The "Indie" title in video games.

Now a'days we have alot of poeple begining to start thier video game careers with these smaller, less expesensive, more impressive titles, But what do you think actually makes it an "Indie" game? The number of poeple working on the project? How much money in involved? How the content is created/played?

Even considering games with high-budget ends, alot of indie games seem to get some impressive amount of attention, from consumers, gamers, and developers. Does this make it less of a indie title? Has the genre of 'indie' become more of a advertisement, rather than a quick help to understand the game? If a game is intresting enough, and has alot of good points to it, do you think it would sell more with a "indie" background?

Looking basicly though Steam, Indie games are more of a niche' grouped games, but alot of them have sold nearly as well as other games. Minecraft for one, has gotten ALOT more attention than other games, not becuase of a "indie" title, but becuase its very easy to pick up, play with friends, or alone and still have alot of fun with it. Not to mention that it may of popularized the infinite creation of randomized land that can make any game replayable for a long time.

Has it become a term of quality or quantity? Smaller, more passionate gamers creating their own games? Over the much larger developers going with the tried-and-true formula that will sell best over the compitition?

-----

My personal feelings on indie titles are, "If you makes games, you are a game developer, No need for the word indie."

I think the term "indie" applies to those without any sort of outside string-pullers. A game developed by a team of people and that team alone, with no investors or publishers calling the shots, or to impress. I think that "indie" is less of a genre of game, and more of a developmental label, in that case - a developer can be independent, which would make the game "indie" by default.

I've always decided that a game that was developed for its own sake is probably an indie game. Keeping this in mind: games like Portal, Mirror's Edge, and Psychonauts count as "indie". So I'd say, a game that wasn't built out of a contractual obligation counts as indie. Or something.

The word is being muddied when you realize that Valve is independent and yet they basically own the store in which every game ever made will eventually end up. So yes, perhaps your feelings on this are right. But there are definitely a lot of games being made that can't be defined as anything but indie. There's no way around it. Games made by two people on a budget of $49.73 and a watercrass sandwich, that's a combination driving/simulation/horror/adventure/shooter, with pixel art and credits that say "by Matt and Dave". Yeah, um, you're going in the "indie" pile.

I WISH every game would end up on Steam. Sadly the fact is they won't, because some developers just don't want to give valve the small cut of the profits from putting their game in the store. Not to mention Bioware is pretty much BANNED from Steam since they violated the agreement and made Origins (the store client not DA:Origins)

That last sentence of yours is all wrong but hey, whatever.

EA's new release games are not allowed on the Steam store because they want to sell DLC for them over Origin and not Steam as well. Steam's terms of use say that if you sell DLC, even somewhere else, you need to include it on Steam. Now EA (who publish Bioware's games) weren't so keen on this and so raised their hands up in defeat. For the most part.

A lot of EA games still make it to Steam, seen in a great example in which Crysis 2: Maximum Edition recently cropped up in the listings after supposedly being removed forever. It comes with all the DLC as standard though so presumably this is a rare occasion in which EA is gonna let the whole "exclusive to Origin DLC" thing slide.

But yes. Bioware make games. EA publish their games and sell them on their store, Origin. Steam's terms of service have changed, they haven't "banned" anyone from anything. EA chose not to abide by the terms of service and just withdrew their games altogether - they weren't "forced" to do anything.

And now you know.

Just going off of what I was told from a friend that has had Steam, since about when it was released, over a year ago. So time + second-hand information = some details wrong. Meh, doesn't bother me. I got the basics right. EA/BioWare not following an agreement. I have only had Steam for less than a year, but it's great service.