If that is what you are reading into my statements, I am not making myself clear. As I said, I realize that complete innovation is rare. It's not rational to expect every game that is released to be a completely new genre and a never before seen game structure. It is possible however to expect that more effort is put into how a game plays. And that if a sequel or a new game boils down to adding higer resolution textures and rewriting the story then the game is not necessary.

Again, shovelware will always exsist, not everything will be stellar. My issues are that the games that are universally hailed as the best games of the year more and more often tend to be what I call graphical upgrades of old ideas. The FPS genre for example is a prime example of this. Luckily, the game industry is more vital then the film industry, but this generation has seen videogames move closer to the creative black hole that the movie industry is in, and that worries me.

Maybe Uncharted 3 will prove to be absolutely amazing, who can tell from the trailer? But then again, maybe it will turn out to be Avatar, a piece of shit in a pretty dress that everyone in the world will say is the best thing ever.

This has deviated a bit from my original post though. I stand by the idea that when graphics hit a certain level of photorealism, they start to look pretty bad since they are naturally compared to the real world. That point has been reached this generation in my opinion and I think many of the most 'realistic' games we see now look worse than many games from generations past.

SOooo I'll be buying

Assassin's Creed 3
Mass Effect 3
Uncharted 3
Gears of War 3
Resistance 3
Mass Effect PS3
White Knight Chronicles 2
MGS: Rising 

and possibly VSXIII next year?

EPIC

Almost correct, except I think entire genres are remakes of the same game, not necessarily just a series.

Bong Lover, im not done yet.  You also dont realize (and im assuming based on your stance on video games in general this gen that this doesnt apply to you) that several fans of series become emotionally invested in their favorite games, its what keeps them coming back.  Everything from the story to characters, environments, atmosphere etc etc are just as important to a game as the gameplay itself.  This is why developers continue to build upon the foundation they created, rather than scrapping it for an entirely different model.  Heres a prime example, if metal gear solid 4 were to ever be anything other than a stealth action game, such as just an action game, I would never support that series again a day in my life.  I would feel as though they robbed me of a true metal gear experience.  Another reason creating sequels simply works the way it does is because there are so many other gaming experiences to be had that by the time the sequel rolls out everyone is ready to return to that particular universe.

What you said at the end of your post is the reason I don't already own a PS3....time. Hell I barely have the time to play the few games I play on the 360 as it is. It sucks because I know I'm missing out on a lot of quality titles on both systems. I'm sincere when I say that I want to play some of the PS' big titles but if I'm gonna do that, I'm just gonna have to say F-it and go out and buy a PS. If I think about it too much I'll talk myself out of it like I have to date.

I guess I'm also just disappointed that MS pretty much didn't even show up to the VGAs. I mean I mostly don't give a shit about who wins what as far as "awards" but seeing the premiers is cool. I'm sitting there watching with my two sons and all I'm seeing is all this good looking PS3 shit. MS better have a good showing at E3 in 2011 and not just a fucking Kinect stroke fest. I don't have a problem with Kinect either, I actually think it's cool and I remain optimistic  as long as MS balances out the offerings. 

I forgot about this until now, but what happend to the resident evil game that was rumored to be announced. Also there was a a peace walker emblem that popped up during one of the geoff keighly interviews.

I guess I can understand where youre coming from if youre the kind of guy thats played lara croft and decided that there is no need to play uncharted because of their similarities in gameplay.  It sounds as though gaming just isnt for you, or that you stick to one game for a very, very long time.  I can respect that you do not have the want or will to plug your way through another cliche jrpg, or another online first person shooter.  I guess im the kind of guy that plays all types of games within each genre just to see how each experience differs from the next.  Essentially every genre boils down to the same mechanics if you look at it that way, but my passion for video games is what drives me to play as many great games as I can despite the similarities.  Im sorry for sounding a bit malicious but I believe that now is the best time to be a gamer period.

as long as its an sexy ass I'm cool with it

This is where we differ. I don't consider these thinsg to be part of the 'game' in the sense I use the word. These things are presentation. When I speak of a game I mean the rules that determine how the game plays. 

I am very passionate about games. That is why it is disappointing to me to see that games are rellying more on more on fluff, and less on actual gaming. You are right that I prefer sticking to the same game for a long time rather than playing many variations of the same basic game.

Though, I don't want to seem like a nazi about it. I concede that a genre or a game can be advanced by improving on presentation, maybe even story telling. Not every game can invent its own genre. My problem is that game innovation seems to be virtually at a standstill and the entire industry is focused on presentation.