Soul of Flames,
You remind me of an annoying graduate student who likes to try and one-up professors by playing semantic games. What you say, of course, is objectively true. It is also absurd on its face. Is an ice cream cone with one tiny chip of chocolate still a chocolate chip ice cream cone? In your literal and narrow-minded world, yes.
In the real world, i.e., the business world where there are consumers, the relevant question is as follows: "In an era of normalization of companions, is it reasonable to expect that Treek will perform relatively on par with others?"
Most consumers would say, yes. The problem is that Treek objectively performs worse in every role.
So, congratulations, you score debating points for being technically correct and are no doubt basking in your self-righteous pseudo-intellectual prowess. At the end of the day, it remains a foolish decision on the part of the Devs not to address the issue, particularly since it is presumably easy to fix.