You’ve sold out! – A word of warning to Indie Snobs

Today’s column is a word of warning to the die-hard Indie fan, and why they should double check their motivation.  It is also an explanation of why I should be allowed to dislike a game if I want to!


This might make me a bit of a pariah in some circles, but I’ve never really enjoyed the indie games movement.


This is not to say, of course, that the indie movement hasn’t created some outstanding games. It allows for some true gems to shine through thanks to the complete freedom from the bureaucratic locks that come part and parcel with the mainstream model. The problem is, however, that indie also has a few things that come as part of the package, and it’s these that get on my wick.


Mainstream games take a lot of flack for hype and ludicrous terms like “Intellectual Property” and “SKU”, things only spoken by lawyers and accountants. They’ve pushed these into the collective gamer vocabulary, and it is exceptionally annoying. The thing is, I find it much less annoying than the snooty elitism that permeates the indie scene, especially as this is the fault of the fans rather than the developers.


You all know of what I speak. There’s that certain tangible smugness about someone who is supporting the bedroom developer, that little twang in the way he says ‘So, I’ve just bought Braid’ which really means ‘I’m essentially the god of art’. They get it into their heads that the internet has become lodged during the Regency, and that every artist needs a patron to fund their advancement of culture, a noble goal which earns both artist and patron some renown.


Obviously, this isn’t true. The artist needs money to keep going, but art for art’s sake is self-defeating. Genuine innovations come from the indie world, but they can also come from the mainstream. Just because a game has a small, unpaid team does not mean that the finished product will instantly surpass the mainstream purely on those merits. It’s the substance of the piece that allows it to stand out, not the design model, and it seems more and more people are beginning to ignore this.


It starts out simple with saying such as ‘Oh, you can’t expect the same of an indie game’, but you can. Indie is just the state of the developer, independent of a publisher or other source of funds. This doesn’t mean that the game should be given breaks if it fails, only that it should be given more praise if it succeeds.


The proper indie developer will fight tooth and nail, struggle their way through so that the finished product will be on par with the mainstream, to prove that you don’t need to be tied to a big company to produce worthwhile games. If they succeed, fantastic, shower them with well deserved praise, but don’t salute the effort if the end product isn’t to your liking.


I’m not saying that indie games are bad, only that there are bad indie games. The internet, in its insular and protective manner, has grasped onto them, however, because they originate close by. It’s becoming like a hideous beatnik bar, with beret-wearing game snobs clicking their fingers at every new release, not bothering to check if it is even any good.


A good game is a good game, regardless of the circumstances of its creation and I find it incredibly irritating that while it is perfectly acceptable to dislike, say, Civilisation 4, disliking Spelunky is grounds for social exclusion. I understand the need to support the little guy, but there seems to be a culture brewing that thinks that being the little guy is an end in and of itself. If he can produce the goods then yes, he’s a little guy worth supporting. Just be sure you’re supporting him for the right reasons.


Art can’t be appreciated for what it is if it’s being lauded for all the wrong reasons. Judge it by its merits and not the method by which it was created.


And if I want to dislike Spelunky I damn well will!