Out of curiosity, what about games that update? Crawl gets a new release like every six months where they often make big changes. New gods, species, other changes (like when they removed food, or added shapeshifting talismans)
I guess it’s possible you are correct and like the bulk of people who have ever studied film, literature, and art more generally are wrong. That seems unlikely. More plausible is that it’s common for people to experience a given work multiple times and get different things out of it.
That’s not even accounting for the “Reading Lear as an old man hits differently than reading it when I was a teenager” factor. That is, who you are changes over time and that affects how you experience art.
I don’t think that’s especially common for roguelikes. I played a lot of crawl: stone soup and it was pretty common for folks to go for a win with every species, god, and class.
More broadly, games with different narrative choices (eg: Witcher 2 has two mutually exclusive middle acts).
And also more broadly, games with different mechanical choices (eg: many RPGs).
There’s also games where the process itself is fun (eg: Tetris).
Also, as many humans have imperfect memory, after enough time has passed a game may feel fresh playing it again. It may also land differently playing it at a new stage in life.
If you set the server config to limit one player per class, and set the max team size to like 8, you basically have a hero shooter. That’s not an unusual config- some servers were just like that for years.
What’s missing ? “Each class has two powers” is an extremely specific metric I don’t think is a requirement for hero shooters, and even if it was you have the unique grenades on top of the more obvious “he can build a sentry, he can turn invisible”.
You could maybe argue there aren’t enough classes, but I don’t buy that. As long as you have enough for everyone on the team to play something different, you’re good. The characters in TF2 certainly have personality.
I knew someone who got really upset when I compared overwatch to TF2, but I think it was because they were emotionally invested in overwatch and felt bad when I was like “it’s kind of like this much older game I like more”. Saying the thing they love is kind of a knockoff made them feel bad.
Anyway. To your point. I wouldn’t call tf2 a hero shooter first. It’s not the best representation of the genre, probably. But to my point, I still stand by overwatch added very little on top of TF2. Most of Blizzard’s changes were changes in minor detail. It’s basically "more classes, fewer game modes, you can’t run your own server, and we’re going to try to sell you micro transactions "
I stand by my assessment that overwatch is essentially team fortress 2 with a limit of one player per class and fewer game modes.
I don’t know the name of the trope, but it’s like when a cover gets more popular than the original. Except the person doing the cover (blizzard) is a huge scumbag.