undefined> #1 This part is what probably disqualifies me as underground. I am not too interested in open-sourcing my games at this time, and while the games I have released so far have been free, I am planning to sell my next one. Not because I expect to make a lot of money or because I am making it for that purpose, but because it feels like the right choice for the project.

Hi. OpenSourcing your game(s) is explicitly not asked. Underground Gaming and FLOSS are close related, but not identical. OpenSourcing video games is okay for some, hardly possible for others (who are working with closed-source engines or do modding), and some might have reservations against it for any reason (feeling that the code lacks quality/fear that it could be misused, or whatever). I believe building a community and linking non-commercial developers is by far more important than bringing people to create free/open source software (though I do hope that some people come closer to the scene via underground gaming and consider going FLOSS).

Also, even if you take money for your games, I wouldn't say that you aren't a underground game through this. It really depends what money you intend to make by doing it in first line. If you plan otherwise, I wish you the best of luck - but from my experience you make more money from putting your hat onto the street than by making and selling an amateur video game. The revenue for most of these is negative, and I don't believe that anybody will blame you if you try to come into the green area. Other thing if you plan to launch some big marketing parade or bundle up with a (indie)publisher.

If you make your game, knowing that it will hardly have any benefits for you, you shun the logic of the market regardless if you identify as an anarchist or not; I would like to add that Underground Games should be a left, but pluralistic scene. As long as you don't mind sharing the scene with political left people, and go along with the "mutual respect" (no bigotry, see #2) thing, you are not forced to be directly political as human or in your work to be a part of it. If you want, check out my games ( https://thunderperfectwitchcraft.itch.io/ ) - there are (if any) only very discreet political statements in them.

But the whole thing about monetization is something that I would really like to discuss within this community. What I have written are my ideas, and partly my ideals - but I'm willing to move towards other people in this aspect - in both directions (be it that underground games shouldn't be sold in any case, or that a stronger monetization than described by me would be okay).

#2 This seems like two different points. Bigotry should be excised, of course. I’m not sure what is meant by “developers and players are both participants.” Is this about the nature of games as interactive art, or referring to playtesting and feedback, or referring particularly to open-source development?

Without a person who plays it, a game can't a game - as it can't be played. If we make a game we should have in mind that the last step in completing it is done by someone who is willing to boot it up and play it. The sentence is in there to take the wind from the sails of those people who state that their group focused enmity (or bigotry, if you want) is a part of their artistic freedom and thous can't/shouldn't be prevented in an artistic setting.

#4 This is the point that I find most peculiar. I know that there are a lot of dead prototypes and abandoned projects out there, but every game is a work in progress until it is finished. This seems to imply that games should not be mentioned, shown, or talked about in the underground scene until they are complete, which I think is counter-productive.

Showing, Mentioning, talking about WIPs is no problem at all. But I would ask to not call them Underground Game until they are in a state you think they are a good, finished game. Maybe use demo or prototype as a substitute term that you can later replace with Underground Game? As things are very easy to go through atm it isn't a problem to post your WIPs, ideas and concepts here - but if the community should manifest and grow, we could (and should) create a separate board to discuss these.

I manually search through the Itch releases, and finished games aren't played since they are buried in prototypes, or even unrealized concepts. Nearly no hobbyist game developer has the nerve to go through these, and nobody who isn't deeply interested in amateur gaming does this. We shouldn't replicate this issue here.

#5 I agree that democratizing game development is overall a good thing. Some of the work that has helped that happen has come from corporations putting out products like Unity and RPG Maker, but of course using these proprietary tools makes your work less portable. It’s a tricky situation.

It is indeed. I believe that a lot of creativity is set free when people have these easy to use tools available, and would love to get them in - but I don't know how to address and reach them atm tbh.

#8 If this refers to mod support, this is always great to have, but unfortunately it also requires a lot of work and planning.

It does. But it says the scene is open; if you include mod support this is great, but if you don't it is no problem. You should - however - not mind if somebody creates a (non vile) mod for your game, even though you didn't intended it.

I hope I could clear some things up. What you think of it? Do you think the manifesto should be changed in some areas? Also, the Practical Questions Post I made also addresses some of the things from your post; it includes some thoughts about the selling of non-commercial games, but I think that the essential things are in this post :).