Humbled, Shocked: IGF's Grand Prize Nominees React

I'd like to see an "IGF Nominee Quick Look" or something, because I honestly have heard very very little about any of these games. And I don't like getting my info from anywhere but GB :O)

Another impressive round of winners this year!

Fez looks seriously great.

@Psychaberration said:

@I_smell@Branthog: Can either of you clarify where the line between Asperger's as a character trait and as a crutch is? These really are some of the worst arguments against the game I have seen. Blaming a game for cheap emotional cash-ins for having an real condition in it for the sake of a well crafted story? None to very few of you can really understand how well portrayed BOTH afflicted characters are in the story. Having it myself and having a job working specifically with children with it, certain scenes seriously hit so hard and on the mark it almost scared me (the "acting" dialogue exchange in the bookstore specifically felt like a punch to the chest in how dead on it was to exactly how I have had to live, I almost broke down) It is not "killing the child" cop out you claimed it was, it's well thought out, researched, and portrayed and CRUCIAL to the entire unfolding of the story line. Caring at all that it's a current issue is the truly "hipster" thing, so don't throw that stupid fucking word around as an unfounded criticism, properly validate your reasons instead.

And that's only the second most incorrect use of a word in your statements. Depth. Fucking depth. Putting in anything in an indie game makes it a cheap attempt at DEPTH. What? Play the goddamn "game", there's nothing deep about it. It's a semi-interactive story with a completely linear path. I don't think it belongs on here because it's less of a game than myst, but it's one of the best crafted and emotionally impacting stories of last year, regardless of medium, and that is what's worth commending.

You spout the same two arguments everyone who complains about indie games do, and I expect no less than laziness and dismissal from the internet, but COME ON, drop the two completely valid arguments against Braid you read and then subsequently adopted, and come up with some that actually apply to this.

You completely missed my point. Or, rather, I probably have done a terrible job at trying to describe what it is about games like this (and Braid, for that matter) which irk me. In fairness, it's an often amorphous thing that I can't pinpoint, either. It just manages to grate on me.

In particular, it isn't the games. To the Moon is pretty good (not really a game, but still a tale around an interesting idea). Braid is a really good game, too. And plenty of games are pretentious and use hip-thing-to-care-about-now to convey depth of their creation. That it's a point the game pivots around doesn't itself validate it (it doesn't invalidate it, either, of course). There are plenty of movies that are about issue-to-care-about-of-the-year that may be well-researched and portray the issue accurately, but that doesn't mean some of them are any less cloying and formulaic and manipulative for it.

However, the real issue I take with this game in particular (and Braid, now that you mention it) is the discussion that surrounds it. The pretentious "look at the kind of intellectual shit I'm into, motherfuckers! I'm fucking deep!". Often this sentiment that "this game is so fantastic, because it is an emotional journey into an affliction that impacts so many, today". Their discussions/reviews about it (this and Braid and others) feel like the game journalism version of wearing a red AIDs ribbon to an award show. In fact, that is precisely the kind of thing that makes a lot of people not consider playing a game. It took me a long time to give To the Moon a shot, because the pretentious reviews really put me off.

That isn't really the fault of these games (unless their creators are centering their promotion around these points), but it impacts the perception of their games, none the less. Until people give it a chance. I'm usually willing to give it a chance, but often in spite of the coverage.

@kmg90 said:

@TehChich said:

@Branthog said:

@TehChich said:

@Branthog: There's a game about Asperger's?

It's that something Moon something game. It's actually based around a sort of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind science-fiction plot, but the big deal that every "game journalist" makes about it is "and the girl in it clearly has some sort of aspergers" (because aspergers has been the new self-diagnosed geek-chic of the last five years, of course) and that it's ostensibly really about relational disorder (a phrase I'd never heard of before, but after googling, appears to basically mean "you have problems in relationships" because there's a diagnosis in the DSM for everyone!).

The problem with criticizing such a game, topic, or anyone reviewing it is that it's so easy to counter absolutely any dissent with "you're a narrow minded hateful durp durp" than consider whether certain elements of a game (just like in movies, books, etc) are just trivial attempts at "depth" (like I mentioned, if the game was made fifteen years ago, it would have an identification with some other condition that was popular at the time).

Maybe I'm too critical and jaded, but the majority of things in gaming that try to be deep, topic, emotional, etc just come across to me as a sophomoric attempt to force those things (and then those on the receiving end heap them with praise, because they want to be seen as having the same qualities that the game aspires to).

Other than those aspects of it, the most basic premise is actually kind of cool. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the game, so I don't want to risk ruining it for anyone.

I think the only reason I would play it would be to confirm whether or not this character does have Asperger's. Because I have Asperger's. I was diagnosed at a young age so it's not just me trying to be "hip". ;)

I'm in the same boat as you, I would play the game just see if its actually features aspergers in the story line, since I too have been professionally diagnosed during my childhood.

Also I despise people who think that Aspergers has become the some sort of "way of living labels" where people are under the impression that all people who (claim to) have Aspergers are hiding behind a learning Disability they don't really have and just trying to justify their ways of living. I say "Fuck you" if you have that mentality towards this life effecting Disability/Disorder

I've never heard the claim that people with Aspergers are just clinging to it to disguise a learning disability. I've heard some people say that apsergers (very mild autism) is maybe an unfair thing to diagnose people with, because it's just putting a label on something that is just a person being different. (the psychiatric profession seems infatuated with finding a diagnosis for every part of the spectrum that you take up). That's not really relevant to the discussion though, I don't think.

I do know that a lot of people self-diagnose as having Aspergers because "gosh, I like to focus on stuff and am socially awkward - I am mildly autistic!". Fucking attention whores. This all started maybe half a dozen years ago on Slashdot, when the first stories about "mild autism" started to surface. Then, for some reason, we started to see articles claiming that every single successful geek/nerd, practically, "surely has Aspergers". And, suddenly, every jackass on Slashdot (and then elsewhere) decided they had it. They're like that fucking annoying girl who posts on her Facebook page saying that she just read a book or played one game of pacman and proclaims "I am such a nerd lol!".

I would presume that those who actually have some degree of autism would be offended by that, too. Especially if it truly impacts their lives. And suddenly you can't wave a stick without hitting someone who is claiming to have what you actually have, because it's the geek-chic of the year thing to do.

And that's what is kind of weird about this game. It's pretty good. Well, the story is pretty good (I still have a hard time calling it a "game"). The content when actually playing the game doesn't make any direct proclamation of aspergers or "relational disorder", as far as I know. And yet, it somehow has become the meat of almost every review of it. I can't entirely put my finger on why, but something about everyone needing to make a point of that in their reviews feels . . . awkward.

@kmg90 said:

@TehChich said:

@Branthog said:

@TehChich said:

@Branthog: There's a game about Asperger's?

It's that something Moon something game. It's actually based around a sort of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind science-fiction plot, but the big deal that every "game journalist" makes about it is "and the girl in it clearly has some sort of aspergers" (because aspergers has been the new self-diagnosed geek-chic of the last five years, of course) and that it's ostensibly really about relational disorder (a phrase I'd never heard of before, but after googling, appears to basically mean "you have problems in relationships" because there's a diagnosis in the DSM for everyone!).

The problem with criticizing such a game, topic, or anyone reviewing it is that it's so easy to counter absolutely any dissent with "you're a narrow minded hateful durp durp" than consider whether certain elements of a game (just like in movies, books, etc) are just trivial attempts at "depth" (like I mentioned, if the game was made fifteen years ago, it would have an identification with some other condition that was popular at the time).

Maybe I'm too critical and jaded, but the majority of things in gaming that try to be deep, topic, emotional, etc just come across to me as a sophomoric attempt to force those things (and then those on the receiving end heap them with praise, because they want to be seen as having the same qualities that the game aspires to).

Other than those aspects of it, the most basic premise is actually kind of cool. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the game, so I don't want to risk ruining it for anyone.

I think the only reason I would play it would be to confirm whether or not this character does have Asperger's. Because I have Asperger's. I was diagnosed at a young age so it's not just me trying to be "hip". ;)

I'm in the same boat as you, I would play the game just see if its actually features aspergers in the story line, since I too have been professionally diagnosed during my childhood.

Also I despise people who think that Aspergers has become the some sort of "way of living labels" where people are under the impression that all people who (claim to) have Aspergers are hiding behind a learning Disability they don't really have and just trying to justify their ways of living. I say "Fuck you" if you have that mentality towards this life effecting Disability/Disorder

I just want to say To the Moon is amazing, Asperger's or not.

@TehChich said:

@Branthog said:

@TehChich said:

@Branthog: There's a game about Asperger's?

It's that something Moon something game. It's actually based around a sort of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind science-fiction plot, but the big deal that every "game journalist" makes about it is "and the girl in it clearly has some sort of aspergers" (because aspergers has been the new self-diagnosed geek-chic of the last five years, of course) and that it's ostensibly really about relational disorder (a phrase I'd never heard of before, but after googling, appears to basically mean "you have problems in relationships" because there's a diagnosis in the DSM for everyone!).

The problem with criticizing such a game, topic, or anyone reviewing it is that it's so easy to counter absolutely any dissent with "you're a narrow minded hateful durp durp" than consider whether certain elements of a game (just like in movies, books, etc) are just trivial attempts at "depth" (like I mentioned, if the game was made fifteen years ago, it would have an identification with some other condition that was popular at the time).

Maybe I'm too critical and jaded, but the majority of things in gaming that try to be deep, topic, emotional, etc just come across to me as a sophomoric attempt to force those things (and then those on the receiving end heap them with praise, because they want to be seen as having the same qualities that the game aspires to).

Other than those aspects of it, the most basic premise is actually kind of cool. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the game, so I don't want to risk ruining it for anyone.

I think the only reason I would play it would be to confirm whether or not this character does have Asperger's. Because I have Asperger's. I was diagnosed at a young age so it's not just me trying to be "hip". ;)

I'm in the same boat as you, I would play the game just see if its actually features aspergers in the story line, since I too have been professionally diagnosed during my childhood.

Also I despise people who think that Aspergers has become the some sort of "way of living labels" where people are under the impression that all people who (claim to) have Aspergers are hiding behind a learning Disability they don't really have and just trying to justify their ways of living. I say "Fuck you" if you have that mentality towards this life effecting Disability/Disorder

Eww look at those dirty hipsters playing Johann Sebastion Joust. 
 
I also find it kind of weird that games that aren't even out yet are winning, but I guess that's not the point?
 
With that said, I still can't wait to check out Fez. That game just looks great.

Just release Fez!!

@Psychaberration: You are misunderstanding his point. His problem is not with the game, his problem is with the attempts by individuals playing it who are also in the public eye being pretentious about it. The "game" itself may be good at what it is trying to do, but it is the reaction to it that is the problem, not the "game" itself.

For the same exact reason that you find it so powerful, the average person will not be able to directly recognize why you felt that way. Therefore, the "game" itself may be great at what it is trying to do, but the individuals covering the game should not fake a reaction to it out of some sense that GAMES NEED TO BE ART mentality.

If anything, you should be agreeing with him because a faked sense of so called "deepness" that those playing it are grabbing for places your true emotional reaction in bed with the hipster nerd mentality that makes your reaction seem unauthentic.

@I_smell: well if you had a sense of discretion and avoided the amateurish attempts and find ones worth looking into, you would be a lot less weary of it and a lot more pleasantly surprised. You wouldn't dismiss all film with any artistic ambition because every year a thousand freshman film school dipshits make an "avant garde surrealist look at the pain of loss" which boils down to 12 minutes of askewed shots of a field and some woman crying in reverse.

You're not an idiot, I won't call you any names, that's not my way of discussing stuff like this. I just hate seeing people immediately writing off something that really has legitimate substance because 99% of the people who try to be profound don't have a goddamn clue.

@I_smell@Branthog: Can either of you clarify where the line between Asperger's as a character trait and as a crutch is? These really are some of the worst arguments against the game I have seen. Blaming a game for cheap emotional cash-ins for having an real condition in it for the sake of a well crafted story? None to very few of you can really understand how well portrayed BOTH afflicted characters are in the story. Having it myself and having a job working specifically with children with it, certain scenes seriously hit so hard and on the mark it almost scared me (the "acting" dialogue exchange in the bookstore specifically felt like a punch to the chest in how dead on it was to exactly how I have had to live, I almost broke down) It is not "killing the child" cop out you claimed it was, it's well thought out, researched, and portrayed and CRUCIAL to the entire unfolding of the story line. Caring at all that it's a current issue is the truly "hipster" thing, so don't throw that stupid fucking word around as an unfounded criticism, properly validate your reasons instead.

And that's only the second most incorrect use of a word in your statements. Depth. Fucking depth. Putting in anything in an indie game makes it a cheap attempt at DEPTH. What? Play the goddamn "game", there's nothing deep about it. It's a semi-interactive story with a completely linear path. I don't think it belongs on here because it's less of a game than myst, but it's one of the best crafted and emotionally impacting stories of last year, regardless of medium, and that is what's worth commending.

You spout the same two arguments everyone who complains about indie games do, and I expect no less than laziness and dismissal from the internet, but COME ON, drop the two completely valid arguments against Braid you read and then subsequently adopted, and come up with some that actually apply to this.

@I_smell said:

@Branthog said:

The problem with criticizing such a game, topic, or anyone reviewing it is that it's so easy to counter absolutely any dissent with "you're a narrow minded hateful durp durp" than consider whether certain elements of a game (just like in movies, books, etc) are just trivial attempts at "depth" (like I mentioned, if the game was made fifteen years ago, it would have an identification with some other condition that was popular at the time).

Maybe I'm too critical and jaded, but the majority of things in gaming that try to be deep, topic, emotional, etc just come across to me as a sophomoric attempt to force those things (and then those on the receiving end heap them with praise, because they want to be seen as having the same qualities that the game aspires to).

Other than those aspects of it, the most basic premise is actually kind of cool. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the game, so I don't want to risk ruining it for anyone.

Cool, thanks for putting why I don't like "art games" into words! It's like nobody can express something in games without making it pixelated, sihlouetted or black n white, and telegraphing from a mile away "THERE IS A DEEPER MEANING IN HERE!!"

I should clarify that I don't inherently dislike games that try to do more and try to achieve some artistic merit beyond the standard experience. It's just that they almost always come across as forced, to me

At this point, I'm fairly convinced that Fez exists in a permanent limbo of non-release solely to gobble up indie game awards and nominations.

@Branthog From what you've said it seems you think the game itself is fine but the fact that its being written about constantly bothers you but you take shots at the game and not the reviewers or news writers.

A game is not suddenly bad simply through over exposure.

Go Spelunky! Win everything!

@Branthog said:

@TehChich said:

@Branthog: There's a game about Asperger's?

It's that something Moon something game. It's actually based around a sort of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind science-fiction plot, but the big deal that every "game journalist" makes about it is "and the girl in it clearly has some sort of aspergers" (because aspergers has been the new self-diagnosed geek-chic of the last five years, of course) and that it's ostensibly really about relational disorder (a phrase I'd never heard of before, but after googling, appears to basically mean "you have problems in relationships" because there's a diagnosis in the DSM for everyone!).

The problem with criticizing such a game, topic, or anyone reviewing it is that it's so easy to counter absolutely any dissent with "you're a narrow minded hateful durp durp" than consider whether certain elements of a game (just like in movies, books, etc) are just trivial attempts at "depth" (like I mentioned, if the game was made fifteen years ago, it would have an identification with some other condition that was popular at the time).

Maybe I'm too critical and jaded, but the majority of things in gaming that try to be deep, topic, emotional, etc just come across to me as a sophomoric attempt to force those things (and then those on the receiving end heap them with praise, because they want to be seen as having the same qualities that the game aspires to).

Other than those aspects of it, the most basic premise is actually kind of cool. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the game, so I don't want to risk ruining it for anyone.

I mean some indie games are not artsy in any way, whether it be through graphics or mechanics, and some commerical ones can be artsy graphically or mechanically in some way. Either way, usually you can enjoy the game itself without looking at what it is trying to do on a deeper level, but if you do do it on a deeper level there can be a lot more to appreciate and possibly even relate to, i.e. Braid. Also, I have never seen ESotSM, but boy do I love the music!

@I_smell said:

@Branthog said:

The problem with criticizing such a game, topic, or anyone reviewing it is that it's so easy to counter absolutely any dissent with "you're a narrow minded hateful durp durp" than consider whether certain elements of a game (just like in movies, books, etc) are just trivial attempts at "depth" (like I mentioned, if the game was made fifteen years ago, it would have an identification with some other condition that was popular at the time).

Maybe I'm too critical and jaded, but the majority of things in gaming that try to be deep, topic, emotional, etc just come across to me as a sophomoric attempt to force those things (and then those on the receiving end heap them with praise, because they want to be seen as having the same qualities that the game aspires to).

Other than those aspects of it, the most basic premise is actually kind of cool. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the game, so I don't want to risk ruining it for anyone.

Cool, thanks for putting why I don't like "art games" into words! It's like nobody can express something in games without making it pixelated, sihlouetted or black n white, and telegraphing from a mile away "THERE IS A DEEPER MEANING IN HERE!!"

I should clarify that I don't inherently dislike games that try to do more and try to achieve some artistic merit beyond the standard experience. It's just that they almost always come across as forced, to me and sometimes when they don't, the response to them from reviewers seems forced (that probably shouldn't be held against the game, of course). You see this in movies all the time, but maybe we're just more used to it there and we've just come to expect the "formulaic sensitive/emotional topic/plot-point of the month" movie and we disregard it. I think games are still in such infancy that it's very hard to achieve it without drawing attention to it and by drawing attention to it (directly or by reviewers), it forces a certain set of people with my mentality to be very skeptical.

At least, that's as well as I can manage to explain it. I'm probably doing a poor job.

@bluecollaralaskan said:

To be fair, those of you who have not played " To the Moon" .. I played it all the way through, and to me it didn't really seem like it was just throwing in the girl having asperger's to try and elicit some sort of response from the players. In fact that part seemed really no more significant than the rest of the story. Now it's not till about 2/3 through the game when the rest of what is really going on with the girl becomes apparent, and till that point she seems weird, but it starts to make sense, and I felt was actually a pretty neat story. IMO it did a way better job of telling a fairly involved story than alot of other games have come close to.. Maybe everyone here who is talking about it has played it, but, if not you may want to reserve judgement and actually just go play the entire game. I wasn't sorry for spending the money.

Hopefully I got that across in my comment, too. The game doesn't even mention it, yet it has been part of the conversation and review every time I see coverage of the game in absolutely any way whatsoever. But, like most people have also pointed out . . . it's only a game in the loosest of ways. How do we give consideration to "games" and the topics they cover when they have almost no "game" to them? At that point, do we not just judge them the same way we'd judge a film?

My only knowledge of Spelunky is that character I unlocked in Meat Boy. He was pretty useful in getting my S-rank, I'll tell you.

To be fair, those of you who have not played " To the Moon" .. I played it all the way through, and to me it didn't really seem like it was just throwing in the girl having asperger's to try and elicit some sort of response from the players. In fact that part seemed really no more significant than the rest of the story. Now it's not till about 2/3 through the game when the rest of what is really going on with the girl becomes apparent, and till that point she seems weird, but it starts to make sense, and I felt was actually a pretty neat story. IMO it did a way better job of telling a fairly involved story than alot of other games have come close to.. Maybe everyone here who is talking about it has played it, but, if not you may want to reserve judgement and actually just go play the entire game. I wasn't sorry for spending the money.

The problem with criticizing such a game, topic, or anyone reviewing it is that it's so easy to counter absolutely any dissent with "you're a narrow minded hateful durp durp" than consider whether certain elements of a game (just like in movies, books, etc) are just trivial attempts at "depth" (like I mentioned, if the game was made fifteen years ago, it would have an identification with some other condition that was popular at the time).

Maybe I'm too critical and jaded, but the majority of things in gaming that try to be deep, topic, emotional, etc just come across to me as a sophomoric attempt to force those things (and then those on the receiving end heap them with praise, because they want to be seen as having the same qualities that the game aspires to).

Other than those aspects of it, the most basic premise is actually kind of cool. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the game, so I don't want to risk ruining it for anyone.

It's good to hear this now, since Microsoft just announced the games that willcomprise the XBLA House Party, and they're all games from huge publishers. Which kind of defeats the purpose of the XBLA/PSN/digital stores, if you ask me.

@Godak: Or he's just a man-whore.

@Branthog said:

@TehChich said:

@Branthog: There's a game about Asperger's?

It's that something Moon something game. It's actually based around a sort of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind science-fiction plot, but the big deal that every "game journalist" makes about it is "and the girl in it clearly has some sort of aspergers" (because aspergers has been the new self-diagnosed geek-chic of the last five years, of course) and that it's ostensibly really about relational disorder (a phrase I'd never heard of before, but after googling, appears to basically mean "you have problems in relationships" because there's a diagnosis in the DSM for everyone!).

The problem with criticizing such a game, topic, or anyone reviewing it is that it's so easy to counter absolutely any dissent with "you're a narrow minded hateful durp durp" than consider whether certain elements of a game (just like in movies, books, etc) are just trivial attempts at "depth" (like I mentioned, if the game was made fifteen years ago, it would have an identification with some other condition that was popular at the time).

Maybe I'm too critical and jaded, but the majority of things in gaming that try to be deep, topic, emotional, etc just come across to me as a sophomoric attempt to force those things (and then those on the receiving end heap them with praise, because they want to be seen as having the same qualities that the game aspires to).

Other than those aspects of it, the most basic premise is actually kind of cool. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the game, so I don't want to risk ruining it for anyone.

I think the only reason I would play it would be to confirm whether or not this character does have Asperger's. Because I have Asperger's. I was diagnosed at a young age so it's not just me trying to be "hip". ;)

@Grissefar: Yeah, I was probably a bit more peeved than I should have been. But we've both had our say, and no one seems to be fuming over anything. I attempted to do something silly, you did not find it silly, end of story?

@TehChich: Duke Nukem Forever was, in reality, a look at the social connections that those with Asperger's find difficult to create. Hence Duke's propensity towards casual sex and crude jokes. He is trying his hardest to make relationships with those around him, but, at the end of the day, he is just an empty shell of a man.

I love Spelunky so I'm stoked to see how it'll be on the 360.

Branthog layin' it down with an article within an article. I tip my hat, sir.

@Grissefar said:

And wow, Phil Fish is really not a fan of capital letters, hehe. I guess he assumed Patrick was going to clean up his comments before posting!

Somebody doesn't have PHIL_FISH on Twitter ;)

@RockmanBionics said:

@Beforet said:

@Branthog: Are you talking about a specific game here, because I don't know what you're talking about?

He's talking about To The Moon.

Spoilers, I guess.

The aspergers and "relational disorder" parts aren't really spoilers. They are aspects of the characters and their relationship that are trotted out every time anyone writes or talks about the game, but I don't believe that anyone actually brings up "she has aspergers and likes skittles" or something. That, at least, is a point in its favor of possibly not beating you over the head with it (though it's then undermined by everything I've seen written about it bringing it up again).

The plot that actually encircles all of this is a science fiction one that is at once very familiar, yet new and frankly should be able to stand on its own without journalists always bringing up the "touches on serious sensitive topics of modern society" bit . . . because . . . you know . . . we're always striving to validate our expression as an artistic one to the rest of the world, even if we have to do it with an oversized mallet.

@TehChich said:

@Branthog: There's a game about Asperger's?

It's that something Moon something game. It's actually based around a sort of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind science-fiction plot, but the big deal that every "game journalist" makes about it is "and the girl in it clearly has some sort of aspergers" (because aspergers has been the new self-diagnosed geek-chic of the last five years, of course) and that it's ostensibly really about relational disorder (a phrase I'd never heard of before, but after googling, appears to basically mean "you have problems in relationships" because there's a diagnosis in the DSM for everyone!).

The problem with criticizing such a game, topic, or anyone reviewing it is that it's so easy to counter absolutely any dissent with "you're a narrow minded hateful durp durp" than consider whether certain elements of a game (just like in movies, books, etc) are just trivial attempts at "depth" (like I mentioned, if the game was made fifteen years ago, it would have an identification with some other condition that was popular at the time).

Maybe I'm too critical and jaded, but the majority of things in gaming that try to be deep, topic, emotional, etc just come across to me as a sophomoric attempt to force those things (and then those on the receiving end heap them with praise, because they want to be seen as having the same qualities that the game aspires to).

Other than those aspects of it, the most basic premise is actually kind of cool. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the game, so I don't want to risk ruining it for anyone.

Maybe my memory is going bad, but wasn't Andy Shwatz's big year two years ago?

It's so weird to think video gaming has a middle class now. I imagine this sort of contest will become more important than it's ever been as these tiny studios attempt to leave the free flash/browser Indie game strata and get themselves some sweet downloadable market lucre.

Honestly, when you're stuck at the aforementioned flash game level, you're just making cutesy puzzle platformers, artillery physics games and tower defense. It'd be interesting to see what these creative teams do with a little more bank to work with.

I'm slightly intrigued about Johann Sebastian Joust's status as a video game. I assume there's some PSN program that keeps track of scores and such as well as telling the Move controllers what to do? It's reminding me of those board games that use VHS and whether they technically count as video games, in terms of the media part being largely incidental to the gameplay at least.

I think it's kind of unfair to include Fez here, since it's been in development for, like, 4 years. Isn't the point of making smaller indie games to NOT work on things for half a decade?

Oh cool, fun fact I've now learned today: the award is named for the guy who made one of my favorite games ever: http://www.giantbomb.com/tread-marks/61-368/

@Branthog: There's a game about Asperger's?

Bumbled, Bhocked: BGF's Brand Brize Bominees Beact

EDIT: Don't blame me! I am a product of society.

Fez!!

I'm perplexed as to why games that aren't out yet have won.

@Rowr said:

@nail1080 said:

@Branthog said:

@nail1080 said:

@Branthog said:

Holy crap, a list of winning indie games that didn't involve aspergers and relational disorder!

you're very sad

I just don't wank over every pretentious attempt to be "deep" in a game so that I can feel erudite. Especially when the attempts are so painfully forced. If the specific game I'm talking about was made fifteen years ago, it would have been about AIDs, instead of aspergers, because that's what was trendy at the time. And it's that hipster insincerity (either by the artsy person creating it or - more often - by the reviewer who plays along with it) that is so off-putting.

Someone commented about Patrick. I didn't even notice this post was by him. I was simply referring to the fact that all of the games in the list seem to be about being games and not about putting forth some art-house poseur vibe. (And also understand that I'm not taking issue with games containing deep, emotional, or meaningful content - but gamers and journalists have a propensity to react to even the most obviously shallow attempt toward any of these things with far more reverence than they deserve. The equivalent to having a child die in your movie, because you think it'll really stir people; not because you have anything valuable to say about it. I dont' know why I'm still writing inside these parenthesis.)

Fair enough, but do you have any examples of the type of games you are referring to? And do you have links to any articles glorifying these games?

This conversation is just wanky enough for a comments section related to indie games. I approve.

So is your hand?

@Branthog said:

@nail1080 said:

@Branthog said:

Holy crap, a list of winning indie games that didn't involve aspergers and relational disorder!

you're very sad

I just don't wank over every pretentious attempt to be "deep" in a game so that I can feel erudite. Especially when the attempts are so painfully forced. If the specific game I'm talking about was made fifteen years ago, it would have been about AIDs, instead of aspergers, because that's what was trendy at the time. And it's that hipster insincerity (either by the artsy person creating it or - more often - by the reviewer who plays along with it) that is so off-putting.

Someone commented about Patrick. I didn't even notice this post was by him. I was simply referring to the fact that all of the games in the list seem to be about being games and not about putting forth some art-house poseur vibe. (And also understand that I'm not taking issue with games containing deep, emotional, or meaningful content - but gamers and journalists have a propensity to react to even the most obviously shallow attempt toward any of these things with far more reverence than they deserve. The equivalent to having a child die in your movie, because you think it'll really stir people; not because you have anything valuable to say about it. I dont' know why I'm still writing inside these parenthesis.)

You sir are my hero.

Great winners! A little unsurprising this year, but wow over five hundred entries? That is pretty awesome.

@nail1080 said:

@Branthog said:

@nail1080 said:

@Branthog said:

Holy crap, a list of winning indie games that didn't involve aspergers and relational disorder!

you're very sad

I just don't wank over every pretentious attempt to be "deep" in a game so that I can feel erudite. Especially when the attempts are so painfully forced. If the specific game I'm talking about was made fifteen years ago, it would have been about AIDs, instead of aspergers, because that's what was trendy at the time. And it's that hipster insincerity (either by the artsy person creating it or - more often - by the reviewer who plays along with it) that is so off-putting.

Someone commented about Patrick. I didn't even notice this post was by him. I was simply referring to the fact that all of the games in the list seem to be about being games and not about putting forth some art-house poseur vibe. (And also understand that I'm not taking issue with games containing deep, emotional, or meaningful content - but gamers and journalists have a propensity to react to even the most obviously shallow attempt toward any of these things with far more reverence than they deserve. The equivalent to having a child die in your movie, because you think it'll really stir people; not because you have anything valuable to say about it. I dont' know why I'm still writing inside these parenthesis.)

Fair enough, but do you have any examples of the type of games you are referring to? And do you have links to any articles glorifying these games?

This conversation is just wanky enough for a comments section related to indie games. I approve.

I'm really happy about how well indie games are doing recently.

Finally something good about this generation in gaming.

I'm stoked for Fez and Spelunky. 

Another awesome Klepek story. Keep up the stellar writing!

Very happy and surprised that Dear Esther made that list. Forgot about the remake, hopefully it comes out this year.

Everyone should play Wonderputt right now. It's like Zany Golf but goofier.

@Branthog said:

@nail1080 said:

@Branthog said:

Holy crap, a list of winning indie games that didn't involve aspergers and relational disorder!

you're very sad

I just don't wank over every pretentious attempt to be "deep" in a game so that I can feel erudite. Especially when the attempts are so painfully forced. If the specific game I'm talking about was made fifteen years ago, it would have been about AIDs, instead of aspergers, because that's what was trendy at the time. And it's that hipster insincerity (either by the artsy person creating it or - more often - by the reviewer who plays along with it) that is so off-putting.

Someone commented about Patrick. I didn't even notice this post was by him. I was simply referring to the fact that all of the games in the list seem to be about being games and not about putting forth some art-house poseur vibe. (And also understand that I'm not taking issue with games containing deep, emotional, or meaningful content - but gamers and journalists have a propensity to react to even the most obviously shallow attempt toward any of these things with far more reverence than they deserve. The equivalent to having a child die in your movie, because you think it'll really stir people; not because you have anything valuable to say about it. I dont' know why I'm still writing inside these parenthesis.)

Fair enough, but do you have any examples of the type of games you are referring to? And do you have links to any articles glorifying these games?

@Beforet said:

@Branthog: Are you talking about a specific game here, because I don't know what you're talking about?

He's talking about To The Moon.

Spoilers, I guess.

I'd never heard of spelunky before.