I honestly think snooker's rule set is convoluted and inelegant, with gimmick rules like multiple attempts at an escape, no requirement to hit a rail after contact, playing away from frozen balls, a player having no mathematical chance to comeback in a frame, making efforts like centuries and 147s glorified victory laps instead of winning feats, the respotting of the colored balls (which continuously brings the referee into the picture), and the arbitrary end game of having to make the coloreds in order.
Now I do agree that 8 ball, 9 ball, and maybe even 10 ball have become too easy for pros on modern equipment and can lack that "extended drama" you're talking about since those games have become too break and run centric, but great sets in those games are just as good as viewing as anything in snooker. Difference is a snooker frame can sometimes last as long as a set of 9 ball, so you'll simply get more "drama" due to a snooker match lasting a lot longer, not because it's inherently a better cue sport. The Efren/Earl race to 120 had everything a great snooker match has.
That said, I do agree pool needs a "new" game. 8 ball and 9 ball caught on due to their relative simplicity. Straight pool is awesome, but not good viewing since you might only see a single player shoot. It's my opinion that a pool table is better designed than a snooker table due to Phelan's innovation by making the traditional rounded pockets flat faced. This simple innovation actually creates an exponential amount more of offensive and defensive possibilities and forces players into more "dilemmas." Because shots are easier to make and you can make them from more angles reliably, players are faced with more 50/50, 40/60, etc decisions than snooker where going for offense vs. defense is an easier decision. It makes safety play more interesting because you have to lock up more due to those additional offensive options, this translates into more kick/jump escapes and kick/jump return safes. You can get away with playing distance in snooker a majority of the time. I think 5x10 is the table size sweet spot, for pool at least. Playing safes via just distance is lame, so the equipment shouldn't be too friendly toward that tactic.
I say this because a lot of pool fans who have p*nis envy of snooker think the equipment (smaller table, bigger pockets) is responsible for how easy it is to run out in modern pool, when it's the actual games (8 ball, 9 ball, 10 ball the core pool games now) being played. Create a game that will naturally produce more clusters off the break and that will better balance defense with offense and better balance players battling for a single game rather than players simply exchanging break and runs/runs from a dry break. I think Joe Tucker's American Rotation on the 10 footer is a step in the right direction. On the fence about ball in hand after the break, though. That's one of those "inelegant" rules I don't like. Seems contrived, but I understand the theory behind it.