Is Larian Studios an indie dev?

[OnTilt]

Technically, Larian is an indie studio.

Technically, we have free speech in America.

I'm going with "in reality" over "technically".

[maidenhaver]

In reality, you still have free speech, but nobody wants it.

[Xenich]

In reality, you still have free speech, but nobody wants it.

Government colluding with private business to stifle speech, I wouldn't call free speech and that happens all the time. Also, the feds have been caught directly violating this over the years depending on the issue, who it was, how much reach they had to the public, etc...

Honestly, I would say the entire concept of our constitutional protections are an illusion as they are disregarded on a daily basis.

[Luckmann]

It's very obviously "no".

Whether a company used to be considered "Indie" or not had everything to do with whether they were "self-published" or not, and thus not under the thumb of a publisher, but that was solely because it just wasn't that common that the various studios were owned by various companies left and right, and when they were, they were often left entirely to their own devices, as games weren't a big enough "thing" for the owners to care too much.

This is very evidently not the world we live in today, and no company that is owned 30% by TenCent, and subsequently under the direct influence of a hostile state entity in the form of the Chinese Communist Party can possibly be considered independent. It boggles the mind that anyone would think otherwise.

Trickier question: Is Valve an indie dev? Private company, self-funded. They don't publish other peoples' games, but their virtual game store business is what gives them their freedom.

The tricky question here isn't whether or not Valve is independent or not - they absolutely are in every real sense of the word. Still privately owned, under the control and direct influence of no-one. They may be hugely successful as a business and a "corporation" in every sense but the most technical at this point, but they are still independent.

The real question is whether Valve is still a "developer" or not.

[Metalhead33]

my friend Rusty are justice
it very indie artisanal product not slop

If only the Chinese put more pressure on Larian to not put so much alphabet woke stuff into BG3 lol

[Anon]

my friend Rusty are justice
it very indie artisanal product not slop

If only the Chinese put more pressure on Larian to not put so much alphabet woke stuff into BG3 lol

Why would they? For them the west going woke is better so more industries realocate to China

[ArcaneLurker]

my friend Rusty are justice
it very indie artisanal product not slop

If only the Chinese put more pressure on Larian to not put so much alphabet woke stuff into BG3 lol

Sun Tzu: "Never interrupt your opponent while he is in the middle of making a mistake."

[rusty_shackleford]

and no company that is owned 30% by TenCent,

reminder that nobody actually ever proved this and it was all an assertion made because an unrelated holding company owned by Swen had 30% ownership by Tencent.
This is what all the information is repeated from:


Both the holding company and Larian itself are private, so, nobody knows to the best of my knowledge.

But it probably is related.

Still indie!

[BobT]

Those are also just "dividend" shares and shouldn't carry any directive privileges. However we all know money talks and if they have Swen 30% by the balls well.. that's a significant chunk.

[Hauberk]

If the trash is developed by the same company that publishes it it's an independent studio per definition. If you can't grasp that, you just might be the kind of moron that gave us a thousand games which are nothing like Rogue (1980) and yet are known as Roguelikes.

As for the real question: "Is it possible for an independent company, which is unaffiliated with the really big computer game companies, to produce the same kind of banal, shit, boring piece of trash propaganda poorly disguised as a game?"

► Show Spoiler

[Luckmann]

If the trash is developed by the same company that publishes it it's an independent studio per definition.

That's an autist's definition of the word, based on obstinate adherence to a world that no longer exists. It's not even a reasonable usage of the word "independent" by any reasonable common or colloquial definition. The association between "independence" and "publisher-less" comes from an age when having a publisher meant that you weren't independent, and when having a publisher was the primary limiter to independence.

These days, the relationships are wholly different, and corporations and owners routinely act as publishers used to act in this way, while the developers themselves still technically remain the actual publishers, because the nature of publishing in the market (primarily entirely digital) is just different. When it comes to independence, it doesn't matter whether the one holding your leash happens to print your CDs or not, because you're still leashed, whether that leash comes with by means of financial pressure or contractual obligations. Just because the overlords have managed to shed the only thing they materially contributed to the process doesn't mean that they're not still there.

It's so fucking stupid to think that if Interplay had pushed the publishing job onto Black Isle and had just become an "owner" or "financier" instead of a "publisher" for Black Isle, Black Isle would have been "independent".

voting yes means you think words should mean things rather than just deal in feelies where words mean different things depending on who or whom

No, it's actually the other way around. Voting no means you think words should mean things rather than just deal in autism where words mean different things based on corporate relationships and technicalities. Whether something is "independent" or not should be determined by whether they are actually fucking independent or not, not by some legalese hair-splitting.

[rusty_shackleford]

just deal in autism

yes

[krokodil]

larian xisters BTFO

[Hauberk]

Whether something is "independent" or not should be determined by whether they are actually fucking independent or not

That is exactly what I said.

If it's wholly made by the same company what's the difference? If it says that Larian is both the publisher and the developer on the tin I believe them as I'm not privy to the fact that (for instance) DU is a secret shareholder who forces Swen to make the game suck more so it's fit to be hosted over on the Codex.

[wndrbr]