1 good game out of two dozens is better performance than a 100 out of 10,000. There are much more indies than what's listed in the "top rated" section of your favorite store.
It's one thing to appreciate indie devs who make great games, it's another to disregard the tons of shoddy clones and meme crap pushed by anyone who can afford Valve's $100 publishing fee, or the time to create a page for their over-glorified gamejam projects on itch.
Sure but that's where customer due diligence comes into play, and frankly, if you've played a few games those hobby projects are easy to avoid.
They don't exactly have real reach on even Steam, you get there after clicking past three pages of games and still not satisfied with what you found - ergo you're desperate to find game X of type Y and you've played all the good ones already.
That's how I end up there anyway
I've just checked the Steam reviews of this game, and I got really sad - not just because of the state the game is in, but also because of the expectations people have. Most of the reviews were like
"the game is fine, but the graphics are trash - NEGATIVE". Are we really so obsessed with superficialities that we can't have a positive experience unless our eyes are watering from all the shiny things on screen?
Its not superficial. See, pixel art games
rarely get flak for their 'poor graphics'. Why? Because the
art design hits home. It just works. It looks nice, it is immersive, whatever - it works. Gollum, doesn't work. There is no nice art design, and there are no fancy graphical effects either. Heck, even games with fancy graphics but generic art still generally don't get a pass in reviews. Another example: Elden Ring. Its not exactly a graphical masterpiece on a spicy new engine. But the world and art design makes it tick. That's exactly the reason Nintendo still exists despite running games on toasters.