The independents are clearly frustrated. They’re developing their work with lean and innovative processes. They’re diving into risk and creative expression. They’re exploring new visions and new voices. But all the while, they’re struggling against a large, established, and out-dated infrastructure that’s resource-hungry, risk-averse, and wielding too much influence over the creation and control of their creative work.
It sounds a bit like the struggle between independent artists and established nonprofit arts institutions. But it’s the world of computer and video gaming. And a small group of investors is trying to turn the tide.
The Indie Fund, established by seven highly successful independent game developers to provide the next generation better options to game developers. As they describe it:
It was established as a
serious alternative to the
traditional publisher funding model. Our aim is to support the growth
of games as a medium by helping indie developers get financially
independent and stay financially independent.
BoingBoing offers a more detailed overview of the problem and solution the fund seeks to engage (along with lovely pictures, as you might expect). But at the heart of a problem is an established industry of game publishers and distributors that brings all sorts of old business-model baggage to a creative field brimming with innovative processes. Says the overview:
The problems: publishers give too much money for what should be smaller
budgets….presuming old model additional costs of
manufacturing and maintaining inventory, working with retail,
marketing, they’re taking on too much risk and can never hope to make
up that investment. “The machinery for triple-A retail games doesn’t
scale down,” said Carmel — it becomes inefficient and developers end up
becoming tenant farmers.
Much of the arts infrastructure is also dominated by high-fixed-cost venues and infrastructure, built upon long-evolving assumptions about how professional arts enterprises need to function. Many of these institutions are resource-hungry, risk-averse, and create increasing imbalance between the organizational interest and the individual artist’s voice.
I’m not sure a fund can fix things. But it’s an interesting way to start.
