Indie development is a constant struggle for resources. With limited time and budget, every task requires a strategic approach. You need not just to make a game, but to make it efficiently: quickly, with quality, and within budget. But what do you do if your team, for example, has strong programmers and game designers, but no skilled artists? That’s where outsourcing can help. Based on our own experience, we’ve gathered tips on how indie developers can work with external teams and not lose money in the process.
What to Outsource?
Many indie developers believe that outsourcing is a tool exclusively for large studios with million-dollar budgets. But in reality, it’s often the opposite: for a small team, outsourcing can be a way to survive and grow. When you’re working as a team of three and doing everything yourself — from level design to marketing — delegating tasks allows you to avoid spreading yourself too thin and focus on the essentials: gameplay and production.
Today, outsourcing is available at different price points and scales: you can order not “all the art,” but, say, 10 UI icons or a single modular location kit. The main thing is to know exactly what you need and how it will fit into your project. The indie approach — with clear priorities — makes this format especially effective.
Most indie developers first consider hiring freelancers — they will cost less than a full outsourcing studio. But in that case, you only get an executor, with no external quality control or art direction. Large outsourcing providers solve these issues: you get a team, an established pipeline, your own art director, and managers ready to run your project. But the price will be higher, and flexibility lower — not every major contractor will take on small volumes or be ready to adapt to the unconventional conditions of indie development.
A golden middle ground is often small outsourcing studios. They are often made up of experienced specialists who have recently joined forces, bringing with them the practices of big companies while keeping flexibility and engagement. For indies, this is often the optimal option: you get a coordinated team that takes over organization and control, but without excessive overhead costs. At the same time, you should remember that different types of work have different “weights” in the budget and affect the final quality of the game in different ways. The same budget can be spent on:
one super-detailed realistic model of the main character,
— or —
a whole modular environment set.
Moreover, visual style can influence timing and cost no less than volume. Simple-looking stylized graphics may take just as much time as realism — especially if you need a flawless silhouette, well-thought-out colors, and expressive props. Assets comparable in quality to Blizzard’s works or modern photorealistic blockbusters will cost you tens of thousands — so why not target older, less technically demanding, but still beautiful games?
Important: The goal of outsourcing is not just “to do the work well,” but to allocate the budget as effectively as possible while keeping the focus on your team’s strengths.
Let’s break tasks down by the “cost → effect” principle: which ones give the highest return on investment (ROI)? ROI (Return on Investment) is the ratio between what you invested in a task and the benefit it brought to the project. In game development, this is not always about money directly — it’s more about the result for the resources spent: time, effort, budget. For example, if you order a modular environment kit that can be reused in different levels, its ROI will be higher than that of a unique object that appears in the game only once. High ROI means that the investment works for the project — visually, gameplay-wise, or marketing-wise.
✅ High ROI — smart investments that scale the project
Environment and modular assets
Reusable elements: walls, doors, furniture, natural objects, props
Scalable: one set can cover most of a level
Often cheaper when ordered in bulk (one scene = dozens of same-style objects)
Examples: sci-fi corridors, village architecture, dungeons, ruins, throne rooms
NPCs and secondary characters
Do not require the same level of detail as the main character
Create a sense of a living, populated world
Well-suited for pipeline work (one style — many variations)
Examples: villagers, merchants, guards, enemies, neutral creatures
UI/UX elements
A quality interface is one of the most underrated elements of game presentation
Icons, HUDs, menus, character cards — the “front” the player sees all the time
Work “outside the engine” — easy to hand over and integrate
⚠ Medium ROI — worth outsourcing, but with caution
Main character
The face of the game, a key marketing element
One character can take up to two months of work
Even if your game is first-person, creating in-frame character hands with all iterations and revisions will still take a lot of time.
Tip: Remember that a character is not just the model itself but also rigging, animation, and voiceover, each of which affects overall quality. In indie and AA projects, you sometimes see beautifully drawn characters with mediocre VO or poor animation — such mismatches can nullify all the effort.
Key environment details
Boss arenas, central hubs, unique buildings
These elements influence the perception of the project as “premium”
Require immersion in the game’s style and context
❌ Low ROI — expensive and risky for a limited budget
Full cutscenes and complex animation
Requires not only rigging and animation but also directing, camera work, and sound synchronization
A production nightmare without a final script and VO
Better to use library solutions: Mixamo, Asset Store, Retargeting
VFX, shaders, complex visual systems
Require precise integration into gameplay
Often subject to constant iteration: balance, readability, performance
In small amounts, easier to make in-house; but if you know you’ll need many, and exactly which ones, better to outsource
When to Start Outsourcing?
It makes sense to bring in outsourcing not at the very beginning but when the project already has a foundation — the vertical slice is complete. This means you’ve built a working prototype, tested core mechanics, settled on the style, and obtained at least minimal funding — be it a grant, Kickstarter money, or a publisher deal. At this stage, it’s already clear which assets are needed, in what volume, and how they will be used in the game. This allows you to avoid wasting time on rework and immediately give the studio a clear technical brief.
You can start carefully — order one pilot asset and see how well the contractor matches the style and deadlines. This approach is especially useful if you’re working with a new studio: the test task helps build trust and avoid unpleasant surprises later. At this point, you can also plan production in “batches” — for example, order a set of props for several levels at once or a batch of NPCs, which saves money through volume.
Starting outsourcing too early, before the prototype, is almost always a mistake. At that point, the game may still change: mechanics, visual style, even genre. Assets made in advance may not fit the final version, and you’ll have to redo them. Another risk is panic before a deadline. Rush outsourcing is almost always more expensive and often lower in quality: the studio has no time for reviews, polishing, or getting into the details. It’s better to plan ahead and choose the right partners without haste.
Where to Find Contractors
The easiest way to find outsourcing studios is on platforms familiar to most developers. LinkedIn is an excellent option if business contacts and transparent company information are important: you can view the studio’s profile, case studies, staff, and even reviews. On ArtStation, there is a dedicated Studios tab where you can find teams with the desired style and quality level, browse portfolios, and contact them directly.
In addition, there are B2B contractor directories like Clutch and GoodFirms. They work on a ranking system: companies are listed according to client reviews, project volume, specialization, and geography. This is a convenient way to quickly filter out unsuitable contractors and focus on those with real game development experience who are ready to work with your type of project.
Outsourcing rates vary greatly by region but don’t always affect quality — a reality you can use to your advantage. Here’s an approximate table of hourly rates for specialists (including art, tech art, rigging, etc.) in different regions. Note: this includes not just the artist’s labor but the full cost of the studio’s service.
USA & Canada
71–95
Wide selection of boutique studios and skilled niche specialists, good for critical one-off tasks
Western Europe
~60–75
Reliability, strict management, stable communication
Eastern Europe
~25–45
Lowest labor costs without quality loss, convenient time zones for Europe
Latin America
~35–60
Convenient time zone for the US, growing market
Asia & South Asia
~22–44
Lowest rates, but less transparent market and possible communication/stability issues
For high-value brands and art assets critical to the game, Western Europe or USA/Canada are ideal — but expect higher prices. For fast, localized, low-budget projects, Latin America is worth considering — though time zones may not suit everyone. Asia works if cost efficiency is key, but the risks of communication and control are higher. For indies with both limited budgets and high quality/reliability needs, Eastern Europe offers the best compromise:
Many studios experienced in both AAA and indie
Understanding of processes, documentation, and approaches familiar to Western industry
Moderate rates without loss of quality
What You’re Really Paying For
When indie developers first encounter outsourcing, one of the most common reactions is confusion about the rate. Why does an hour of studio work cost more than a freelancer on ArtStation or Upwork? The answer lies in the structure: a studio sells not just “artist hours,” but a complete production process tailored to the client’s needs.
Spoiler: you’re not paying for hours — you’re paying for reliability.
🎨 Art direction — style under control. You send references, describe the atmosphere — and that’s it. The studio’s art director ensures every asset matches the game’s visual language. No endless “this isn’t quite the style” or “the character feels off.” Everything is pre-approved and monitored.
🛡 Built-in QA — no need to play cop. Every asset goes through technical checks before it reaches you. UVs, topology, materials, scale — all matched to the brief and engine requirements. You get not a “raw” file, but a result verified by a team.
🔁 Pipeline management. You don’t coordinate artists, remind them about deadlines, or send revisions manually. The studio’s internal manager tracks the process: who does what, in what order, when to deliver, and when to review. You don’t manage production — you just receive progress.
⚙ Teamwork = scalability. Need 20 props in two weeks? One freelancer can’t handle it. A studio can quickly scale and bring in five artists at once. You get results faster without losing quality.
🤝 Post-delivery support. What if the pipeline changes? Or you need adaptation for the engine? The freelancer might be busy with another project. The studio stays in touch — quick edits, integration help, formatting included.
Versatility. Whether you need concept art, animation, rigging, models, integration, optimization, or something else — usually one studio can handle it.
A simple example: imagine you need a stylized 3D model of the main character. A freelancer might create a great high-poly, but it turns out too detailed for your mobile project, mismatched with your UI style, and with poor UVs. You end up hiring someone else to redo it, paying twice, losing time. In a studio, the art director monitors the style, the 3D artist meets optimization requirements, QA checks everything before delivery — and you get a working result.
A studio’s hourly rate is usually higher, but not always: for example, a senior freelance artist from the US may charge $75/hour, while a European studio charges from $30. When you calculate costs not in hours but in results, a studio is often more cost-effective: fewer revisions, less frustration, fewer missed deadlines. Which means more chances your indie game will release on time and at the quality you expect.
Conclusions
If you’re limited in time and resources (and indie developers almost always are), start outsourcing with tasks that bring maximum benefit for minimal budget — environments, props, UI. These elements scale well, are easy to reuse, and rarely require endless revisions. Moreover, they create the feeling of a “filled” world, even if you have only one level and a couple of enemies. Through modularity and repetition, they help make a small project look complete without overloading the budget.
The best time to bring in an external team is not at the very beginning, but after the vertical slice stage. Once you’ve tested mechanics and confirmed the idea works — and you know exactly which assets you need — you reduce the risk of rework, make communication with the contractor easier, and can be specific in your briefs. Contractors do well with clear, pre-planned work — this is when outsourcing works as a time-saving tool, not a source of chaos.
Finally, regional price differences are not just numbers — they’re a strategic tool. More importantly, a reliable studio takes on not just asset production but the entire process — quality control, style consistency, stage planning. You’re paying not only for “this sword model,” but for the certainty that it will arrive on time, look right, and not break your build. In indie development, that’s often more important than pretty graphics.
by Evgenii Park at codastudio.dev
Top comments (0)