ALife Exists and is Called In Game

[Salt Engineer]

So I do really nerdy stuff for work. Offensive research & development mostly, and along with those skillsets comes a desire to dig into technical things. Trolls have popped up claiming that ALife doesn't exist, has never existed, or whatever.

Allegedly, nobody is trolling and making false claims,

Originally posted by Matt:

No one claimed it was a conspiracy to fool people.

but I've included some samples that kicked this post off below:

Originally posted by Paradoxicc70:

Multiple software specialists including myself are able to prove factually that A-LIFE or A-LIFE 2.0 are NOT in the game whatsoever

Originally posted by Wilhelm:

and?` that doesn´t contradict what we said. all claims about a-life not there, vanishing from the store site etc. are true.

This is a obvious lie. We have proof that the game activly DESPAWN NPC when you and the so called bubble go away. This was not in A-Life 1.0. Why should this be now a bug in A-Life 2.0.

Yeah, very trustworthy, a dev who already lied about the atrocious performance that this game suffers from, sorry but i think i'll take the word of my fellow gamers on reddit that took the time to completely dissect A-life or correction hereby the complete lack of it.

There are no A-life period, no need to argue or discuss it, that's the naked truth

Originally posted by Paradoxicc70:

Multiple software specialists including myself are able to prove factually that A-LIFE or A-LIFE 2.0 are NOT in the game whatsoever, nor are they functioning incorrectly as the Community Manager have stated.

Originally posted by Paradoxicc70:

I'm also under the impression that GSC in some way shape or form has activated a bot farm to skew reviews

While having my morning coffee I decided to do research into ALife.

Edit: Let me clarify. Yes, it's surface level. There's very little time between this post:

Originally posted by Salt Engineer:

Originally posted by label_14254afab / ALifeStartSimulation:

r8_2 = sub_142a14170)&var_78, u"Child doesn't exist", r8);
wchar16* const rcx_7 = var_78;

Looks like UE style function code to me.

and the post you're reading. No, it's not an in-depth technical analysis. It was an attempt to answer whether there is "ALife", or if it's all just a grand conspiracy as a handful of posters make it out to be.

First, I did some static analysis. As soon as you filter strings for ALife[i.postimg.cc], there's a litany of them. Some to states:

Originally posted by ALife Action Types ENUMs:

EALifeGroupPriorityType
EALifeGroupPriorityType::Default
EALifeGroupPriorityType::Global
EALifeGroupPriorityType::Local
EALifeGroupPriorityType::Emission
EALifeGroupPriorityType::Quest
EALifeGroupPriorityType::Directed
EALifeGroupPriorityType::Count
ESpawnStype::ALifeGroup

Originally posted by Interesting variables:

bALifeTick
UnkillableByALife

Others appearing to reference the class and function calls

ALife
ALifeStartSimulation

Still more referencing things like points of interest:

UALifePOISubsystem

So let's follow "ALifeStartSimulation"... sub_14254aed0. Cool.

Originally posted by label_14254afab / ALifeStartSimulation:

r8_2 = sub_142a14170)&var_78, u"Child doesn't exist", r8);
wchar16* const rcx_7 = var_78;

Firing up a debugger (and this is a huge pain on Linux), I set a breakpoint at this code specifically, because the moment we attempt to start the simulation, it will freeze and kick me over to it. Think of the breakpoint like a pause button and bookmark all in one.

Sure enough, after hitting continue, the map starts loading the game hits the paused state, and the debugger switches to the highlighted code above.



Listen, I understand there are going to be people that are unhappy for whatever reason, whether their machine is seeing performance issues, or it just isn't what they expected.

Saying that ALife doesn't exist or isn't integrated into the game is a flat out lie, and you'll notice that every single time it's brought up, it's done so by a person with a litany of negative things to say before ALife - and if you let them talk long enough to get to that point - they will still have failed to provide a single shred of proof to back any of their claims.

Their lack of owning the game is gamepass. Their wanting to like it is in direct contrast to bashing it before it launched or hit the review embargo.

It's too convenient.

So here you go. Evidence that ALife is in, functioning - even if buggy - and that the people claiming otherwise are full of it. Now that you've seen proof they're full of it, take the rest of their claims with the grain of salt it deserves.

I'm not saying that ALife is NOT broken, despite some people that are claiming otherwise. But if you want developers to hear your feedback, you're going to need to stop throwing out garbage feedback. Especially when it comes from bad actors.

Edit:
The alternative claim is the developers, instead of attempting to create a new ALife system, created a bunch of dummy sections with the sole purpose of fooling the very people who deny it's existence based on pop-in.

It's a massive conspiratorial stretch, and quite honestly, all the effort trying to make a convincing, but still non-functional, system could just as easily build a half-baked AI governance system to serve as the foundation for ALife. Just saying. We don't need tinfoil for things to be broken.

Edit 2:
Since there are a few people that think it's just copy-paste text:

Originally posted by Salt Engineer:

...
Most of the code related to ALife is in the executable. Strings are a starting point. 1[i.postimg.cc] 2[i.postimg.cc]

Then it's worth taking a look at the related functions like ALifeStartSimulation[i.postimg.cc] being called, and the function itself.[i.postimg.cc]
...

The above can be used in a hex editor or disassembler of your choice to dig in and investigate, or attempt to start modding ALife.

[JohnMac]

Bigfoot exists, i saw a photo.

Jesus exists, it says so in the Bible.

[Salt Engineer]

Originally posted by Larry:

technical illiteracy being passed off as expertise. But let's address your brilliant logic:

You said it, let's roll with it.

Originally posted by Larry:

"People are literally stitching together what they can" - Yes, that's called WORKING AROUND A BROKEN SYSTEM. The mod author LITERALLY CALLS IT DUCT TAPE. How does this prove your point about A-Life working? It proves the opposite.

Now, take a look at the contents of that .pak file for me.

Originally posted by Larry:

"Anyone that has to constantly flex how smart they are, is definitely lacking intelligence" - Says the guy defending string searches as technical proof while having zero technical credentials himself.

No, he just pointed out you are taking plenty of time to tell us all about your intelligence, superiority, and... don't bother to do anything other than try to feed your own ego.

Originally posted by Larry:

I:

Write game engines in C++ and Rust
Maintain multiple open-source projects with thousands of downloads
Develop high-performance libraries
Run an AI company
Was first to crack Themida 2.0 along with game guard in a very popular game that you definitely know
Write binary exploitation tools

And no, I won't link anything because I'm a publicly searchable person and I keep my professional life separate from calling out ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ on gaming forums. This is obviously a throwaway account because unlike you, I actually have a reputation to maintain.

Honestly, it's good that you do that.

Literally everything you listed there takes substantial effort and time, so claiming to do them all - at once no less - would probably call for a lot of people to question how full of it you are. Publicly.

Remarks about JIT I made? You totally could have pointed out Blueprint isn't, and actually had a single compelling argument. But you didn't, likely because about the best you've got is bs you've pulled off of a conversation about cheat tables.

Originally posted by Larry:

What's truly insulting here is watching clowns like you spread technical disinformation that discredits the hard work of people who actually understand what they're doing. You're not just wrong - you're actively undermining the credibility of real technical analysis.

Next time, try actually understanding what you're defending before questioning others' credentials. It's less embarrassing that way.

I'll be perfectly honest, if I had someone like you show up on an interview panel, I would probably nope you right out. If there's even a scrap of truth to what you've said, which I highly doubt, you're overly emotional and prone to making leaps based off superficial snap judgements.

Perhaps that works when you're the AI company CEO/CTO/Engine Developer/Exploit Developer/I do all the things kind of guy, but in a real company you start with research. Something that you, nor Matt applied. You applied your feelings based off a "here's what I saw in a few minues" post, and your judgement was because "it's not deep enough for me!"

Cool.

Yes, we get it. You're the SysWhispers-erer. Super smart exploity guy... that doesn't even understand how to address a target audience, or follow breadcrumbs.

Let me guess, it's because you learned how to do a BoF against a printf, so now you're a super leet kind guy. I get it. I see it a lot, but you're still full of it.



Since you're the pro, go ahead. Open up the binary and prove my surface level thoughts apart. Clearly how busy, or not, a person is doesn't matter to a guy that runs an AI company with C++/Rust game engines. Roll it out home. Dazzle us.

Break down the code that proves there's no ALife code implemented - not just bugged - and I'll eat crow, recant, and you can point and laugh without a word back.

Or is there a reason you can't?

[Salt Engineer]

Originally posted by Disinterred:

Lmao roleplaying is wild.

If people are still reading this, I'd like to ask. If A-Life was fixed what would it look like?

Originally posted by JohnMac:

Bigfoot exists, i saw a photo.

Jesus exists, it says so in the Bible.

Rofl. I love some of you guys. Genuinely.

Originally posted by 𝕊𝕋𝕌ℝ𝕄-𝕂𝔸𝕋:

<pops head round the door>

Can I just point out.. The game has literally just been released, and the devs have had exceptionally difficult...circumstances to deal with during recent months. but I'd bet my last bottle of Cossacks, that A-life will be in the game, if of course it currently "isn't".

In other words, don't panic, don't worry, everything's going to be okay

<closes door gently>

100% agree. Sane words, but nobody has any patience... or sanity. People have been utterly broken for years.

[JohnMac]

Originally posted by Salt Engineer:

People have been utterly broken for years.

This game is probably going to be broken for years too.

[mookymook]

Originally posted by Disinterred:

Lmao roleplaying is wild.

If people are still reading this, I'd like to ask. If A-Life was fixed what would it look like?

yes indeed
please answer this, self-proclaimed computer science magnates

[Salt Engineer]

Originally posted by JohnMac:

Originally posted by Salt Engineer:

People have been utterly broken for years.

This game is probably going to be broken for years too.

Perfect fit then. Hope it gives people enough time to get those irradiated reps in before go time.

[𝕊𝕋𝕌ℝ𝕄-𝕂𝔸𝕋]

Originally posted by Disinterred:

Lmao roleplaying is wild.

If people are still reading this, I'd like to ask. If A-Life was fixed what would it look like?

I can't say much for Stalker2, but as far as I remember it's kind of like this;
A-life oversees multi relationships between not only you and other factions but factions and other factions, in the background, while you are playing the game, separate from but running in line with the story questline. This means that you don't have to piss off a faction for a faction to get pissed with you, if you belong, or are considered 'allied' with a faction which has accidentally-on-purpose become enemies with said pissed off faction, who are now looking to string you up by the balls, all because of Duty. But I digress..

It means that you could be mooching across the garbage having a nice, friendly chat with the Duty guards but all of a sudden, the guitar strumming gets cut short by a frag grenade landing in the middle of the camp and a bunch of Freedom guys vowing to kill all of you, regardless of who you are, because you got all too pally-pally with Duty ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. And NOW the garbage belongs to Freedom, which it didn't do the day before.. But rest assured, Duty will be sending some boys over to re-balance that injustice and put the Garbage back in Duty's control. A-life. ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ life. Then just as Duty get control of the gate back, a bunch of dogs AND Boars emerge from absolutely everywhere and completely ♥♥♥♥ everyone up.

It's all Freedom and Duty's fault. Always has been, always is.

[Larry]

Originally posted by Fluffy Newfoundland:

Originally posted by Larry:

"This guy is seething" - Nah, I just have zero tolerance for technical illiteracy being passed off as expertise. But let's address your brilliant logic:

"People are literally stitching together what they can" - Yes, that's called WORKING AROUND A BROKEN SYSTEM. The mod author LITERALLY CALLS IT DUCT TAPE. How does this prove your point about A-Life working? It proves the opposite.

"Anyone that has to constantly flex how smart they are, is definitely lacking intelligence" - Says the guy defending string searches as technical proof while having zero technical credentials himself.

"I doubt you regularly push code up at all" - Funny you should mention that. While you're here defending broken features, I:

- Write game engines in C++ and Rust
- Maintain multiple open-source projects with thousands of downloads
- Develop high-performance libraries
- Co-founder of an AI company
- Was first to crack Themida 2.0 along with game guard in a very popular game that - you definitely know (First to make a public release)
- Write binary exploitation tools

And no, I won't link anything because I'm a publicly searchable person and I keep my professional life separate from calling out bullsh*t on gaming forums. This is obviously a throwaway account because unlike you, I actually have a reputation to maintain.

What's truly insulting here is watching clowns like you spread technical disinformation that discredits the hard work of people who actually understand what they're doing. You're not just wrong - you're actively undermining the credibility of real technical analysis.

Next time, try actually understanding what you're defending before questioning others' credentials. It's less embarrassing that way.

Completly out of the subject but i wanna try making a video game of my own ( I know, it's a LOT of work ) Any website or tip to recommend to become good at C++ ?
Or any other tip in your area of expertise it seems. I like programing but unfortunatly i'm pretty much on my own.

Well that entirely depends on what exactly you are looking for.
If you only want to develop games and you are not much of a coder and rather focus on the business side then mess around with tech, then I recommend you taking an existing Engine like Unity or Unreal or Godot (Or want more control, then take one of the well maintained open source engines like Bevy) and use those.

I am more of a tech guy that likes messing around with numbers all day so if I can I write my own stuff. It usually ends up being faster than the public stuff but it takes a lot of work especially to get it stable.

If you are like me then there is this awesome book called LearnOpenGL by Joey de Vries.
He will take you through the graphics pipeline, all the main concepts of vector algebra and 3D math used in game dev (With very good references to mathematical sources so you can also learn how to derive the matrices on your own).
He will teach you some GLSL and how shaders work.
- Graphics pipeline fundamentals
- 3D math and vector algebra (with mathematical derivations)
- GLSL and shader programming
- Phong lighting model
- Memory representation of 3D models
- Optimization techniques like Frustum Culling
- Advanced concepts: PBR, HDR, SSAO, etc.

It is OpenGL but once you have a basic understanding how a GPU works, I recommend moving to Vulkan and actually studying the GPU hardware to learn how to properly optimize your code.
- Study GPU architecture
- Learn hardware-level optimization
- Understand modern graphics APIs

If you have no prior experience to coding in C++ or Rust, then this is too much of a pie for you to chew on. Learn the basics first and maybe in a year or two you can return to this.
- Start with C, not C++
- C is essentially "portable assembly" - it teaches you fundamental computer concepts
- Build a solid programming foundation first
- Give yourself at least a year of basic programming before diving into graphics
- Learn data structures and algorithms


Some cool sources I enjoy watching:
Vercidium --- Awesome channel on Youtube. The guy made a game that was free to play on steam a while ago and was pretty popular.

He has some insane optimization techniques.

Threat Interactive --- Another awesome guy that focuses on graphics optimizations.
You study this enough and then you will understand why I am so mad seeing modern games being in such a sh*t unoptimized state.

Graphics programming has advanced so much in the past two decades, yet these idiots are writing code as if they were post graduates with zero regard for speed.

Also I recommend you moving to Rust once you get comfy with C and C++. So much better experience and it has more advanced compiler---A lot of bugs and memory issues can be captured at compile time

[Salt Engineer]

You know, I was looking forward to some more trash talk Matt, but that's actually a decent overall list even if Go is being rolled out more than Rust at the moment.

[Fluffy Newfoundland]

Originally posted by Larry:

Originally posted by Fluffy Newfoundland:

Completly out of the subject but i wanna try making a video game of my own ( I know, it's a LOT of work ) Any website or tip to recommend to become good at C++ ?
Or any other tip in your area of expertise it seems. I like programing but unfortunatly i'm pretty much on my own.

Well that entirely depends on what exactly you are looking for.
If you only want to develop games and you are not much of a coder and rather focus on the business side then mess around with tech, then I recommend you taking an existing Engine like Unity or Unreal or Godot (Or want more control, then take one of the well maintained open source engines like Bevy) and use those.

I am more of a tech guy that likes messing around with numbers all day so if I can I write my own stuff. It usually ends up being faster than the public stuff but it takes a lot of work especially to get it stable.

If you are like me then there is this awesome book called LearnOpenGL by Joey de Vries.
He will take you through the graphics pipeline, all the main concepts of vector algebra and 3D math used in game dev (With very good references to mathematical sources so you can also learn how to derive the matrices on your own).
He will teach you some GLSL and how shaders work.
- Graphics pipeline fundamentals
- 3D math and vector algebra (with mathematical derivations)
- GLSL and shader programming
- Phong lighting model
- Memory representation of 3D models
- Optimization techniques like Frustum Culling
- Advanced concepts: PBR, HDR, SSAO, etc.

It is OpenGL but once you have a basic understanding how a GPU works, I recommend moving to Vulkan and actually studying the GPU hardware to learn how to properly optimize your code.
- Study GPU architecture
- Learn hardware-level optimization
- Understand modern graphics APIs

If you have no prior experience to coding in C++ or Rust, then this is too much of a pie for you to chew on. Learn the basics first and maybe in a year or two you can return to this.
- Start with C, not C++
- C is essentially "portable assembly" - it teaches you fundamental computer concepts
- Build a solid programming foundation first
- Give yourself at least a year of basic programming before diving into graphics
- Learn data structures and algorithms


Some cool sources I enjoy watching:
Vercidium --- Awesome channel on Youtube. The guy made a game that was free to play on steam a while ago and was pretty popular.

He has some insane optimization techniques.

Threat Interactive --- Another awesome guy that focuses on graphics optimizations.
You study this enough and then you will understand why I am so mad seeing modern games being in such a sh*t unoptimized state.

Graphics programming has advanced so much in the past two decades, yet these idiots are writing code as if they were post graduates with zero regard for speed.

Also I recommend you moving to Rust once you get comfy with C and C++. So much better experience and it has the worlds most advanced compiler---A lot of bugs and memory issues can be captured at compile time

Thanks a ton ! I will look up all that ! ( And yes i was going to mostly try with those engines, Unity, UE5 and Godot, Godot at first, since it seems the easier to learn with. )

A few of my online friends did recommend me to do that, start with C, then C++ and move to Rust ! Seems to be the go to then !

I like learning things so i don't mind learning multiple software/coding language ! ( Just need to find the good tutorial/teachers/ressources )

Thanks again for all that ! ( I already tried to learn the GPU architecture but holy sh*t it seems complicated lmao )

[Larry]

Originally posted by Salt Engineer:

You know, I was looking forward to some more trash talk Matt, but that's actually a decent overall list even if Go is being rolled out more than Rust at the moment.

Go is slow and it is for people who don't understand hardware.

- Your precious Go binary carries a bloated runtime with GC overhead, scheduler, and type metadata that's completely unnecessary for most tasks
- The scheduler alone adds ~10KB overhead per goroutine. Real threads with proper stack management would be more efficient
- Runtime bounds checking and interface type assertions waste CPU cycles. At least Rust moves these to compile-time
- Memory layout is garbage - objects scattered with GC metadata, poor cache locality, and unnecessary pointer indirection
- Can't even control basic things like SIMD intrinsics or proper CPU cache alignment without CGO overhead
- "Simplicity" is just an excuse for abstracting away hardware reality. If you actually understood memory and CPU architecture, you'd see how wasteful this is

Regarding your other post:



Literally everything you listed there takes substantial effort and time" - Yes, it does. It's called dedicating 12 hours a day to coding because it's literally my form of entertainment. Some of us actually live and breathe this stuff instead of just playing with string searches.

Your JIT comment shows how little you understand. What does JIT have to do with Unreal Engine blueprints? They're not even conceptually related. You're just throwing around technical terms hoping something sticks.

"You're overly emotional and prone to making leaps based off superficial snap judgements" - Says the guy who made sweeping claims about A-Life functionality based on... string searches and config files? The irony is palpable.

"In a real company you start with research" - You sound like someone who's worked at one company and thinks their workflow is universal. Here's a shocker: You research based on needs, not just to research for research's sake. But please, tell me more about "real companies" while defending surface-level analysis.

"Break down the code that proves there's no ALife code implemented" - Classic deflection. First, others have already done this work and posted their findings (try Google). Second, YOU made the initial claims about functionality - the burden of proof is on YOU. I know exactly how much time proper reverse engineering takes, which is precisely why your surface-level "analysis" is so insulting to people who actually do this work properly.

The fact that you think I need to waste hours (or more likely days) reverse engineering something to prove YOU wrong, when YOU'RE the one who made claims based on string searches, shows how backwards your logic is. I know exactly how long proper reverse engineering of such functionality takes, and I'm not wasting that time on a petty argument with someone who clearly doesn't understand the effort involved. I have nothing to gain from it except proving something that others have already documented. Your demand for proof while contributing nothing but surface analysis is exactly why I'm calling you out.

But please, continue being butthurt and demanding others disprove your superficial claims while you contribute nothing of substance beyond config file searches.

[Salt Engineer]

Originally posted by Larry:

Your JIT comment shows how little you understand. What does JIT have to do with Unreal Engine blueprints? They're not even conceptually related. You're just throwing around technical terms hoping something sticks.

I was throwing bait genius. I even told you I was doing it. Let's recap:

Originally posted by Salt Engineer:

Remarks about JIT I made? You totally could have pointed out Blueprint isn't, and actually had a single compelling argument. But you didn't, likely because about the best you've got is bs you've pulled off of a conversation about cheat tables.

JIT was the topic when we got on a silly tangent about Python when talking about the code found in UE.

Again, all I'm demonstrating is you don't even bother to read or comprehend before you make a judgement call:

Originally posted by Larry:

"You're overly emotional and prone to making leaps based off superficial snap judgements" - Says the guy who made sweeping claims about A-Life functionality based on... string searches and config files? The irony is palpable.

See, you're still doing it.

No. I addressed the claim that because a feature - which the developers said wasn't working right - it's clearly a scam and not in the game.

There are two plausible scenarios. They lied, or it's there and busted. You're the genius CEO, reverse engineer guy cracking things, right? So, with all your skill and ability, would naming a few functions and strings ALife prevent you from working out what it does, or fool you into thinking that something silly like a logging function renamed to ALife was actually an AI sim?

Originally posted by Larry:

"Break down the code that proves there's no ALife code implemented" - Classic deflection. First, others have already done this work and posted their findings (try Google). Second, YOU made the initial claims about functionality - the burden of proof is on YOU. I know exactly how much time proper reverse engineering takes, which is precisely why your surface-level "analysis" is so insulting to people who actually do this work properly.

The fact that you think I need to waste hours (or more likely days) reverse engineering something to prove YOU wrong, when YOU'RE the one who made claims based on string searches, shows how backwards your logic is.

Therein is the issue. Yes, it was deflection, to prompt this very response. Ironically, that's a fallacy fallacy - yes I used one, but no, it doesn't automatically remove the validity of my point. Like this one:

Originally posted by Larry:

I know exactly how long proper reverse engineering of such functionality takes, and I'm not wasting that time on a petty argument

So what you're saying is that it's a waste of time to do more than a brief look at something just for the sake of an internet argument?

Originally posted by Larry:

with someone who clearly doesn't understand the effort involved. I have nothing to gain from it except

Yeah, let's pause again. So you're saying that doing a deep dive on a technical topic, with a technically challenged audience is fruitless, a waste of time, especially if it's for the sake of an internet argument.

In other words, taking more than a five second peek is pointless, unless you are actively doing something else with the information.

Originally posted by Larry:

proving something that others have already documented.

Nothing has been documented beyond broken behavior of code.

Originally posted by Larry:

Your demand for proof while contributing nothing but surface analysis is exactly why I'm calling you out.

But please, continue being butthurt and demanding others disprove your superficial claims while you contribute nothing of substance beyond config file searches.

You just pointed out a handful of reasons why it's a waste of time to even look at anything technical in a public environment like this, while simultaneously pointing out that I didn't go beyond that as the reason I'm wrong.


Here's the thing, I pulled this info up for one purpose, and one purpose only. If you want, I'll even relink the comments. Because of stupid threads about lawsuits over "it doesn't exist" bs, backed with "me and my cyber experts know!"

So, I'll say it again.

Devs have multiple times said it's there, and it's in the known issues.
So, one of two things is true:
They're full of it, and leaving bread crumbs to fool the reverse engineers too bright to be fooled (like you clearly, if you can pay attention long enough), and hoping to hell they don't have every cent they've made stripped away for fraud...

...or the code is there and bugged.

If we go with the simplest answer...

Your response, from the very start, was that assessment wasn't deep enough (for the pointless argument we wouldn't do more for) - so clearly I'm wrong, an idiot, and ... insert more bs here.

[Wilhelm]

oh jesus... i wonder why devs don´t close this thread but all the others?
maybe 1 out of 100 people critizing this are into the 'dev conspiracy'.

you are farming steam points again with obvious answers to questions no one asked.

we all know that something called a-life is in there. nobody said its a dummy! it is BROKEN.

the question is: broken beyond repair and not implementable or will it be repaired/provided in the next months?

people are angry because it was a major selling point you gaslighter / goal post mover.

Edit:

classical example of sunk cost fallacy, people are loving this comment thread because they are in with their money or don´t know a thing about a-life. it is hilarious.

[Salt Engineer]

Originally posted by Wilhelm:

oh jesus... i wonder why devs don´t close this thread but all the others?
maybe 1 out of 100 people critizing this are into the 'dev conspiracy'.

you are farming steam points again with obvious answers to questions no one asked.

we all know that something called a-life is in there. nobody said its a dummy! it is BROKEN.

the question is: broken beyond repair and not implementable or will it be repaired/provided in the next months?

people are angry because it was a major selling point you gaslighter / goal post mover.

Brother, I'm still not convinced you, the lawyer, and the dude that's had to change his troll name 3 times didn't get a room during the course of the thread.

If you're that upset about a game you need to touch grass.

[lukandroll]

Playing I've encountered two stalkers waiting, just in the side of a landmark, I traded with them, and parted ways
Exploring the abandonated place, the one with rad pills on it, just by the red flowers place, I've encountered the same two stalkers that I met previously, they were just entering the place, clearly scavenging, they were the same two guys
So there is a system similar to A-Life working on
The problem is that there is also a system that spawns random ♥♥♥♥ at you, usually at your back, which is super annoying