Exactly how I feel as well. I can talk about what WoW does wrong all day long, but I still play it and do it because what it does right, it does really right and thus remains fun. As for other hot takes;
Doom Eternal is the best single-player shooter ever made.
Half-Life 2 is better than Half-Life 1.
Halo has never been a good shooter, in its campaigns at least since IDGAF about its multiplayer.
Dark Souls 3 is the best in the series. DS2 has shit bosses, and DS1's level design is infuriatingly awful in the second half especially.
Saying that as a primarily PC gamer, while 60 FPS is always better of course, I really wouldn't say that going below is that unplayable, at least outside of first-person and driving games. For titles with a third-person or top down perspective for example, the benefits are a lot less pronounced IMO even if still existent.
There's no such thing as a "golden age" of games. Some genres ebb and flow in quality perhaps, but as a whole I can't say there's any period I've experienced where I can say with certainty that the best games where done there for X reason.
Some people claim developers "used to care about gamers" or something along those lines- and that's just nonsense. They were always businesses that cared about money first, save for the vanishingly rare small indie devs that do make stuff purely out of passion. These companies just changed strategies to make money as their audience changed.
When people say "don't put politics in my games", I'm certain they actually mean "don't put politics I disagree with/don't care about in my games". Tons of games have political messages that don't get picked up and raged about because these messages are broadly consensual.