ARCHFIEND'S PROFILE

I think this has some very good points in general, but misses on part of why a novice developer might post a game in the first place - to just get a game out there and get some feedback. What may feel compelling or intuitive to the solo designer could be received badly on a larger scale, but without feedback, the novice will never know which gameplay elements to refine, or even how to do so, which leads to the problem which completes the fault of this circular argument: if a community expects that games developed by novices to be bad, even if they do have compelling gameplay, reasonable scope, and unique presentation, then they'll never be given fair chance in the first place. That's the catch-22. What you're calling for is fair, but effort must still be taken on the part of the community at large to play through these broken, half-completed games, even if the experience is less than fulfilling.

In a perfect world, you can decry the lack-luster efforts of novice developers and their games will improve, making them more desirable to play, and the community, having sensed this shift, will review these games and give the authors the feedback they crave. Unfortunately for you and myself, we live in the real world, where you can blame novice developers all day long, but unless they get specific advice on their own games, they won't know what to fix or how to do so, and the games will not show any marked improvement.

To be clear, I don't think that the community should have to suffer through boring games either... but if the growth of a community depends upon new members, then a community must acknowledge that a new member's first efforts will be sub-par by virtue of inexperience, and yet support those developers in hopes of them improving to the point where they can contribute in a more meaningful way.