[IGDA_indies] making money

[Brian Hook]

> I think financial freedom sounds a bit one-sided toward those
> indies who seek to commercialize their work in such a form as to be
> free of any other needs.  

Sure, I have no problem there.  The definition I've used is that "an 
independent developer is one that exerts control over the majority of 
a game's distribution, development, and design."

Yes, by that logic, EA and Activision are independent 
developers...and, well, I think they are, because they DO get to 
choose what they do and don't do ( modulo stockholders ), which is 
kind of the definition of independence.

> If you ask me the Indie Game Sig's charter should be to "ensure the
> sustainability of independently produced, and distributed computer
> games"

That's a good definition.

> Brian earlier called this "open source" but marketing and
> distribution collectives in the farm, arts, and other communities
> are not open source. It's a poor analogy.  They're actually very
> different.

Yes, which is why I put an smiley when I said it (for those wondering, 
this is from a thread from February), but the open source world is 
still somewhat analogous in that you have a lot of developers helping 
each other, directly and indirectly, by sharing.

> If you were a smart self-
> motivated indie where do you feel information is lacking???  

The information itself isn't lacking, it's the fact that a lot of 
information is held as proprietary (e.g. royalty rates, distribution 
costs, sell through figures) and it's spread across dozens of 
different forums.

> Recruiting more people to this list will help on that too.

For what?  Again, going back to my central theme, what do I tell 
someone to get them to describe?  "We, uh, talk about stuff...doing 
with indies...sort of"

> marketing and consumer driven - you need to expand the consumers
> appetite for playing and purchasing games not on retail shelves
> and/or from larger commercial publishers.

Marketing is the step you take after having a good product. I don't 
think we're getting to the good product stage yet.  If I want to make 
an indie movie that's good, I know how to do that.  If I want to make 
an indie CD that's good, I know how to do that.  In both those cases, 
the hardest part is distribution.  The problem right now is that a lot 
of people don't think they can make good indie games because of lack 
of resources.

> It would have some content judging or some other thresholds as you
> could get killed if 90% of the work sucks to meet to ensure quality
> and it would be really well done.

...and we're right back where we're started.  The point of being an 
indie is that you don't want to be judged by people other than your 
consumes to determine your viability.

> time but honestly it's not as easy as it should be.  I think if you
> did this, and you found a way to make is sustainable and operate
> collectively as a non-profit then you'd be on to something.

I'd like a pony too, and world peace while we're at it =) Seriously, 
it's a decent dream, but who has the time?

> The bottom line is when you find a way where people see their
> contribution as expanding the consumption of indie games then
> you'll really have something.  Otherwise you'll just be all talk.

I disagree.  Marketing is something that each indie can and should do, 
and many successful indies have their own ways of approaching this and 
don't see any value or need in a collective effort towards this.  
However, general things, as you say, to ensure the sustainability of 
indie development are good things.

Brian