The CEO’s take here is actually pretty on-point. The article title over-simplifies, a bit.

The problem he points out is that a “failed” game that doesn’t sell well, or even sells moderately, is still a valuable game, and experience for the developer(s), but it also often means financial ruin for the studio. In his opinion, it’s that such studios aren’t recognizing when they’re releasing into an over-crowded genre, and need to adjust their budget expectations down.

Cause yeah, people SHOULD be able to make shit little games, without having to re-tool their entire career if it doesn’t do terribly well.