Wall of text.
Yep. That is how most MMO companies think. If they come up with something better, good for them, but this concept isn't broken or need to be fixed.
Yep. Needs a fine balance of all those things. Like I said, you can always improve the concept, but if the thing you are dangling in my face is not worthwhile, then my influence to obtain it is not there, thus potentially having the player quit the game.
Potentially yes. At the same time, if you emulate every concept it has, it is doomed for failure also. If you actually read what I said, it said that you need familiarity to reel you in, then slap you with a unique concept to keep you hooked onto it. Actually I will use GW2 as an example. While it was not my cup of tea, it is a very well designed game concept wise. It has familiar concepts, at the same time though, it brought unique concepts to the genre that definitely makes it stand out on it's own. You can easily say WoW and GW2 are not the same game at all, at the same time, the core of their game is essentially the same.
If you want to risk millions and millions of dollars that could potentially bankrupt your company to make this "unique" game? You have to bring some form of familiarity, or no one will even care to look at your game. You can't be unique just to be unique, this was why FFXIV did so badly. You have to believe that this new and unique concept is necessary to make the game better.
Take Resident Evil 4 as an example. It's core gameplay is still that of the RE titles before it, but simply creating the over-the-shoulder camera angle and better aiming mechanic, not only did it take the same concepts as RE1-3 and improve upon it, it created it's own standard, and various games used it's concept like Dead Space and Gears of War that improved upon it. Take what is good and make it better.
I left because I got bored. The game couldn't convince me to engage in it's end game content. It flashed pretty gear at me, but wasn't interested.
Actually I do enjoy PvP, but I don't have a competitive nature beyond self-accomplishment. Actually, this is one place I can argue against a gear based system. It was never fun in WoW dealing with someone who's gear was so high that I could barely put a dent on him. GW2 I believed did it right however in this aspect and why I understand where their concepts come from. However I believe that gear tier and PvP can work if done right. Such as putting higher tier with higher tier, or design it so you compete with others based on your rank, or have the option of a non-ranked battle.
Why actually....yes! Why shouldn't developers tell me that this piece is obviously better than your last piece? It is the developer's responsibility to make sure the game is as easy to understand as possible without hindering the challenge or difficulty the game provides. I don't need this overly complex gear system where people debate on each other about endlessly on forums such as this. If I am a Dragoon, don't give me gear that tells me "Ohh this will be good in this particular fight." or "I can use this to make my Fire better.". No, to me it is just too overly complex for it's own good. As a Dragoon, just tell me "Okay, you need STR, ATK, and Crit. If your Dragoon has these, he will be powerful.".
You know what the situational gear system appeals to? Hardcore players. The team isn't making this game just for the hardcore players, they are also making it for people who are just stepping into the MMO genre. If I was playing an MMO for the first time and dealing with situational gear, it would be a turn off. FFXI was fine because that is just how it was, and really, MMO's were more catered to a hardcore base. With gear, it needs to be simple and have depth to it. It shouldn't have to be debated on what is best for your character. You should be slapped in the face with it from the start.
So yes, that sums it up.