Top Indie Games Of 2003 Discussed

Mr.Wiggin writes "Specialist indie site GameTunnel recently announced its top ten indie games of 2003. Each game was scored by its regular review panel, and the list highlights the growing craftsmanship and quality being brought to the niche low budget independent games scene. There are also awards for specific genres, such as best graphics, best sound, most original concept, best adventure, etc. Why should we be concerned by low budget offerings like this - isn't it just the usual cliched crop of puzzle games? Thankfully, no, since these are the elite cream of the indie crop. Some say indie games are the home of innovation and the birthplace of future star developers (remember id, anyone?). It is also one of the few remaining mediums where we (the gaming public) actually get listened to and can often make a difference."

Comments

Re:Uh

[bear pimp]

So, 3rd Person Action Adventure, 3rd Person Action Adventure, 3rd Person Action Adventure, 3rd Person Action Adventure, 3rd Person Action Adventure. Welcome to the world of consoles. Is it necessary for indie games to break the mold? Is originality really the key here for them to succeed? The overall winner is an interesting example: Yes it's a shooter, but I rank it one of my favourite games of the year (on any platform and for any price). Namely because it adds some interesting elements (ship building and resource gathering) to this medium. I suppose it has been done before, but not looking this good and this polished. A lot of its appeal must be to do with getting jaded with consoles in my old age though! Plus I love shooters! Many of the other popular games on the list aren't 100% original (what is) but they are looking at genres the mainstream has abandoned. Some of us who love these genres can only get a fix from these games. It also proves that interesting ideas can work within older game frameworks. So, yes, not wholly original, but different, and I would say a great year promising a bright future.

disagreement in terms

[*weasel]

abstract it to that level and nothing is original. i mean, at that level The Lord of the Rings is just a FedEx quest and The Matrix was a 'blue key, blue door' shooter.

in general, there is genre innovation and gameplay innovation. genre innovation is something like stair dismount, or tetris (when it was released). this is very difficult and very rare. if this is your sole qualification for 'innovation', you're going to be disappointed an awful lot.

gameplay innovation is more like the sims, pikmin, or gta. it's the refinement of a fairly well-known genre with a fresh focus. the sims is just an isometric sim in your abstraction. but the -play- is so wildly different from any other previous title in the genre, you can't help but hail it as a great innovative achievement.

Of course, I haven't played half of those games, and the ones I am familiar with i'd be dubious about calling 'innovative', I just think you're being a little overly strict in your definition of game innovation.

and frankly, at this point in the indy game industry, just getting a fun game finished and out there is deserving of an award, even if it is inappropriately titled for the achievement ;p

Re:disagreement in terms

[ziggles]

"and frankly, at this point in the indy game industry, just getting a fun game finished and out there is deserving of an award, even if it is inappropriately titled for the achievement ;p"

Probably true. But their attitude seems to be that they're making games that are better than the "mainstream" and we're all fools for not taking notice. Pretty silly.

Variety?

[dchamp]

Would have been nice to see a little variety - as otthers mentioned, there are a lot of similar games here - and some that are just new versions of older games.
How about Live For Speed? It's a great independent race sim game.

The "indie" intangible

[h0mer]

I don't know how to put this very well, so my post may not make sense. That being said, there seems to be a similarity between indie games and indie music.

If I were itching to play a FPS, would I rather play Half-Life 2 (hypothetically) or a indie FPS created by a 3-man team? Personally, I'd choose to play HL2, and I think 9 out of 10 people would make the same choice.

Likewise, if I were itching to listen to some rock, would I rather listen to some Led Zeppelin or some indie band that sounds a little bit like Led Zeppelin? Again, the mainstream choice would probably win.

What I'm getting at is, indie developers should strive to innovate like the previously mentioned Puzzle Pirates and Stair Dismount. The same goes with indie music where bands who do something interesting get recognition. The band Cursive comes to mind for including a cello along with their guitar rock.

It's circular logic, but indie games that copy mainstream games have a problem. A new twist on the game concept is added, which may be very cool, however the entire package doesn't stack up to the original material. But if the entire package was/is great, the chances of being bought and published by a large company goes up.

I'm not even considering the presence of indie snobs who define themselves by being "indie", and automatically assume a game published by EA is the worst thing ever.

Re:Puzzle Pirates

[Anonymous Coward]

you're right board games don't have AI. Because board games are played with friends. Only lonely ass losers need an AI to play against. And besides, non-American board games like Samurai have little or no luck involved, that's what makes them great. It means that when you play, the winner is the best player, not the luckiest. Also, all of these games are basically abstractions of mathematical fomulae and/or electronic circuits. A computer can simulate these very well and make a very dangerous AI very easily. So not only is it loserish to play a board game alone with AI, it also defeats the purpose of the game itself.