
What does "indie game" really mean these days?
Questions about this terminology have been circulating for years, but as the video game landscape evolves, they return every so often as people continue to wrestle with it.
Cut to The Game Awards 2025, where — among many others — Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 picked up the award for Best Independent Game.
This has caused a bit of a stir among enthusiasts online, and not about the fact it won, but about whether it's even an indie game in the first place. Some say it falls under "indie", while others say it categorically doesn't.
Subscribe to Push Square on YouTube166k
Merriam-Webster defines "indie" as "one that is independent", further specifying "an unaffiliated record or movie production company". Other definitions are similar, essentially describing a small production company not owned by a larger entity.
When indie games (as we know them today) first started to appear, they were as these definitions describe — titles developed and released by independent companies.
Due to smaller budgets, or no backing by big investors or publishers, these games were typically smaller in scope, quicker to make, and visually simpler — games made faster and cheaper than mainstream blockbusters from big companies.
The rise of digital storefronts further enabled indie teams to publish their work themselves on platforms like PS Store or Steam, and this led to an influx of diverse, interesting, experimental, weird games that enriched the gaming space.
It didn't take very long, however, for the definition of "indie game" to become somewhat muddled.

One early example of an indie game with publisher support is Hotline Miami, which was developed by Dennaton Games and published by Devolver Digital.
While the game was produced by a core team of just two people, one could argue that its status as an indie game was nullified by Devolver's involvement in the project.
Fast forward to now, and it's much the same argument regarding Expedition 33. Though much of the development was carried out at Sandfall Interactive — a French studio of roughly 30 people — it was published by Kepler Interactive.
Kepler Interactive was initially set up by seven independent studios all pooling their resources together, but in addition to publishing games from their own teams, the company has published several external games under its name, including Pacific Drive, Tchia, and the upcoming Ontos.
Expedition 33's categorisation as an indie game has been the subject of some debate, then, but it's not just about publishing partnerships — it's also about budget.
The game apparently cost less than $10 million to make, which is impressive when you consider the scope of the RPG versus projects from triple-A studios costing at least 10 times that.
However, some argue that a budget of millions is highly unusual for projects deemed indie, with suggestions the game is at the double-A level instead.
From our perspective, the term "indie" has become less and less useful over time. The definition has been growing looser as the space matures; we now have many "indie" publishers, like Devolver, Annapurna Interactive, Finji, and more all backing smaller titles.
In The Game Awards' Best Independent Game category, only two were self-published: Hades 2 and Hollow Knight: Silksong.
It says to us that there's something less cut-and-dry about exactly how an indie game is defined. It's a cultural, spiritual thing as much as anything else, perhaps more so.

Dave the Diver springs to mind as an example of what we mean.
The game was developed and published by Mintrocket, which is a subsidiary of South Korean company Nexon.
As the game gained traction, it was being labelled an indie title almost entirely due to its presentation. With a pixel art style, fun sense of humour, and imaginative gameplay features, most immediately filed it away as an independent game.
It was even nominated for Best Independent Game at The Game Awards in 2023.
However, Mintrocket's affiliation with Nexon was less commonly known, and the team itself has publicly said it doesn't consider itself or the game indie.
The big indie debate is unlikely to come to a meaningful conclusion anytime soon, as it seems that what defines them is so messy that it's far too complicated to truly untangle.
But we want to know what you think. Should Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 have been eligible for indie game categories at The Game Awards? What does "indie" mean to you, these days? Discuss in the comments section below.





Comments 46
I don’t know, but after months of not playing this game and ignoring the hype, I finally got it a couple nights ago and I’m blown away by how incredible it is. It’s not just a game, it’s an experience.
I'd say Indie is a combination of Low Budget, Small Team and Self Publishing. So with that said to me Expedition 33 is not an indie.
Let's apply this to the music industry.
If some aspiring rapper records an album using their own money for production, studio time, mixing etc but then get signed to Jay Z's Roc Nation and they help publish, advertise and distribute said artist's album...no I don't think that artist is independent.
Yes they created the art with their own time, money, and resources but the second a big studio is helping them out I think they no longer qualify as an independent artist.
Same with gaming or any other meduim, in my opinion.
By not having a multi million $ budget
Small time and definitely not something like Dave the diver 👀
Expedition 33 feels less like a traditional indie and more like a AA independent game. Independent studio but with publisher backing and a mid-sized budget.
To me calling it indie isn’t wrong under modern definitions, but it does blur the line for smaller self-funded devs.
Small dev team.
Small team, small budget... and it depends on when a publisher gets involved and who the publisher is and how they contribute.
E33 is an indie, but it is also AA.
Sweet FA, as a short but sweet answer to the question in the headline
I think not having a publishing partner is key, but it's not the whole story. For the purpose of an award, I think being self-published is the first criteria, but a maximum game budget should also be a factor. Maybe a maximum of $1M, but I think you could make an argument for much less.
To me, the "Best Indie Game" category should be populated by games I largely haven't heard of. Isn't the point to raise awareness of lesser-known titles/devs?
Common sense prevails in the vote.
At some point in time I have to try this game. Maybe after I finally finish the game of the year-winner BG3.
Low budget and small team go hand in hand, because you can't increase the size of the team without increasing the budget. So that's a distinction without a difference.
But honestly, I don't care about the definition of Indie. If some small team inside one of the large corporations is allowed to build their own thing on a small budget, it may not be Indie because it's owned by a major studio, but it can still be functionally Indie if it's a small team and small budget building it.
I suppose arguing the difference between AAA and AA and sub-AA might be a bit better, but even that is just a rule of thumb. Who gets to define if you spent enough money to become AA or AAA, and how do you adjust that over time for inflation?
Don't sweat the arbitrary definitions - just enjoy good games, no matter who makes them.
While indie should literally mean "independently funded," few publicized games are even that. So, to me, indie is just a vibe. I wouldn't call E33 indie, because it doesn't feel indie. Indie implies small budget, small team, and likely a counter-fidelity aesthetic. E33 certainly had a bigger budget than most indie games, despite its small team utilized a lot of outsourced work, and looks more AA than anything. So I wouldn't call it indie. But I also don't think the indie label is this sacred thing that can't be co-opted.
It's kinda like how Hollywood realized there was a craving for lower budgeted, experimental movies from young, unproved crews, and all the major studios started launching 'indie' side studios. None of those movies should really be considered 'indie,' but they were going for that vibe and pretty successfully replicated it. And, to me, that's fine. I don't think it takes away from legitimately independent arts. It just means major players can actually produce interesting stuff instead of always following proven market trends.
It is a shame that Expedition 33 was ever even nominated in this category, especially considering the number of nods that it got overall. It took a spot (and a win) from other truly independent games that could have used the recognition and spotlight. Remember how Balatro’s sales exploded after it won best indie game?
Call them what you will, indies, AA, AAA, short, long, in the bag by the door etc.
If the game is good and to my taste, I'm gonna play it regardless of who published it (devs or separate company) or of how many members the dev team has.
Call me ignorant, I don't care, gaming time is at a premium and only growing shorter with each passing year, juggling family, work, and the rest of the daily life chores - I'd rather play the game than label it
By nature, being independent means you aren’t subjected to the pressure and the obligations of a big corporation, cause you don’t really have a board and shareholders to answer to. You’re financially independent and have the freedom to build the games you really want to build. Sure, you get the financial meetings here and there but you’re driven by the creative people and not a board of directors, along with their shareholders.
I’ll also add that indie studios are often backed by voluntary financial support and investors from the outside, cause the competition is good for bigger studios.
Combination of BOTH self publishing and low budget. For those who claim E33 has a publisher, where were they when Sifu (also Kepler) was nominated? Kepler isn't a typical publisher. Really a co-op of indie devs than anything else.
@RobN Wonderful point about arguing the threshold of AAA vs. AA. What a lot of people miss in these discussions are how arbitrary all these labels can be. There is no exact budgetary or resource-intensive point something becomes AAA. I'd argue likewise the same for AA, A (if anyone still uses that), and indie. I'll always just say they are all vibes, not specific categories.
One can argue indie specifically needs to be independent of a publisher. Which is fair, but also still kinda meaningless. Like, Baldur's Gate 3 was indie, in that sense. Despite having a bigger budget than what most would consider indie and the backing of one of the biggest IPs in the world. And a lot of outwardly appearing indie titles do have some publisher, or at least publishing assistance. Even Stardew Valley, a game effectively made by one guy, got some 3rd-party funding at the tail end of its development, and has had a dedicated team work on its ports. So, to stand by such an absolutists definition would be to say BG3 is indie while Stardew Valley isn't, which just feels wrong — it doesn't fit the vibes.
This game isn't indie. Charlie Cox is one of the VAs, ffs lol the budget needed to pay such actors isn't small. I think this game is more like a AA. Megabonk is an indie game
Im more interested in what does “RPG” mean to VGA.
This is like the Elden Ring DLC controversy of last year.
TGA is wrong on both counts.
Balatro is an Indie. 33 is very obviously not.
My standard is that if a game can't be replicated by a small group of 20 people with low budget and reasonable time, then that game is not an indie.
@Tobimune I agree with much of your post... but Kepler Interactive ISN'T the equivalent of Jay Z's massive record label, they are a small publisher (formed from the partnership of 7 independent game developers) specifically formed to help their own, and other independent studios publish their games without a major publisher.
Either way I don't really care about how it's labelled, it's just semantics that doesn't change the game. But I do think The Game Awards (and other awards) need to make a line in the sand about how to classify indie games. But this isn't easy.
How would you all define Indie games for an awards?
E.g. Almost every "indie" game at TGAs (except Hades 2 I think) was part funded by some bigger corporation / entity whether that's Venture Capitalists, major publishers, state funding, Microsoft or Sony through Game Pass PS+, etc.
If you limit it by budget Silksong probably wins (except Game Pass money?). If you limit it by staff Silksong probably wins, if you limit it by self publishing Silksong or Hades 2 probably wins. It doesn't change all much imo!
It doesn't bother me personally. In the example of Dave the Diver, that shouldn't have been nominated because the team itself is not independent. Case closed.
With E33 that simply isn't the case though. Sandfall isn't owned by anyone. They are independent so it qualifies to me. Is it a bigger budget than most indies tend to be? Absolutely. Is it kind of crazy to think this means a big studio like a Larian could technically be called independent as well? Yeah it is.
However, the award isn't called "The best game from an independent studio that has a small team and a small budget and sought no outside help to accomplish its development". Maybe changes need to be made to the criteria of the award itself (spoiler: yes improvements could be made) but that isn't Sandfall's fault. They won the award as its presented fair and square.
Indie for me means it has to be self-published and the devs only publish their own internally developed games and not other studios.
@Korgon I understand what you're saying, but disagree. The award was "Best Independent Game," not "Best Independent Developer." The game was published through a third party publisher, so the game is not independent, even if the studio is.
In my own mind, I look at how many devs are a part of the core team. Sure E33 had a lot of contractors and part-time workers working on the game but they still had a core team of around 30 or so devs. Same with Team Cherry, they have a core team of 3 but they obviously had some outside help as well.
When it comes to budget, Kickstarter games that generate millions of dollars during their campaign are still indie games.
I don't know if I like the idea of taking away a game's indie status just cause they have a publisher, cause that would discredit every game that Devolver Digital publishes for.
Just my two cents on the matter.
It's a tricky one. On the other hand, indies should be independent (it's in the name) so they should fund and publish their games themselves. But then that would make all of the Devolver Digital games etc not indies while generally people consider them to be indies.
Anyway, Expedition 33 definitely is not indie, no matter what definition you use.
Indie games certainly are not funded out the wazoo by external parties.
@wildcat_kickz
Fair enough. I'd still personally say it qualifies because I don't see a publishing partner as a partner in development as much as just a budgetary partner. Similar to how Kickstarter works.
I'd consider any of the many games made through Kickstarter to be independent even though one could technically argue that the backers of the project in that case almost acts in a similar fashion to a publishing partner. The development of the game is 'dependent' on the money coming from backers just like E33 depended on the money coming from Kepler.
It's all semantics though at the end of the day. It really just kind of depends on how people interpret different factors that determine where people sit on the topic.
In theory, self produced and/or self published.
If both, good, if not also good.
My only gripe is with indies made with government grants. These shouldn't belong anywhere other than the trashbin.
@Korgon I think that's fair as well, but while I think we can all be wishy-washy with definitions in normal conversation, there should be strict rules when it pertains to an award category. Having nebulous criteria for an award just makes it easier to abuse.
I'm on the fence. I usually define indie games as those without a big publisher, so a small publisher, like Limited Run Games, wouldn't disqualify it, but a huge one like EA or Activision would. I wouldn't call Kelper big enough to be with likes of EA, but it feels like a little too big to be "indie." So I don't really know if I'd call it indie or not, but I'm leaning towards no.
When it comes to awards for best "indie" game it should be games that are self published. Because they self financed everything so you can't get more independent than that.
@ElkinFencer10 What about Valve?
At the time they released Half-Life 2 they were a small independent games studio who built their own distribution system for the sole purpose of releasing the game independently and whilst Steam itself is an absolute behemoth today, Valve themselves are still a modest, privately owned company...which would technically make Half-Life 3 (should hell freeze over one day) a potential contender for Indie game of the year one day.
I’m not even sure what it “Indy” is. But when I look at E33, I know what “Indy” isn’t. And it isn’t E33. At this point I just chalk it up to a lesser known studio that hasn’t previously released a game that’s divided the gaming community.
It all depends on the definition as defined by the entity giving out the award. As long as they follow their guidelines, I don't see the problem. If they want the award to be taken seriously, it should be narrowly defined and not vague.
I'm very surprised that neither this article, nor any of the comments I've read so far have addressed the fact that Sandfall (the developers) outsourced over 200 developers to help make this game. To me, THAT is the deciding factor in making this game not indie. Clair Obscur was definitively developed by at least 230 developers in total, whereas the other actual indie games nominated this year had teams of 50 at most.
There's also the fact that, although I believe an indie game can be published by a different company and still be indie (like Balatro), Kepler Interactive simply isn't one of the smaller publishers: they announced 4 brand new games during The Game Awards. That tells you all you need to know.
According to this game: being indie means coming from a wealthy family, leaving a high ranking position at one of the biggest publishers in the world to make a game funded by the French government and largely put together by an outsourced team that got no credit.
But it's turn based. So indie I guess.
@DreadfulDragon I'd say there's an argument to be made that Valve could have qualified as indie up through the initial release of Half-Life 2, but they absolutely have not been at all "indie" for the past 20 years.
For me, it’s more about whether you have the support and power of a big publisher behind you. Now, this doesn’t necessarily mean that no big publisher has a hand in supporting you to any degree, as if a publisher gives you a tiny tiny budget, 3 members of staff, and no marketing at all, for a passion project, this isn’t fundamentally different to a small team getting a small amount of seed money and being truly independent of a publisher.
For a consumer, the game that is possible under these conditions is what makes something “an indie game” as far as I’m concerned.
Clair obscur expedition 33 is like a aaa indie game the graphics looks amazing you wouldn't know it's one.but I enjoy indie games.both aa and aaa are good also.word up son
I don’t see why using a publisher should disqualify for being an indie game. In my understanding, publishers are especially useful for small developers:
Handling the whole struggle with platform holders, age ratings (in case of physical releases), physical releases, music studios and orchestras, voice acting, motion capture studios, localisations and translations (-> poor Chinese translation for Silksong), trailers, advertisements on the Geoff‘s, …
There is a reason why independent authors („indies“ by definition) still need publishers BESIDES the need for printing and selling the books.
@wildcat_kickz
100% agree there. There are definitely some categories that could use some updates. I honestly can't stand the "Games for Impact" award. I have no idea what that means. 😅
Independent simply means something is produced and distributed independently of existing means of production and distribution.
Early on, the indie scene was made up entirely of micro studios and bedroom coders because the larger independent studios such as Bullfrog, DMA Design, Id Software, Obsidian Entertainment, Monolith, Raven Software, etc, etc...were making games funded by and published by corporate publishers.
Then those developers started getting bought up and then shut down leaving the creatives the opportunity to go independent again only now in a world where going it alone is a genuinely viable option.
Self publishing is the thing that should make it an Indie but at the same time its quite that simple nowadays. Personally i wouldn't have picked E33 for best indie because of the fact it had a publisher.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...