If factorio interviews fill all roles with competent personnel, reduces hiring of incompetent people, etc., then it could be "good enough". Sure, you miss a lot of people who would also be good [enough].
They're not saying people who can't play factorio can't develop; it's the opposite. The hypothesis is surely that the can't+can't group has a large overlap.
Why not use starcraft instead and filter by apm and multitasking? You are sure to miss out on a few good candidates but you will filter out a lot of people who cannot manage 3 bases really effectively while watching the minimap, while designing custom build orders that can survive in the current meta. It’s like interviewing boxers on their blitz chess playing ability because you want “people who can think ahead under pressure.” Please.
Skipping candidates “just in case” is like not hiring women “just in case” they distract the men. Those defensive hiring practices destroy diversity, diversity of thought, and the chance for a human to be evaluated in a fair or rational way.
I don't think an arbitrary choice of test is "like not hiring women", but other than that yours is a valid criticism (personally I'd suspect it to bias for wealth).
I somewhat buy the anticipatory response elsewhere that essentially it's no worse than some of the other arbitrary choices -- basically, every style of assessment will miss some good candidates.
If factorio interviews fill all roles with competent personnel, reduces hiring of incompetent people, etc., then it could be "good enough". Sure, you miss a lot of people who would also be good [enough].
They're not saying people who can't play factorio can't develop; it's the opposite. The hypothesis is surely that the can't+can't group has a large overlap.