Indie Game VS Big Company Game Development

Hi there! Let’s talk about what we think on the topic of Indie Games VS Big Company Game development.

Here’s my personal take on the subject:

Big Game Companies:

Big well established game companies have the obvious advantage in the financial department. Because of this, they have a lot more access to resources that independent game companies wouldn’t even be able to afford even with a decade’s worth of success. The big game companies can hire top talent in every department they need, such as programming, 3d modelling, 2d art, music composition and performance, and even story writing. Another important capability that big game companies have is their vast marketing reach. They can easily make tv ads, net commercials, and even have regular gamer oriented game magazines to hype games for them.

Independent Game Companies:

Just because big game companies have all the money they need to hire top talent to create games, that doesn’t mean independent game companies are not as talented as the people they hire. The only difference is that independent game companies usually have very low budgets that they can’t afford to have a lot of people working on a game at the same time. There’s usually a lot less programmers, 3d modellers, artists, and other things to use to create a game in a timely manner. Some people might even do 2 or more jobs just because they can’t afford to pay having anymore extra members in the team, and this greatly lengthens the development time of a game since nobody can concentrate on just one thing.

Gameplay:

I think that the feel or manner that a game plays is not relevant to whether a game company is rich or not. Anyone who has a game idea who is comfortable using his/her programming language (or at least has someone to do the job) should be able to translate that idea into gameplay. For example, there are many “clones” of famous games like Street Fighter, R-Type, and of course Mario. You can play these clones on flash sites or wherever on the net and just experience the same fun as playing the commercial versions.

Sound/Music:

This is probably one department where independent game companies will potentially have trouble with. Sound/Music composition is a different art itself and requires a talented musician. Usually, great singers, instrumentalists, or song writers already work and have established careers and require decent pay to write or perform some tunes for you. For sound effects, you’ll need someone with the right equipment who has the imagination and technical know-how to capture crystal clear sounds from the real world and modify them if needed using his tools. Sound and Music in games can get pretty expensive.

Graphics:

I think independent game companies don’t really have that much trouble in terms of graphics. I’ve seen a lot of people create 2d and 3d art that rivals the quality found in really big commercial games. More people also seem to know how to create 3d models that would be good for animation. I think the only real advantage of big game companies when it comes to graphics is that they have more people working on this part of the game and can finish up a lot faster with the same or better quality.

Story:

Although having an experienced writer on your team would help a lot in developing the story of your game (if you want a story), anyone can come up with nice and interesting stories. The only advantage big game companies have is they can hire people with experience in story writing, people who already know what mistakes to avoid and how to spice up seemingly bland situations with engaging dialogue.

Marketing:

Although big game companies have the power to easily afford air time for game commercials, in the age of the internet, independent game companies can market their games by themselves on game forums usually for no cost. Youtube and other video sites that let you put videos for free are very useful as well. Eventually, video game magazines will take notice of the indie game and write about it.

Distribution:

An indie game can easily be made available on the internet, no need for putting it on physical media like cds. I think this lessens the cost as well since majority of the people have net access these days anyway. You’d only be losing out on potential “walk-in” sales like from Gamestop or other places that sell games, but then again, these same people must have net access at home anyway so it doesn’t really matter.

Game Security:

I don’t think any form of DRM has been successful at all. Every game has been cracked, no matter what the big game companies say themselves. Look at Ubisoft, they say their “Always On” DRM was successful, but in reality, a simple check on your usual torrent places produces lots of “solutions” to their DRM. That’s the reality of DRM as of today, it’s just extra expense that doesn’t really stop a game from being distributed to others. Even if the DRM made the game super secure, it doesn’t hide the fact that the way it works is something that customers really hate. Recently, Ubisoft’s been removing certain ways that their DRM works, most probably because they’re realizing how bad the DRM is making them look to customers (but I still think they’re disillusioned with the reality of the DRM’s “success”). Until there’s a 100% proven DRM style, there’s no point investing in any of these protections as of now.

Anyway those are just my ideas about the whole indie vs big game company thing:)

I don’t think ‘big’ comanise have many advantages at all anymore. The major ones in the past have been distribution and advertising. But distribution has been solved by royalty share and the Internet for little guys like me. As for advertising this is still a bi issue and the only real way to make a splash is by publishing through someone with some advertising muscle that targets your core audience.

One big advantage that some of the new big players (zynga etc) is speed and data anylists. They release something fast, gather a crap load of information about their users and then fix and change the game to suit who’s playing. It’s a cleaver way to do it because you don’t waist time guessing and implementing features people don’t actually want. You wait and see and then do…

I Strongly disagree. NO flash game will compete with those examples. gameplay is quite different in quality.

and on Marketing I still think large development companies have a clear advantage. everything else had good info though.

Agreed. Everything used to be sold on store shelves. People are now purchasing games off Steam and other portals nowadays, cut a deal with Steam as an Indie, and they are almost like ‘your big publishing company’.

On top of that, development budgets for coding games in C++ etc were always larger and more highly specialised. Now because of tools like Unity, much more competitive games can be built on lower budgets.

I cant see indie devs really having the pure ££ power to pay the amount of people needed to create the assets for a big AAA game these days but at least the indie dev is in with a chance of being seen now

The only difference to me nowadays is the paycheck. Companies can pay you, where indies cannot. Today, with Unity, I see more indie projects out than on UDk and CryEngine COMBINED!!
Also, companies want money, so they will make the same game over and over, COD, Battlefield, shooters in general.

Indies can make games that are more akin to their dream game.

Very, very few indie devs can say that with a straight face. Not unless they seriously dream of yet another 2D side scroller with pretty (average) graphics.

Main advantage of any large company:

Seriously, that's all the advantage they need anyway. Marketing still rules the charts. And unless you want to talk about the **handfull** of lucky hits that indie devs pulled off these past 2-3 years, nothing has changed. The philosophy shifted towards micro-transaction and shorter/ episodic mobile gaming. But it's still the same companies behind them and the same heavy marketing cash. [quote] I see more indie projects out than on UDk and CryEngine COMBINED [/quote] Yes, and 99% (a really exaggerated statement) of them are below average or bland copies of bigger hits, even as side scrollers go.

(bookmarked)

Big Companies actually have one major drawback: Unlike indies, they can’t approach innovative titles with anywhere as little fear as Indies, as “Big Company” also means “big number of mouths to feed” so either its a blockbuster or a team or more will get layed off at the end of a big production due to the failure and its financial consequences …

thats a problem indies do not have that often, for them such an approach more regularly offers a big potential on grabbing public attention and reaching users that are normally not needfully genre fans etc while allowing them to express their creativity without the normal expected boundaries, making back what they invested.

This is exactly right. The key to success for anyone big or small is to exploit their advantages. Big companies with cash invest the cash in things they know will sell, hence COD 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,million and if I were in their position I would too. If it aint broke don’t fix it!

Indies don’t have to care about investors, employees stability (because they are all in for the ride), Quarterly statements and so on, so they have the time to explore, innervate and create public interest in ways other than spangly pre-rendered over the top and expensive trailers (I’m talk about you Blizzard).