A Discussion about the decision to pickup Hytale and include it into Vintage Story as a Mode instead of making a separate game, & on if picking up Hytale is a good idea. RESPECTFUL RESPONSES ONLY.

[Thorfinn]

Looks like it took them a bit. The decision to freeze the minetest game was not made until July 2020. I assume they waited until then to unbundle game and engine.

I should look into it a bit more. If I ever find enough time to get involved with yet another game. I'm still not caught up on VS release candidates.

[Katherine K]

5 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

I do not know of any game that does a 'mode' that is an entirely different experience.

You probably do. Ever played any of the Source Engine games? Counter Strike? Team Fortress? How about any of the games built on id Tech? I know it's been a hot moment since either of these have been popular, but a couple of decades ago, this is how a lot of best games were made. In the early days, they'd straight up use the same executable, maybe shipped with different build of it, but functionally interchangeable, and you'd just change the folder the engine looks for assets and game/server .dll files in. You could jump from playing one game to a different one by running a console command in the game.

The reason people don't do this anymore is because almost nobody's making games on their own engine with an indy studio. Almost everyone's either using a 3rd party engine, like Unreal, or they're using an in-house engine in a giant studio with hundreds of people working on each game, and where keeping these separate is just a way to prevent four hundred people you never met making changes that influence your game.

5 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

Now...consider this. The new 'mode' as a mod means when you play that mode you will have to turn off all your other mods or you will have to create a new data folder with a link that points to just this instance of the game experience. All game files share the same mods.

So the mod manager will have to have multiple mod lists. It's been a highly asked for feature and now it will have to actually exist. I fail to see a downside.

5 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

also, I think you understand that if you have one full complete game code all the way up to the UI and you have to write conditionals for every single thing you display, every single game loop reactions that its going to be a mess really quick.

That's... Not how you write game code. This isn't Balatro. Anyone who thinks that an if/else statements are a good way to handle different special cases of game elements and UI need to learn better coding techniques. There is inheritance, interfaces, and virtual methods to handle all of that. And crucially, that's how VS already works. If you know any C# at all, I encourage you to look through survival mode's source as it's public.

5 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

Not to mention are we going to just skip over the entire mechanics of forging if the new game mode does not have it? How about cooking? temperature control etc etc etc.

These things are already part of the survival mode. They're not part of the core engine. Again, feel free to take a look at the source code. It's well structured.

[CastIronFabric]

1 hour ago, Katherine K said:

You probably do. Ever played any of the Source Engine games? Counter Strike? Team Fortress? How about any of the games built on id Tech? I know it's been a hot moment since either of these have been popular, but a couple of decades ago, this is how a lot of best games were made. In the early days, they'd straight up use the same executable, maybe shipped with different build of it, but functionally interchangeable, and you'd just change the folder the engine looks for assets and game/server .dll files in. You could jump from playing one game to a different one by running a console command in the game.

The reason people don't do this anymore is because almost nobody's making games on their own engine with an indy studio. Almost everyone's either using a 3rd party engine, like Unreal, or they're using an in-house engine in a giant studio with hundreds of people working on each game, and where keeping these separate is just a way to prevent four hundred people you never met making changes that influence your game.

So the mod manager will have to have multiple mod lists. It's been a highly asked for feature and now it will have to actually exist. I fail to see a downside.

That's... Not how you write game code. This isn't Balatro. Anyone who thinks that an if/else statements are a good way to handle different special cases of game elements and UI need to learn better coding techniques. There is inheritance, interfaces, and virtual methods to handle all of that. And crucially, that's how VS already works. If you know any C# at all, I encourage you to look through survival mode's source as it's public.

These things are already part of the survival mode. They're not part of the core engine. Again, feel free to take a look at the source code. It's well structured.

I am not going to address everything you have said only because I have to do some other things and its not out of disrespect for the time you put into the reply

I will keep this short and perhaps in summary

 

If one wants to play Counter Strike, they do not double click on the Half Life 2 game to do that.

 

That is the point I am making.

Ironically this game specifically had the same path as Counter Strike, however, the Half Life team did not set out to intentionally create another game that will be instantiated by clicking on Half Life as an end goal. Now is VS plans to make this a mode until its a game and then spin it off? I do not know but I think you can see the difference 

 

Edited August 21, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[Teo9631]

Oh, for crying out loud. The sheer, unadulterated arrogance of your post is almost impressive. Almost.

6 hours ago, Dark Thoughts said:

Your posts tone & length over a completely hypothetical scenario with a bunch of made up straw man arguments is definitely outrage culture.

Hypothetical? The head developer, Tyron, literally posted an announcement. He wrote the words. We quoted them. Are you calling the lead dev a liar? Or are you just incapable of reading? These aren't "made up straw man arguments"; they are direct responses to the developer's own stated plans. Calling valid, evidence-based criticism "outrage culture" is the laziest debate tactic on the internet. It's a thought-terminating cliché for people who have no actual counter-argument.

6 hours ago, Dark Thoughts said:

Buying into games that are unfinished is always a risk... you're not entitled for Anego Studios... to only work on one single project

Nobody is this naive. We understand the risk of Early Access. The risk is that the game we paid for might not get finished. The risk is NOT that the developers will take our money and pivot to funding their buddy's failed dream project mid-development. The implicit contract of Early Access is that you are funding the completion of that specific game. It is absolutely not a blank check for the developer's personal slush fund to "maybe maybe at least partially keep [a different] dream alive." This isn't about entitlement; it's about basic consumer-producer integrity.

6 hours ago, Dark Thoughts said:

You can say the same thing about VS being born out of sentimentality

This is where you expose your complete misunderstanding of... well, everything. Passion is not sentimentality. Passion is the drive to create a great product. It's a rational force that leads to quality and success. Sentimentality, in this context, is making a poor business decision based on a personal friendship—resurrecting a failed project (Hytale) out of a sense of obligation to a friend. One is an asset, the other is a liability that jeopardizes the product we actually invested in. If you can't tell the difference, you have no business discussing game development.

6 hours ago, Dark Thoughts said:

You think Hytale is cursed because it was mismanaged? If you have that little faith in this development studio, then why even bother with Vintage Story?

Another beautiful strawman from the guy accusing others of using them. The irony is palpable. We don't think Hytale is "cursed." We see it for what it is: a monument to mismanagement and a decade of failure. The concern isn't some supernatural hex; it's that Anego is willingly tying themselves to that anchor of incompetence and bringing that baggage into the VS ecosystem. Our faith was in Anego to develop Vintage Story. This decision is precisely what erodes that faith. You have the cause and effect completely backward.

6 hours ago, Dark Thoughts said:

Maybe try to be not so illogical. Then people can make more sense out of your future points.

The absolute gall. You, who can't distinguish between a hypothetical and a developer announcement. You, who conflates passion with nepotistic sentimentality. You, who defends the diversion of early access funds for a secondary project before the primary one is even stable. You want to lecture me on logic?

Your entire argument is a cocktail of corporate bootlicking and fallacious reasoning, topped with a smug sense of superiority. You haven't refuted a single point from the original post.

You've just thrown a tantrum, waved around buzzwords like "entitled" and "outrage culture," and demonstrated a profound inability to engage with the actual substance of the issue.

Go back and read the developer's post, then read our concerns again. Slowly, this time. Maybe then you'll see it's not "whining"—it's a legitimate critique of a bafflingly risky and poorly communicated business decision.

Edited August 21, 2025 by Teo9631

[Katherine K]

37 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

If one wants to play Counter Strike, they do not double click on the Half Life 2 game to do that.

You did start it from hl.exe originally. It was separated out into its own project later.

It's already been said that adventure mode might end up shipping as a separate product, depending on how things go with it. That's always an option. The question's only about how it's developed.

37 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

Ironically this game specifically had the same path as Counter Strike, however, the Half Life team did not set out to intentionally create another game that will be instantiated by clicking on Half Life as an end goal.

You say that, but it's exactly how HL multiplayer worked. It was a completely separate "game" packaged with HL, using some of the same assets and the same engine, but also having a whole bunch of separate assets and its own client and server DLL files. That was developed entirely by Valve in house in parallel with HL single player, and was started using the same executable.

Edited August 21, 2025 by Katherine K

[cosmobeau]

12 hours ago, Dark Thoughts said:

Your posts tone & length over a completely hypothetical scenario with a bunch of made up straw man arguments is definitely outrage culture.

No buts, you already thrown an insult at me so you can't hate to be offensive that much.

Maybe wait for a full release before you buy then? I don't even know how many years & decades we have to explain this to people like you. Buying into games that are unfinished is always a risk, regardless of potential other projects or not. And you're not entitled for Anego Studios, or any other development studio, to only work on one single project that you personally are interested in. It's their company and their budget to handle how they see fit.

You can say the same thing about VS being born out of sentimentality, just like any other video game with passionate developers. Otherwise this would've simply stayed a MC mod, or never even got that far anyway, since it was obviously very heavily inspired by TFC.

You think Hytale is cursed because it was mismanaged? If you have that little faith in this development studio, then why even bother with Vintage Story?

Maybe try to be not so illogical. Then people can make more sense out of your future points. Until then I just see the typical entitled whining that I've seen way too much over the last decades of video game development.

Bro don't drag me into your argument with someone else.

God forbid I have an opinion on the Internet about a game, I get called out for outrage culture meanwhile people in this thread break out into actual outrage over completely unrelated topics.

I can make whatever statement I want off of the information we all have. Disagree with it, cool. Tell me all about how you think this is a great idea, but don't sit here and tell me it's a "hypothetical scenario" while the Hytale founder is literally bleeding money trying to buy back their failed project from RIOT like omfg leave me tf alone with that nonsense 

Hope you can handle that tone sweetheart 

Edited August 22, 2025 by cosmobeau

[Katherine K]

1 hour ago, cosmobeau said:

Hytale founder is literally bleeding money trying to buy back their failed project from RIOT

Yeah, I certainly see how that puts people on alert. There are a lot of tempers and finger pointing, and some choices being made. But the situation this most reminds me of is all the drama surrounding Hiveswap, the Homestuck game, with all the delays, and developer changes, and flip-flopping between 2D and 3D. And meanwhile, Toby Fox went off and made Undertale, which was a lot closer to what the fans of Homestuck actually wanted than Hiveswap ended up being years later.

I think there's an opportunity for something similar here. Not in scale, but just the general outcome. Even if Simon makes the deal with Riot, it sounds like he's trying to prove something with it. I don't believe for a moment that the game's going to be released to the general public any time soon, because it'd be a vanity project at that point. In the mean time, VS team can just go and make the adventure game people actually want to play. Without the Hytale logo or the attached baggage. And they really seem to be in a unique position to do so.

I don't know if that makes it the wisest business decision, but I also don't think it's reckless. And at the end of the day, if we want games to be art, we have to recognize the need for the artist to take artistic risks. I think that's one of these moments.

[Koobze]

10 hours ago, Teo9631 said:

The implicit contract of Early Access is that you are funding the completion of that specific game.

10 hours ago, Teo9631 said:

One is an asset, the other is a liability that jeopardizes the product we actually invested in.

I am not sure what implicit contract there is, or what you think you invested in, but personally when I buy an early access game it's because I like what's there, hope that it gets better, believe that the developer wants to do more of what they're doing, and I have the disposable income to support them doing what they're doing. I don't expect some commitment or guarantee of a completed product, and for all I know the developers will decide to completely change the direction of the game and make it something I don't like - and that's absolutely fine and within their rights. I gave them money, I got a game, transaction is complete.

I really like Vintage Story and want it go continue how it is, but I paid for what I got, and I'm happy to have given money to support an independent developer. If the developer wants to pivot and do two games at a time, or ten games at a time, great! Go for it! Maybe it'll work out, maybe not - I could have also waited until something was "finished" to buy it if I was so concerned about the future roadmap.

[Facethief]

Any game that you pay for is paying to keep the developer(s) alive. The developer(s) then continues to develop games, as they are alive and that’s what they do when they’re alive. Developers also sometimes make multiple games at once, which is just something they do. If you don’t want to feed the game developers, okay, but if you’re feeding them, they’ll make games… plural.

[Teo9631]

6 hours ago, Koobze said:

I am not sure what implicit contract there is, or what you think you invested in, but personally when I buy an early access game it's because I like what's there, hope that it gets better, believe that the developer wants to do more of what they're doing, and I have the disposable income to support them doing what they're doing. I don't expect some commitment or guarantee of a completed product, and for all I know the developers will decide to completely change the direction of the game and make it something I don't like - and that's absolutely fine and within their rights. I gave them money, I got a game, transaction is complete.

I really like Vintage Story and want it go continue how it is, but I paid for what I got, and I'm happy to have given money to support an independent developer. If the developer wants to pivot and do two games at a time, or ten games at a time, great! Go for it! Maybe it'll work out, maybe not - I could have also waited until something was "finished" to buy it if I was so concerned about the future roadmap.

With all due respect, your perspective is precisely the problem. It’s the result of a consumer base that has been so thoroughly domesticated by the Early Access model that you now willingly defend a lack of accountability.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the premise. If the transaction were complete, it wouldn't be called "Early Access." It would just be called "the game." You are not merely purchasing a product in its current state; you are investing in its stated potential and its journey to a full release. That is the implicit contract. To suggest otherwise is to strip the model of its entire meaning and turn it into a simple donation with a playable demo attached.

And why not expect commitment? This passive acceptance is why the landscape is littered with abandoned projects. We've been conditioned to believe that it's normal and acceptable for developers to lose focus or fail to deliver on the roadmap they used to secure our money in the first place. It shouldn't be the norm. Having a basic expectation that a project you financially support will be seen through to its promised completion is not entitlement; it's common sense.

This isn't about disposable income or giving a developer a friendly pat on the back. This is about focus and risk. We funded the development of Vintage Story. The concern arises when those funds and, more importantly, the development team's finite attention, are diverted to a second, high-risk project—especially one associated with a notorious failure like Hytale—before the first project is even stable or feature-complete.

[Thorfinn]

1 hour ago, Teo9631 said:

It would just be called "the game." You are not merely purchasing a product in its current state; you are investing in its stated potential and its journey to a full release. That is the implicit contract.

No. That is what you believe. To put it in your phraseology, you have been domesticated by your government to expect things that were not agreed to. I dropped it before, but you don't seem to understand the difference between the terms of the agreement and what a court in your jurisdiction might rule about those terms. Those terms constitute evidence of a "meeting of the minds"; your purchase and their issuing a key to the game is evidence of bilateral acceptance of those terms.

Edited August 22, 2025 by Thorfinn

[Thorfinn]

18 hours ago, Teo9631 said:

Oh, for crying out loud. The sheer, unadulterated arrogance of your post is almost impressive. Almost.

 

18 hours ago, Teo9631 said:

Your entire argument is a cocktail of corporate bootlicking and fallacious reasoning, topped with a smug sense of superiority.

..he said, oblivious to the irony.

18 hours ago, Teo9631 said:

This is where you expose your complete misunderstanding of... well, everything. Passion is not sentimentality. Passion is the drive to create a great product. It's a rational force that leads to quality and success. Sentimentality, in this context, is making a poor business decision based on a personal friendship—resurrecting a failed project (Hytale) out of a sense of obligation to a friend.

As always in discussions of late, how do you know what was going on in the minds of those making the decision? Can't it be true that he's helping friends and it's a good business decision? Personally, I think it is a good decision, as I see the massive sales of fantasy adventure-type games, particularly those with a more cartoony art style.

[cosmobeau]

Again just to reiterate my original concern was just that this wasn't the best idea. Because Hytale was a failed project & it didn't make sense to me to put that game inside Vintage Story if the goal is to make it it's own game. AND NOW Hytale Founder likely will not be able to buy back the rights to Hytale and all is assets. 

I'm not here to argue with people over the semantics and moralities of an early access game. I'm happy to support this game in early access.

I'm not here to complain about the price of the game versus what we have so far. This game is already worth MORE than Minecraft, but it's cheaper.

I DO NOT CARE IF ANGEO MAKES MORE GAMES. In fact I would LOVE that and they are ALREADY doing that.

I don't want to argue or debate with you over completely unrelated topics that could be their whole other forum post about topics like AI, Copyright, licensing, or Internet culture.

My issues were:

- This isn't their game they're making, they're picking up a failed project

- Announcement made it very clear that the founder has strong endearment to the people who were working on Hytale

- They are picking up this game with the intention of making it it's own game (which... It already is...)

- They are making this game a mode in Vintage Story (when it originally wasn't a mode, it's a game)

- I don't want a completely unrelated failed game in Vintage Story personally (This is called a personal preference and opinion and people are allowed to disagree with you or me)

- Hytale seems to be picked up not because it's a good idea but because they want to save their friends project (This is called making an inference based off of emotional language someone used, and inferences between people can differ. This is an OPINION and when people state opinions they are AWARE it is possible it is not a fact)

- Not even sure if they can do that since the founder of Hytale just offered in his words "10x the value of Hytale" to buy the rights back and Riot has been dead silent 

- Some of the statements in the announcement seemed weird/sketchy/not really possible, like claiming it would come at no extra cost or no extra busy work. But then say they're picking up a whole other team to make this game. Well more teams means you're paying more people and overseeing more projects. So just be real. 

Again I HAVE changed my mind on some things because of GOOD FAITH POSTS THAT ARE ON TOPIC and my reply is somewhere in this forum on why I'm not nearly as concerned that this will impact VS at all. I don't think it will be successful either, but even if it fails I'm not longer concerned about Vintage Story somehow going down with it.

Edited August 22, 2025 by cosmobeau

[cosmobeau]

On 8/18/2025 at 3:07 PM, CastIronFabric said:

So do I drop the game into my mod folder with all my other mods?

Can I play the mod in my existing world?

Can I use other mods in this modded game mod?

Is it a standalone?

Is it being created and supported by Angeo?

Since its in the mod page will they support all the other mods I am using from the same front page if I use it in this mod?

Questions I am not asking, but questions I would assume would be asked.

I just think it would be cleaner to create a separate game. If they like ones key for VS would work in the other game. simple.

 

anyway, that is as far as I am going to go into the statement of 'I think this will cause confusion that will escalate quickly' because I think it already has.

This is basically the core of my issue. This was originally a failed game, not a mode, not a mod. It's own game.

The team says the goal for picking this up is to make it it's own game. It's own game completely different than Vintage Story, in gameplay, genre, look, feel, everything.

Then they say it's going to be a adventure mode in Vintage Story.

That is so confusing. That's why I said, if the goal is to make it it's own game, and that's what it originally was, then do that. And that's my opinion. And I'm allowed to have that opinion. And I can see why this person is done because there are quite a few people here who act like you're not allowed to have that opinion.

[Thorfinn]

18 minutes ago, cosmobeau said:

And I can see why this person is done because there are quite a few people here who act like you're not allowed to have that opinion.

That's not it at all! It's that we are not allowed to have an opinion that disagrees. You think it's a bad business opportunity, I think it's a good one. Both opinions, both for (IMO) reasonable interpretations of the evidence, but, ultimately, only time will tell which is more correct.

I will give you this, though. You are not nearly as strident about insulting people who disagree as some others...

[Teo9631]

1 hour ago, Thorfinn said:

No. That is what you believe. To put it in your phraseology, you have been domesticated by your government to expect things that were not agreed to. I dropped it before, but you don't seem to understand the difference between the terms of the agreement and what a court in your jurisdiction might rule about those terms. Those terms constitute evidence of a "meeting of the minds"; your purchase and their issuing a key to the game is evidence of bilateral acceptance of those terms.

"Belief?"

Are you serious? The only "belief" here is your devout, fact-free faith in your own stunning ignorance. This isn't a matter of opinion. It's a matter of commercial standards and consumer law, concepts you are clearly too lazy to spend five seconds researching before running your mouth.

You keep babbling about a "meeting of the minds" and a "bilateral acceptance." Your tiny brain has fixated on the most simplistic interpretation possible: "I give money, they give key, transaction over." That's not how it works, and if you think it is, you've been successfully "domesticated" by every shady developer you've ever defended.

The "agreement" in an Early Access sale includes the entire context of the sale. It includes the developer's public statements, their roadmap, and the very definition of the "Early Access" model they are using to solicit funds.

Since the concept of a principle seems to be difficult for you, let's look at the industry-defining standard set by the largest PC storefront on Earth, Steam, to see how this is *supposed* to work. Valve's own rules explicitly define Early Access as a tool to sell a game "while it is still being developed" with the explicit requirement that you "plan to continue to develop for release." They go out of their way to state what it is NOT: it is not a way to crowdfund, and it is not a pre-purchase. It is a tool for developers to "gather feedback while finishing your game." That stated goal—the plan to finish the game—is an inseparable part of the "meeting of the minds" you keep failing to comprehend.

Here is a link. You can read how they define "Early Access"

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/earlyaccess

In places like the EU, consumer protection laws like the Digital Content Directive exist precisely to shut down the kind of anti-consumer nonsense you're spouting. Goods must conform to what a consumer could "reasonably expect" based on the seller's advertising. When Anego Studios sells "Vintage Story Early Access" and outlines a plan to finish *Vintage Story*, the reasonable expectation is that the money will be used to... finish Vintage Story. Not to fund their friend's failed game.

Your entire argument is a pathetic defense of a developer's right to mislead their customers. You've made a fool of yourself by trying to sound intelligent with legal phrases you don't understand, while completely ignoring the actual legal and commercial framework we all operate in.

Frankly, it's just profoundly disappointing. It genuinely makes my brain hurt to see a consumer so utterly stupid that they're willing to publicly argue against their own rights and protections. To see someone champion a mindset that only benefits unaccountable developers and screws over the rest of us. People like you are the reason the industry is in the state it's in. This is absolute bollocks.

Edited August 22, 2025 by Teo9631

[cosmobeau]

43 minutes ago, Thorfinn said:

That's not it at all! It's that we are not allowed to have an opinion that disagrees. You think it's a bad business opportunity, I think it's a good one. Both opinions, both for (IMO) reasonable interpretations of the evidence, but, ultimately, only time will tell which is more correct.

I will give you this, though. You are not nearly as strident about insulting people who disagree as some others...

Honestly this forum is 6(?) pages long so I'm not sure if my statement includes you or not but if you're not doing any of the stuff I was talking about then I'm not talking about you specifically.

I have made multiple statements against ad hominem on this post and edited the post itself to condemn it before you even read the original post. Insulting people? Again people need to stop dragging me into their off shoot arguments that are off topic with other people. I am not doing that shit. Do not confuse me with the people in here still having completely unrelated and obnoxious takes on things completely separate from my original complaint. I called out BOTH people who were rude in here, and cover anyone else who comes in being rude. It's literally at the top of the original post

Both opinions are reasonable and you are correct about that for sure.

Just so people remember what ad hominem is:

"I think your opinion is bad" not ad hom

"I think YOU are bad" is ad hom.

 

Edited August 22, 2025 by cosmobeau

[Thorfinn]

22 minutes ago, Teo9631 said:

Since the concept of a principle seems to be difficult for you, let's look at the industry-defining standard set by the largest PC storefront on Earth, Steam, to see how this is *supposed* to work.

This is what I'm talking about. The propensity to insult anyone who disagrees. I'd have to go back and look, but I think your very first post you insulted someone who had a different opinion than you. You didn't even try to discuss your opinion before becoming uncivil. 

Are we on Steam? Then why the heck does that have anything to do with whatever terms Tyron made on VS? Whatever drivel the EU enacts, and there is a prodigious amount, does not affect the words you agreed to, only how your jurisdiction will unilaterally alter those words. My country has a similar thing. "This gives you specific rights that vary from state to state." This is not a difficult concept.

Edited August 22, 2025 by Thorfinn

[Thorfinn]

28 minutes ago, Teo9631 said:

Oh, for the love of God. The last refuge of someone who has been intellectually cornered: whining about the tone because you have nothing of substance left. You're not being insulted because you disagree. You're being insulted because your arguments are demonstrably, profoundly, and stubbornly idiotic.

Your inability to grasp a simple analogy is genuinely staggering. I used Steam—the largest, most successful digital storefront for PC games on the planet—as the industry standard to define what "Early Access" means as a commercial concept. It was an example to illustrate the principles and expectations inherent to the model, because you clearly had no clue. The fact that you interpreted this as "Steam's specific T&C legally applies to this specific sale" proves you are either arguing in bad faith or you lack the basic critical thinking skills to participate in this conversation.

This right here. This is your magnum opus of stupidity. This is the single most moronic thing you have said in this entire thread, and the competition was fierce.

Law isn't some post-purchase DLC that "alters" an agreement. It is the operating system on which the agreement runs.

An agreement is not a magic scroll that exists in a vacuum. Any "terms" you agree to are immediately null and void if they contradict the consumer protection laws of the relevant jurisdiction. The law is the foundational framework that dictates what a valid and enforceable agreement can even be. To suggest that a company's terms of service and the law are two separate things is to fundamentally misunderstand the concept of... well, society.

You're trying to build a house and claiming the laws of physics are just "unilateral alterations" to your blueprint. It's a level of delusion that is almost impressive.

You have proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you are not interested in facts, standards, or reality. You are a pseudo-intellectual ideologue, wrapping yourself in misused legal jargon to defend a position that is anti-consumer, legally illiterate, and just plain wrong.

There's nothing left to argue. You've been refuted at every turn, and your only response is to misinterpret simple examples and cry about mean words. It is honestly pathetic.

Moron.

[cosmobeau]

39 minutes ago, Teo9631 said:

Oh, for the love of God. The last refuge of someone who has been intellectually cornered: whining about the tone because you have nothing of substance left. You're not being insulted because you disagree. You're being insulted because your arguments are demonstrably, profoundly, and stubbornly idiotic.

Your inability to grasp a simple analogy is genuinely staggering. I used Steam—the largest, most successful digital storefront for PC games on the planet—as the industry standard to define what "Early Access" means as a commercial concept. It was an example to illustrate the principles and expectations inherent to the model, because you clearly had no clue. The fact that you interpreted this as "Steam's specific T&C legally applies to this specific sale" proves you are either arguing in bad faith or you lack the basic critical thinking skills to participate in this conversation.

This right here. This is your magnum opus of stupidity. This is the single most moronic thing you have said in this entire thread, and the competition was fierce.

Law isn't some post-purchase DLC that "alters" an agreement. It is the operating system on which the agreement runs.

An agreement is not a magic scroll that exists in a vacuum. Any "terms" you agree to are immediately null and void if they contradict the consumer protection laws of the relevant jurisdiction. The law is the foundational framework that dictates what a valid and enforceable agreement can even be. To suggest that a company's terms of service and the law are two separate things is to fundamentally misunderstand the concept of... well, society.

You're trying to build a house and claiming the laws of physics are just "unilateral alterations" to your blueprint. It's a level of delusion that is almost impressive.

You have proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you are not interested in facts, standards, or reality. You are a pseudo-intellectual ideologue, wrapping yourself in misused legal jargon to defend a position that is anti-consumer, legally illiterate, and just plain wrong.

There's nothing left to argue. You've been refuted at every turn, and your only response is to misinterpret simple examples and cry about mean words. It is honestly pathetic.

Do you know how to talk to people? Did you read the top of my post?

People who even AGREE with you aren't going to want to side with your walls of text calling people stupid, moronic, idiotic- we get it, you have access to a thesaurus and you're gonna use it.

I do not condone this Xbox live checkmate atheists behavior in my forum. You are not providing anything to support my concerns or even your concerns you're just making people who are wondering if picking up Hytale is a good idea look bad.

Like for christs sake I thought I was a bit too inflammatory but wtf is this? I did not want to come back to 3 more pages of people bickering on my post

[Echo Weaver]

@cosmobeau, I went back and looked at how you edited your OP, plus the frustrated recent post where you clarified your position related to the rude posts taking positions against Adventure Mode. I have fresh respect for how you've tried to keep a controversial topic civil. (FWIW, I thought your clarification post came across justifiably frustrated but not inflammatory.)

It made me think that maybe there ARE some interesting things left to discuss around this topic, which puts egg on my face for my earlier ugliness. I do generally have the perspective that Adventure Mode is a reasonable project for Anego to take on, and that they are the ones qualified to sort the capacity of their team. I'm also not totally sure if my thoughts weren't already said. @Thorfinn covered the game engine vs separate game issue pretty thoroughly. If I understand correctly, your primary concern centers around mixing the Adventure Mode project with VS while also claiming it's a different thing.

The beef that I'm developing is that Anego is classifying VS as early access in the first place. When you have a roadmap that goes out 10 years and the game is playable now, that's not EA. That's a released game with planned expansions. It's really just a terminology issue, but it matters when we talk about Anego's priorities for "finishing" VS compared to working on other games when afaik there are only vague distant plans for ever finishing it. Don't get me wrong -- I LIKE that model. I really, really don't want to hear plans for completing the game content next year or whatever. Existing games with regular new content releases keep me playing for a long time. I just don't think it's an early access model.

ETA: It occurs to me that the early access framing really did have a big effect on the way the original announcement thread went down in flames. When you say, "We have a roadmap going out 10 years," and the new content is considered expansions on a released game, that's exciting. When you say that about a game that's considered incomplete, you're really saying, "Don't expect a finished game for at least 10 more years," and that doesn't feel so good.

I'm curious as to whether that framing of VS as a fully released game with regular planned content updates affects your view of the Adventure Mode project. 

Or maybe there's no way to have a thoughtful discussion on a thread invaded by ad hominem attacks. 

Edited August 22, 2025 by Echo Weaver

[Echo Weaver]

Also, I just learned "Checkmate atheist." Thanks 

[Diff]

48 minutes ago, Teo9631 said:

My harshness was a direct response to that. When people refuse to engage with facts and resort to bad-faith, fanatical loyalty, they forfeit their right to a civil conversation. Respect is earned, and it is not owed to those who refuse to think.

My dude it's never okay to get steamed to the point where you're harassing people over videogames (of all things) online. That's so stereotypical. If you can't keep it cool, you don't get to be disrespectful, you just walk away from the situation. 

[cosmobeau]

1 hour ago, Teo9631 said:

Yes. I just don't know how to talk to morons.

You're right. I have no patience for engaging with willful ignorance.

You've been dogpiled for pages, not because your concerns are invalid, but because you committed a heresy. You dared to question the tribe's leader.

What you've been subjected to isn't a discussion; it's primitive psychology. You're seeing the knee-jerk reaction of a tribe whose identity is so fused with the developer that they perceive any critique as a personal attack. Their arguments are not built on logic, but on a desperate need to defend their own judgment for being a "supporter."

My harshness was a direct response to that. When people refuse to engage with facts and resort to bad-faith, fanatical loyalty, they forfeit their right to a civil conversation. Respect is earned, and it is not owed to those who refuse to think.

They aren't morons, and this will be the one time you will see me use ad hom: YOU have a STUNTED emotional intelligence.
Labeling people you don't agree with as stupid, and attempting to psychoanalyze them is the most cringey behavior I've seen this month, and I'm online a lot.
I don't feel dogpiled. I have been online long enough and a few comments of people groaning because they love a game isn't "dogpiling."
You also engage in the emotionally unintelligent behavior of extreme exaggeration. These people are biased, not fanatical. 
I am on the internet and TBH I am in real life and I think I can handle people have emotional opinions based off of their endearment to a hobby or game. It's called talking to human beings who have emotions and their own personal opinions.  If you've been living for more than one day, you'd know that's a common, normal occurrence. 
Non-psychological professionals using hot button psych terms they don't understand GRINDS MY GEARS like no one cares about your mental conspiracy theory.

Edited August 22, 2025 by cosmobeau

[Thorfinn]

@Teo9631, I'll admit to being triggered. @Dark Thoughts was a little terse in his reply, true, but your first reply in the thread included, 

Quote

Consumers these days. You don't have a shred of critical thinking. I really hate to be offensive, but reading this thread is giving me a headache.

...

What is there to not understand? There are literally no simpler terms to explain this to you

Do you not understand that was much worse than what @Dark Thoughts said? The only plausibly problematic bit was "ignorant and uninformed", though that is true for literally everyone who is not in the Anego inner circle. Including me. Including you. He said he did not understand the outrage. Neither do I. I think that's probably because we are operating under a different set of assumptions than you are. We (or at least I) see the potential opportunity, you see only the potential failure.

I do kind of understand the sentiment. I've seen lots of people get their knickers in a bunch because they think the hoi polloi are stupid. Heavily skewed towards one ideological bent, which, I'd note, you seem to be. I'd agree that people as a group are not too bright, but no one knows his own interests like the man himself. I don't care if your IQ puts Einstein to shame, you cannot know what another person values. You cannot rationally say he should feel outrage at the same things you feel outrage about.

Edited August 23, 2025 by Thorfinn