Thinking about what the writer gets out of doing something being of primary importance does not, in my view, make anyone a 'bad' person who does it. Neither does creating something that you know will have its faults, but is an honest expression of your imagination, Not having to concern yourself with mass approval is very liberating, as is creating something that might not be written particularly 'well', but manages to make a stranger somewhere smile.
Large numbers of people saying they like what you've done is something to be proud of. So too is managing to make a story that is true to what was in your head when you decided to do so, with or without it being ' popular'
I remember a particular piece of fiction that I had to 'dissect' as part of a university degree course paper. By the end of the process. even though I did 'well', with the analysis, I resented the book. Three years later, I read the book as a cure for boredom and quite liked it.
People who like to write for uncomplicated escapism are not the enemy of those who take it all seriously. Someone may enjoy a piece of fiction for exactly the reasons many others hate it. 'If only people could be more like computers.' Yes, that was something else I succeeded in dissecting. I did so by cynically telling the over-analysts exactly what I knew they wanted to hear.
The ' mechanics' of the subject area here probably do have a point at which most variables have been exhausted, The creativity around those mechanics? I think and hope not.
Feel free to disagree/ agree / not care about any of the above!