http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7427
Author: Eric Raymond, former software architect on NetHack and Battle for Wesnoth
Summary: An obscure category of pre-modern games showcase the virtues of minimalist video games versus Triple-A cinematic monstrostities. CLI and TUI games in particular free up the designer's focus and implement a solid gameplay foundation.
My take: These early games have distinguishable cultural contribution to our hobby, having unique qualities from the arcade games that come to the regular person's mind when they hear the term "retro". However, the terminal interface went to the dustbin of electronic gaming for good reason. Better to have ascii graphics inside a renderer, with modern control tech. Ultimately, I wish the point about visual polish detracting resources from gameplay was more appreciated with the general public. Games like Crysis and EA: Battlefront were visually stunning and exciting, but the triple-A industry has become centralized and zombified over the past 2 decades, partially because of a consumer fascination with presentation.
Solution: Sever all contact with those who play Candy Crush.
indie and solo devs make the gameplay argument, but it's a lie. if they had the resources: people with the talent, time, skills, money, they would make a AAA game. but they don't so they make an indie game + some excuses.
Top studios make larger, more polished games because they in fact do have the resources. they add shit gameplay because your average gamer is a retard and thinking is painful for them. they add shit stories because that's just our culture, bro. everyone is a fag or an ugly woman. and also stupid. can't remember more than 4 names in a story at once.
"consumer fascination with presentation" - people enjoy and respect craftsmanship. this is good. Indie games would have good presentation too, if they could afford it.
Yet, Factorio and Rimworld completely blow that statement out of the water. Both of those games have made bank, and neither Ludeon or Wube have shown any interest in creating some bland super graphics shooter that is a AAA game. Gameplay>polish, every single time.
Good art is good art. My presentation statement was aimed at newer gamers and clickbait journos who think Skyrim's animations are its biggest sin. Or that its prescripted NPC interactions are an undoubted improvement over Oblivion's; these people have no joy in their heart. 3d graphics from 2006 were enough, but woe to any mid-budget studio that doesn't want blow through its budget on visuals or lean on a gimmick (ex: fake voxels in Minecraft). Disqualifies you from most of the console market.
The best indie games have incredible levels of polish within their limitations. Anyone who acts like those kinds of people wouldn't like to be able to do the same with a bigger budget is lying.
We must have different definitions of "polish" because I play almost exclusively indie games at this point and they're generally unbelievably polished.
Unless by "polish" you mean insanely detailed and textured 3d models -- and I just call that "graphics whoring."
There is a happy medium with crowdfunding but its harder that it used to be with so many scammers involved.
I keep stanning Pathfinder Kingmaker as a top tier AA game. Great presentation, with both deep and wide crunchy game mechanics as faithfully carried over from tabletop as the developers could.
I still play Nethack occasionally and it is still just as good.
Lootboxes, "streamlining" controls and gameplay, hollywood actors, graphical fidelity > resolution > world detail, bland corporate storytelling, and muh cinematics? Oh my god lets give these indie devs more money so they can finally give us the true AAA experience.
Yeah that's why I like indie games. Most people seem fine with dog shit AAA though.
Somehow plenty of indie games have great polish and presentation so... doesn't seem to be a cost issue.