Every game has a compulsion loop. In chess its a full game of chess. In Street Fighter II it is one full fight with up to 3 rounds. Its a very dystopian sounding but very central component to almost all games.
Of course, but in non-Skinner-box-speak, we call that the "gameplay". Refactoring an old concept like "gameplay" to wield the tools of war usually associated with gambling -- that's the crux of the matter. That's what I and the root-level commenter fear.
Vampire Survivors itself isn't the problem -- it costs $3, and doesn't require any more (non-temporal) investment, neither microtransactions nor additional quarters. But it's a harbinger of things to come. Remember horse armour, and how harmless it was?
What we call things is fluid and flexible, like our language. So there might be a discussion about calling the main loop in a game something different. But redefining the gameplay loop as the compulsion loop is oh so wrong in my mind; one implies no nefarious intent, and the other is clearly meant to describe the loop of a game focused on selling microtransactions.
Or a game that is engaging and doesn’t fall into the trap of making the player non-productively frustrated or bored.
It’s really hard for me to play video games at all because of my ADHD and so I feel it so hard when games fail to get this right because it makes them basically unplayable; I can’t “power through” the luls.
Games like Minecraft, World of Warcraft, Slay the Spire, Binding of Issac, Don’t Starve all are A++ because they either have tight game loops with lots of variety or they make it so the player always always has something meaningful to do.
