i'm one of the bigger critics of the IGF but even i don't agree with most of the negativity toward it shown in those comments. it has major problems, many of which its admins refuse to admit are problems, but it's not completely valueless
i feel that the greatest value isn't in who wins, but in who enters. if you go through the entered games (all 800+ of them) you'll find some great looking ones. i try to go through all the entries each year (at least in the sense of looking at their screenshots, reading their descriptions, and watching their trailers) and each year i find a bunch of great new games in the entries, even if those never become finalists
plus it's a sort of built-in deadline for a lot of games; a lot of devs rush to improve their games before the deadline (including me), which helps out indie games a lot (a lot of games would never have gotten done without the igf as motivation, even if they don't become finalists)
to paraphrase tale of tales about the igf: 'there should 800 grand prizes, everyone who enters the igf is a winner'
I think Paul's comment is spot on. I entered last year's competition, and like most of us, my game wasn't nominated nor did I receive an honorable mention. It did however lead directly to a post on PCGamer, which helped drive awareness of it prior to the launch of the pre-order alpha. I realize that I was very fortunate, and the $95 entry fee isn't cheap, but it is possible to get some tangible value from it without winning or being nominated.