Pretty poor choice of a first image. The rest of the article is some rambling about the AAA industry doing crap because the players are stupid, even the grown ups, nothing outrageous but nothing particularly interesting or new either and the OP clearly only focuses on the most obvious cases.
But really, that first image? What is the writer even trying to achieve here? First off, colored blocks are a huge boom to a kid's mental development. To call them 'narratively lacking and mentally unsatisfying' is plain stupid, they're the polar opposite of that.
But ignoring the writer's failure to recognize it, and assuming he simply needed a quick example to link to to put down the video game industry, and for the sake of the argument, let's imagine he used a different, valid form of entertainment that is 'mentally unsatisfying'. Even then, the real offender is that, if you use such a wide brush as the writer did here, and depict games produced by the AAA industry as repre.senting 'video games' as a whole without any nuance, then you have to do the same for other forms of entertainment. And the whole thing would come crashing down. Movies? Yeah, tell us how popular are trully thought provoking movies compared to the usual action block busters? Music? It's all pop music crap. Bach, Mozart, Vivaldi you say? Sorry, we're painting in broad strokes here. Litterature? Can I interest you in the latest Dan Brown? Or maybe the George RR Martins books? Granted he's managed the feat of being such a mediocre writer he's getting a TV shows which is better than the books... but at least it's not The Republic. Nobody wants to read that.