Every single suggestion you are making ignores the associated cost to the developers/publishers of the game, and when confronted with it you don't engage with the point by either refuting or accepting it but instead pivot to an entirely different argument.

In debate terms this may not be "moving the goalpost", but rather "topic drifting" or whatever the proper term for that is.

If you are fine with making game development an even riskier financial endeavour than it already is, and placing the needs of consumers higher than that, you can just say so!