Former studio developers are turning to indie work after closures, stalled projects and difficult job searches—but independence does not remove risk. It trades some of the uncertainty of studio employment for more control over what gets made, alongside lower income and greater personal financial exposure.
Why these developers chose to go indie
The moves described in GamesIndustry.biz’s October 5, 2026 report were prompted by both circumstance and ambition. Justin Fischer and Brock Feldman formed Airlock Games after Player First Games closed in 2025. Murray Pannell, Phil O’Connor and collaborators started Big Dumb Games in early 2026 after their previous studio was put on ice. For them, independence offered a way to keep making games when established studio work disappeared, as well as a chance to make decisions about their own projects. GameDev.net’s credited briefing links to the original GamesIndustry.biz report.
That distinction matters: these are accounts from developers navigating specific career disruptions, not evidence that leaving a large studio is generally safer or more profitable. O’Connor described the appeal as being “the masters of our own fate” rather than relying on an industry he regarded as an unreliable partner. Fischer made a similar point about control: “We can’t control what the publisher scene looks like, but we can control what we’re making.” Those sentiments describe a change in what the founders can influence—not the elimination of risk.
How the two studios are approaching their first games
| Studio | Background | Reported project | Approach and reported funding |
|---|---|---|---|
| Airlock Games | Justin Fischer and Brock Feldman formed the studio after Player First Games closed in 2025. | What the Stars Forgot, a sci-fi horror management sim. | The founders said they planned to ship without outside investment and were relying on severance. The game’s Kickstarter reportedly raised more than $25,000; the accessible account does not establish the campaign date. The team is keeping scope small rather than pursuing a large multiplayer budget. |
| Big Dumb Games | Murray Pannell, Phil O’Connor and collaborators started the studio in early 2026 after their previous studio was put on ice. | Starship Bloopers, a co-op space survival game. | Reportedly unfunded and relying on founders’ savings, with grants and small seed investment considered as possibilities. |
The funding details are interview accounts, not audited financial statements. They show different versions of the same challenge: a small team must find enough time and money to finish a game without assuming a large publisher or investor will appear. The report does not establish either studio’s full budget, runway or eventual commercial outcome.
#1 Best Overall
Why keeping scope small can reduce exposure
Airlock’s stated choice to avoid an enormous multiplayer budget is a practical form of risk control. A smaller, finishable project can limit how much capital and time the founders must commit before they have a shippable game. That does not ensure sales or make development easy; it narrows the size of the bet they are choosing to make.
The trade-off is that a constrained scope also limits what the team can attempt. The useful question for a new studio is not simply whether a game sounds ambitious, but whether its team, funding and schedule can plausibly carry it through development and release. The examples in the report point toward scope as a decision founders can control even when they cannot control publishers, market conditions or the cost of reaching players.
What independence changes—and what it does not
Working independently gives founders more authority over project selection and creative direction. It also makes the consequences of financing choices more personal. The developers described accepting lower pay and relying on severance or savings; potential grants or seed funding are uncertain sources rather than guaranteed income.
Fischer noted that user-acquisition costs are difficult for everyone. A finished game still needs to find an audience, and studio independence does not solve that problem. Nor does it insulate a team from a crowded market, delayed development or the possibility that a release will not earn enough to sustain the company.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Pannell summed up the personal trade-off by saying the year had been among the most rewarding of his life, while probably the least financially rewarding. That is a useful distinction for anyone weighing the move: satisfaction and creative control can improve even as financial security worsens.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to assess the risk of a similar move
The accounts do not provide a universal formula, but they suggest several concrete questions for developers considering a small studio:
Rank #4
- Scope: Can the team finish and ship the proposed game with its current capabilities and likely resources?
- Funding: Is the plan based on money already available, or on grants, investment or crowdfunding that may not arrive?
- Runway and income: How long can founders cover living costs while earning less or no regular salary?
- Team structure: Who is responsible for production, development, marketing and business decisions, and how will collaborators share risk?
- Control: Which decisions will founders retain, and what concessions might funding or publishing agreements require?
- Audience: How will players discover the game, given that user acquisition remains difficult?
The title’s claim that independence is “less risky” is the interviewees’ personal framing: they prefer risks they can influence to dependence on studio and publisher decisions. It should not be read as an industry-wide finding that indie work is safer than AAA employment. The evidence here is a set of developer experiences, not a measured comparison of career outcomes.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
