Its because the people do not want new ideas and I.P, they want the same stuff rehashed. Look at the top 50 for the year, all I could count were 8 new I.P games in the top and they mostly related to new interface stuff. It is pointless to point any fingers at the creative people who would be first in line to create new experiences etc if they could, however the market realities dictate otherwise.

i agree and dissagree. COD will never innovate while its expected of others to do so. one things for sure and thats that Sony will always release new and inovative IP'S. the leap from LBP to LBP2 is on a scale that can't be measured.

you will see innovation in soft ware as the yrs go on.

It's human nature. People don't need new and innovative stuff that radically changes everything to come out every single year. The "same old, same old" formula gives them a sense of stability.

system shock 2 is similar, but at least the games are 8 years apart :)

Ok, another thing here.  I am going to definte "raising the bar" as "quality", and then comment, that people don't play games for "originality" or "quality".  An aspect to being entertain is novelty, so you get a pleasant surprise from a game.  Originality helps to aid in this process.  As far as quality goes, people don't play a game because it is high quality.  They play a game because it does what they want to do, and excutes sufficiently well that it lends to the experience.  The experience is high quality. Proof of this is that there are a multitude of high quality titles that are original that people didn't buy or play.

Say, for example, a $50 million curling simulator was created.  It emulated curling to a high degree, had TV quality production, and opened up the world of curling to newcomers and made it fun.  Well, anyone think such a game would even break into the top 10 here, or generate great review on metacritic (get over 90 average)?  No it wouldn't.  A curling simulator would be original, and it would by high quality, but doesn't INTRINSICALLY do what people want.

Honestly, i could care less if a is original or innovative i just want a good game. Assassins creed is a good example. Sure it was a little innovative, but then II and brotherhood came out and there is going to be another one the year after. The thing is, i could care less. I LOVE those games, and if they are good, i will buy them all.

It's not an issue. At all.

There will always be new IPs being developed and published. It's unrealistic to expect all of these to have AAA budgets (the kinds that have real marketing budgets and can be found at any retail outlet with no effort), considering that most new IPs are being developed by indie developers with minimal capital.

Keep in mind that most new IPs don't even merit a sequel due to lack of consumer interest and commercial success. Sometimes it's because the game was built on a bad idea or poor design, but in other cases, there simply wasn't enough to make the finished product stand out to win over sales.

As far as AAA budget games (or AA budget or A budget, or B budget...) go, every new IP will not be achieve commercial success, regardless of how much is spent on development and marketing. That's when the reality of basic business kicks in. You can't keep gambling those kinds of budgets away and expect to stay in the game development or publishing business.

Lastly, sequels (or any good sequel) have the tendency to add polish and refinement to what was presumably a good enough product to merit a sequel. Add new stories, new characters and an expansion of the game's universe and most consumers have a compelling enough reason to buy a sequel to a game they particularly enjoyed rather than take a $60 gamble on an untested IP.

Sales reflect this sentiment accordingly, so it's pretty easy to see where the publishers are coming from as well in regards to sequels.

What's original about The Orange Box? It was a video game compilation with a 3 year old game (at the time), a 1 year old (at the time) sequel to that game, a new sequel to that game, a sequel of a much older game only one new and original game (Portal). There was nothing original about 80% of The Orange Box.

As for BioShock, it was much more original than System Shock 2:

#1 System Shock 2 was a sequel, BioShock was a new IP.

#2 BioShock had an unique setting, and atmosphere.

#3 System Shock 2 had a clichee setting, it being a sci fi horror that took place on a ship.