You are welcome. I am happy if your store succeeds, I am not trying to be intentionally rude or antagonistic - just trying to get you to understand why what you are saying does not work for the developers using the marketplace.
I feel you have a lot of misplaced anger at ‘developers’ as though they are cash cows making all this money from your work. In reality the ‘big boy’ studios are not your customers. They are making assets in-house by hiring artists (which costs, quite literally, millions of dollars over a few years). The people buying your things are mostly indie studios working on very limited budgets.
And the reasons marketplace assets are generally affordable for them is because they have a major limitation: non-exclusivity. You as a seller have the luxury of being able to sell multiple times to multiple clients. For the devs, this is a huge drawback. The assets in their game can also appear in someone else’s game.
This is meant to be the trade-off for low cost per asset. You as the seller make up the difference in cost because you can sell multiple times, to multiple clients - but the people buying lose the ability to have exclusive rights to that thing you made.
We can agree to disagree on licenses, but just know that as a developer I would never pay for subscription assets. It is always a balance of cost and time, and if the cost or terms are not appealing, we will make them in-house instead. Why pay again continuously, and also accept non-exclusivity? We would rather cut those sellers out entirely if those were the terms.
P.S. I apologize if my post came across as rude, but I hope that given the above context you can see why this type of thing for those prices do not fit into the development budget for indie projects. Game devs are not the enemy; very much the opposite, and understanding their actual needs may be helpful for you in terms of making things that sell.