I have several different complaints about BLB, only one of which is the price, but what you wrote there sums up nicely that one complaint. This is precisely why I see the BLB prices as “too high”.
I can accept that the DLC prices weren’t sustainable, for a variety of reasons that all combined to make it impossible to continue developing this game without increased revenue. What I have difficulty accepting is that the revised prices need to be at least 10 times higher to make things sustainable again.
I am perfectly fine paying 3-5 times more, like I did with the Stormglass Sanctum Set and the Sandstone Super Set. I might even go somewhat higher in certain cases. But the BLB prices are pretty consistently much higher than that.
And you know what? I can totally live with that, too. If the price is too high, I don’t buy it and maybe I offer some feedback on the forums, and that’s it. It’s not the end of the world. However, when people start “explaining” how this is “necessary” to “support” this game, because the DLCs were underpriced, then I feel the need to point out that this explanation doesn’t hold water.
It would be much more honest to say that they want to extract as much profit as possible to meet revised revenue goals that don’t necessarily have as much to do with the development or the support of this particular game as they do with the directives coming from higher up.
Now, personally, I would prefer to avoid characterizing this as “pure greed”, because it inevitably triggers a flame war. Use an emotionally-charged expression like that, and you’re guaranteed to have people jump in with ad hominems directed at your own core values, and it all goes downhill from there. So maybe, let’s not, okay? 
Not to put too fine a point on it, but that seems to be my impression lately. The focus seems to have shifted, and while I’m not sure whether I would bring “happy customers” into the discussion, I would dare to point out that the profitability of a company isn’t a binary thing. It’s not just that a company is profitable or not. In other words, it’s not that “you’re either not profitable and you close your business, or you’re profitable and you get the same profit as everyone else who is profitable”. You can rake in more profit, or less.
And on that wide, wide spectrum, there’s room for many different kinds of focus towards the customers, and the product. Or, if you prefer, many different variants of mission and vision for the company, and for each team in it.
When it comes to Conan Exiles, the focus has shifted from (what seemed to be) prioritizing the development that will be popular with the players while maintaining certain levels of profit, to (what seems to be) prioritizing the profit above else.
The impression their “recent” actions leave is that if the “customer satisfaction” or “popularity of the released content” cannot be measured in terms of impact on profit, then it doesn’t matter. Taken far enough, this turns into a McNamara fallacy, but Funcom is now in the hands of people who are expert at toeing that particular line without crossing it.
I doubt this game is “dying” because of this shift in the focus. It’s merely turning, slowly but surely, into a game some of us long-time players will just not enjoy anymore, but when you look at it objectively, it really doesn’t “matter” as long as there are enough other players to keep the game profitable. 
