TStael: Sorry if I seem a bit intransigent - or not sorry, actually - but how about you lay down some sources; preferably vigorous and source critical.
Surely u must have some to lay out fair n square - and kind-heartedly help a thread novice like myself to see the light, as opposed to go through 200+ pages.
But any outside this thread will do, in case u are not very source critical, or not very used to the idea of having references. ;-)
Take Serpent in Staglands. Do you know it, and where from?
Take Dragon Age Inquisition. Do you know it, and where from?
Which one do you think got high media exposure and consistent thumbs' ups and praises? Which one, might, in fact have much more mixed meta-critic reviews?
Which one was the title I bought even when I could find not a single professional review in Finnish game press; and which one was the title where I cursed myself for having pre-ordered, as a PC-gamer?
The issue: as much, as ever - methinks - is with UNDER-representation of smaller titles; not undue promotion of some of them.
With the possible intimidation of genuine impassioned promoters of indie games for "corruption" as a novel option - which would in fact represent a deterioration for gaming. Methinks.
How about you learn to use Google?
Even Polygon revised their ethics policy. The Escapist did.. Other magazines added disclaimers for conflict of interest after the fact. Including Patricia Hernandez and her 4 reviews of her friend and former roommate's games, all now with disclaimers.
You can claim what you think is the problem with indie games, but there are many cases where some of them have received glowing, near perfect reviews which inexplicably "forgot" to mention serious game flaws. I'd say that indie games have the problem that many gamers will not and cannot trust the integrity of those game reviews. As such, it doesn't matter if they get covered, many people will believe the praise is due to corruption. Because corruption in certain indie game circles has been rampant.
Just take the game Sunset. It did get reviewed by IGN, Gamespot, the Washington Post, PC Gamer, Game Informer. and Gamasutra It was promoted by Leigh Alexander's PR firm (former editor of Gamasutra). The developer even claimed to have bribed Anita Saarkesian $40,000 for a positive word. Yet, the game only sold 4,000 copies after release. Probably because it called itself a narrative game, but maybe also word of mouth about how buggy the game is, the boring gameplay of just doing chores, the poor optimization which makes it run poorly even on high end machines...
That was only a couple pages ago...