I put the vote up for graphics focus, but I'm equally disgusted by the progressive shift towards simpler gameplay, the enforced fake freedom, the DRM, and the multiplayer tendencies.
Graphics is understandable - everyone wants prettier graphics. In most cases, it's fine, too - making a generic game stand out by improving graphics is a good way. However, lately just about every non-indie game is trying to push itself forward technologically. Everyone wants to make their game look good, and they spend the budgets on hiring artists and visual designers instead of programmers and game designers. This frequently results in games that have great graphics, but that have such low performance on midrange rigs that they feel like the GPU manufacturers were supplying half the budget.
The simplification of gameplay is the side-effect of the rise of multiplatform games, even though there are exceptions in that area. I can't stand it when what could be a great game becomes needlessly simplified to appeal to a bigger audience (I'm looking at Spore, specifically). I see the reasoning behind it, but why can't people make difficulty settings include complexity?
Enforced fake freedom is a staple of "sandbox" games, but thankfully many titles avert this. Though you still see invisible walls here and there, even in games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion, a lot of times the game designers have the brain to remember another great way to prevent sequence breaking, which I remember from as far as Desert Strike:War in the Gulf. 'Tis simple, if the player goes where you don't want him to, crank the difficulty up to 11. GTA IV excelled in that regard, there are relatively few places where you cannot go - this is generally characteristic of the series as a whole.
The DRM is a matter that's been discussed at length here, I see. My view on it is that the best DRM is game quality, and availability/accessibility. If you're making a good game, people are more likely to like it enough to buy it. If the nature of the game is such that a single playthrough would reveal everything the game has to offer, then either release a good demo (if there's a good reason for having a short-ish non-replayable game), or introduce something that can be unlocked, or downloaded, or something. Enforcing DRM on paying customers is just mean.
And the multiplayer tendencies... well, they don't hurt too many genres. FPS games frequently only benefit from a multiplayer focus, but foregoing the singleplayer aspect entirely is never a good thing. Strategy games, on the other hand, were completely devastated by the shift to cybersports. In the wake of Starcraft, every RTS conceived since, with very few exceptions, has strived for simpler and faster gameplay. The biggest gaming disappointment before Spore came in the form of Supreme Commander. With a completely redone economics and balance system, the slow-paced gameplay that was possible in Total Annihilation became useless in competitive matches. The 'Crafts and CnC are having a very disruptive effect on the genre, and I find it very sad.