So I’m not complaining about not having to read about games that aren’t bad, but aren’t as good as what’s already out there. But I am curious enough to think about it.

Because mediocrity is a problem in the rest of the game industry. This doesn’t surprise me like it used to. One of the many reasons to dislike EA is that they spend “two or three times as much on marketing and advertising as it does on developing a game.” And it shows. Just look at Dante’s Inferno. The game was hard to miss, and I’ll admit that its marketing campaign was delightful. But every time I read about the game, in the back of my mind I was thinking “that’s money that isn’t being spent on making a good game.” So I wasn’t surprised when reviews labeled the game average.

The game industry churns out dull, uninspired games by the boatload. At least Dante’s Inferno was new (well, old but distorted beyond recognition) territory for a game. The industry shovels out dozens of movie and TV tie-ins like the god-awful Avatar and clones of whatever game is popular at the moment. They’re designed by committee, pieced together from other whatever the current trend in gaming is with no clear voice or vision. How many first person shooters came out last year that used the cover mechanic, and how many God of War clones do we really need?

That’s not to say that major developers can’t make great games. I happily split my time between the small- and the big-time developers. But it’s far harder to judge a game from a major studio before it comes out. Whether the game is good or bad, the marketing team is going to be able to spin the early press however they want. Mainstream games have a way of letting me down in a way that’s rare for indie games. That’s why I wait for a demo, or a consensus of greatness or a personal recommendation from a friend before sacrifice $60 to a game. But I have no problem pre-ordering indie games. Well, indie games and Valve games.

I can pre-order from an indie developer because what I know about the game means something. They’re usually by one person or a small team that doesn’t change. I could order VVVVVV because I loved Terry Cavanagh’s earlier work, Judith and Don’t Look Back. All I knew about Blueberry Garden at the time of purchase was that it had won the Seamus McNally Grand Prize.

Think about Braid, Darwinia, World of Goo, Trine and Torchlight. They’re great games, obviously, but what I love about these games — what I love about indie games in general — is that they succeeded on their own merits. Braid and World of Goo won IGF awards. Trine and Torchlight spread through player recommendations. And Introversion, Darwinia‘s developer, had Kieron Gillen.

There’s nothing like IGF for mainstream games. The closest thing to a deliberative body for mainstream games is, what, Spike’s VGAs? That ceremony is a joke, even by game industry standards. On the other hand, most indie games that win competitions are a surprise, at least aside from the IGF where even the nominees get a fair amount of scrutiny. But at the dozens of other competitions, the winners are selected from relative unknowns. Who had heard of James Silva or Ska Studios before The Dishwasher: Dead Samurai won the first Dream-Build-Play competition?

The same goes for indie games that do well commercially. Torchlight, Trine and Castle Crashers did well without much of a marketing push. And the best-selling indie games on steam are pretty damn good.

Even when indie games market themselves successfully, that’s an indication the the game is worth buying. Unlike AAA developers, who have separate design and marketing departments, most indie developers are also the marketers. If you look at AaaaaAAaaaAAAaaAAAAaAAAAA!!! A Reckless Disregard for Gravity, the team responsible for the awesome press release is the same team responsible for the game. Dejobaan’s passion for the game shines through in the press release, and it shines through in the game. Silva’s second success came from a game with a similar marketing strategy: I MAED A GAM3 W1TH Z0MB1ES 1N IT!!!1. All Silva needed was that title and a song. 2D Boy put their faith in their fans when held a pay-what-you-want sale for World of Goo, and their faith was rewarded.

The games that don’t win awards? The ones that don’t seem worth talking about? The games that nobody pays for? Why would anybody talk about them. I don’t. I don’t talk about games on DIYGamer that I don’t want to play. That’s why you’ll never see me talking about a puzzle game or racing simulator. That’s also why you’ll never see me talking about platformers with middling controls or an adventure game with childish challenges. If I get bored of a game within the first half-hour of play, I’m not going to inflict that boredom on a reader.

And I think other games journalists feel the same way. So that’s why mediocre indie games don’t appear on many game blogs. And they don’t win awards because they’re not that good. And they don’t get bought because nobody’s going out of their way to tell their friends.

In the end, it’s better for the indie scene if its mediocre games live in obscurity.

First off, let’s admit it. There’s quite a few holes in the system. Whether it be for the developers or gamers, we are all aware they exist. But personally, I love the XBLIG platform. Games such as Clover, I MAED A GAM3 W1TH Z0MB1ES 1N IT!!!1, Soul, Your Doodles are Bugged, the entire Arkedo Series, and so on would not have been possible on consoles had it not been for the XBLIG platform. Sure, you may get the  useless app or unplayable game from time to time, but just as Rambo pointed out in his editorial:

“It’s easy to look at all the crap that’s released for the platform and be discouraged, but that’s just because everything ends up in the same place. There’s plenty of bad games on Kongregate and Newgrounds, but it’s a lot easier to find the good on those distribution platforms because the people running things act as curators, separating the good from the bad.”

But the question remains: what can Microsoft do to make it better? Here’s a few ideas. I’m sure most of them are debatable but exploring the possibilities won’t kill us!

1. Make XBLIG titles playable offline. Why I have to be logged into my LIVE account to play games that I’ve paid for and downloaded is beyond me. It’s easy to dismiss this problem by acknowledging that Microsoft wants full control over the platform (as my DIYgamer cohorts pointed out); perhaps the assurance that gamers will keep paying for the service is what makes this so… Whatever the case may be, when I pay for an app on my iPhone/iPod Touch, I can use everything but its online components if I wish to stay offline. Most of the games on the XBLIG don’t even have online capabilities. Some have leaderboards and a few have online play (like Creed Arena) but these components aren’t essential to most indie games anyway. If you wish to play a game on LIVE, log onto LIVE. If you purchase something, it becomes your property. Your ability to utilize a purchase should not be restricted.

2. Promote the XBLIG platform better. I know you’ve heard this a lot. This one is mainly for the developers, who have a rough time getting downloads as it is. Sure, there’s the trial or demo that comes equipped with almost all of the indie games but this is simply not enough. Yes, there are the top rated, top downloaded, new arrivals categories and even an IGN picks category, but what about all the hidden gems we don’t get to play? Why doesn’t Microsoft keep us informed as to what’s coming out in the near future? They do this with XBLA. I don’t think anyone wants to view XBLIG as a cheap cash-in for Microsoft, but they certainly make it seem so.

3. Achievements anybody? Well, there’s a problem with this suggestion right off the bat. Developers can abuse this capability… how will the flashlight apps and games such as Dont B Nervous Talking 2 Girls distribute their achievement points?… But again as simply put by my DIYgamer cohorts in our podcast, why not add an extra step in the review process for achievements? I’m thinking scaling it from 0 to 100 points should do the community well. (Maybe at intervals of 25?) In any case, this would be quite the incentive for gamers who are on LIVE but refuse to utilize the indie games platform.

4. Encourage better box art. I know this is kind of a weird one because it also draws on the developers to put in some extra effort. But I figure if you’re putting effort into creating a game, then its box art should be suitable. If you simply take a look here and see the comparison of the best and worst box art for games, you can see that most of the successful titles fall into the “best box art” category. Why is this? Because people judge a book by its cover. It’s the same when purchasing mainstream games as well: when the cover art looks enticing then gamers are much more inclined to purchase and play the game. Am I wrong?

The XBLIG platform is still young and who knows where we’ll be a year or two from now. It has spawned some excellent titles but also some atrocious failures. Microsoft can make many adjustments that can easily aid the service in becoming stronger and better. For some reason, it chooses not to. But hey, the first step is admitting to a problem. I hope they listen to our demands. Long live indie!

Machinarium was released yesterday for the price of $20, a steal if you ask me. It was one of the most delightful games I’ve played this year (read our review). The artwork was fantastic, the story was amazing, the puzzles were challenging, and it gave me about 8-10 hours of gaming. There’s little more I could have asked for from the game especially considering it’s relatively low price point.

I’ve also been playing Tim Schafer’s new game: Brutal Legend. Like with Machinarium, it’s been one of the better games I’ve enjoyed this year, it’s funny, and overall I’m loving the mechanics behind the game. I’m just about to beat the game and I’ve only invested about 10 hours into it.

So you can see there’s little play time difference between a title that’s $20 and one that’s $60.

Now, obviously, Brutal Legend costs more because of the notoriety behind the game (Jack Black’s voice casting) and the much higher development costs. This isn’t a question about the pricing structure of major release games, after all, but rather the willingness of gamers to splurge a little more and top quality indie developed titles.

And of course it’s all relative. Brutal Legend cost a lot of money to make, but they also had a multi-billion dollar corporation backing them up. If the game cost $15 million to make then it’s still just a fraction of EA’s quarterly revenues. A game like Machinarium, however, may have only cost $30000 (just as an example) to make, but I’d bet that it was a much higher fraction of Amanita Design’s revenue that went into that game.

To get to my point, cause I feel like I’m starting to ramble on, if Machinarium sold for just $10 more, a price I would still pay for the game, many gamers would instantly be turned off of the title. Not because they don’t feel the title is worth their money, or even because they don’t think it’s worth $30, but, rather, because they are accustomed to getting indie games at super cheap prices, despite how much money, effort, love, and creativity was put into the title.

Oh and I am in no way proposing that we all pay more for games, indie or otherwise. I just wish there wasn’t this stigma that if it’s an indie game it can’t cost more than such and such; especially when I’ve seen much crappier games come from big publishers and selling for twice as much.