ChatGPT 5.5: Stronger for Coding, Weaker for Critical Discussion?

I’m very satisfied with OpenAI’s newer models for coding and agentic workflows. The progress there is clear. Like many users, though, I regret the disappearance of 5.3 Codex that could handle longer tasks with fewer constraints for ChatGPT Plus users, while the newer mandatory models consume significantly more tokens. What I’ve noticed since ChatGPT 5, and even more with 5.5, is that conversational mode increasingly feels like an entertainment product rather than a tool for critical thinking. Responses often amount to paraphrasing the user’s ideas or repeating familiar patterns rather than providing genuinely new analysis. By contrast, Advanced Research remains extremely valuable and is now the only mode I consistently rely on when I want to deepen my understanding of a subject. My main criticism concerns the structure and tone of conversational replies. They often follow the same pattern: “you’re mixing different things,” followed by an explanation and a conclusion that presents the model’s framing as the correct one. The result can feel patronizing, as though the assistant’s role is to reorganize the user’s supposedly confused thinking rather than engage with the substance of the argument. For example, I recently discussed real estate prices, housing affordability, purchased surface area, and monetary dilution. Instead of investigating the relationships between these variables, the model mostly told me I was conflating concepts while simultaneously paraphrasing my own argument. When challenged, it claimed to be using a more analytical framework. Yet when asked what a proper analysis would require—historical data, statistics, long-term comparisons—it could describe the methodology but would not actually perform it. The discussion remained superficial. This leads me to suspect that since ChatGPT 5, and especially 5.5, conversational interactions may be optimized to avoid spending significant resources on open-ended reasoning, philosophy, or exploratory discussion. Whether intentional or not, many conversations now feel sterile. I noticed a similar shift in Voice Mode nearly a year ago. It went from being genuinely informative and capable of producing useful insights to something closer to lightweight entertainment. At the time I thought this was limited to voice interactions; now I see the same trend in written conversations. At the same time, OpenAI seems to be increasingly prioritizing professional and coding-related use cases. As a developer, I benefit from that evolution. Nevertheless, I feel that the conversational experience has lost some of the depth, curiosity, and intellectual value it once had. Have other users noticed the same change?