- Edited
If you're not good at 3D or 2D, then learn, the best thing about games these days is you don't need zomgwtf unreal style realism to make a game as long as you get the point of your visuals across. Especially given how common it is for devs to shamelessly rip 3D assets, these days if I see a game with 'good graphics' I immediately think it's going to be garbage.
The reason being is we've all seen these internal systems before and when I look at the third party assets I know the studio in question likely has barely any experience making games or worse they're lazy and are looking for a quick asset flip cash grab by charging as much money as possible for what is essentially an early access game and then running off when the torches and pitchforks come out. That's not to say you shouldn't make a game with terrible graphics, but you should find a style that suits your workflow, there's also that issue of time spent on art and indie devs can definitely outperform the big studios if they ignore fussing about graphics and concentrating on things like animation, gameplay and sound.
You have to bear in mind that the big studios are likely getting a couple of million in funding at least and have 30 artists on a regular payroll full time, don't ever compare yourself to them in terms of art quality.