The Independent View by Dan MacDonald

The Indie Ideal (April 9, 2005)

One of the perennial discussions surrounding the topic of Indie games is the definition of the term "independent" as it relates to game developers. Instead of trying to define who is and isn't an independent developer, I think it would be beneficial to approach the subject from the perspective of defining the Indie Ideal. What is an ideal? Webster’s defines it as "a conception of something in its absolute perfection". An ideal is something we strive towards or believe in, but that is not tangible or arguably achievable (except in rare circumstances). It is difficult to define an “independent developer” or the Indie Ideal without an understanding of the spirit of independent game development.

So what is the Indie Ideal? Recently on the IndieGamer.com forums, Derek Yu from TIGSource posted one of the best definitions I've herd for the Indie Ideal. He said, "Independence - whether it's about games, films, music, or anything else - should be about creating something personally satisfying." In its purest form I believe this is the true spirit of “indie” game development. The title “indie” then would belong to those developers who make a game because it’s cool, not because it will sell like crazy, not because some big publisher paid to have it made, but for the simple joy of creating a game that satisfies their interests and personal tastes.

So where does this leave independent developers who are out there working after hours on games with the hopes of one day making game development our [RC1] sole occupation? Or those of us who have taken our game development passion and turned it into a business that we run full time? The term independent has often been equated with freedom. As independent developers, that freedom means that we can create whatever we want. Unfortunately we live in a practical reality where making a living doing what we love often goes hand in hand with making some sacrifices when it comes to realizing the Indie Ideal. When we apply the objective of making money to a project, we are automatically limiting some of our inspirational indie freedom. Suddenly we are considering things like download size, conversion rate, a mouse interface, a family friendly theme, and gameplay; then crafting those things to fulfill not only our own satisfaction but hopefully the satisfaction of many paying customers.

This is why it becomes so difficult to define what an indie developer is or isn't. If a developer goes after the largest downloadable games market (casual) and targets the most profitable segment (abstract color matching games), are they really working in the spirit of the Indie Ideal, or are they just as constrained by the market as any developer working with a publisher is constrained by their publisher’s whims? I suppose it really depends on how much a developer enjoys color swapping casual games. If they love color swappers and find them personally satisfying then yes they are probably acting in an indie manner. If they have no interest in color swapping games other than making a buck or two, then they probably aren't acting very "indie". In the end, intent really seems to be the defining characteristic in determining whether a game fits the Indie Ideal, and only the developers themselves can really be the judge of their own intent when creating a game.

In conclusion, choosing the Indie Ideal as the basis for the definition of independent game development doesn't really work. So many other factors come into play and so, to arrive at a more practical definition, we are left with something simpler: developers who are free to create whatever they want. Whether they choose to make a market-driven game or one that is personally satisfying, the important part is that they have the freedom to make that choice. They walk a path of their own choosing and the games they create are entirely at their discretion.

Personally I'd love to see more developers stick closer to the Indie Ideal and make games that really interest them. This is the one thing that really sets indie games apart from other games out there: the unparalleled freedom the developer has to make games that are an expression of their own personality and preferences. I realize that there is a need to make money and that not every game I make will be personally satisfying to me as a developer, but I do think a balance can be found between the constraints of the market and the desire to create something personally satisfying. If we get a “Wik” for every “Big Kahuna Reef” I would consider that to be a win for the Indie Ideal.