if a game is good and addicting but its addictive quality can be reduced, should it be, if it will retain the exact same 'good' (whatever that means)?
Is 'addicting' something that is neither necessarily good nor bad? Does it change depending on the game? What affects that?
Er, and last thing, what's the difference between good+addicting vs good+nonaddicting? Is that simply replay value? (if that is the case addicting doesn't seem like the right term)
I think this depends on the goal of the game. MMOs attempt to be good but almost always prefer to be addicting. Obviously, they make money off of micropurchases or monthly fees and so it only makes business sense. If addicting is simply described as the quality of a game that makes a player want to play more often and/or for longer periods of time then it is simply the replay value of a game. Golden Eye was addicting according to this model.
To provide consistency to our terminology, an addicting game admits some negative aspect. Otherwise, it is a fun game with high replay value. Farmville is addicting but this is because it is not a good game. You feel drawn in with false promises and end up playing for weeks because you just have to buy crap that doesn't actually change the game. That is addictive. Left 4 Dead on the other hand is a wonderful game that has high replay value. The draw is that you want to get better and try new strategies and win. In doing so you get just that plus a great experience.