My point was that if the state space of the market has lots of undiscovered areas all bets are off who is going to succeed an who is not. I would not call gaming tech "complete" by a long shot.
I would argue the NBA example is not a good one. In that the parameter space is quite fixed, whereas in technology and games, I would claim the state space of what success looks like is much broader.
Yes, if you have super accurate metrics of what success looks like and the domain is highly competitive and lucrative then the scrappy upstart has poor chances.
I dont' think you can have a Billy Beane/Moneyball/Sabermetrics moment in NBA like you had in baseball.
But I think gaming and technology still has lots of unfound angles to be discovered.
I would guess the question YC pondered was not "can these guys create an MMO" but "could they have a small chance to bring some value adding innovation to some place in some market".