| > It may be the middle of indie game development, but across the whole landscape, the "missing middle" would seem to refer to the "single-/double-A" studios/publishers/games that died out between the launch of the PS2 and the release of GTA IV. To be fair, the author specifically listed their definition in the opening: >These are games that are bigger and more polished than a game jam game but are not huge, 30 hour epic triple-I indie game. A “middle game” should only take 1 to 9 months to create and can be profitable (or at least not a money sink) because it is expected to earn in the range of $10,000 to $40,000. if you don't agree with the definition, then of course the rest of the arguments run hollow. But this was an article aimed at existing (or soon to be) small indie developers, not consumers nor AAA developers. >here is very little opportunity today for any team (let alone individual person) to push the boundaries of the technology in a meaningful way. Sure there are. But you aren't making a game at that point, nor should try to sell a game on that premise. maybe a tech demo, but that can still be a multi-year venture depedning on the tech. Consumers don't care. People who do that sell tools to other devs who may make games based off that, and that's probably a more profitable venture than indie devlopment. |