One of my teams is currently using a mesh colorization system for our game, which we developed in-house. E.g. we have a game level where each mesh is assigned some color ID, such as "primary accent" or "background1" (but not an actual RGB color); and there are color schemes which we can apply to the level according to these color IDs to get different looks.
The first version of the color scheme system was "clearly superior": it offered a lot more possibilities for assigning color schemes to meshes, but it needed about 80 color values for each color scheme.
The second version of the same system was "clearly inferior" -- just 28 color values, and much less creative control over the resulting look of the level.
Guess which system was adopted? Right, the second, simple one. Despite offering less creative possibilities, the second system was smaller and thus could fit more easily into artists's heads, which produced better-looking results overall.
To sum up, "superior" is multidimensional. Dvorak can offer better typing speed, but it offers much less "habit compatibility" with existing keyboards in the real world, and thus is a worse time investment. Or, Haskell offers much better maintainability, refactorability and reliability, but dynamic languages offer faster time-to-market and easier-to-hire coders.