I can totally see where you're coming from there. It just seems weird to me that in a game that is all about the corp building and protecting stuff and the runner trying to break in and destroy it and steal it, that there are two cards that kind of destroy those defenses in a very natural way (doing things you want to be doing anyways, instead of having to go out of your way to do it).
Parasite does so in a very obvious way. It simply destroys the ICE so where its not there anymore.
Yog.0 does so in a very non-obvious way, because the feeling when you have enigmas, or viktor 1.0, or datapike, and the runner passes through them without having to do anything, it feels like it might as well not be there.
I do kind of agree that Parasite skews the meta more, but that's more because of the ubiquity of its partner in crime, Datasucker.
I think that the meta skewing effect of both cards is kind of best summarized by the fact that ICE design in Netrunner is kind of weird. They definitely have not respected how pervasive parasite is, and seemed very reluctant to address just how powerful Yog.0 is.
Yog.0 is kind of an edge case, because I think its so close to being a good card. You could keep it the same cost, same everything, but just make it have to pay 1 credit to break all code gate subs (basically Morningstar for code gates).
But any card saying that this ICE doesn't matter (either by destroying it or making it cost literally nothing for the runner to break) just feels bad.
I think any problem card that they have to print a new problem card to stop the old problem card is a problem.