The debates are all about format, who the moderator is, and what s/he lets them get away with.
Unfortunately, they are run by news outlets that want to maximize viewership, so they are not really looking for content, but rather entertainment value.
Astute people watching the "debates" of prior elections can only walk away pissed off that the candidates were able to avoid answering questions, answer questions that were not asked, and to go off bloviating about irrelevancies.
Honestly, it's less painful to just watch YouTube during the debates and read about it in the WSJ the next morning.
The only thing painful about the debates was the stupid number of Republicans in the debates for the nomination. Everyone got three minutes to set forth their stance on a complex issue; it might as well not happened at all. It did give face recognition to some of them, I guess.
The ones with Trump and Hillary went okay, I thought, although the only winner I recall was Chuck Wallace, moderator of debate #3, who did a spectacular job.