All these games are singleplayer games. In multiplayer games the point of the GP post is much more pronounced. If a single strategy beats all others, approximately nobody will play the other strategies and a significant part of your game content may as well not have been written. You need multiple viable strategies (preferably in some sort of rock/paper/scissors loop) to keep the game interesting.
Yours is the only reply that didn't use absolutes to describe human behavior, and I genuinely appreciate that. I agree that there are situations where a similarly-structured playing field becomes important to the main function of the game, but the OP made sweeping generalizations about every game type needing to be developed in a hyper-specific way (his way), otherwise the game is automagically bad -- and I hope we can both agree that's pretty silly.
