Get Out of Your Comfort Zone for 2016

[CarelessRook117]

Honestly.
I don't know how Yahtzee manages to do it, but he never fails to destroy any and all aspects of my life that make me happy and turn them into more sources of anxiety.

So I guess I'm bad for the industry then? I basically played games BECAUSE of the security. They were my escape from the chaos and anxiety of real life and something solid. I could take pleasure in the fact that games were something that I can just do and go along with without having to over think and question everything because they were just something that made me happy.

But apparently, that's not how the industry NEEDS me to play games. Why would I ever play a game unless it reinvents the medium, right? Who cares if you enjoy Halo and Tomb Raider, they're "bad for the industry", so by enjoying them you're a part of the problem.

You know that movie you really enjoyed? The Force Awakens? Yeah that's also bad for the industry.
How dare you be a sheep and enjoy it and let if make you happy, You should be getting out of your comfort zone, Andy by that I mean playing the games and watching the movies that are collectively referred to as"Good" for the Industry.

So you want to create content on the future? Well you better not put the stuff you enjoy into it. Because you enjoy stuff that isn't good for the medium, anything you create won't advance anything either, because taking concepts from previous works that you enjoy is absolutely awful.

And now every time I try to sit down and enjoy myself, I just end up with stupid unanswerable questions ruining whatever I'm doing.

"Am I a bad person for enjoying games that people dub as mediocre?"

"Am I supporting the downfall of the Industry?"

"At what point does an artist's vision get overridden by what's considered best for the medium?"

"Is all the effort that AAA devs put into their games rendered invalid just because they didn't make a massive change in the industry?"

" Can it possibly be this black and white?"

"Does staying in my comfort zone make me a weak person? And if that's so, why do people want to stay in their comfort zones in the first place?"

"Who gets to determine what is good or bad for the industry and what gives them that right?"

"Does personal preference have any place in gaming then if all of this is true?"

"If games somehow meet this vison where nobody does the same thing twice, won't that just end up as a bunch of unpolished ideas, and restrict artists from realizing their vision because "it's not innovative enough? Won't that end up being the death of creativity then? Because, how can a game be special when every game is supposed to be special?"

Fuck this shit.
I can't play games any more because some British Sociopath in Australia is making me doubt myself from halfway across the earth.

 

[Thyunda]

So does this mean Yahtzee is going to be playing RTS games, Smash Bros, and Space Marine? Or by 'leave our comfort zone' does he mean for us to come join him in his comfort zome and just sit quietly while he explains why his views are inherently correct and that he need not take any risks of his own, because that might ruin the facade of expertise he cultivates?

Also I went ahead a watched an Undertale Lets Play after the vitriol I received when I said Yahtzee was just baiting Indie gamers in his Top 5.
And I will admit if my only experience with RPGs were the Pokemon series and Skyrim, then yeah Undertale does a lot of new things. If on the other hand I had played FF6, FF7, Chrono Cross and maybe half a dozen other 90s RPGs...then no. No, Undertale doesn't really do anything unique or new that hadn't already been done 20+ years ago.

So I assume this is the part where you present to us a bullet-point list of all the things Undertale is said to have innovated, but didn't - and you'll provide examples of these 90s RPGs that do it?

What exactly did Undertale innovate? I can think of two things:
A) The whole "We know what you did even if you don't save/we know when you save" thing, which was honestly the only part of the game that wowed me, even though the moments where this comes into play are too few and far between
and
B) the bullet hell-like combat, that (subjectively) is boring and time wasting.

Everything else seems pretty standard. None of the major players are anything new (Outside of Flowey, obviously), heck, Alphys and Papyrus's characters are pretty cliche at this point. It's hardly the first game to break the 4th wall or go "You know how in other video games, this happens? That's hilarious!"

I kinda figured that was the entire point of Undertale honestly. It doesn't do a whole lot of new things, but the things it does do, they're done very well. Except the combat. That was shit.

That's two new innovations alongside a well-rounded and decent game. Two whole innovations. That's more than the flat zero from the first post.

 

[PG]

This is among the best EPs you've ever done. I'm not even sure it's about finance, it's about 'lazy ambition' of developers who want all the acclaim but none of the effort. Steam Greenlight has shown us over the last year that indie devs suffer the same lack of imagination as AAA powerhouses.

 

[Flatfrog]

The Irony is that when Lucas needlessly inserted silly things from the OT like C3P0 into the prequels to make them more interconnected, it was rightly criticized. Yet lifting the entire OT and dumping it into a new movie for 'familiarity' gets a free pass in the case of SW VII. I'm hoping that in a few years the general audience will be more open to analysis and critique of the new movie. Lord knows it has its share of problems beyond the creative bankruptcy of the whole copy-paste plot thing.

There are differences between these two cases, though. The Force Awakens did ape the original plot very closely, as well as including a number of 'greatest hits' moments (the cantina being the most obvious example) but it also, most importantly, introduced some brand new characters, all of whom were believable, interesting and well-rounded. The best criticism of Phantom Menace from the legendary Plinkett reviews was that its characters were profoundly empty. Who was Qui-Gon Jinn? A Jedi. He had no interesting character traits, no back story, nothing to make him memorable as a person, and so his death meant nothing to us.

At the end of The Force Awakens, I have a very clear sense of who all four of the main characters are; and what's more I'm intrigued to find out more. By keeping the story simple and familiar, they had enough space to explore some new territory with the characters, and that is what made The Force Awakens satisfying.

 

[Zjarcal]

Honestly.
Fuck this shit.
I can't play games any more because some British Sociopath in Australia is making me doubt myslef from halfway across the earth.

Sure you can, just take Yahtzee's opinion for what it is, an opinion... take it, analyze it, and if you disagree then ignore it and move on.

I love the Tomb Raider series and I don't give a flying fuck how much Yahtzee rags on it, he's free to do so in his own spaces and I'm free to enjoy it on my own, there's no need to ruin my own fun just cuz someone else disagrees. Your enjoyment of things should not be dictated or influenced by others.

I like the idea behind this EP, I also like to keep an open mind towards anything just in case it surprises me, whatever its nature or whatever reception (good or bad) it might have gotten. Of course it woudln't be a yahtzee column without an obligatory dose of hypocrisy in regards to him not playing certain genres, but hey, we all expect that by now as it is part of his shctick.

 

[Dalisclock]

Honestly.
I don't know how Yahtzee manages to do it, but he never fails to destroy any and all aspects of my life that make me happy and turn them into more sources of anxiety.

Snip....

Fuck this shit.
I can't play games any more because some British Sociopath in Australia is making me doubt myslef from halfway across the earth.

I really hope you aren't serious. The opinion of one dude you've never met, even if he is internet famous, shouldn't be a source of mental suffering or affect how you enjoy your free time. If it is, I'd recommend you a.) stop reading/listening to him and b.)Perhaps talk to a therapist.

 

[CarelessRook117]

Honestly.
I don't know how Yahtzee manages to do it, but he never fails to destroy any and all aspects of my life that make me happy and turn them into more sources of anxiety.

Snip....

Fuck this shit.
I can't play games any more because some British Sociopath in Australia is making me doubt myslef from halfway across the earth.

I really hope you aren't serious. The opinion of one dude you've never met, even if he is internet famous, shouldn't be a source of mental suffering or affect how you enjoy your free time. If it is, I'd recommend you a.) stop reading/listening to him and b.)Perhaps talk to a therapist.

It's not so much his opinion by itself as it is the sentiment of the community as a whole.
He's right though and I can't prove him wrong.
And because of that, I have to question myself as a gamer, as a future artist, and as a consumer.

Disregaurding what he's said in this article as if it was just his opinon would just be fooling myself and trying to hide in ignorance again. And if he DOES turn out to be right, I'll just be contributing to the problem by supporting these games that are supposedly ruining the industry.

It's not like Yahtzee is a vocal minority when it comes to these kinds of views, so clearly there has to be more to this than just his opinion.

I continue to watch Yahtzee because I acknowledge that there is a pretty decent amount of truth to what he says. Even if it's buried beneath mountains of preferences and jokes about genetailia. Unfortunately that truth tends to leave me less than secure about my own meager views.

I've also been to therapy.
Clearly it hasn't been working.

Honestly.
Fuck this shit.
I can't play games any more because some British Sociopath in Australia is making me doubt myslef from halfway across the earth.

Sure you can, just take Yahtzee's opinion for what it is, an opinion... take it, analyze it, and if you disagree then ignore it and move on.

I love the Tomb Raider series and I don't give a flying fuck how much Yahtzee rags on it, he's free to do so in his own spaces and I'm free to enjoy it on my own, there's no need to ruin my own fun just cuz someone else disagrees. Your enjoyment of things should not be dictated or influenced by others.

I like the idea behind this EP, I also like to keep an open mind towards anything just in case it surprises me, whatever its nature or whatever reception (good or bad) it might have gotten. Of course it woudln't be a yahtzee column without an obligatory dose of hypocrisy in regards to him not playing certain genres, but hey, we all expect that by now as it is part of his shctick.

My concern on more about what he said in the article that isn't an opinion.
The objective truths that he's put forth that have challenged my complacency in a way that puts me off balance. I can't write off the truth in what he's said.

 

[Space Jawa]

There are differences between these two cases, though. The Force Awakens did ape the original plot very closely, as well as including a number of 'greatest hits' moments (the cantina being the most obvious example) but it also, most importantly, introduced some brand new characters, all of whom were believable, interesting and well-rounded. The best criticism of Phantom Menace from the legendary Plinkett reviews was that its characters were profoundly empty. Who was Qui-Gon Jinn? A Jedi. He had no interesting character traits, no back story, nothing to make him memorable as a person, and so his death meant nothing to us.

At the end of The Force Awakens, I have a very clear sense of who all four of the main characters are; and what's more I'm intrigued to find out more. By keeping the story simple and familiar, they had enough space to explore some new territory with the characters, and that is what made The Force Awakens satisfying.

Force Awakens gave us:
*Kylo Ren, a bad Darth Vader knockoff featuring all the traits that people complained about for his Pre-Vader form from the Prequels
*Ray, a girl with no backstory other than "She's waiting for her parents to come back for her" and who invokes strong heated debates about if she's a Mary Sue or not
*Poe Dameron, whose character amounts to "He's the Resistance's best pilot" and only comes back from certain death under circumstances that are never explained beyond a half-hearted handwave because - if what I've heard is correct - the actor threatened to quit the movie if Poe actually was killed off.
*Finn, who's wishy washy on exactly what his motivation is beyond "First Order bad, Ray good".

And then we've got a Luke who's gone into exile to run away from the responsibilities handed to him at the end of VI and a Han Solo who's regressed back from all the character growth he got over the course of IV-VI, and Leia who's just kind of static.

Phantom Menace gave us:
*Qui-Gon Jinn, a Jedi Master who has strained relations with the Jedi Council and is the guy who trained Obi-Wan Kenobi - Qui-Gon is arguably more fleshed out in Episode I than Obi-Wan was fleshed out in Episode IV (not to take anything away from what we got of Obi-Wan in Episode IV, mind you)
*Amidala, a young leader who wants the best for her people, with a desire to maintain peace but a willingness to go to war when push comes to shove
*Jar Jar Binks, who for all the traits people people complain about is someone who is actually recognized as a clumsy oaf in-universe (you know how some people would like to banish Jar Jar from the Prequels? - well that's effectively what the Gungans actually did.)
*Darth Maul, who people love and call one of the best parts of the movie in spite of having no backstory or character beyond "He's a dangerous Sith Lord with a Double-bladed lightsaber".

And we got expanded stories on the likes of Obi-Wan, Anakin Skywalker, and even the future Emperor Palpatine (in all his enjoyable evil scheming).

And, beyond characters, it also gave us the Jedi Order before it was wiped out, Coruscant and Naboo to provide us a larger galaxy that wasn't a knockoff of what came before, and it actually bothered to go to Tatooine - further fleshing out that planet beyond what was given in IV and VI rather than going to another knockoff world.

From where I'm sitting, I don't see Force Awakens doing anything better than the Prequels did with its new cast; any flaws you can point to with Episode I can just as easily if not more easily be pointed at the case of Episode VII.

 

[Zjarcal]

My concern on more about what he said in the article that isn't an opinion.
The objective truths that he's put forth that have challenged my complacency in a way that puts me off balance. I can't write off the truth in what he's said.

Well you go on and have fun with that... >.>

The only objective truth he put out there is that he likes some things and doesn't like others.

 

[CarelessRook117]

He talks about how devs aren't taking risks anymore due to consumer complacency.

Or how they are only obligated to do what nets them a profit, and because of the consumer taking what they've been given, there's no obligation to improve.

The way I see it, He's saying we should only play "innovative" games because by enjoying "mediocre" one's we're ruining the industry by encouraging stagnation.

I can't find a flaw in that logic, so I took it as something objective.

This whole article I would be pointless unless Yahtzee is trying to get some kind of message across, and that's what I've found so far so I assume it as the message he sent.

If you saw something else, I would be genuinely glad to hear about it, because otherwise this is just confirming my fears about where gaming is going.

 

[Samastic]

Welp, now I'm depressed. Also I thought The Force Awakens was incredibly boring. Since I am a huge fan of A New Hope, seeing it again with less interesting characters was not all that fun. Granted, the lightsaber battles were neat, but so where the ones in the prequels and people didn't accept them there, so I have no obligation to accept them now. I also don't buy the argument that it was to "put us back in the comfort zone". If the puppet that is Lucasfilms really wanted to make something special and exciting, I'm sure they would have. But even the thought of controversy over a new story and plot development that isn't identical to a previous movies was probably pants-shittingly scary. They knew that if they made something that was "ok" than that's exactly how people would react to it. So instead of people being on one end the spectrum or the other, most people just sit in the middle. That's where I think the triple-A industry lies right now.

I don't think that money has much to do with the whether or not a video game is intuitive or not, it has to do with whether or not they can profit from it. If a company can print the same thing over and over again and get the same result each time, why not keep doing it? The best example to Assassin's creed. That is the best example (at least in my opinion) in the industry. You have a game that most people consider to be okay, and move on. They hype the game up to get the most pre-orders as physically possible, then once the dust settles, people aren't displeased, nor do they think it's amazing. But that's where the scarcity of really good games comes from. You said in the article that you only get games that make you excitied every one and a while. Well that's because each company has that model-T. But some don't. More and more am I seeing the more 'critically acclaimed' being indie. Games like UNDERTALE becoming more and more popular. But indie devs don't have the security blanket which they can pump out a game and it sell, they are forces to make something special. You see games like Her Story, Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes, The Beginner's Guide, and many more becoming the more popular games. Now, that's not to say that overly hyped game like your Fallouts and Just Causes aren't going to be popular. Putting 60 bucks into a game can sway an opinion, but it seems that less and less people are willing to put that much money into a game that isn't spectacular But, in all, it's still depressing. Because I'm sure that I'll be dead before the huge triple-A companies actually start making excellent games again.

 

[Oroboros]

The Irony is that when Lucas needlessly inserted silly things from the OT like C3P0 into the prequels to make them more interconnected, it was rightly criticized. Yet lifting the entire OT and dumping it into a new movie for 'familiarity' gets a free pass in the case of SW VII. I'm hoping that in a few years the general audience will be more open to analysis and critique of the new movie. Lord knows it has its share of problems beyond the creative bankruptcy of the whole copy-paste plot thing.

There are differences between these two cases, though. The Force Awakens did ape the original plot very closely, as well as including a number of 'greatest hits' moments (the cantina being the most obvious example) but it also, most importantly, introduced some brand new characters, all of whom were believable, interesting and well-rounded. The best criticism of Phantom Menace from the legendary Plinkett reviews was that its characters were profoundly empty. Who was Qui-Gon Jinn? A Jedi. He had no interesting character traits, no back story, nothing to make him memorable as a person, and so his death meant nothing to us.

At the end of The Force Awakens, I have a very clear sense of who all four of the main characters are; and what's more I'm intrigued to find out more. By keeping the story simple and familiar, they had enough space to explore some new territory with the characters, and that is what made The Force Awakens satisfying.

The characters were definitely my favorite part of the movie, though I think a lot of that had to do with the acting. They still seem to be suspiciously similar to characters they are replacing from the OT. Rey is definitely supposed to be the new 'Luke' of the franchise, and Poe Dameron is an obvious Wedge Antilles replacement, Snoke is a new Emperor, Maz is our Yoda, etc etc, with Kylo Ren of course is a bit of a mashup of Prequel Anakin and Darth Vader. So I don't think they really stand on their own so much.

They also suffer quite a bit from rushed arcs IMO, like the writers/directors wanted to get all the development out of the way so they could get to the action scenes. Finn's stormtrooper background wasted a lot of potential, because his turn from the First Order is so sudden and complete... and he was the best developed character in the movie, IMO. Rey gets a lot of flak for her excellence in various fields, and while I think her proficiency as a mechanic is pretty well established in the movie, her piloting skill and force abilities *do* sorta come out of nowhere...getting to around Luke's RoTJ proficiency after only learning she was sensitive half way through the movie. It seemed to me very clear that character development was very secondary to fanservice and overblown action scenes, and it shows.

The characters were enjoyable to me in spite of their writing, rather than because of it as a result. Overall the movie just came across as an incredibly unambitious generic action movie, albeit one slathered with a bafflingly high amount of regurgitated OT content.

 

[cszs]

Hey Yahtzee, if you decide to try out some RTS games to broaden your horizons, i would advise you to try out the Homeworld remastered collection, especially Homeworld 1. If you like space games, then this is something for you. Also, a prequel game to Homeworld 1 is coming out just a few days from now called Homeworld Deserts of Kharak. I would check that out too.

Another commenter mentioned another excellent game: Crusader kings 2, although you need some patience to learn it, it is well worth the time investment.

 

[Thanatos2k]

Worse, they ruined the game for themselves by WATCHING it. A game about making your own choices and reacting to the unexpected they watched someone else make choices and then are criticizing the game.

Isn't there just one true approved behavior and everything else "bad time"? Hardly about own choices if there's just one supposed ending and you're a dick for doing otherwise.

No. There's a variety of outcomes on a non-purely pacific or genocide route. Some strangely better than others even when you would not expect them to be.

 

[CaitSeith]

The people I can't stand are the ones who preemptively dismiss it largely because its fans can be a bit weird

Um, isn't that a huge reason why people hate the Sonic and the Star Fox series (Despite how good the games are).

I don't know about Star Fox, but people hate Sonic games because there hasn't been a really good Sonic game since Sonic Generations.

 

[CaitSeith]

Honestly.
I don't know how Yahtzee manages to do it, but he never fails to destroy any and all aspects of my life that make me happy and turn them into more sources of anxiety.

Me neither. Nothing of what you said makes sense. Who cares if you enjoy Halo and Tomb Raider? Well, why should you care about who cares? Does gaming require community approval in order to be enjoyed? No, it doesn't. The people who declares that AAA is stagnant and no longer innovates, care more about what they are going to lunch today than about what you like to play. Why should you let them ruin your play sessions?

 

[Hawki]

There are differences between these two cases, though. The Force Awakens did ape the original plot very closely, as well as including a number of 'greatest hits' moments (the cantina being the most obvious example) but it also, most importantly, introduced some brand new characters, all of whom were believable, interesting and well-rounded. The best criticism of Phantom Menace from the legendary Plinkett reviews was that its characters were profoundly empty. Who was Qui-Gon Jinn? A Jedi. He had no interesting character traits, no back story, nothing to make him memorable as a person, and so his death meant nothing to us.

At the end of The Force Awakens, I have a very clear sense of who all four of the main characters are; and what's more I'm intrigued to find out more. By keeping the story simple and familiar, they had enough space to explore some new territory with the characters, and that is what made The Force Awakens satisfying.

Force Awakens gave us:
*Kylo Ren, a bad Darth Vader knockoff featuring all the traits that people complained about for his Pre-Vader form from the Prequels
*Ray, a girl with no backstory other than "She's waiting for her parents to come back for her" and who invokes strong heated debates about if she's a Mary Sue or not
*Poe Dameron, whose character amounts to "He's the Resistance's best pilot" and only comes back from certain death under circumstances that are never explained beyond a half-hearted handwave because - if what I've heard is correct - the actor threatened to quit the movie if Poe actually was killed off.
*Finn, who's wishy washy on exactly what his motivation is beyond "First Order bad, Ray good".

And then we've got a Luke who's gone into exile to run away from the responsibilities handed to him at the end of VI and a Han Solo who's regressed back from all the character growth he got over the course of IV-VI, and Leia who's just kind of static.

Phantom Menace gave us:
*Qui-Gon Jinn, a Jedi Master who has strained relations with the Jedi Council and is the guy who trained Obi-Wan Kenobi - Qui-Gon is arguably more fleshed out in Episode I than Obi-Wan was fleshed out in Episode IV (not to take anything away from what we got of Obi-Wan in Episode IV, mind you)
*Amidala, a young leader who wants the best for her people, with a desire to maintain peace but a willingness to go to war when push comes to shove
*Jar Jar Binks, who for all the traits people people complain about is someone who is actually recognized as a clumsy oaf in-universe (you know how some people would like to banish Jar Jar from the Prequels? - well that's effectively what the Gungans actually did.)
*Darth Maul, who people love and call one of the best parts of the movie in spite of having no backstory or character beyond "He's a dangerous Sith Lord with a Double-bladed lightsaber".

And we got expanded stories on the likes of Obi-Wan, Anakin Skywalker, and even the future Emperor Palpatine (in all his enjoyable evil scheming).

And, beyond characters, it also gave us the Jedi Order before it was wiped out, Coruscant and Naboo to provide us a larger galaxy that wasn't a knockoff of what came before, and it actually bothered to go to Tatooine - further fleshing out that planet beyond what was given in IV and VI rather than going to another knockoff world.

From where I'm sitting, I don't see Force Awakens doing anything better than the Prequels did with its new cast; any flaws you can point to with Episode I can just as easily if not more easily be pointed at the case of Episode VII.

I think the divide between TPM and TFA (both of which rank closely on my Star Wars films list if I ranked them best to worst) exemplify something Yahtzee touched on. TPM has good ideas but flawed execution. TFA has good execution but a lack of ideas. That's not to say that they're entirely lacking in their weaker area, but I feel that best sums up the divide. It's also why I rank TFA above TPM because, IMO, execution trumps conception at the end of the day.

That said, I will give credit for TFA having better characters. TPM's characters aren't as lacking in depth as Plinkett might suggest, but TFA...well, we learn a lot of the backstories about Ren, Rey, and Finn for instance, whereas in TPM, we learn nothing about Obi-Wan outside the film, and even where we do have backstories, we have to deal with kid Anakin and Jar Jar. Not as bad as many claim IMO, but not nearly as pleasant as BB-8 (comic relief) or Rey (Mary Sue perhaps, but still a character with plenty of backstory and traits, if not flaws). Likewise, Darth Maul may be a "badass" and I don't think the duel is as bereft of depth as many claim, but Kylo does have the benefit of having backstory, a defined character, and strengths and flaws. All I can say about Maul within the scope of the film itself is that "he looks like the devil, he's Palpatine's apprentice, he wants revenge on the Jedi (either for himself or for the Sith) and that he's an excellent duelist." Very few of those words say anything about his actual character.

 

[CarelessRook117]

Honestly.
I don't know how Yahtzee manages to do it, but he never fails to destroy any and all aspects of my life that make me happy and turn them into more sources of anxiety.

Me neither. Nothing of what you said makes sense. Who cares if you enjoy Halo and Tomb Raider? Well, why should you care about who cares? Does gaming require community approval in order to be enjoyed? No, it doesn't. The people who declares that AAA is stagnant and no longer innovates, care more about what they are going to lunch today than about what you like to play. Why should you let them ruin your play sessions?

Because I hope to be an artist in the future. And being an artist means you can't just lock yourself in your little box and only make what you want to make.

(Unless you're Toby Fox apparently. I don't know weather to congratulate that man for his success. And staying true to himself or tell him to go eat a big fat dick because I have to live up to his success.)

Hearing consistently that the stuff I take inspiration from is "bad" for the industry is disheartening to say the least.

 

[CaitSeith]

Honestly.
I don't know how Yahtzee manages to do it, but he never fails to destroy any and all aspects of my life that make me happy and turn them into more sources of anxiety.

Me neither. Nothing of what you said makes sense. Who cares if you enjoy Halo and Tomb Raider? Well, why should you care about who cares? Does gaming require community approval in order to be enjoyed? No, it doesn't. The people who declares that AAA is stagnant and no longer innovates, care more about what they are going to lunch today than about what you like to play. Why should you let them ruin your play sessions?

Because I hope to be an artist in the future. And being an artist means you can't just lock yourself in your little box and only make what you want to make.

(Unless you're Toby Fox apparently. I don't know weather to congratulate that man for his success. And staying true to himself or tell him to go eat a big fat dick because I have to live up to his success.)

Hearing consistently that the stuff I take inspiration from is "bad" for the industry is disheartening to say the least.

Meh! I wouldn't worry too much about that. These trends come and go like waves. One day, a different stuff will be the safe stagnant trend, and your source of inspiration will be considered that sweet spot outside the comfort zone. Keep practicing, and you'll be ready for the big ride.