Indie Games: Here to Stay or Gone Tomorrow?

Peter Molyneux has been courting controversy recently (or perhaps that should say 'again'), with the 22cans founder this time talking about indie games, suggesting that they're just part of a cycle, and that their current popularity is set to end at some point in the foreseeable future.

In an interview during this year's GDC, Molyneux - the creator of titles such as Populous, Fable and Godus - told CVG that he considered the current trend towards indie games to be just that - a trend - and not one he envisages lasting very long.

We're not sure we agree with those sentiments, and in recent days a variety of different developers have sprung up and voiced their opinions, adding further fuel to the debate.

"These things go in cycles," Molyneux originally said. "What I'd say is, enjoy this time, because it won't last. Don't think we're going to be all indies for the next five years - these things go in cycles, just like in the music business. You have a time where punk is big, and then you have times like now where everything is manufactured."

"Enjoy this time, because inevitably it will only last a short period," Molyneux added, before going on to suggest that as well as attracting success, indies will also attract investment, and that any potential investment comes additional burdens that could end up stifling creativity.

Not long after those statements were made public, Devolver Digital's Mark Wilson wrote a letter in response to those comments, which was posted by Destructoid, where he basically outlined the reasons why he disagreed:

"These tiny teams are making incredibly tight, creative games with tools that anyone can acquire, non-programmers can use and that don't require the hiring of engineering and art departments on a massive scale. The gameplay mechanics... aka the FUN, and even the storytelling of indie games (which are not a genre, by the way) are made by artists who are truly independent and not owned or beholden to some corporate machine that has nothing to do with the art itself. Indies are surpassing the big games on a regular basis, even while 2013 had some of the most awe-inspiring AAA games ever made. 

"It's not that one is any better than the other, in our opinion... it's just different types of artists working on entirely different types of projects within this world of digital entertainment we call 'games.' But the core difference, and why we disagree with the idea that this is just a fad or cycle that will repeat itself, is that the basic aspiration of these artists is different. Yes, they are experiencing the excitement of money and opportunity thrown at them, but so far they aren't biting, at least for the most part.  These artists are creating whatever they want on their own terms, and that is way more valuable to them than selling out or trying to make something massive.  

"We aren't trying to speak on behalf of the indie community here, that's not our goal. But what we've observed is that these ladies and gentleman of the indie community aren't making small games with small teams because they are trying to prove themselves so they can grow into bigger teams and projects. They are choosing to do what they do because they love it. They aren't competing in secrecy but rather openly collaborating, lifting one another up and inspiring one another. Gamejams!!! And while many of them are doing incredibly well financially, that's not the point, or certainly not the main point. Which we think is what is quite different than the past, at least to our eye.  

"The point is that this isn't a fad; these are the fruits of the breaking down of the brick-and-mortar, corporate driven machine via the miracle of digital distribution (thanks, Gabe!) and therefore are easy, global and accessible for the fans to find whatever they want, not what's being fed to them en masse. The Internet happened. Social and mobile gaming happened. These things aren't going away." 

We were interested to find out what indie developers themselves thought of Molyneux's comments, and so we put the question to a selection different developers working at independent studios - large and small - to see what the general consensus of opinion was.

Dean Hall, who emerged from the modding community, is the creator of DayZ and is now attached to Bohemia Interactive while he leads the team making the official DayZ standalone. Hall explained to us what he thought: "To an extent everything's a phase, everything changes. It's just how long that phase lasts. I think it can be difficult to define what indie games is. Like if you look at a company like Bohemia there's more than one hundred people, but it is independent. So I think that not all indies are created equal."

Hall continued: "I do think that publishers are going to have to find where they fit in the world, with things changing, with Kickstarter, with Early Access. All these things are redefining how the industry goes through and what publishers mean and what role they provide. If we're not printing discs any more then we don't need their manufacturing ability and their distribution contacts. But Early Access and Kickstarter aren't all lollipops and rainbows as well." 

Jamie Hales, who used to work for Bizarre Creations before that studio was shut down, is now working on an independent game, a platformer called The Arc. When asked if he thought indie games were just a phase he said: "No I don't think so, they've always been around. I mean I think they will evolve... The games that we're doing now, they do get bigger. As you get more money your ideas I think grow to your budget. Like Thomas Was Alone, a fantastic small platformer - got a bit of money from that and he's [Mike Bithell] now doing Volume. It's still simple, but it's a bigger scope game than Thomas Was Alone. People are always going to be doing it for a passion, a lot people do it just for the fun of it."  

Chris Hunt, who's been working on the RPG/RTS sandbox title Kenshi for a number of years now, had a much shorter response than most: "He's talking smack. Peter Molyneux is a phase."

Phi Dinh is heading up a very small team of developers working on a roguelike RPG called Tiny Keep. Din explained that he thought it was more likely that the celebrity surrounding indie development would, at some point, die out.

"I think indie games have always been there, since games first started, until today. People enjoy making games, obviously. I think this phase that Peter Molyneux is talking about is the kudos associated with indie game development, and maybe that will blow over and will kind of die out, but that doesn't mean that people will stop making independent games."

Dinh continued: "It's just we'll have more focus on the better indie games, instead of people saying "I'm an indie developer" and suddenly being a rockstar... It will die out and people will forget about indie games and we'll just talk about game developers in general...

"I think in terms of the market, it's getting more competitive, and if indie games are a barrier to entry - there's so much stuff out there that it's hard to compete - I think it just means that the best ones will rise to the top. The lesson there is to just make better games." 

Tom Hegarty, director of Roll7 (who made OlliOlli and the recently announced Not A Hero) was straight to the point: "I don't think they're a phase. I think they've always been here. I think they seem to be getting a lot of attention at the moment, I think that's a change that's happened, but I don't think it's a phase at all, I think we're here to compete with triple-As. We're never going to have the same budget, we're never going to be able to produce the same size of games, but there's a demand for them. There may be an ebb and flow when some stuff comes in and out of fashion, but I think indies are here to stay, definitely." 

Finally, we caught up with Simon Roth, who's game Maia actually pays homage to some of Bullfrog's games (Peter Molynuex's former studio). He's obviously a big fan of Molyneux's legacy, and of all of the developers we spoke to on the subject, he was the closest to agreeing with the phase theory, but even he sounded sceptical.

"There are always ups and downs, everyone has ups and downs," he told us. "Whether that's something we can predict or say yes or no to... Obviously there are big things coming up, Steam are opening up more and more to developers. So if it is a cycle we're obviously on the uptrend of it, and the downtrend is not coming for good few years yet."

Ultimately we have to say we agree with the majority here, those that are saying indies are here to stay. Never before have we had such a diverse range of games and experiences, and thanks to Kickstarter, Steam, bundles, mobile games, and with the major consoles pushing indies into the limelight, it's highly unlikely that we'll see the genie going back in the bottle. All these things have happened, and can't unhappen, and as such we reckon that indie games are going to be part of the gaming landscape for years and years to come, sitting happily alongside triple-A titles and offering us, the consumers, choice and entertainment from here on in. Long may that continue.