Generally, tangible things are "fewer," everything else is "less."

"Less" is correct here.

On topic, I too am sad that Japanese budgets aren't as unnecessarily bloated as their Western counterparts. C'mon Japan, roll 'dem dice!

No it's about countability. "Risks" is being used as a plural and hence countable number (one risk, many risks). So fewer is correct.

"They have less risk" would be correct, because risk would be used as a collective noun there.

More money =/= better game. Metro showed that. It looks better and plays better then A LOT OF GAMES with much much less money (about $10.000.000). Most of the money goes into marketing .

"less risk" and "fewer risks" are the correct forms, depending on whether it's being used as a countable or collective noun.

The countability part refers to measurable units though, i.e. count nouns. A risk does not fall under that category: it's a mass noun. At the least, I don't see how one normally goes around quantifying risks. Here, even though "risks" is plural, it's really being used as a single unit.

I love how jap games r right now don't ever want them to adopt western thinking at all! the only ting I want them spend ore money on is localization of its games

You can count risks. "There are two risks associated with this proposal:" I agree it CAN be used as a mass noun, but then you'd always say "risk" and not "risks". By using "risks" they mean a countable number.

Yeah, because that game wouldn't be a helluva lot more expensive if it was developed in California instead of Ukraine...

I can't say I agree, not in this context: it seems to me the word is being used as a mass noun here. Certainly, Mikami's not sitting down and tallying risks taken by this group vis-a-vis that group. Though to address your earlier unanswered question, yes, the distinction is going away. Not that I'm too fussed: according to the Book of Knowledge (citing Webster), the distinction only arose because some 18th century nobleman thought "fewer" sounded more formal than "less."Anyhow, agree to disagree here.

And on that note...

I seem to bring this up in every discussion about Japanese game budgets, but I very much respect the fact that a company like Compile Heart can retail release a HD JRPG that'll sell ~ 60k copies in Japan and they'll turn a profit from that.

I like that Japan still has "the middle" too. Sure, there's the AAA games (not too many actually; FF & Resi spring to mind in terms of budget) and there's the smaller, Otaku stuff. Then there's the stuff that isn't quite there like, I dunno, Tales of or Yakuza. These aren't million sellers nor are they 100-200k, yet they keep going along with mostly respectable production values and still manage to be profitable and continuing series.

Anyway, point being, there may indeed be a lack of risk taking, but there's also a much more stable industry. And in this day and age of western studios shutting down left, right & centre plus the popping up of indie teams everywhere (ironically, where they can take more risks because budgets are smaller); then a bit of stability would actually be a welcome change.