Pick a topic related to games.

So, to summarize your argument: Games are not as artistic as they used to be. My apologies if I misread. First point: Games becoming more like games. I would first like to point towards how modern games are using their specific strengths as the medium they are more so now than they did in the past. In other words, games are getting used to being games as opposed to movies or books. This is still hard to explain, so I will use an example to put forward my point: WARNING THIS NEXT PARAGRAPH CONTAINS SPOILERS FOR "LIFE IS STRANGE" In the modern game "Life is Strange", the player takes control of Maxine, or "Max" as she is usually called, on a strange adventure beginning when she suddenly gains the ability to travel through time. The game is mostly choice based, and gets to be more and more of an emotional rollercoaster as the game progresses. At the very end of the game, the player has to make the choice of killing her best friend, or watching her town (and possibly multiple timelines, depending on whether or not you take one of the stages to be a dream or not) get completely eradicated. We could argue that this event would have been just as emotional if it were a movie or a book, but I believe adding in choice gives this scene a lot more voice. The choice wasn't added there to give players an actual choice; realistically, if entire timelines are at stake, the decision is somewhat cut-and-dry. There are some ethical perspectives in which the event of doing so is immoral, and they would no doubt choose to sacrifice a town; but I would argue that this idea isn't why it made it into the game. The game allows choice so as to tempt the player, forcing them to think about what could have been. It also makes sure that the player has to actively contribute to their friend's death. What does this prove? Well, it means that games are becoming more comfortable with themselves as a medium. It, in and of itself, means games are showing the potential to evolve, and keep going Point 2: Indie Games. Undertale as a widely acclaimed game and, considering its nature of jumping-in-blindly runs doing better than well-prepared-for runs, there's not much more I can say. If you have played it, you would understand what I mean. I don't believe it is too much of a stretch to believe that you have played it, considering its popularity, but I will state briefly that it is a masterpiece by most definitions of the word: It has emotions, reasonable plot, and it steps out of the boundaries of normal gaming by allowing pacifism as an option What you mentioned about games not being as artistic as they were in the past does apply to the AAA gaming industry. However, with the current boom in easy-to-use game designers and people who are willing to accept gaming as a way to get their creativity out there. For one thing, indie developers don't have the same biases that AAA developers do. Because they don't have the need to make a profit in order to compensate the cost of the project. For another, on a related note, we cannot place indie games into a box. We can notice common ideas in AAA games because of those biases, but if an indie developer is going to make a game, they have their own motivations, styles, and everything else based around the medium. There aren't less artistic games, there are just more games in general out there, which means that you may have to dig a little deeper to find them.