There are more people that want to make hit songs than there are hit songs. As long as that's true, it will not be easy.

While some necessary factors about what makes a pop hit are known, even with that knowledge -- and a huge marketing budget -- the vast majority of songs written even by the very top producers and songwriters flop massively, all the time.

They know this, too. They budget so that their 1% massive hits pay for the 99% that nobody cares about.

That probably involves more of a corporate marketing vanguard that picks winners more so than it organicly finds them.

And you think Games are different?

The corporate marketing vanguard that picks winners in the gaming industry is almost entirely dedicated to microtransactions, pay to win, pay walls, subscriptions, and battle passes.

Inorganicly chosen winners is a problem, but in the music industry, the end product itself doesn't exploit the listener beyond just that.

Sure they are now, that's simply where the money is nowadays. 5 years ago it was battle passes 5 years before that it was an attempt to recoup costs with used game. 5 years prior to that it was experimenting with DLC types and seeing what would stick. And 5 years before that it was trying to have long term subscription attachments to a game.

Games are ultimately tech. And games grew along with the internet. It was inherently going to be run more like a tech company than a media conglomerate for that reason. I see it less as games being exploitative than a double edged sword, like the internet itself. It can be a lot more exploitative. But it also opened up entire mediums of ideas and arguably tore down world borders.

Artists absolutely want to follow a formula. Read a little bit about songwriting. How common chord structures are across popular music. Music theory in general is literally formulaic. Beethoven or Radiohead both follow formula.