We live in a f*cking backwardsasss society

We live in a society where a lot of things that should be, aren't. Homosexuals aren't given the same marital rights as Hetrosexuals, Police brutality, me somehow not being a Mod, ect. ect.

But there is one Video Game related thing that has always made me go

The fact that Budgeted Indie titles that have a small dev team can not only match butsurpass High budget Blockbuster full retail games that have a huge dev team.

I shall reiterate

Now, for this thread, I will be dealing with Indie titles that actually contain traces of quality, which is why PSN will mostly be left out of this thread.

Same goes for my Full retail examples. Mas Effect 3 and Gears of War 3 will be left out of this thread due to those titles not having been touched by the quality bug.

Biodrones,

Now, moving on to the topic

HOW THE JESUS F*CKING BATMAN DOES THIS WORK OUT?

How... is a game with a limited budget and a small dev team OUTMATCHING the quality of an AAA Blockbuster HUGE budget game???

And sometimes the budgeted game even outmatches the Blockbuster title incontent as well. :| :| :| :| :|

"You're just talking out your asss Slashless, is...is that Alchohol I smell on your breath?"

Irrelevant, and my asss is quiet as ever.

You want an exapmle? Here.

Let's say we went on the streets and took a random person who was completely clueless about video games.

"hey what's your name?"

"Greg Miller"

"PERFECT!"

We took Greg into a room with two computers. Each computer had a different game,.

COMPUTER A:

60$ Full retail game with a HUGE budget, tens of millions, and a dev team of a 100+

COMPUTER B:

12$ indie game, very limited budget, and very small dev team.

I then ask Greg, given the descriptions, which game would he guess to be theo higher quality one.

"Why, Modern Warfare 3 of cou-"

NO F*CK YOU YOU'RE WRONG.

To The MoonRUNS CIRCLESaround COD:MW3 in quality.

CIRCLES

NOT THESE LITTLE F*CKERS, CIRCLES.

Well, MW3 doesn't have much quality to begin with (still better than BF3)

And, it's not as if THAT is the only example out there.

No no no no no no no no.

Here's even more

Quality wise

>>>>>>>>>>

(Heck Bastion runs circles around most games in both Quality AND Content as well.)

>>>

>>>>

I can go on and on and on but you (hopefully) get the idea.

And let's take a look at this year.

A lot of crap has released like Mass Effect 3, Final Fantasy 1000990 or whatever, Twisted Metal, ect. ect.

You want to know what the GoTY is so far?

:o Surprise surprise, AN INDIE GAME. A PSN exclusive title for that matter.

You know what other game will be the best of April

and

That's right,your Xenoblade,your Risen 2,your sh*tty Mass Effect DLC.

"But Slashless I have played numerous Indie games and they all suck, what gives?"

Well, judging by your font, you do seem to be a Playstation 3 fanatic, so it's understandable if you haven't played any if at all quality PSN Games. PSN is so useless it might as well have a tag.

So, can anyone explain, how this works out exactly? I mean, no other form of media is like this.

I mean, it's not like

is better than

the f*cking Batman

I mean, granted, Big budget films like Avatar, titanic, and Hunger games can suck ass but it's not like the Low budget films are any better.

Why is it that bugeted Indie titles are better than FULL RETAIL HIGH BIDGETED TITLES?

Pour que?

WHY

tldr only read 2 sentances

why are you complaining about society in system wars?

Slashless I'm sorry and I'm gonna let you finish...but mygod the formatting on that just sucked double lined text, and you had so many gifs and pictures every where it made it hard to follow.

TLDR:) Nice pics though.

TLDR:) Nice pics though.

KiZZo1

I've been playing Payday: The hiest recently, and can say that it's a better quality game that many full retail titles I have played in the last 6 months.

It was £7.99...... And it's better than Journey :P

High budget / marketing does not equate to a quality, fun title. Opinions vary however.

I do like a lot of low-budget games more than higher-budget ones, but I don't draw the line on indie/non-indie. I played just as many bad indie games as bad non-indie games.Eponique

[QUOTE="KiZZo1"]

TLDR:) Nice pics though.

Slashless

Nah, it just seemed a bit too pretentious.

Why are you crying over Indie developers making money?millerlight89

[QUOTE="Slashless"][QUOTE="KiZZo1"]

TLDR:) Nice pics though.

KiZZo1

Nah, it just seemed a bit too pretentious.

I'm gonna take the bait and argue just for a little bit.

First off, I'd argue that other mediums can easily work this way as well. There are plenty of independent films that are just as good, if not better, than their Hollywood competitors. Maybe not in budget or special effects but in other areas. And that is much like how your argument of Call of Duty vs. To the Moon works. I disagree that the average joe who doesn't play many video games would say To the Moon is the better game. Call of Duty has graphics, action, highly cinematic set-pieces, something that To the Moon is lacking. I wish I could play To the Moon because I bet that I would love the game, but this is more about the non-gamer coming in and playing both.

And I question your comment on a lot of the arguments on content and the like with no depth to the argument to back everything up.

Regardless, with stronger points behind your argument I'd be inclined to agree with you. It is why I refuse to buy most titles at full price now and would rather wait for a price drop; many of them just aren't worth the $50-60 price tag and would maybe be better suited to be priced at $20-40 to compete with the downloadable titles plus to get a one-up on the higher-price titles.

There, I took your bait. I hope you're happy!

I disagree that the average joe who doesn't play many video games would say To the Moon is the better game.

Zassimick

I never said this :/

I wouldn't mind indie titles getting bigger next gen, and big ass blockbuster releases simmering down a bit.

I wouldn't mind indie titles getting bigger next gen, and big ass blockbuster releases simmering down a bit.

FIipMode

But when your average indie title is outmatching your average retail title in quality.. something fishy is going on.Slashless

[QUOTE="Eponique"]I do like a lot of low-budget games more than higher-budget ones, but I don't draw the line on indie/non-indie. I played just as many bad indie games as bad non-indie games.Slashless

[QUOTE="Zassimick"] I disagree that the average joe who doesn't play many video games would say To the Moon is the better game.

Slashless

I never said this :/

Let's say we went on the streets and took a random person who was completely clueless about video games.

"hey what's your name?"

"Greg Miller"

"PERFECT!"

We took Greg into a room with two computers. Each computer had a different game,.

COMPUTER A:

60$ Full retail game with a HUGE budget, tens of millions, and a dev team of a 100+

COMPUTER B:

12$ indie game, very limited budget, and very small dev team.

I then ask Greg, given the descriptions, which game would he guess to be theo higher quality one.

"Why, Modern Warfare 3 of cou-"

NO F*CK YOU YOU'RE WRONG.

To The MoonRUNS CIRCLESaround COD:MW3 in quality.

Slashless

[QUOTE="Slashless"]But when your average indie title is outmatching your average retail title in quality.. something fishy is going on.Teufelhuhn

Was talking about XBLA nd PC DD, don't think I should have to clarify that in every post.

I now see what you meant, its that you tell someone that their opinion is wrong. Gotcha.;)

Zassimick

They don't have much of an opinion to begin with seeing as they've never played either game. They made a false assumption that CoD was the better game because of its budget.

The Mass Effect 3 ending DLC I could do without but the Mass Effect Resurgence Pack for MP will be amazing.Spartan070

I read the whole thing.

Your main argument is that the best Indie Arcade Games are better than the best Full Retail Games.

You have to understand that there are many great Super Nintendo games, PS1 games, and other retro games. If those same retro games were made today, they would still have the amazing gameplay, the high amount of content, the fun factor, and I know this all too well because I just started collecting retro games and consoles.

The thing is, while these Indie Arcade Games have great ideas which translate into amazing games that are reminiscent of retro gaming's past, they don't cost very much to make. The development costs and resources spent on these games pale in comparison to a full retail game. This is indicative in the price of Indie Arcade games when compared to the price of Full Retail Games.

I honestly don't see where you're going with this thread at all. Sure, you say that Indie Arcade Games are better than Full Retail Games, and that's your opinion. It's not like Arcade games aren't getting the recognition they deserve, or they're being treated unfairly. They all have a spot on Gamerankings, they all get reviewed here at Gamespot, they're popular games in which a lot of them sell very well....

They aren't held to the same standards as Full Retail Games, and aren't compared to Full Retail Games because of the fact that they're budget games, they cost almost nothing to make. That's why they're priced how they are, very low. There are tons of people out there that like retro gaming more than current gen gaming, but it doesn't make it a fact that retro gaming is better. New games call for new technology, which calls for money, time and resources. That's why they're held to current generation standards, based on the technology. That's why they're priced the way they are, because of the technology.

TC, your argument is horrible. How in the world are you comparing a indie to big budget games, as if they're 'higher' quality... When they're not the same damn genre, across the damn board they're different genre that you compared.

The only thing you got vaguely close was Bastion vs Skyrim, and that's still miles off.

[QUOTE="Zassimick"]I now see what you meant, its that you tell someone that their opinion is wrong. Gotcha.;)

Slashless

They don't have much of an opinion to begin with seeing as they've never played either game. They made a false assumption that CoD was the better game because of its budget.

So if he had said To the Moon you would have pat him on the back and said "job well done, you didn't fall for my trick?"

Also, so are you saying that this Greg Miller, when sitting at the computers, would only see an image and then text that says "60$ Full retail game with a HUGE budget, tens of millions, and a dev team of a 100+" and whatever it said for To the Moon? Well of course Greg Miller would then say Call of Duty. But if he actually saw gameplay on the computer I would argue that he would be inclined to say Call of Duty then too.

Regardless of which one he sees at the computer, how could you yell at him for assuming that Call of Duty is higher quality? I fail to see how this point supports your argument. :?

[QUOTE="Spartan070"]The Mass Effect 3 ending DLC I could do without but the Mass Effect Resurgence Pack for MP will be amazing.Slashless

I think you're just another pretentious fuk like those idiots who refuse to watch a movie because its from hollywood, and think theyre better than everyone else with their sh*tty subtitled foreign 'indie' films.

There are just as many sh*t xbla/psn titles as there are sh*t blockbusters.

TC, your argument is horrible. How in the world are you comparing a indie to big budget games, as if they're 'higher' quality... When they're not the same damn genre, across the damn board they're different genre that you compared.

The only thing you got vaguely close was Bastion vs Skyrim, and that's still miles off.

Inconsistancy

I never said Bastion as a game>Skyrim. I was comparing the quality of each, which is kind of what this whole thread's about.

I read the whole thing.

Your main argument is that the best Indie Arcade Games are better than the best Full Retail Games.

You have to understand that there are many great Super Nintendo games, PS1 games, and other retro games. If those same retro games were made today, they would still have the amazing gameplay, the high amount of content, the fun factor, and I know this all too well because I just started collecting retro games and consoles.

The thing is, while these Indie Arcade Games have great ideas which translate into amazing games that are reminiscent of retro gaming's past, they don't cost very much to make. The development costs and resources spent on these games pale in comparison to a full retail game. This is indicative in the price of Indie Arcade games when compared to the price of Full Retail Games.

I honestly don't see where you're going with this thread at all. Sure, you say that Indie Arcade Games are better than Full Retail Games, and that's your opinion. It's not like Arcade games aren't getting the recognition they deserve, or they're being treated unfairly. They all have a spot on Gamerankings, they all get reviewed here at Gamespot, they're popular games in which a lot of them sell very well....

They aren't held to the same standards as Full Retail Games, and aren't compared to Full Retail Games because of the fact that they're budget games, they cost almost nothing to make. That's why they're priced how they are, very low. There are tons of people out there that like retro gaming more than current gen gaming, but it doesn't make it a fact that retro gaming is better. New games call for new technology, which calls for money, time and resources. That's why they're held to current generation standards, based on the technology. That's why they're priced the way they are, because of the technology.

arkephonic

Some good points here, took long enough.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

[QUOTE="Slashless"]But when your average indie title is outmatching your average retail title in quality.. something fishy is going on.Slashless

Was talking about XBLA nd PC DD, don't think I should have to clarify that in every post.

idiots who refuse to watch a movie because its from hollywood

RR360DD

I mean, it's not like

is better than

the f*cking Batman

Slashless

:|

Blog is that way sir >>>>>>

Thanks for letting me know about To the Moon. It's a must-have, and I'll buy it.

Can I give you a hug? :)

PC DD is the same sh*t, there's thousands of games released on Steam that nobody will ever care about. XBLA has endless crap on it too, despite being a market that requires a publisher (so indie!) and Microsoft certification to release on there.

Teufelhuhn

And there's 100's of niche full retail crap out there as well, If you want I can compare the bottom spectrum of each platform. Will include Mirrors Edge, don't worry.

Thanks for letting me know about To the Moon. It's a must-have, and I'll buy it.

Lithos_

Can I give you a hug? :)

Joedgabe

You can argue story, gameplay, artistic graphical design and content all day, but what really separates these Indie Arcade Games from Full Retail Games are the graphics. That's the one main thing that this thread is failing to take into consideration. I see arguments about story and gameplay, but those things don't cost money, they just require talent. The things that require money in making a game are advanced game engines, graphics, sound design, animation, that kinda stuff. For example, take the RAGE Euphoria Engine that Rockstar created, used in games like GTA4, RDR, and soon Max Payne 3. That's where the money goes to, that's why full retail games cost as much as they do. The higher development costs are directed towards things like graphics and sound.

Show me an Indie Arcade game that looks as good as Modern Warfare 3, Crysis 2, Gears of War 3, Uncharted 3 and you may have a point. You ask the question how could an Indie Arcade Game have better story and gameplay than a Full Retail Game? Very simple, just like how many retro games have better story and gameplay than a lot of current Full Retail Games. That isn't what costs money, the money is in the graphical and sound design/technology, something that Indie Arcade Games are lacking in, and that's why they're priced how they are.

You can argue story, gameplay, artistic graphical design and content all day, but what really separates these Indie Arcade Games from Full Retail Games are the graphics. That's the one main thing that this thread is failing to take into consideration. I see arguments about story and gameplay, but those things don't cost money, they just require talent. The things that require money in making a game are advanced game engines, graphics, sound design, animation, that kinda stuff. For example, take the RAGE Euphoria Engine that Rockstar created, used in games like GTA4, RDR, and soon Max Payne 3. That's where the money goes to, that's why full retail games cost as much as they do. The higher development costs are directed towards things like graphics and sound.

Show me an Indie Arcade game that looks as good as Modern Warfare 3, Crysis 2, Gears of War 3, Uncharted 3 and you may have a point. You ask the question how could an Indie Arcade Game have better story and gameplay than a Full Retail Game? Very simple, just like how many retro games have better story and gameplay than a lot of current Full Retail Games. That isn't what costs money, the money is in the graphical and sound design/technology, something that Indie Arcade Games are lacking in, and that's why they're priced how they are.

arkephonic

This dude is on crack. Games like Super meat boy better then Uncharted 3? l0l Someone cut your crack with rubber and petrol.

Games like Super meat boy better then Uncharted 3? Eddie-Vedder