Those are two different situations.
There isn't enough paying for shit that's gonna make a mod run in an unmodified console. You can find people who have bought every single Pokémon game ever, and they still want to play romhacks and randomizers and such.
There's something to be said about how willing people are to pay and whether they admit it or why. But sounds more like you don't want to believe there's any other reason to do it.
A lot of people resort to emulation simply so they can play mods too.
You gotta have a crazy amount of hours in that game. That tree is complicated to read, nevermind to understand.
I'm all for the cultivation part, but not when games make it so planning it wrong means starting over and grinding a hundred hours more. To keep the analogy, if your farm is not going too well you can just change things after the next harvest. Experimentation is something that helps these games stay fresh.
And yet people still say "if you don't like ads, pay up" as if getting ads in a subscription is not a matter of time, like it's happening to streaming.
I'm not extremely against all of copyright because I believe artists should have some protections (though the law sucks at this), but I also believe that once something becomes a decades-old billion-dollar franchise, non-identical imitation should be fair game. Can you imagine what would happen if companies could simply say that they own whole genres?
Right? Steam provides better service and functionality than any other PC storefront. It's ridiculous that there's so much whining about them charging for it. So what if it's a higher percentage? It's also a better service and a large audience. Whoever doesn't like it is free to go elsewhere, unlike console games that can only be sold though the manufacturer's store.
A dumb oversight but an useful method to identify manufactured artificial manipulation. It's going to make social media even worse than it already is.
However logical it may or may not be, it's a reality. Just yesterday we got a stark reminder of how pervasive poor decisions are.
Also, simply "calling out" your boss and HR for making poor decisions is more likely to put them against you than to fix anything.
Frankly feels like this anti-DEI wave is more politically motivated than a matter of results.
We don't live in a perfect meritocracy where people are judged solely in grounds of their skills, we live in a society that is already prejudiced where a lot of minorities don't get the chance to prove themselves. There's studies proving how young white men are favored over any other demographics even when other people have equal or better resumes.
There's no reasonable form of this.
If you simply start at the base and just get going, the branching paths quickly add up to an enormous amount of options. If you don't get any decision paralysis from a tree with literally over a thousand nodes, you might just be a superhuman being.