I think you misunderstood my previous comment.

Game theorists, like any academic, prefer models with the least number of assumptions and (transitive) dependencies.

My issue is with thinking this presumed fixed point was created with an elegant model (and thus conclude it's relatively interesting to study).

If you deconstruct the model - i.e. look through its full dependency tree to state the assumptions - It's not simple or elegant.

Other assumptions like modeling without irrational behavior are purer in that sense.