Apologies if this is too broad of a question.
As popular movies get serialized, in that new entries to the canon happen regularly and without a foreseeable conclusion, Some people argue that the finite amount of time and money invested in these movies directly harms the production of other movies in a similar genre.
I believe that this isn't a zero-sum game; a man-hour or dollar spent on producing Star Wars: Rogue One, for example, might actually help the development of new IPs by popularizing Science Fiction, by showing the industry that incredible money can be made in that genre.
Inversely, is it an established fact that studios refrain from taking risks on non-established series because they can make money easily by sticking to what they know?
While I focused on Star Wars, this is only because they are an easy target. Disney seems keen on mass producing as many films in the Star Wars universe as is profitable, but this question applies to Marvel, DC, Star Trek, possibly Harry Potter, et al.
Do fewer superhero movies get made these days by studios other than Marvel Studios? Has anyone ever rejected a movie script because he/she didn't believe it would be able to compete in a market actively saturated with similar, hugely popular, movies?
Do fewer epic space opera films get created these days because they would always be directly competing with a Star Wars film?
Is there any hard data or research available on the production of new intellectual properties during periods of intense popularity for similar movies with regular entries into their series?
There are so many variables here that speculation is unavoidable, but hard data is really what I want.