Definition discussions are not really my favorite topics and especially Indie Games is something that stands for quite a lot of things. But what I never liked was, that it should stand for independence of investors, or the Big Players, or money from a third party. I agree way more with what Petri Purho says in the opening of the article, that it stands for independence of profit maximization. I think one of the ways to achieve this, is to get someone else to take some of the financial load of the developers shoulders. And if the partnership is a good one, it means that you not only still make the games you want to make, but that you can make them even better.
I think ThatGameCompany, one of the examples Fenixius raised, is a good example for that, because they are exclusive to Sony, thus are dependent on one of the Big Players of the industry. Still they make games that are generally classified as Indie, and rightly so in my opinion. Why? Becasue they make small games that are focused on one specific treat of games, rather than doing everything that is needed of a AAA title today, and they polish that specific part to an extent that it can really shine. That one treat can be a game mechanic, could be a visual representation, could be transporting a meaning or could be putting the player into a certain mindset - like in ThatGameCompanys fl0w or Flower. I think that is something that all currently known Indie titles share. They are games, that are very focused on delivering a specific part, that can be made by a small team - because it's hard to communicate novel ideas during development to a lot of people - and that are not being made to maximize profit but to try out what our medium can pull off.
But to get back to the articles title, yes, it is a delicate balance because independent developers should be able to earn a living by designing games. And that's why I think that it is a bad idea to stick to an ideology of financial independence. If a developer can make better games by partnering financially with a third party they should do it, because what we, as developers, should care about is - as Svedäng says it - is "moving the art form forward" and we are most likely better in doing that if we don't have to worry about paying the rent.
Greets
Felix
Broken Rules