>>40
That's not really true
Yes it is. Indie devs claim their games and indie games in general are more ``artistic'' and have more ``meaning''.
but the whole thing is moot because it's been established that people are paying money for these games. The market doesn't subscribe to your taste and prejudices.
People are paying money for Angry Birds. Do you consider it the pinnacle of game design even with its inconsistent physics? The market usually decides on the lowest common denominator for entertainment. Or in the case of indie games it's mostly hipsters with no taste that don't want to buy Call of Duty or Angry Birds because they're popular so they praise games that aren't good and aren't popular either (Limbo, Braid, Super Meat Boy or even worse, shit like Passage).
Or let's look at books. The market doesn't subscribe to my taste and prejudices, it instead subscribes to the Twilight series and books about Design Patterns.