Innovation is certainly more expensive and risky, but they can certainly sell well. Eventually it creeps into more mainstream games. A large amount of the "new" features in BF3/4 were borrowed from Red Orchestra, as an example. But a large part unwillingness on part of the publishers and part unimaginative customers. They don't realize it, but enhancements to old gameplay is welcome and well received. They just don't realize it until they play a game that branches out. Mafia 3 is an excellent example of a such a game. It is GTA in the 1960s. The cars, guns and music is changed but aside from that the gameplay is just mirrored and as dull as GTA itself. Despite being set in the 1960s, the player can call in new cars, ammo trucks and the like. Even though cell phones did not exist back then. It is hilariously awkward to see the main character talk to himself aloud and then have whatever you ordered delivered right to you. They didn't even try to make the game fit the setting. It sticks out like a sore thumb. Ironically, the game was panned. Probably in large part due to GTA being the godfather of the genre and better marketing, but both series (at least GTA4/5 and Mafia 3) are just as underwhelming and stuck in the early 2000s. Had it not been for marketing and brand recognition, I bet GTA would have been panned to. I think the reaction to Mafia 3 is people realizing that genre is too played out and has not seen any good changes for well over a decade.