Too much truth in this post.
Yeah, but what if I actually enjoy the "shitty, boring gunplay" and the "mundane exploratory elements" and the "elementary platforming"? Isnt that enough?
But at least we have Dark Souls to play the Ying to Tomb Raider's Yang.
I'm fine with both of them existing and each offering me different, but immensely valuable and enjoyable, gaming experiences.
Well, part of me feels the same way, at least to an extent. What really is the the problem with popcorn games, junk food games, comfort games? I think though that this shares a similar difference as between mindlessly entertaining films and engaging, challenging films. It's just that, at least in the opinion of many producers and publishers, these more "broadly accessible" titles are the ones making the most money. Should one kind of game become the most rewarded, that becomes the accepted baseline, and through the elimination of potentially less profitable projects, we must be faced with some level of homogenization. It's not unreasonable to have a low tolerance for this, I don't think.
I'm glad there are lots of experiments out there, I certainly don't want certain types of games to simply go away, I would just like to see certain established types of games to remain, especially as I have a concern that the most abundant current titles are actively abandoning what I consider the unique qualities and strengths of the medium.
I mean, I'm someone who loves the Souls games, classic Mega Man, old Tomb Raider, but also No More Heroes and Saint's Row 3. My top 4 games that left an impression on me last year were Tokyo Jungle, Dragon's Dogma, Sleeping Dogs, and fucking Frog Fractions for god's sake.
Maybe I'm just easy to please sometimes, but I think ever since Uncharted 3, I've been done with the direction AAA games have gone. I think I can respect weird, over-the-top, wacky, janky, even plain mediocre if it's coming from somewhere more creative than a committee with a hungry wallet and a checklist.