It’s a great blog post but here’s where I think “being indie” doesn’t really make sense.
If there’s no escape from the matrix of Capital -and I agree- and if “indieness” is a gradient then
There’s no need for *more* autonomous or more indie people. We are already on a gradient, people are free. It’s a bias to think people want, lean toward independence and are more or less capable of doing so due to education, geographic location social class, etc. A lot of people have everything greenlighted to be more autonomous but don’t want to be more autonomous. That’s what Tales of tales expresses in this interview, game developers genuinely love to be cozy in a huge team in Montreal and love what they do. They could go their own way but don’t. It doesn’t mean that they don’t try internally to push the medium. Creativity can come from anywhere.
Independence is a value, a state of mind. I’m strongly independent because being an orphan and adopted built that up in me. But some people grew up in strong communities taking care of things and don’t have the same thoughts as adults about independency, it’s not so important for them. Independence is a direction for some and isn’t for others. We are indeed on a gradient.
What counts to me in making games is not the” indieness level” or how to go toward more independence: people who need it, will or already are independent. What is important is that the people in the team share something strong. Like a band. It’s the chemistry between members that will create great, interesting, fun, amazing things. Great “AAA” or “indie” games show that all the time: it’s all about the team.
So at the end where you are or where you go (or not) on the gradient of independence doesn’t matter, output something different. Think about Louis C.K. It doesn’t matter if he’s a TV backed-up artist or if he’s a stand-up comedian or a loner in his apartment or a millionaire. He’s a bit of all of that at the same time.
He changes TV sitcoms with his team, creating a unique show. And that’s what counts.