Quick -- think of a wildly successful indie developer. Chances are, you probably just named one of the people behind the Indie Fund, whose ranks include the likes of Jon Blow (Braid), and the guys from 2DBoy (World of Goo).
Described as "a brand new source of funding for independent developers," the Indie Fund seeks to work around the traditional publisher/developer relationship in favor of a more realistic and mutually beneficial funding model between the indies themselves.
As Jon Blow writes on his blog,
[...]it seems like some kind of strange synchronicity that we’re revealing our existence just as all this trouble is happening at Infinity Ward. When you’re a mainstream developer, and you’ve made one of the most successful and profitable games of all time, and then just a few months later your publisher and parent company is willing to so bald-facedly mutilate your company, well, what conclusions can be drawn from that?
[...] If Infinity Ward can’t be treated with respect, then who can?
Independent developers can. That’s one answer, at least. Indie Fund is here to help make that independent existence a reality for as many talented developers as we can.
Sounds good to me. The backers haven't announced any of the games they're funding yet, but 2DBoy co-founder Ron Carmel will explain more about the Indie Fund at his GDC talk, "Indies and Publishers: Fixing a System that Never Worked." We'll be there to cover it.
Contest:
10:20 AM on 03.03.2010
| 
Not really the most sucessful but my favourate
With a threadbare website offering no content I don't know how anyone knows what they're trying to do.
I would assume that these "indie" developers are contributing only their own money into a kitty. They are then funding projects of their own choosing based on some sort of contest or proposal submission system. However, I can see this entire thing drying up real fast if these "wildly successful" indie developers become less successful or no longer "indie". I also wonder what kind of kickback they will expect to the "indie fund" for any game that they help?
If they are expecting donations from the public, I hope they are ready for disappointment.
This might change after the gamma4 success
Sure, it might not work, but the current system is in favour of the big guy, and it never hurts to try and change that. You need only look at the business driven attitudes of Activision to see how wrong it can go. To them, its about milking the cow, so you aren't going to see much original games from them, just mostly sequels. That cow could easily dry up, any day.
Empowering small developers is always a good thing, to keep good game creativity rolling and the march for sky high profit as a secondary. Such start up funds can be invaluable to letting young blood cut their teeth, in an ever competitive market.
I expect this could work like a Prince's Trust award (a U.K award, google if you must), where you apply, and if successful, funds are provided to help you start up. If your game sees success and you are in profit, you pay that helpful money back into the Indie Fund later on, so someone else can use it. It helps feed itself, and everyone wins, and if you fail. There'd obviously be precautions in place to stop leechers applying, though.
John Blow and co, should seek some backing from Valve, who are still keeping that indie spirit alive by supporting mods, free source code, etc, while also feeding the industry from a profession stance.
www.kickstarter.com
'We here at the Indie Fund can assure you that when alleged instances of insubordination and breaches of contract occur on the part of those who receive our hard-earned indie funds, they will be answered with 'respect' and not mutilation of any kind.'
That being said, this sounds like the old Gathering of Developers to me. A lot of good games came out of that (Max Payne, Mafia, Age of Wonders, Oni, Serious Sam, Tropico, etc.).
That';s the gist of it, but I'm pretty sure that there will be contractual differences. Creators will maintain all rights to their IPs, and other things like this.
This is an assumption, mind you.
Probably by ousting them from the community altogether. They won't "mutilate" anyone, but good business dictates that they take no shit. Someone steps out of line, they're no longer a member of the publishing group. They keep all their shit, they just have to go do the hard selling that indie devs are used to doing, not to mention surrendering themselves to the ridiculously comprehensive contracts this will entail.
Again, this is all assumption.
As someone that's has actual real world experiences with software development in the corporate world, the big problem is how money gets back into the fund.
Not every indie game is going to sell enough to make back its development/distribution costs. At some point, games are going fail and then "indie fund" is out money. Unless the founders are going to continue pumping money into the fund (assuming they stay indie), it's a recipe for failure.
Complain about casual gamers but act the same way. How an indie fund could be bad?
At the end of the day, if the Indie Fund works, there will be interesting new games for all of us to play.
I'm not sure that's so different from the usual industry practice. "Mutilated" is such a charged word, it's hard to take them sincerely when they try to use emotional idioms to distance themselves from mainstream publishers. Fired is fired, repercusions and all - however way it's phrased.
And as you say, there will be quite a bit of contractual tape. It would be interesting if they managed to account for creative independance outside of financial backing - and how they would insure against breach of contract while still lavishing the culprit with their current creative project.
I heard a rumor that Indie Fund will have more of 'board of directors' type feel to it, where various developers apply for funding and Indie Fund chooses what to pour money into. Maybe not true, but much different than the idea behind Kickstarter, which is to have the community at large fund your endeavor.
I hear you, Jamn. I understand that not every indie game will sell, but then I feel its down to those holding the cash to perhaps police that, and at least raise the odds of success through selection. I'm not in the dev community, but I have friends that are, and I don't ever pretend or expect to understand it all, but I still aim to try and understand what I can. Like I said, it doesn't hurt to try, even if they fail, some talent will hopefully be discovered in the process and new things learned.
Indeed, how they'll get the money back, and keep it coming in is the big question. I guess they'll enlighten us all soon enough with more info. Stay tuned.
@Reginald
Erm, sorry but I don't get you. Would you prefer that nothing was said on this post about the idea? At the end of the day, Reginald, those who buy games still are entitled to their opinion, positive or negative. No offence to you, but if you don't like what's being said, as if we have no right to comment on this mighty topic, like we do other topics, what are you doing on Dtoid? No one forcing you to read it, and Gamasutra is that-a-way.
I know some on here see from a gamers perspective only, however, some of us try to see from both sides, if that's possible, myself included.
From what i've read so far, there will be better developer percentages than with other publishers. If a game doesn't do well or isn't finished there is no punishment to the developer, the indie fund simply eats the loss. they hope to have more success than loss. Profits will partly pay back the indie fund but will pay back less over time after they've paid back their funding. The indie fund offers their expertise and advice to the developers but doesn't control in any way, in fact even marketing etc will still be up to the developer.
The indie fund simply acts as a fair investor.
You've understand, not like lots of people