I don't care about the tussle. I just thought his comment was funny in the current situation.
I don't think Sony takes bigger risks anymore either. On the hardware side they are similar. On the software side Sony just had more studios to do it with.
I agree on graphics. Gameplay is ultimately what keeps us playing. Don't really get the static gameplay point relative to the discussion. Neither sides big exclusives really broke a mold or took risks in that department. Perhaps you mean more like VR, which is fine, but its limiting tech and fairly low popularity make it more nich and not really a massive boon or loss either way...that could change nest gen, though.
It goes beyond that. For example, remember when the analogue sticks were first introduced? This is when we first switched to 3D gaming, which also meant that more buttons were required. But imagine if the risk had not been taken and we still relied on the same controls from the 2D era with better looking graphics. What about the DVD disc? With the 3D era, worlds became massive in scale and detail. Imagine if games were still on CDs or even cartridges. Worlds would remain so much smaller and basic even. From here do we move into things such as cameras and motion controls. This is where everything else attached to that starts to fall into place since you are now dealing with a level of immersion. It is the new era of realism, and what comes along with "immersion" is personality. So, to put it blunt, static gameplay of the 3D era is beginning to take a backseat to that. This is what i mean by innovation. Nintendo sees this just as much as the PC market. Gaming is changing and the controls are becoming more complex as the whole graphics era closes to a crawl.
This market thrives on constant innovation. There is no room to simply stand still and be a formidable player. This is what Sony means by waiting for the numbers. That proof determines how nimble you are at paving your own path