No is not man,a game that is design to freaking load fast will have problems on a system with slow loading.
Example let's say you will enter a multiplayer,and you have an SSD and I have a 5200rpm HDD,you will load your assets and be ready to go much faster than me,but you can't start alone playing,so you have to wait until I load.
This is one simple example of this.
Why you insist in arguing that something that is develop for 100 different hardwares will perform exactly as good as something done to 1 hardware?
Hell one of the biggest problems GPU had for years was abstraction,windows been easy to code for,but holding back your hardware,even DX12 weren't on the level of the PS4 programing tools for a reason.
If you find a PC hardware with the same specifications as the PS5 hardware and you show me a game made for that hardware that doesn't benefit allot then you have a point,other wise you are assuming and using data which is related to hundreds of storage devices.
Even on PS4 some games don't even benefit at all from SSd and load the same as the slow ass PS4 HDD that should tell you something.
You are changing your narrative. You stated that a game designed for SSD can't be done "...without screwing up those with mechanical drives." That is simply false. Now you talking about gamers waiting because mechanical is slower. Which was never the topic of discussion.
Also, I never stated anything about something being developed for 100 different hardware performing the same as just being developed for one. Don't mis-represent what I have stated. I have told you many times the same thing over and over. Games do not need to be build from the ground up to fully utilize hardware. That concept is dead for consoles because they are all running on the same architecture. Stop subbing to the secret sauce and hidden power nonsense.
The rest of your comment is just baseless speculation that is not worth anyone's time.
1. Depends on what kind data would be prioritized, less prioritized data can be written to vram from storage (i.e. cutscenes). Other things like game logic being fed to vram by CPU are more prioritized. It's matter of balancing.
2. PS360 came out in a time when PCs were running with 2GB of RAM which then spiked up to 8GB then 16GB. Well it's no worse than the "memory issues" on PS5 in a future worse case scenario, it's just that Sony wants to completely avoid a scenario like that ever again (which was more complained about than t3h Cell). It's always ideal to have your computing power always being the main limiter and not some other aspect that gets in the way (of hitting closer peak TFLOPs/performance).
1. You are also changing your narrative. "XSX also has less addressable memory as more is memory space is wasted on duplicate data (worse case scenario of 6.5GB out of 10GB available to graphics) ."
That is false. Time to abandon that falsehood.
2. This next gen has the absolutely smallest memory increase in console generation. Instead of being 8 times the previous gen its just 2X. That is a exceptionally clear indicator that the need for more memory just isn't there and the concern that 10GB of VRAM (faster) is going to cause problems is just unfounded. You are trying to argue that games in the future would need more than 10GB of active(GPU needs to access all 10GB to perform its tasks) memory to prevent performance degradation. That's absurd.