If we add to this graphs the ones showing the number of released games every year and the average revenue / number of owned copies per new game every year we'll see that the discovery and revenue for new games is way worse than before Discovery 2.0 or Greenlight.
That's not how this works. I mean, it is, but also... No.
You're combining an increase in product with an average of revenue and sales.
So, unless all 3 of those rise at the same rate, they're obviously not going to sync. And they literally
can't all rise together, due to revenue being affected by price of product sold, and product sold being different dependent upon price, and a general increase in product regardless of if people have the money/feel like buying a game on a given day. Add to this different release dates for different games, marketing, "big releases" fighting it out over certain periods, etc...
Finally, you're using
all of that to say that the Discovery 2.0 and Greenlight updates failed for new games. Except their success is measured not only on number sold, but on how many developers got their games in-front of potential buyer's eyes, or onto Steam. Which are two very different things anyways.
I feel like I'm not really explaining why this is so wrong, but my wife is at work (she's the mathematician, I'm the... not mathematician. Like, literally, she's a maths teacher).