the biggest. Some studios only have one person doing all the work (Dishwasher on XBLA) and others are big but their budget isn't.
If you're a big company it doesn't mean you make crappy games for the Appstore. Need For Speed Shift is really good. Gameloft is probably the top game developer and they are big (mobile game-wise). Capcom just came out with Street Fighter with isn't that bad.
The same way as you define it for music, i.e. any artist who isn't signed by a label, or in this case, a publisher.
Good big-name games: NOVA Need for Speed Street Fighter Grand Theft Auto Skee-Ball Minigore Secret Exit games Illusion Labs games Rolando Good smaller-company games: Enviro-Bear 2010 RunSwimFly games Spider: Secret of Bryce Manor Edge Eliss geo Series Smashed! The Graveyard Aftermath
