It's a good point about trying to copy Hollywood being the wrong way to go, but as you say, it's more 'follow the money' and the perceived way of making the most money (cinematic blockbusters).
It's weird, I'm playing RDR at the moment, a critically acclaimed game. The actual gameplay in that game is pretty terrible - cover-based shooting for the most part- and the game's strengths are all in the cutscenes, dialogue when travelling to missions, and the game world and characterisation - all Hollywoody stuff. I'm glad we have this type of game - but developers seem to continually over-reach in an effort to get there; both this and LA Noire were beset with development problems. Even Rockstar are running into trouble with the cinematic action game (Max Payne too) recently but they still manage big sales.
I think the issue with developers following their own business model is that they have very rarely shown that they can do that. There seems to be a massive disconnect between the business people and the developers, and you have to think that there is a very incompetent strata of middle management in there somewhere that is not able to forecast their sales properly, understand the complexities on each side (accountants won't understand development, and developers may struggle with planning/budgeting), or deliver projects on time/budget.
This is all conjecture on my part based on general gaming press reporting of course. I work in software, and am full of amazement and admiration at what developers achieve, and the relatively bug-free products that ship. I think there is an incredible industry there that needs better management.
Good article on Eurogamer
yesterday about it. Amazing that Square forecast 15m sales over their three big releases.