I actually think that technology curtails innovation in games. Constraints is what drives innovations in game design. If you gave a painter an infinite canvas and every possible medium he would stare at it blankly but if you say you can only use black and white and you only have 3x5 inches then he gets creative. I think restraints create creativity. The challenge with the technology is that you can always say well we will make the same game or a elaboration of the genera with better graphics and more sound or in 3D or whatever and what that does though is move you're focus of attention towards the display of the model. You have to remember that games the model is not the display the map is not the territory. I have a whole bunch of examples I typically use. If we go back to checkers and you ask someone about it and say tell me what the board of checkers is like. They say oh you play it on an 8x8 chess board which isn't true. You play checkers on this crazy 4x4 diamond grid. Its not played on an 8x8 chess board we think it is but that is just because that s what it looks like. Asteroids is not played on a square it's played on a torus. Shoots and latter's is played in a non-Euclidian teleporting space and we give it to kids to learn about wormholes. From the get go the representation which is where we spend our technology is a lie. The drawing the display is a lie and when we chance the graphics we are spending all our energy lying to users better rather than on innovating what the model is. You can innovate the model with pen and paper.