As long as gamers can't define "good game gamers actually want", this is a useless metric.
As an example, I am confident that a true successor to Battlefield 3/4, unencumbered by EA's often terrible decisions, would sell very well. The problem is, it probably wouldn't make the same money as some microtransaction-ridden free-to-play dopamine factory, and so management wouldn't actually _want_ to make the game that the gamers want. (Though supposedly there is a game like that in the making -- I just don't want to get my hopes up because I've been fooled too many times.)
Put them all together and we'd probably get a mess of genres with little overlap, or "worse": probably some already existing popular game that is hated by the gaming enthusiasts. Because we've long left this monoculture where any one game is the talk of the town for years to come. Or because the businesspeople actually are serving what people want.
You're also right that what enthusiasts want are rarely the most profitable. Blizzard can make 5 HD games and even MTX them up to high hell. Candy Crush is probably still making more than any of them. Just another example of how utterly diverse gaming has become (or perhaps, full circle where bejeweled on steroids still can make so much money).
But I doubt the DEI departments at Sony, EA, Ubisoft and Microsoft will ever let them release games with waifus and jiggle physics, so they'll have to keep saying no to free money on the table just to die on that hill.
Edit: The gocha waifu anecdote was an example to prove a point, I'm not advocating that that's the only way to make money and that everyone should start making that. There's other successful examples besides gocha.
Never seen western studios release a game of this genre.
relying on organic advertising is even harder than making a good game. Some things are just in a snug little corner and never truly break out to that mainstream.
2. Ubisoft is large, it does both. it has several mobile games. No gacha models, AFAIK.
3. "You don't need to ask people define what they want". If someone is going to assert "make good games", then yes. I may as well just simply ask them. Alternatively: do you really think I'll make Genshin Money if I just copy Genshin? a dozen studios already beat me to it.
4. "I doubt the DEI departments at Sony, EA, Ubisoft and Microsoft will let them release games with waifus and jiggle physics so they'll have to keep saying no to money to die on a hill." Those aren't the only ways to make money. Not even in Asia. And this is an odd statement given Sony did publish Stellar Blade this year. Its wishy washy but it's not like there's some hidden cabal banning this stuff. It really comes down to a mix of culture, PR, and sales. Dead or Alive's newest dating sim isn't releasing in NA just because of "DEI"
EDIT:
I was referring more to the addictive nature of gacha games.
A dude staring at a screen just clicking buttons with no expression on his face for hours on end might say he's having fun, but that's gonna be hard to sell me on.
People want services, but don't want to continuously pay for a continous service. well, that's why MTX work. For every 100, 1000 people playing for free, you got some whale amortizing the cost for them.
Uhh... people do all the time, we invented a word for it, subscriptions. It's like the main form of non-ordinary expense people pay, the issue is that the product has to worth it, MTX focused games are so geared to the lowest common denominator they aren't fun (usually)