this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2025
1220 points (98.1% liked)
Gaming
5840 readers
288 users here now
!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.
Our Rules:
1. Keep it civil.
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.
2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.
I should not need to explain this one.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.
Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Logo uses joystick by liftarn
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Shitting on hard work and effort of indie devs and then wondering why the gaming ladscape is filled with souless corporate slop.
I mean, part of the reason why the gaming industry sucks is because indie devs helped prove how low people's standards are.
I noticed my enjoyment of gaming shot up 1,000-fold once I stopped caring about indie trash again and instead focused on games that appealed to me as a kid, before I was exposed to the low standards of the PC crowd.
he said on a post about hollowknight.
Hey man, you might be new to the internet, but I was around when indie games were taking off.
Fez, slenderman, and even journey all served to show what people were willing to accept. They were all considerably lower quality, cheaper, and easier to make than AAA games.
Hollow Knight is just the latest entry into that category.
Try playing some older AAA games to see how much effort was put into them vs. what you've been conditioned to accept now. There's a world of difference between Castlevania: Symphony of the Night and Hollow Knight.
You just don't see it because you've never played those older games because you're new to the world and part of the consumer bandwagon.
Hey man, you might have been around a while- a lot of us have- that clearly doesn't make you an expert.
You are confusing 'production value' with 'quality'. Being 'easier to make' (if that were true) and costing less to produce are both objectively good things, the only way that someone could remotely think they were bad is if they confuse 'production value' with 'quality'.
In 1992 a crime film was released called "White Sands" having a budget of $22 Million. That same year an indie film was released called "Reservoir Dogs" with a budget of $1.2 – 3 million. White Sands had great production values and 11 times more budget than Reservoir Dogs had.
Both films had very good actors, but ironically the Tarantino film was the one that didn't star Samuel L. Jackson. The 'production value' of Dogs is quite low. There are only a handful of locations and the majority of the film is shot in 1 room of 1 warehouse.
Reservoir Dogs is to this day hailed as one of the best films of the genre and a 'masterpiece' and White Sands is... I've honestly never even heard anyone mention it even once in the last 33 years and had no idea it even existed before googling 'Crime films from 1992'.
See also "Monty Python and the Holy Grail", "Halloween", "Trainspotting", "The Evil Dead", "Night of the Living Dead", "Memento"...etc
Having a huge budget and high production values clearly don't make a film good or lack thereof a film bad- same goes for video games.
There are plenty of "AAA" games that were turds you've just forgotten about them. And there are still plenty of AAA games being released so saying that we've " been conditioned to accept (indie games) now." is just wrong. People don't play indie games because they've been 'conditioned to accept' them, they play them because they are fun.
Are we putting Fez and Journey in the same bucket as that old ass shitty freeware Slenderman game?
Castlevania would be an Indie game by todays standards in budget, team size and concept.
You are making an argument about 21st century cars based on your favorite 19th century horse carriage.
You don't understand, clearly.
What makes these games better is that the developers did more with less. They are also simply of higher quality than the indie games trying to copy them without trying nearly as hard.
You should get some experience by actually playing these games and then come back to us.
But that is the definition of today's indie games. You have games that are done by a single person, or a very small group in a shoe string budget. As far as I know there was no such thing back then, especially in the console market (I can think of a few exceptions on PC) . What today is viewed as less resources back then was still for that time a big studio or team.
Is that a parody? Castlevania: Symphony of the Night famously have a god awful menu screen that was literally a placeholder and they forgot or didn't have time to change it. Not that it is a bad game, I point it out to say that even back them AAA not always is the Pinnacle or effort and polish, and how can they be, they are subject of so many constraints, like release date to fall into marketing strategies and such, specifically with physical media production. So if a game was to be released for the Christmas shopping season it would not be postponed because a lack of a menu design.
I too was there 3000 years ago and there was a lot of shit AAA games even back them. For one there was a lot of bad habits from the arcade time that made a lot of gameplay suboptimal. I think that it is just survivorship bias because the 90% not great is forgotten with time and we only remember the great games.
But all of that is beside the point, how can you put Fez and Slenderman in the same group? Fez is a great game, there is no lower quality in any aspect of it. In fact in modern games I see more experimentation and innovation in Indie titles and almost none in AAA because they are so expensive they have to always play it safe (same shit happening with the film industry by the way).
Suggesting Symphony of the Night is well-known because of a goofy menu screen is almost comically missing the forest for the trees.
Ok, I reread my comment, sorry, it is my bad, English is not my first language and I should have proof read it. I will edit my original comment.
What I meant was that The menu in Symphony of the Night is famously bad, not that the game is known for or only because of its bad menu.
Now I'm wondering what games are known for their menus lol, maybe Eve Online?
For some reason only games with bad UI comes to mind, like Skyrim.
Fez and Journey are in no way shape or form "lower quality."