I really dig the type of culture the Itch.io promotes when it comes to gaming. I like the notion of more lightweight, maybe even browser caliber games being emphasized - and it gets bigger. They are just easier to have a go with, more compatible across platforms.

'Pay-what-you-want' and the associated 'free-to-play' system allows people to actually play the games and talk about them, rate them, give fair feedback and point on support, rather than to revolve everything around money to begin with. 'Pay-what-you-want' is just friendlier, more doable, it is actually a renaissance approach. In my opinion, this is the way of the future. Yes, this is not a place that will be the favour of greed, but certainly if someone came for joy and to have a good, constructive time, it will land.

Maybe Itch.io looks messy compared to some other platforms aimed at heavier commerce, but I do believe this is a creative chaos, the one which emerges when a lot of people try to make a valid contribution.

Keep up the spirit of indie gaming!

Compared to Game Jolt with its lack of information provided on each and every game pages, Itch.io is still better. Plus, Itch has a better tags system. Itch has the option to make your library "private", Game Jolt doesn't have that. Itch is more lightweight than Game Jolt, making browsing hundreds of games easier, thus increasing discoverability. And even though it's free to upload your games on both platforms, I see more quality games here than on Game Jolt. Like, the good/bad ratio is: for every 3/4 games here, I find at least 1 good game; on Game Jolt, the ratio dropped to 1 good game for every 10 low-effort games.

Indie gaming, for what I believe, is a lot about accessibility, experimentation and open mindedness - which involves social aspect as well. If someone requires me to pay money before do I even know what am I paying for, it does spoil the experience in the outcome. Money does bring bias to the reception. It elevates the expectations, among else. If I like the game a lot, I will pay for it eventually, in the manner of a donation. The surrounding culture should help with that - telling if you like something, if it survives the test of time for you, if it makes for a fine memory or you keep returning to it, then you should support the developer, because he earned it. But it takes a while to unfold, such a higher level, "ecological" approach, for what it is. On the other hand, if someone does not have the money to pay for every game one wants to try out, if one simply does not want to spend money on games, why should then one be forced out of the community? There are also other currencies in existence, valid feedback being one of them. People forget that time, ideas, social involvement, are also something of worth. Even if money is eventually most welcome for practical reasons, people generate social gravity and social gravity, attract more potential customers.

EDIT:

For the 'low-effort' category, I say, let us talk about games made 'smart'. There are plenty of titles overdone in multiple ways that ultimately somehow fail to become the latest craze or set a new cultural standard. 'Smart', is the way to go.