@Wavehawk
This was the one I think.

The strength of a visual novel game is in two elements: characters and story. Thing is, most if not all the characters are now stereotypically cliche, and the stories of most aren't much to write home about either. Essentially, if you can't be bothered to like the characters or be interested in the story, there's no real draw.

Unfortunately, like my example of FPS and fighting games: most companies don't really see beyond "package new game to sell". And like you mentioned, not many companies really take time to develop new technologies and interfaces for the genre, thus it stagnates. And hell, with the number of Bishojou Game stories nowadays making the jump to TV animation? Why bother with a game if the TV animation can tell the same story (or just show the same characters)?

I seem to recall Namco trying to use the Half-Life:Counterstrike engine to make a sort-of Visual Novel some years back. The idea might have been lame, but it sounded like there was at least some effort involved. And anyone who's played Half-Life, Halo, Metal Gear, etc. games can probably attest that being able to interact with your environment makes a story and characters more immersive than just (sad to say) point-and-click choices for conversation.

As for the good old 'Pinas…the less I can say about the Colonial Mentality (este, Mental Colony pala), the better…

Innovate in story telling? Sure, absolutely. Despite the fact that I don't think the Japanese anime/gaming industry has ever really been driven all that much by innovation (more on continuous improvement and refinement), I think there's always plenty of room for new ideas. But stories don't become automagically better-*written* just because they employ more-advanced technology. Fundamentally, these are books — illustrated, narrated, semi-interactive books. The auditory and visual aids are meant to augment and enhance the *reading experience*, not so much become a "gaming experience". Even works that integrate RPG-esque battle components tend to have a line between "story" and "game-play". Yes, they're all sold as games, but that's mainly because of the platform and distribution method. I think that innovating *in* the genre would mean delivering a better reading experience; if you remove the focus on reading, it seems to me that it becomes something else entirely (not that that's necessarily a bad thing). When you complete an AVG/NVL work, the first question should probably be more like "was it a good book", not "was it a good game".

(The move to HD for these works is sort of notwithstanding, though, as this allows for a more immersive experience for those with widescreen monitors. Besides that, it will make it much easier to port to HD consoles. So, on that point, I agree that the move is a bit overdue.)

In the end, the lament about "the lack of creativity" is by no means limited to this form of entertainment. Consider anime, consider "Western" video games… heck, consider Hollywood! Our entire entertainment culture right now is focused on sequels, safe bets, and progressive improvements to old formulas rather than on "reinventing the wheel". You need look no further than the E3 conference currently going on in the U.S. to see this in action — even the "big announcements" are just evolutions of previous ideas.

At the end of the day, the whole industry is designed around a sort of "revolving door" model where new people gain and lose interest on a fairly regular and quick cycle. So, at any given time, you will always find stuff that touches on all the major interests and demographics (yes, including Da Capo games), and most will be derivatives of things we've seen before. To those entering the market at that point it'll be new and exciting, but those who've been around for a while may start growing weary and nothing will ever be "the way it was before". Those of us who choose not to head for the exit and stick around in the genre have to find a way to keep our interest up. I suppose that'd be especially hard if you derive enjoyment more from "new, innovative experiences" rather than "comfortable, familiar experiences". Neither of those preferences are better or worse than the other, but I tend to think that a good portion of the dedicated community in Japan must be in the second category.

So, anyway… all that and I didn't really address the catalyst of the article, which is the erosion of freedom this industry group is imposing on the creators. Certainly, this is an opportunity to innovate, but the only way to fund that innovation will be through consolidation and by doubling-down on the formulas that do work. It's nice to tell the industry to "reinvent thyself", but at what cost, and what is the expectation of return? As I said above, I'm not totally convinced that the move to more expensive technology will result in a corresponding increase in sales for a genre that's really all about reading. Is there really that big of a market interest in simulations, 3D eroge, and the like? Who knows… time, as always, will tell.