Anyone sitting on the IGF webpage hitting refresh in hopes of seeing what games made it to the final round, or am I the only one? I know it says they're not going to be announced until the 10th, but it's pretty damn close!

On one hand i'm afraid that they're going to pick mostly titles with $90,000+ budgets. But I'm also afraid that it's going to be full of art house games that arent actually fun to play. Anyway, here are my picks for the games that I'd like to see go to the final round:

Alien Hominid (Ok, it's just a sick fantasy to see a game this twisted make it to the show)
Buboids
Chain Reaction
Defection
Devil Whiskey
Marble Blast
Strange Adventures in Infinite Space
Strength And Honour
Teenage Lawnmower
Trash

I know I'm missing some, and this list certainly doesnt mean they're the only good games. There were a ton of very solid titles submitted this year, it's tough to decide!

Did Gridrunner++ get submitted?

It's pure.

Cas :)

I checked the IGF list for alien hominid the other day trying to find a link, and it wasn't there... it's like it vasnished... did it get pulled?


Ahh I now see that I was checking the student showcase list

They've been announced. Unfortunately, I wasn't among the 10 :( Glad to see some of the ones I liked made it

2 things, first how the hell do indies get budgets of 100k for games ?

Second is it only me, but does every year the games in igf get worst ?

Or $250K (see Reiner Knizia's Samurai). But, taking the example of Klear Games (the makers of Samurai), consider that all four of the co-founders previously worked in "the real world" for several years (this comes from their website; I have no first-hand knowledge of Klear Games or anyone who works there). It's not inconceivable for each of them to have tucked away $60K each, especially if they had some good stock options or made some good investments. What I'm amazed at is that their game cost that much to make. Don't misunderstand me: it looks to be a fine game (perhaps the best of the bunch), but I can't imagine how they could have spent that much money in the 14 months it took to make the game. Okay, I can easily imagine spending that much money on a lot of things, but it seems like it wasn't very cost-effective. :)

The real focus of their judging is innovation. All the games they picked were very different than a normal genre based game. They said that from the beginning though, so it really comes as no surprise.

In my opinion, the only quality that really matters in a game is "fun". After all, that's why we play games right? :)

Heh I bet some people are miffed about "basegolf" as a finalist. One month development time and a small budget. I'm happy with the selection of titles however, Chain Reaction is a great Game, Pontifix has been cool since it's inception, furcadia is a sweet indie MMORPG that's been around almost as long as UO. Trash and Teenage Lawnmower both imporessed me.

I read an interview with one of the IGF coordinaters last year when asked about the finalist choices. He said that the purpose of the IGF is to promote creativity in the indie game market. "We arn't qualified to pick the best game or the funnest game, we're not qualified to do that" he said. "What we can do is pick the most innovative and creative titles".

So basically if you want to be successful at the IGF be different. Which is ironic because "different" isn't always the best way to make money. However the finalists of the IGF are often heavily courted by publishers of one kind or another.

Chain reaction is not a finalist :o

Hmm yeah, I was reading Gmicek's picks(oops!) ... I though it was weird when I was typing chain reaction, because while the game is a lot of fun it's not THAT innovative.

Originally posted by Akura
2 things, first how the hell do indies get budgets of 100k for games ?
Their definition of 'independent' is that the developers didn't recieve money from a firm (or a subsidiary of) that's a member of the IDSA. So they can recieve money from a large number of companies and organizations. That's why people have been questioning just how independent some of the developers really are.

Originally posted by kerchen
What I'm amazed at is that their game cost that much to make. Don't misunderstand me: it looks to be a fine game (perhaps the best of the bunch), but I can't imagine how they could have spent that much money in the 14 months it took to make the game.
There was a discussion some time ago about the figures given by the entrants. Of Cliffski says he spent $500 to make his game he might just be factoring in the materials or tools he bought just to produce it. But if he counts the cost of the computer he used, plus all the software, and the furniture, and maybe the food he ate while developing, and paid himself $18 an hour for every hour he spent working on it then one could easily come to a figure much higher than $500.

Originally posted by Mike Boeh
The real focus of their judging is innovation. All the games they picked were very different than a normal genre based game. They said that from the beginning though, so it really comes as no surprise.
What's interesting is that some of the games aren't all that innovative. Pontifex2(the third game in the series), Samurai(a remake of an old board game), and Furcadia (an MMORPG in a fantasy world). Not saying they're bad games, but they're not exactly ground breaking either if you ask me. Same goes for many of the finalists in past years. Ahh well, I guess the games on my list wer'nt exactly ground breaking either, heh.

Originally posted by Dan MacDonald
So basically if you want to be successful at the IGF be different. Which is ironic because "different" isn't always the best way to make money.
'Bad Milk' anyone? heh