[@BrokenPromise] Sure. I think the "free-to-play" model can dodge a lot of legitimate criticisms under the guise of "being free". (Especially in regards to certain monetary practices.)  But the [b][i]actual[/i][/b] free game is a nostalgic reminder of the endless flash game library that kids everywhere enjoyed. (Opposed to the mobile game market nowadays, where the kids spend thousands of dollars on their parents' credit card.) [i]And I much prefer the former.[/i]

Plus, I think the point is to give the developers free and vital feedback on their design, and "exposure" through word of mouth. So when the current triple-A market and it's defenders argue that games need to be [b][i]more[/i][/b] expensive. Pointing to the variety of (free) indies that I'd rather play instead of their overproduced slop, is an ever-growing counterpoint.

Also, I'd actually disagree with the "free means lack of polish" argument. Because I've had less bugs and issues with free games as opposed to shovelware/cheap indies/early access games that expect money upfront. (Though short duration is usually valid & I think "being left wanting more" isn't a bug. But the point of "prototype/game jam" games.)

And I'll certainly give that list a look.