I and others I’ve known have put the sorts of details and issues you mentioned into games, usually not to “piss people off”, but because we’re interested in making a game about a situation, that behaves like that situation, including the obstacles and inconveniences.
What puts me off many games is the ABSENCE of obstacles that should be in the game. I hate it when a game puts years of work into making a nearly photo-realistic game world with interesting environments, and then it gives those environments almost zero effect on the game. Want to run through the jungle underbrush – no problem! Go full sprinting speed non-stop!
To me, too much convenience can easily undermine the game situation and make it into a game that pretends to be about one situation, but is not really about that situation, because it makes almost everything “super-easy, barely and inconvenience!”
Of course, games can also go too far in the other direction, still unrealistic but MORE inconvenient than they should be. Such as a one-foot-high picket fence that cannot be passed, Or games where you need to eat – every several minutes, and if you don’t, you’ll soon die of hunger.
I think faulty equipment can either be interesting and appropriate, or annoyingly over-done. I like it when it seems fairly accurate/appropriate/realistic, and don’t like it when it seems exaggerated or artificial.
And yes, sometimes I or others will put some things in games expecting them to annoy players, such as places with annoying laws or rules or jerks in authority positions.