Could it be an Indie Revolution?

#1 Both Microsoft and Nintendo are supportive of indies on consoles it's nice that people realize how stupid it is to make these super complex games.

#2 8 figure budgets? You've got to be F* kidding me.
First off, you're so damn lucky you got to go to e3, dont even get me started.
If anyone knows how to apply to get into next years, let me know!

I'm very excited about the chance for independent gamers to get on the Nintendo consoles. Even if I never get a chance to release a game for it, I'm still excited that someone is taking a chance, especially the big N. I see so many damn games out there that are just cookie cutters, that's a big pet peeve. How many FPS war games are there going to be? How many platform games with a cartoon character that spin attacks and jumps on people? Its getting ridiculous here, Game Development companies are not bakeries, they dont need to be producing this many cookie cutter games. I for one would rather buy an indie game about racing marbles *wink* or things of that nature, than playing another goddamn GTA clone. Dont get me wrong, I love action/shooters, but I dont like buying a game, and popping it in, only to have Deja Vu of the game I just beat yesterday, which was for a different console by a different company. Hooray for Nintendo.

#3 If Nintendo does actually follow through and extend support to indie developers that will be awesome, but I am not holding my breath given their past track record.

On the other hand Microsoft has gone out of their way to support indies in the past and in the future. They truly deserve to be cheered on!

#4 Nintendo is no longer in the same position they used to be. I'll believe it when I see it.

But does it really matter? Nintendo has already said that there new system isn't going to match up with the others. So I guess now we will have to wait to see how much sway brand has over power.

#5 While I agree that the Revolution isn't going to be as powerful as the PS3 I don't think it's going to be as bad as Microsoft and Sony would like you to believe. I saw an article in EGM that compared the power of the Xbox with the 360 and while the CPU is much more powerful the polygon power of the xbox 360 it is only capable of producing about 5 times the polygons you see in the xbox 1. If that's the case then Nintendo saying the Revolution will be 3 to 4 times more powerful than the gamecube doesn't put it at much of a disadvantage graphically.

However, it is very clear that Sony and Microsoft want to control your living room and the way you get all your entertainment, not just games. Nintendo doesn't seem to be focused on any of that, they are still solely focused on creating and delivering games.

#6 I still believe that it's all coming back around to the game play though, which was really the start of this post. 8 figure budgets, a zillion polys, total control of your living room don't mean anything if all the games being produced are all that same rehashes. For a long time now, people have been able to get by by showing off their new in-game eye candy and letting story take a back seat. Now, every game is eye candy, so the only memorable ones are the ones that are going to stand out through new and innovative story and mechanics, the 2 things that publishers hate to take risks on. Fortunately, the indie community can take these risks and are.

I can't wait to try all the next gen console, but in the end, it's the games that will make or break the platform.

#7 I'm more interested in Microsoft to be honest. They do have the best online service, and I expect it will stay that way for quite some time. They have the clout to get the kind of infrastructure needed to achieve something like live in a short time and make it work. I don't really enjoy multiplayer online PC games much after using live, it really is that good.

On top of which, Xbox live arcade wants to introduce new games every month, and that means opportunities for us. The SDK is PC friendly, and very well put together, and built on a lot of technology that maes porting from PC a lot easier than the other systems.

If you can make the games, make them fun and polished I think there are good opportunities there. With Nintendo I'll be waiting to see what happens, but I'm not expecting anything any time soon.

#8 @Matt

Why do you say that Microsoft has gone out of their way to support indies? I'm really curious? I would love to be able to make a game for xbox live arcade but I don't see Microsoft being any more open to the indie commuinity than anyone else? What have I missed?

#9 Brandon: GG, Bravetree, and 21-6 are all indie studios with games soon to be on Xbox (XB Live Arcade)

#10 For a start several indies I have spoken to have been loaned Xbox dev kits free of charge in order to get their indie games ready for Xbox live. Plus from the beginning MS had the incubator program that let competent start up companies at the hardware for a huge discount. I thin kit may have even been free for 6 months. Unfortunately not many games on the incubator program were published. From what I understand this was more to do with getting publishers to pick up titles from teams without proven track records.

I know Quantum Redshift was one of them, and I worked on one that was eventually only released in Europe. Was a good opportunity to get started. And the fact that Xbox live Arcade is directed straight at wooing independent developers and attracting new more casual gamers into playing video games is kind of cool.

#11 I have heard rumor that the X-Box Live Arcade has been an unqualified success for Microsoft. I sincerely doubt all the games together add up to the kind of revenue Halo brought in, but I think it's still a moneymaker and more than just a bone that they are throwing to the indies.

I think there may also be an element of "brand loyalty" they are building in from this program - like how Apple once donated tons of computers to schools so when the kids were later in a position to make a purchasing decision, they chose to stay with what they knew. There could be a bit of this mentality going into things too - I don't know. But if you've already shipped an (indie) game on the XBox, it's quite likely that if you get offered the opportunity by a big publisher to create a big-budget game later, the X-Box is going to be a no-brainer on your list of platforms to support (and it may even be an exclusive).

EA can argue all day long that the emperor's wearing really nice clothes, but I think the era of the indie has arrived. Again. :)

#12 That's really interesting I hadn't heard that before. For anyone who has worked on one of these projects, how was development on the xbox? I know that Marble Blast was just recently ported but how big of a job was it to write the porting layers for torque?

#13

Quote:it's nice that people realize how stupid it is to make these super complex games.

What? So game styles and trends aside, your saying technology shouldn't advance and it's stupid to make your game look the best that technology can offer? In order for games to be fun, they have to be a generation behind in budget and graphics? I'm glad Nintendo and Microsoft are doing what they are doing with indie developers but I'm sorry man, your statment makes no sense to me at all.

I like Nintendo but I think, had Nintendo been the dominate game in town all these years we would still be playing SNES and the N64 would MAYBE just begin being shown at this E3, MAYBE, but with Sega Saturn graphics. They only upgrade technology when forced to do so.(look at how long it took for them to update the Game Boy). Nintendo is an innovative company with their games and controllers but when it comes to technology they have proven over and over again that they let someone else set the standard and then they "one up" them knowing that, had that other company set a lower standard, theirs would be too. (Snes to Genesis, N64 to PS1, GC to PS2 and Xbox came into the game too late for Nintendo to one up)

You know why Nintendo didn't show any games at E3? Because they don't have a system yet. It was an empty box. Now that they know the specs of their competitors they will begin building the Revolution on monday and make it just good enough to get by. Now that they know the minimum level of technology gamers will accept, they have over a year to fill in the blanks.

Had others followed Nintendo's lead instead of the other way around when it comes to technology, this is where the console market would be today:

1985: NES

1995: SNES

2005: Nintendo 32 bit

If you think I'm completley silly just remember how long it took for the Game Boy to move on.


My point to all the rambling, don't hold back and stunt the growth of technology. If you have it, use it, and advance it. That's what Sony and Microsoft are doing and that's why I love competition. And if you don't have it then you have to come in from another angle, but it's silly to try to stop or slow down evolution and keep technology from being the best that it can be. It's natural for the cost of more complex things to go up. That's the price you pay for the advanced luxury of any product, not just games. I'm starting to wonder if some of you are against the advancment of the game industry. Should we just sit back and let the music and movie industry dominate? The game industry is finally starting to gain respect and be taken seriously as real entertainment and not just an industry that should have our products on the same shelves with the Etch-A-sketch and the Slinky. Leave it to Nintendo type thinking to keep us back there.
-Ajari-

#14 I get what you're saying but there is no way it is as cut and dry and you make it sound. It takes years to create the tech for these consoles and there is no way that Nintendo can wait until they see the specs of the competition to see where they are going. I'm sure they have been working on a few different versions of their next-gen hardware and now they will probably pick the one that places them where they want to be in relation to Microsoft and Sony.

I agree that competitive business is a good thing, but I think Nintendo has given the console industry more than Sony or Microsoft combined, and a lot of it was before they even showed up. Everything from wireless controllers, rumble packs, analog sticks and triggers, 3D graphics, 2D scrollers, to light guns and power gloves, you name it Nintendo made it. That was all new tech that they didn't have to include to one-up anyone it was just where they wanted to go. Because of that I'm pretty excited to see where they are headed.

Anyway, to the point, there is always a need to move tech forward and make complex and expensive games. But if there isn't a way to get simple, quirky, small budget games made then what are we all doing here.

#15 Er... Your list is a bit off...

1985: NES(well, technicaly it was 1984, when they released it to test markets in the NY area)
1990: SNES


The entire industry is based on one-upmanship, as far back as the Atari days. (Atari SAT on their duffs riding on the 2600 untill Intellivision and Colecovision started making their noises, and THEN Atari decided to do the 5200).

ANY company is gonna do that.. They will continue to 'research' new hardware, but won't release anything untill they feel that their revenue stream is potentialy threatened by someone elses new product.
(If you think MS would be any different, just look at Internet Explorer)

Then there's the fact that Nintendo has SHIPPED actual devkits to thrid parties, so they DO have at least SOME specs worked out(though maybe not finalized).

I do agree with you that Nintendo isn't always aggressive enough with their new platforms though. It's a marketing decision that in the past has helped them maximize their profit(cheaper hardware, greater profit margin).

#16 LOL ... I didn't say I wanted the technology to be stunted. I said "super complex" basically what I'm annoyed at is how every game these days has to be it's own little world with all the complexity of the real world.

Some of them I like but I'd rather play more different styles of shorter games ... then have all these complex monstrosities.

So basically ... I'd like more Orbz and less Grand Theft Auto ... know what I mean?

#17

Quote:Er... Your list is a bit off...

1985: NES(well, technicaly it was 1984, when they released it to test markets in the NY area)
1990: SNES

@Joshua I know SNES came out in 1990. What I'm saying is there would have been no rush for it to be made if it hadn't been for the Genesis gaining steam. Nintendo most likley would have kept the original NES going strong for at least another 5 years. Thus stunting the growth of technology and the industry. But that's what competition will do for you.

@Brandon I know Nintendo is always innovating with hardware such as controllers and things of that nature. I mentioned that earlier. That's what I love about the company. I'm saying it seems that when it comes time to move on to that next system, Nintendo seems to have growing pains.

@Jeremy I see what your saying now. But if there were more games like Orbs(not saying it's not a great game) and less games like Resident Evil 4, Halo 2, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, the Final Fantasy series, and even Metroid Prime, do you think the industry would be looked at with the same level of respect that it is today?
-Ajari-

#18 The real question is: do games like GTA: San Andreas really get the Industry more respect or just more press? If we keep making games that follow the mold of shoot guns, steal things, and kill people are we really going to be accepted as an art form. The greatest movies ever made aren't the ones with the most violence or the biggest budgets, although some of them are pretty good, its the movies that really reach out and touch people in ways that they haven't seen before. That is where we will have to go to make people think of games as art. We need to be on the news at night because people are buying games that are truly deep and rewarding, making them relate to and feel for their characters, or that are just so fun they appeal to everyone, not because the game lets you steal cars and kill hookers.

#19 @Brandon that is a good point. But there are great games being made for all genres. It's only games like GTA that get press. I've never heard anything outside of the gaming community about The Sims and we all know how big that game is.

#20 @Brandon that is a good point. But there are great games being made for all genres. It's only games like GTA that get press. I've never heard anything outside of the gaming community about The Sims and we all know how big that game is.