Nope. Indie Game: The Movie DLC #2. That way you have to buy the base IGTM as well.
Comment has been collapsed.
The "devs" said on their steam forum that it is only that way on Steam, and that you can buy the stand alone version on their site, or so I remember.
Comment has been collapsed.
Tbh, I don't really understand what this means for them
Comment has been collapsed.
So what does this mean for games like call of duty? I read the article but I haven't really seen this kind of thing happen before.
Comment has been collapsed.
Its Activision Blizzard that bought the majority of shares. From what I read on IGN, they have a very nice economic background, of 3 billion dollars, after they bought back their shares. This means they will have the ability to move in what direction they please.
Comment has been collapsed.
They are still publicly traded. They are not indie.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't really get how this makes them "Indie". They're an independent company now, but they still have thousands of people working on the games, so they aren't independent games. Oh well, whatever direction Activision heads because of this, I hope it's a good one for both the company and its consumers
Comment has been collapsed.
It doesn't matter how many people you have working on the games, that has no bearing on if it's indie or not. It's whether or not you self-publish. However, as Activision is solely a publisher, not a developer (I think, I might be wrong), they wouldn't count as indie anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, to be frank, that's wrong, simply a dumbing down of the meaning to what most assume it is. It may be more commonly understood as a small project by starving artists, but, to take a recent example, Project Eternity raised four million dollars and is being developed a well-known studio with at least a hundred employees (presuming no layoffs other than the Stick of Truth one or additions to the team since they had 135 in 2008). However, as they are not only developing it but publishing it as well, that makes it an indie game and, for that one game at least, an indie studio. Whether or not they keep to that is another matter, but independent does not mean small group of people making shit in their own time like the Frontiers developer was pre-Kickstarter. We probably do need another name for that sort of studio to help differentiate, because "indie" is not what people think it is.
Comment has been collapsed.
The title is taken straight from an article headline. After searching for the exact definition of what "indie" is, I've only been more confused, everyone has a different answer. So I'll just take it as "independent", which I'm sure is how the article wanted it to be interpreted.
Comment has been collapsed.
Activison-Blizzard don't make games. Activision makes games, and Blizzard makes games. They are both owned by Activision-Blizzard.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think there should be a certain limit to how many employees or money you can have before loosing the "indie" role. if you bring in as much as them and employ as many staff as them they should not be called "indie" they should be something else.
and plus as far as i see if the company owner does not code their own games they are not indie, i think indie should be kept for the little guys trying, not big companies trying to profit from it. big companies should be publishers, since its nearly all they end up doing, its rare they code their stuff these days.
Comment has been collapsed.
That means they trust their new IP very much, they don't want to split money with Vivendi.I think this is all about Titan ...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, and because Vivendi was having financial problems they were able to get most of the stock proportionally cheap.
Comment has been collapsed.
Paradox is also, per definition, indie. (not always, but they have I wouldn't consider them indie as I also stand by the "small team" thing, even if I well know that - indie=independent and that does not require a small team. Anyways, I don't like the look of this, how people would say "uuh, you play indie games? But so do I! I PLAY COD! HAHAHAHAH" - palmface
Paradox Interactive is the publisher
Paradox Development Studio is the developer... Uh, yeah.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is rightfully there. People should learn that indie is not a genre, nor it is a business model. Indie is an indicative of a developer publishing their products themselves.
Comment has been collapsed.
Owning a stake doesn't mean they have a say in any of its business. Besides any company that ever issued shares has people owning a stake of them.
Comment has been collapsed.
Paradox issues shares and has shareholders. That was my point.
Comment has been collapsed.
407 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by reigifts
15 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by reigifts
6 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by xxxka
7 Comments - Last post 34 minutes ago by WaxWorm
2,068 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Megamind9
76 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Tuxerito
1,413 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by XJ777
10 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by Abaction
111 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by Peiperissimus
599 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by Wildstorm
81 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by Microfish
27 Comments - Last post 21 minutes ago by reallurker
51 Comments - Last post 22 minutes ago by Swordoffury
764 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by GameOverGiveAways
Something I seriously did not expect.
EDIT: Changed the article link to avoid the confusion caused by Rock Paper Scissors.
Comment has been collapsed.