That's obviously incorrect.

They don't have to be more expensive - they just mostly likely are then on Steam.

A lot of people don't care for handhelds - they want their home experience, with best visuals they can get (PC)

Posibility of modding is always a plus - and yeah, it happens quite often with popular indie games.

Yes but Gunman Clive did get exposure on Android front page for awhile.  I remember it because that was one of the last few times I actually went to the Android shop before deciding to stop using a Google account on my phone.

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/01/gunman_clive_developer_3ds_eshop_is_healthier_than_ios

That graph is from a Jan 2013 article and the first link I showed was from March 2013 (so from Jan - March the 3DS caught up and then outsold iOS and Andriod combined).  It is a little hard to judge the graph considering it doesn't provide sales numbers and only provides weeks I assume.  However, you can see when Google started promoting the game on their front page.  Look at that bump on blue.  However, I assume sales nose dived once their front page promotion ended. 

Now looking at the 3DS eshop graph (was only on 3DS on first release) one can see a steady flow of sales and then it just keeps accelerating possible due to exposure on Nintendo's eshop or being a relatively cheap (I believe it released at 1.99) and good indie platform game. 

Granted not all indie developers are rewarded for their games even if they are good games.  However, if you release a decent game (such as World of Goo) then you can be promised to get decent sales.  The only developer that got semi screwed was the Retro City Rampage developer on Wiiware because I believe he never crossed that sales threshold that they used to have under their archaic policies during the Wii era.  I know MDK developer was pissed off too about that but I can't speak of the quality of MDK.  However the Retro City Rampage developer I'm sure made decent money on releasing his game on the 3DS eshop so he probably isn't mad at Nintendo anymore (because if he was then he probably wouldn't have put it on 3DS which I'm sure he is glad that he did go through with it).  So as of now I only know one indie developer that is pissed at Nintendo and that was due to archaic sales threshold for Wiiware titles which has been elminated for many years now.

Yet you didn't care when the hyperboles came from other place, the one and only place to play, the console for the player, the saviour of gaming, the only right leader for the industry, the one who makes everything right, I guess after years of hyperboles one just stop seeing them. 

I think this is any interesting position to take for a few reasons, although I don't really agree with it, especially the title. This is mostly due to lack of specificity in the criteria that makes something the best platform for something, in this case indies.

Is it strictly based on portability? Is it current overall game selection? Future game potential? Game cost? Best controller for playing the game? Best audio/visual presentation? Overall value e.g. crossbuy? Exclusives?

There are many factors in which you could make an argument for the stated position of Nintendo or any of the other platforms being best. In my opinion, most current criteria do not support Nintendo as the best current platform, with the exception of portability. Perhaps in the future this changes.

Something else to consider is that because it is new and has relatively fewer games available to purchase, buyers are currently less critical of the games they buy. In my case I didn't really mind overpaying for a Street Fighter 2 port and the novelty of some games on the portable screen was enough to get me to buy them. As more titles become available, these types of choices will be more scrutinized. 

Due to Switch's portability, in my opinion it is strong in three areas: Nintendo properties (always strong here), ports/remasters of PS3/360 games, and indies. The jury is still out on ports of current generation games. Doom and other games of that ilk will be very telling. I think for what the system does, it does it very well. It's a fantastic companion system that builds on its strongest assets of unique experiences and anywhere gaming. As positioned though, it doesn't lend itself well to non-Nintendo AAA titles. 

Back to the original assertion that Switch is the best platform for indies. Imagine the same question is posed for best platform to watch movies. Would it be a smartphone due to portability? For some, it very well may be. For others, it may be about the biggest screen, best sound, 4K UHD, etc. I think because we have less attachment to smartphones vs. home theaters, it may be easier to view this comparison objectively. Once specific brands get involved, it becomes more difficult. As always, it comes down to criteria and of course personal preference.

Currently the Vita is the King of the Indie.

If I was an indie I would also go to the platform with the least amount of competition.

It could be a mistake by Sony but given the amount of content coming to the PS4, I guess they decided that promoting indies can be sacrified. That doesn't mean that Sony isn't doing anything for indie devs though. They must be doing something right given the support that they have from indie devs. There's dozens of indie games released every week.

And you're saying Switch is on the rise - I'm not sure it can take away enough sales from the PS4 to make a difference. And as you say - the Switch is too weak to get the big games.

Wait, really? Can you link to some examples? 

Edit: Nevermind I see them. 

SOME indie games made most of their money on Nintendo platforms compared to other platforms. Thousands of other indie games made most of their money on PSN, XBL, PC, iOS or Android.