I don't remember stating it being the new fun, i don't even remember saying i fully agree with the article, so i can not answer your question. not trying to be cheeky by the way

 But wouldn't that be innovation on thier film/media front rather than actual games, theres nothing new blue ray has done for gaming experience to my knowledge except for bigger space, i don't own a ps3 yet, but thats what it seems.

Well Sony has given us some quite fun games off the PSN, and even had Pain which was quite different. Also Echochrome will re-invent the puzzle genre.

I dont see where the lack of innovation is.

what he is talking about is if a software company has an idea for a unique, never-before-done game then it is much harder for them to justify taking a $30mil risk than a $10mil risk

upping the development costs leads to less games and especially less games with new features or completely new ideas...it leads to lots of sequels and games that are similiar to successful titles with maybe some small bits of innovation in there to set it apart...

I have to say i totaly agree with this point as well 

I'm not picking you out of a crowd in the least bit ^^ I just constantly here the word "innovative" being pushed around like it's the next god-send. Innovation to me is just as if not less important then all the other things being rated. Granted, I understand why Wii fans would push that priority as it is the best thing offered in their console of choice, but I just don't see it being what everyone says it is.

I mean hell, Uncharted was a mix of Gears of War, and Tomb Raider, and by golly I loved it! Nothing innovative at all, and it was absolutely fantastic :) I just don't want people to assume that every game created needs to be "innovative", there are so many things you can change to make your game unique that it doesn't have to be limited to "new ideas". I almost always prefer solid gameplay over unique. Hell the first person market would be pretty dead otherwise xD

@Kitler, good point with the Eye of Judgement, too bad the game itself wasn't as good as say Magic or Yugi xD Thats a concept waiting to be explored :)

>In my opinion most developers need to step out of the arms race and realise that there is little or no benefit to trying to one up eachother with better graphics and more advanced graphical techniques. Certainly, Konami can afford to spend $70 Million to produce Metal Gear Solid 4 because it is ensured sales to break even but most developers do not have this luxury.

In order to break even with that budget they have to sell around 3.5 million games to break even! That's not a guarantee. And Konami can not afford to just break even on their most important game of the year. They have to make big profits on it.
I don't think the budget will be that high. More in the range of $40 million (still high, but definitely profitable).

I do agree that devs will need to (and probably will) step out of this arms race temporarily, until prices to develop HD games have dropped. If profits on Wii games increase in comparisson with HD games the choice will be easy.

@ChronotriggerJM

I agree with you and i do think Sony are quite inovative with thier software, always have, but i guess the point of the article is more about independ devs, and the their difficulty to enter the gaming industry.

 Of course and I have no objection to them making sequels but I think it makes them very lazy and not prepared to take the risk of making something exciting and new.

They know sequels will make money so they don't really even need to put much thought or effort into them.

Yea but with the introduction of PSN and XBLA, and soon to be Wiiware, developers don't have to make a big budget game to sell in retail. I think companies will look at the alternatives ala Warhawk distribution.