I think a missed part of this debate that people intuitively know but rarely gets articulated is that weapon durability is more of a “theme” of mechanics rather than a mechanic, because its so fundamentally different depending on context.
>most survival games
Weapon durability is constant and requires resources or finding new weapons to resolve. This makes weapon usage both a bar to clear (getting your first one) and a constant resource game. Makes less sense if weapons also use ammo, since the ammo fills about the same niche.
>survival horror
Weapon durability generally exists to prevent skill from ruining the sense of being prey. In modern titles it usually only applies to melee weapons, as to allow the devs to routinely determine how much damage you can actually deal, since they know skilled players with an infinite durability melee might be able to just genocide the enemies.
>freemium/grind games
Weapon durability exists to increase reliance on freemium systems, or in grindy games that might not have paid systems, to encourage efficient grinding, by introducing a routine cost to combat.
>BOTW-style action games
Weapon durability serves to increase the amount of content in the game interacted with by making progression nonlinear, thus making content youd ignore in a borderlands style game useful by virtue of better gear not lasting forever.
>arcade game
Weapon durability cranked up super high makes good weapons power ups instead of progression, interchangeable with ammo

I personally have wildly different opinions on all of these, as i assume lost of people do, despite them all being the “same” mechanic. FO3/New Vegas mostly use durability so they can give enemies super strong weapons without breaking the economy or player progression, its a totally different objective than diablo has or [insert survival game].