Then why are smaller studio's and indie developers making games on no budget that are actually memorable? It's not about the specs -- It's about the mind and what you can do to make things happen on what you've been given. The less specs and money the more ambitious you become... why? Because you hafta really work your *** off to wow people.
Because there are fewer producers trying to regulate what they create, and thus they can express better artistic freedom. You have to work your ass off to impress anyone in gaming (especially these days considering how critical people on the internet are...), but if you have more people invested in the project, they're going to want in on the creation process to make sure it has things they think might bring them more money, regardless of whether or not it truly does enhance the game.
So for example, say you were your own independent studio, running on your own dime and your own time. All the money going in is yours, all the time going in is yours, all the work going in is yours, and all the profit coming in is yours. You were able to distribute it on your own without any outside assistance. In that case, you would be completely in your own right to design, market, and sell your game as you damn well please, and the game would be exactly as you intended it to be, so it hopefully is more memorable from a gameplay aspect from a players' point of view.
Now instead, say that someone like EA gives you half the money, but it doubles your overall possible budget. You have to show them progress of how your game is going, and if they don't like something about it, they'll either force you to make changes or pull funding. Say that you are the main ones making the game itself and you' are better at making it on PS3 but they are distributing it for you, and they say you can only make it for the 360 because that's the only system they will distribute for, or they will again... pull funding. You are further limited unless you want to lose their backing. And say you had a unique idea for a revolutionary shooter that would work wonders, but EA won't publish it unless it has something familiar from other successful series like regenerative health. Say that health idea completely kills the point of your game, but they won't sell it otherwise. You'll be forced to include it, and the overall gameplay suffers because of it.
Factors like that are the main reason games are the way they are today, and it's because customers speak with their wallets, and producers want those wallet contents, and kill the devs in the process to produce them, who often want to make games out of love. It's why series that started off wonderful and well received die of oversaturation, such as Halo's beginning, Guitar Hero's upstart, and even the Sonic series, to name an older one, compared to their present counterparts and all the teams involved in making the games.
PSN:LonelyDesperado MissTFayed: rahmed51387 - You got the surfer accent. You are officially the smartest person on here.