This is disingenuous at best and an obuscation tactic at worst because as you can see here, there's a lot of numbers here. It's very obvious when I'm talking about a magic number. I'm talking about things like 1 0 15 270 360. I'm not talking about what my mouse just happens to be highlighting, which is uh SPR Spark. Yeah. And that's actually not my cursor. That's his I just realized cuz that's his video that I'm looking at. I can't highlight his code in his video. So, he has his cursor on Spark, and I'm talking about all the numbers around that, but he's zoning in on Spark. It It doesn't make sense. I don't know why he decided to do that. He has this repeating theme where somebody gives him a question and then he pivots to something that somebody didn't even ask or address to try to get out of that question. Now, recently, like just yesterday, this guy right here, Coding Jesus, he had put out a video talking about Pirate Software's code and that he had reviewed it and was not super stoked about it. Now, I watched that video on stream yesterday and had the privilege to actually chat with coding Jesus and then he was also making a second video which he had just put out a couple hours ago now as well. Now, in tandem with this happening, Liveream fail put out a video showcasing clips of pirate software responding to code Jesus dissecting Heartbound's code and it's 7 minutes and 30 seconds of clips. Now, some of this stuff was technical talk. Other things were actual points that I myself could talk about. So, I figured if I'm going to cover these clips, I think the best way to do that would be to do it with code Jesus. So, I hopped on a call with him. We had both watched the clip prior and we went over and addressed the most important points through those clips. Now, just a quick 10 seconds before we jump into this video. I highly recommend that you check out Coding Jesus. What we cover in this is just those clips, but these two videos that he's put out have gone into full detail and really go into explaining his points of view. And for those of you who are really into coding and understand it, he does excellent stuff. And so in this I'm just trying to, you know, make sure that I can also give to you guys a a summary that's a bit more digestible for those who don't. With all that being said, I hope you enjoy the video. This can help you. You mean the guy who's never used Game Maker Studio, doesn't know Game Maker language and talked a lot of but was wrong. What's kind of embarrassing for him is I have around 5 minutes of experience worth of Game Maker and I was still able to correct him on the data types within the game in my recent response video by simply referencing the documentation. So, that's an iconic statement from him right off the bat. All right, we can continue. Okay. Okay. Should look at my comment underneath his video. Imagine screaming and about alarms and game makers saying, "Why aren't these renamed when you literally can't rename them?" Wild behavior. It's just another like YouTube grifter trying to fight for relevance, dude. That's all that is all too common these days. Have you ever talked about pirate before this? Like what got you interested in covering this? Yeah. Uh, what got me interested in covering it is somebody who talks a big game and then I want to investigate. Is what they've produced coherent with who they portray themselves as? Right. So, when he says I'm a grifter, I think I've actually been doing this for longer than he has. I build a consistent audience producing content that plays towards the exact same theme, which is getting better at development. I never came onto YouTube claiming I'm the best. It's actually a learning journey for me as well, but I'm not understanding what I'm grifting on. I'm producing content that's consistent with my channel. I'm not changing my message to cater towards somebody else. Have you covered um other people in like quote unquote coding drama in the past? I haven't covered coding drama. I've done code reviews of other people, people in my Discord community, other individuals as well, my own code. I've done coding live streams. So, when I saw somebody that had a dev live stream that talked about video game development, I wanted to check it out. And little did I know, it would be a gold mine because it would expose him for his inability to remain congruent with who he portrays he is. Manually setting all to zero with eight lines. Those were set to zero because it was ending the alarms. By setting them to zero, you're actually setting the alarm to off. So, so pause there. So, his chatter actually corrects him by identifying my by identifying my critique. As a developer, you shouldn't be copying and pasting alarm alarm equals zero and setting it to zero for every object in the array. So what he's doing here is a classic example of deflection. He pretends that chatter asked why do you set the alarms to zero instead of the question which was why don't you iterate over them in a for loop. A for loop is a very basic coding construct. If you're iterating through a consecutive set of numbers, you definitely want to use that. It's the perfect scenario for a for loop. but he pretends that he didn't understand the question and then tries to answer something else. I'm also trying to think of like how we can make it easier for people that are outside of coding to understand. So there's essentially a much more efficient way to do what he's doing that a rudimentary coder would understand to do and he completely reshapes the question to avoid having to admit that. Yeah. Um, another point as well is if he did not want to use a for loop, instead of associating an alarm with an index like alarm 0, alarm 1, alarm 2, cuz as somebody reviewing code, it's not very evident what that actually refers to. He could have said alarm and then had a variable called left and set it to zero and index into that alarm array or alarm data structure with the variable left. So, I would know that this alarm, whatever it is, it's associated with the left boundary of his character or object. So, there was two approaches he could have taken here. Both would have been better, but he chose to ignore both. Can't see your comment. Did he delete it? That'd be even funnier. You deleted the comment. That would be even funnier. Yeah, I I didn't delete the comment. That's Yeah, there you go. It's still there. I wrote this underneath his video. him talking about people like taking this way too seriously and and having these gripes and he is taking time to downvote the other comments. The only other two you can see on screen. I think the the more important thing here is that when he went to, oh, he definitely deleted my comment. That was a bit of projection. I think that's probably the first thing he thinks about when he thinks of a comment that he doesn't like. And then later he realized, oh, you didn't delete my I don't delete comments. The only time I'll delete a comment if it's like a death threat or something extremely egregious. But if you disagree with me, I have no problem with your comment remaining up and people discussing it. It's more engagement for me. Only reason he mentioned that he thinks I deleted his comment is cuz that's what he does. You go on his live stream, you'll see somebody comment # stopkilling games and then in 3 seconds that comment's gone. His moderators have taken it out. So a lot of this is projection as well. I think he was probably expecting as you know a lot of his comments even when he's getting ratioed end up climbing their way to the top, but they aren't. Matter of fact, I was trying to find the comment and I had to confirm with coding Jesus he had to search for the comment because he couldn't find it himself because it's been absolutely buried because nobody is taking him seriously and maybe he was just expecting that it would go to the top like most of his stuff has done for I don't know the last couple years. And then secondly, if I get hate comments, I don't even react to them. Like what's the point of even downvoting them? It doesn't matter. They have some sort of criticism or they're making fun of me. Like I'm getting a bunch of like milking comments for going over this. Okay. Like I I can't even waste the time to downvote it. It doesn't matter. If people are going to say what they say, me putting a thumbs down isn't going to change any of it. And it just I don't know. It's It's interesting at least that I saw that he was doing it. Sprite Spark is not a magic number. It's a direct reference to an asset file called Sprite Spark. This is how Game Maker allows you to link sprites and other assets. When you want to use a sprite, sound, or other object, you call it by name. This is disingenuous at best and an obuscation tactic at worst because as you can see here there's a lot of numbers here. It's very obvious when I'm talking about a magic number. I'm talking about things like 1 0 15 270 360. I'm not talking about what my mouse just happens to be highlighting which is uh SPR spark for whatever reason. Yeah. Yeah. That's like him saying, "Oh, look. He's talking about and giving me about my my turtles." And the the part of the video is talking about all of the zebras and you just happen to have your cursor sitting on a turtle. Yeah. And that's actually not my cursor. That's his I just realized because that's his video that I'm looking at. I can't highlight his code in his video. So he has his cursor on Spark and I'm talking about all the numbers around that, but he's zoning in on Spark. It it doesn't make sense. I don't know why he decided to do that. He has this repeating theme where somebody gives him a question and then he pivots to something that somebody didn't even ask or address to try to get out of that question. Changing this just creates layers of obfiscation without improving usability or performance. Alarms are internal to individual objects and only reference that same object that they're inside of. When you see alarm zero, it's hitting the alarm zero on the left side of the object there. We cannot rename these as as they are tied to the object they are placed in. Setting an alarm zero causes that alarm to stop. So my critique wasn't against the name alarm. It was against what he needed to explain to me to make clear and that is that the index zero corresponds to the alarm on the left. The fact that he needed to explain this to me is already a concession that it wasn't clear enough in his code. When you look at alarm zero, you have no idea what that alarm belongs to. What is zero? If he declared a variable called left, set it to zero, and then indexed into the alarm data structure or alarm array or alarm construct, whatever he'd like to call it, then I would know at least that he's trying to represent a direction. But as it stands, it's not clear. In your best way to explain it, so a lot of the contention that I see, a lot of the criticism that your video has received is that a lot of people think that okay, but in a perfect world, Thor Pirate Software is not going to be sharing this code with you. It's only for him. Only he needs to understand it. So outside of, you know, trying to explain these points to you because they're clearly, you know, harder to unless he directly explains to you what's going on, why why else would it be important to organize it differently or make it more readable? I think the biggest point as to why it's important to make it more readable is that over time as you code and you implement bad coding practices, you accumulate something called technical debt. Technical debt is a concept for those that are not technical where you make choices today that are not optimal in favor of expedience and those choices end up biting you back in the future. So the more you copy and paste code, the more you couple classes together, the more you make decisions for the sake of getting something out the door as opposed to doing it right, the harder it is to continuously progress because you're going to need to constantly looking back behind your shoulder and changing things which might have ripple effects throughout your code. Maybe copying and pasting in this case is fine. But what I'm trying to get to here, because I have such a lack of actual evidence of him coding, is that there is a very obvious pattern here, a pattern of poor coding practices, which might or might not be the reason why this game has taken 8 years to develop. Essentially, I mean, a lot of people understand like spaghetti code. If you cut corners at the beginning, think about like maybe even League of Legends. And I'm not, you know, here to give League of Legends but an issue that can arise from doing something like that is that when you push out an update, suddenly something that has nothing to do with the update is now completely broken or doing something it shouldn't be. And that's because you didn't code it properly to begin with, which just ends up making things take way longer than if you had just done it right and taken, you know, a few extra minutes, a few extra hours at the beginning. Yeah. And that a few extra hours might just mean more robust test cases. It might mean you took a shortcut in how you wrote a class and now it's tied to something else and that that tie has secondary or tertiary effects on that object now and that wasn't picked up because you have poor testing or because you didn't integration test enough. So yeah, that that's correct. Uh data types are not defined in GameMaker. You cannot define a boolean. You can use 01 or true false. It will doesn't do anything. None of this matters in this language. The boolean and the data types. Okay, so I'd like to interpret this in two of two ways because what he could have been saying here when he says data types are not defined is that you can't create your own custom data types which is indeed wrong. You can create structures in Game Maker. It's in the documentation. Searchrs and constructors. But maybe he wasn't referring to strus. Maybe he was referring to booleans which also just isn't true. In one of my more recent videos, I investigated that. I pulled up the Game Maker documentation and I read the boolean instructions. So you would even be able to play this section of the video. I think that would probably be better. He makes the claim that you can't define a boolean in Game Maker because Game Maker itself doesn't have a native boolean type in its scripting language. In other words, it interprets reals as booleans. Now to reconcile the fact that he used a boolean in his code with what he said, I decided to do what any developer would do, and that is I consulted the documentation. So if you go to data types in Game Maker, oh look at that. You are also provided with constants true and false which can always be used in your code to prevent any issues should the native boolean type be defined later. So GML defines constants true as one and false as zero. And the documentation itself even recommends a use true and false instead of reals in case that association between a boolean and a real ever gets changed to a boolean and some other native definition of a boolean. So in other words, if they ever replace the aliasing of bulls for reals with boos for actual bulls, they recommend that you use true and false. But we know he's not going to concede on this point or admit the fact that he was wrong given his track record. So let's move on to the next claim since it's like you know coding speak. Essentially it let's try to boil down just essentially what it is for people who don't have the coding language. So he's wrong that booleans don't exist. The documentation says to use booleans as true and false because while they are currently aliasing integers in the future Game Maker may support a native boolean data type. So the documentation itself which you can see in my video specifies please use true and false because in the future they might actually refer or be replaced by native boolean types instead of integers. Yeah, as you can see the highlighted text here. You're also provided with constants true and false which should always be used in your code to prevent any issues should real boolean data types be added in the future. The expectation is that that is going to be integrated in the future and you should act accordingly as though that that is going to be true because number one it's going to work for you and number two that prevents you from you know your code from completely the bed when that is to happen like when it is to be introduced. Yeah, your code is not going to the bed when it is introduced but it currently makes your code a lot more descriptive. It makes your code currently more descriptive and when they come out with the update that adds these native boolean types as opposed to having booleans just reflect one and zero numbers then you'll have an easy transition. When you look at his code for example in my first video you look at his if statement or one of his switch statements. He has a variable called question true and he sets it to one or zero. Now if you're totally new to programming or even if you're a seasoned developer you look at a variable called question true and then you see it being set to a number. You're asking yourself what's going on? First of all, why is the variable called question true? That already implies that the result is true. Why would it be false? That's confusing. But also, why would it be a number? Question true should probably be true or false. But for some reason, he's setting it to a number. The documentation states currently one and zero is interpreted as true or false. But regardless, please use true and please use false because in the future, if we add a native boolean type, they will be switched out. So true and false instead of being one or zero as the underlying type it'll be an actual boolean type. What he's saying here like the argument that he's trying to make is that I am getting the same output. I'm getting the same outcome by writing 01 true or false. And the whole point of it is you are kind of disorganizing yourself and creating that technical debt that you were referring to earlier by making it this non-escriptive. Yeah, I would say so. And it's not necessarily technical debt because yeah, it's confusing to look at, but it's not confusing to the point where it might screw up other parts of your code. The way that I'd like to think about it is yeah, his use of one or zero here is not adding technical debt per se, but it's making his code more bugprone. Okay. So, just in creating an environment where it's more often to happen than not. Exactly. You can read about the ARG here. It's just a bunch of disingenuous arguments put up in bad faith trying to make me look like a bad programmer. And in reality, this guy has never used the engine that I'm working in, never used the language that I'm working with, and all of his points are moot as a result. So, this is what I commented on because he's saying I'm trying to make him look bad. He doesn't recognize that he himself is making him look bad. That statement, in my opinion, is a bit pathetic because despite the fact that I've never used this engine, even I know that he's doing things incorrectly, at worst, and sloppily at best while claiming, you know, that other people view him as the Bob Ross of programming. So in our discussions we already brought up the fact that yes he should be using true and false instead of one and zero. The documentation tells him to. He mentioned that you can't define data types. The documentation shows you can define strrus and objects. He's at this point it's just a denial of reality. And that's why I said I kind of want to move past this. I made my two videos. There's nothing else that I can add that's unique and there's nothing else that I can really help here because you can bring a cow to the well but you can't get it to drink. Then also in that hand I think it would be important for people again yes you've never worked with this like particular what was it a is it a game engine or a language yeah a game maker okay so you haven't used this particular thing you haven't used game maker so what enables you to like so easily understand that what he like the decisions he's making are wrong besides the fact that you're able to just kind of research a few of them right off the bat. Yeah, that that's a good question. Um, I do think that him saying that is also another reflection of inexperience. I've personally taken constructive feedback from people who are better software engineers than me who have never coded in some of the languages that I have. And that's because good software engineers can recognize patterns and apply principles in an appropriate context. It's like saying, "Oh, you've never had cancer, so you don't know how that it's bad." That's obviously preposterous, right? You can code and as you code you gain an understanding of how things should be designed. What are general principles to follow? What's uh good code versus bad code? What is clean code look like? How should you organize your code? And a lot of those principles are language agnostic. Meaning it's just across the board that it's those are the same kind of standards. Exactly. I think I mean for for me and I think a lot of other people like the understanding of coding languages and the way that pirate talks about it makes it seem as though each of these languages or like when you are developing a game you can attribute more of what he's you know viewing this criticism as as like stylistic or almost personal choices that because you're doing the endeavor on your own you can curtail or or just completely avoid doing it the the technically correct way. And so he's making you look like a snob as opposed to no, this is just the standard that you should be held to in general if you've been coding specifically like for eight years on a single game. Yeah, exactly. And he's bitching about that is not changeable inside of Game Maker, which you know, I would expect a little bit better from someone named Coding Jesus. But I've got the ego, right? So why are you known as Coding Jesus? Is it cuz you're a a soant of of coding? Not at all. So initially my channel was just my name. And when I was first starting out, somebody said, "Hey, dude, you got a really long beard." At the time, I did have like a longer, fuller beard, and you got this like luscious long hair. Why don't you give yourself a name that will really stand out in people's minds? It wasn't The impetus for my channel name wasn't I'm this god amongst men and I'm looking down from here on everybody, and I'm this uh authority figure. The name stems from branding effectively. You really looked like this guy. Yeah. You see that? You see that picture with the Patreon right below the second line and then you look like Jesus. That's just it's and then the one right there. So my coding journey right beside. Right. So that's the inspiration. Yeah. And you've got like the white coloring in the background. It's the hair. It's the beard. It's that's so simple. Yeah. It has nothing to do with my own perceived technical acumen or my own skill set. It's just this is a suggestion that I went with because it reflected the image at the time purely on the physical appearance. Yeah. And you're also I don't know. I haven't seen you do any like quote unquote ego checking when it comes to you analyzing his code. It's all just assessing the basic standards that he should be meeting with the jobs that he has talked about having or like how he references them. You would expect that he would be at those metrics and that's what you're calling out. There's a difference between being reductive towards you know an analysis of his code versus being reductive by bolstering your own skills which you don't do in your videos. Yeah. Nowhere in my video do I say, "Hey guys, this guy's gamedev sucks. Come to me. Watch me do gamedev." In all my videos, or the all my videos, really the last two, I'm giving I'm giving an example of where he screwed up and showing somebody one of many potential avenues to improve. It's up to them to consider the benefits, costs, and trade-offs. Is he a webdev or something? I have no idea, but he clearly doesn't know this language. You can review languages. Many concept concepts are transferable. Concepts can be transferable, but specifics are not. And that's the problem. This person called out a bunch of specifics as they would in another language that are not correct in this language. This is another example of him being corrected by a chatter and then refusing to acknowledge that the chatter even has a morsel of truth in his statement. So this is what we were discussing previously that concepts, patterns, these are all transferable skills between languages. You'll often find software engineers in their career doing 5 years of C++ and then maybe transitioning to Python or Q/KDB or whatever other language. That's because these skills are transferable. That in itself is is wrong. But nothing that I reviewed was as specific as I would have liked it to be because in all his streams or really in none of his streams did he go into specifics himself. He didn't have any specific content for me to review. He had four screenshots and over 60 hours worth of gamedev streams. So I could only be as specific as he was allowing me to be. Does that make sense? Yeah. You don't have anything to actually go off of in terms of like actually analyzing him performing the actions. If you only have such little data to go off of, you can only give, you know, your point of view off of the end product, which is the code. Exactly. And then extrapolate based off of that. So extrapolate conclusions like now I know why it took so long to develop this game or whatever other conclusion right he doesn't give anybody any basis by which they can go into the level of specifics that are up to his standard a lot of his answers a lot of his responses have been obuscation which is it's one of the reasons even watching this makes my head hurt which is why I want to move on with other content personally but I get it that like this guy is he's just out of his I don't want to say out of his mind but he's out out of his depth really and he's like, "How am I correcting him when I have five minutes worth of Game Maker experience and he has eight years?" Like I said, you're going to see a whole lot of people on YouTube trying to pick at me like piranhas to get their 15 minutes of fame. I I don't have much to add there other than he effectively brushed all my legitimate criticism about his code under the rug and then just attacked my character by effectively saying that I'm just doing this for what, clicks or views or clout or whatnot. I've been posting content consistently with my own vision for years and that vision has been to help people become better developers. I have been showing a consistent track record of building a community that's looking to get better in software engineering. You haven't done like a coverage of something like drama really. It's just been reviews of other code. So there isn't even like what a lot of people have an issue with with pirate a pattern of behavior. this is the first time you've like really dipped your toes into I don't even want to call it uh you know trend surfing but it was just it happened to be relevant at the time and it also happened to fit in line with your expertise so you could actually comment on it. Yeah, exactly. I mean if you look at the video that I made prior to the video that I made on him, I reviewed somebody else's code when he came onto my radar. I said, "Well, hey, let's take a look at his code now." the grift al maybe if I was this YouTuber with 30 subscribers and I had no previous history on YouTube then you can say maybe I'm just trying to jump on some bandwagon but I have consistent history of speaking to software engineers doing code reviews writing my own code describing my own code doing live streams about coding so it's really just an ad hominem to try to bury me and and shove all that all that all my legitimate criticism into my my grave that's what he's trying to do either way video is dumb dude probably should have reached out instead of talking this part's extremely funny because I actually did reach out. So, I was in his YouTube live stream and I said, "Hey, I'm making a video about you." I wanted him to respond and then we can talk about it. Now, I don't have proof that I did that. You'd have to take my word. But I did message him on his YouTube chat. And within like 3 seconds when I said I'm making a video about your code, I got banned and my message disappeared from his stream. So, he's not interested with engage in engaging with anybody. He lives in his own fortress. That's why it's so easy for him to say, "You should have just reached out to me." cuz even if he did see that message, he would have never responded anyways. He would have just brushed it off and ignored it. The fact that he didn't respond to it explicitly, it's just a cover for him to say, "This guy never actually reached out." If that makes sense. Yeah. No, trust me, I'm I'm firmly aware. I don't know if you had seen it. I reached out and my initial goal and so I the exact thing that you just mentioned that the clip that we just watched was the driving force for sending this and I actually refer to it because he had said this in a previous drama I think with the only fangs. I sent him this and anyone who's watching they, you know, feel free to pause and read the the kindest thing that I could think of and it also included I hadn't watched some of Ross' stuff about the stop killing games and so I said that he had good arguments that I hadn't seen um kind of really refuted and so it was essentially hey I would love to moderate a discussion between you two cuz I know that you've pretty much said you never want to speak to the guy and I was like I know I have something to benefit. I know I've made negative videos about you in the past as it's it's here or yeah, there's nothing I can type up that can convince you that I'm not doing this to make you look bad, but I I genuinely wanted them to have a discussion and I was like, that's going to it's going to reduce toxicity on your end, all this stuff. So, I was like, you know, I understand that this might just screw me over the fact that I've talked about you like that. He responded, gave a link to one of his very well-known tweets at this point, and then just said that my content is react and hate chasing. Um, says he doesn't respect it, but he gets it. I even followed up and said, "Hey, like if it's closed, like if you're not going to do this because I'm moderating or being a part of it, I'll stay out of it. I just think you guys having the conversation would be useful." So, he left me on red. I asked him if he'd be okay with me sharing this stuff. He said it, you know, in full, not in portions. I truly made the honest effort and the response that I got was again just completely shutting down and ignoring or or just not being willing to have that conversation. And it's crazy that he did it to you as well. Yeah. I mean what we see here is repeated patterns of behavior whether it's in the domain of interpersonal relationships or software engineering. It's there's no real getting to him which is why I'm uh like I said in my previous video just going to move forward with my other content. I think very easily people get into the hate mob mentality where it's either people are just hating and finding any reason to or people look at it and go I don't believe it. I think people are just choosing to hate and I would just rather have videos up that are showing like if I can make an argument for him, I'll do my best. Right now it doesn't seem like there's much of that, but I'm at least I enjoy the effort of trying and like having the two sides of it. Yeah, that makes sense. Now, this next part I'm not sure if you want to include because I'm a little more shaky on it, but I do have something to say. Talk them through the entire thing of why I did that all in an array because that is not normal practice to do that. And it's specifically so that you guys can reverse engineer the game and solve the ARG. Sometimes doing bad practice has meaning, which is why I did it in that case, so that you guys could do those ARG components. And I've been saying that for years. The ARG solving community around the game knows this. That's why it's done. So, it's not a gotcha. It's just stupid. ARG stands for alternate reality game where components of the game itself are like placed outside the game, maybe on a website or some online resources or sometimes even in real life. So, people go out and they look for things that reveal secrets or hints in the game. I'm not sure why he'd sacrifice code quality for an ARG that only a handful full of people bother to do. It just seems like a poor excuse for his bad practice. I mean, he admits it's a bad practice, but then he tries to deflect with his ARG explanation um as kind of like an immediate out. I actually don't know too much about ARG. I guess that's one of the differences between me and pirate software is I admit when I'm not an expert at something. But isn't the whole appeal of hacking and ARG and needing to go and look for something to discover these sorts of hints or clues on your own? Like why would you in a game dev live stream show everybody where the timeline of events are located and then allow them to more easily find ways to change the game or hints within the game? To me, that just seems strange. Now, I also can't confirm this, but apparently he's banned people who try to do ARG in his game. Anyways, it's it's a bit strange to me. Like I said, I'm not the expert at ARG, right? I'll go ahead and admit that. But it seems quite suspect to me. I'll just put it that way. It seems like you could still do ARG and do it in a lot cleaner way. Like you don't need to have magic numbers as your indices for your array in order to use that array for for ARG. You know what I mean? Yes. So, I can actually I can give you a bit of understanding with that. Have you ever played? It's called Inscription. Is that the card game? Yes, it is. Yeah, I love that game. Yeah. So, that is that is a great example of ARG because it's a it's a bit more than just it being like a reality kind of thing. A lot of I believe maybe Undertale does it a bit too where you will have it set up so that if someone does scrape the code or like goes through and tries to as he said it kind of what is it reverse engineer or reverse hack or something like that you make it so that there are things that you are trying to get them to find within the code. So the interesting thing is like you said it feels more like a deflection because number one there's multiple ways to achieve what he's doing and he also talks about his experience with the defcon badges and working on teams where they do actual hacking and that he has these black badges. So you would you would assume that even using the coding practices that you are using he could leave a comment if it was for you know an Easter egg. He wouldn't need to have a comment on every single line of code. He could organize his stuff accordingly, but he's hiding behind it feels like the plausible deniability of I am choosing to write this entire thing terribly because I want to dumb it down to make it easier for people to or maybe not even dumb it down, but do it this way so that it can be easier to implement the ARG aspects of it. I feel like that is a that's an easy out that people are just going to nod their head to because they don't know what the alternative is because they haven't developed a game with ARG. Yeah, I think that that makes sense to me. Like why would you reorient your whole game around poor coding practices just to make it more ARG friendly? Especially when most people are never going to touch it like in scription. I watched a YouTube video of someone doing the analysis of it, but most people are not going to go through the effort of reading up the code, finding those points, and doing it. They're interested in the story, but not necessarily in the adventure of finding it because just it's a lot. Yeah. I I can guarantee you probably like nine out of eight eight or nine out of 10 inscription players probably don't even know what ARG is. So right with Pirates community, you know, maybe you could say that those numbers are a bit different. But even then, if he is selling a game, he should understand that completely. It's like it's like um focusing the way that you balance a game for the hardcore players as as opposed to the general player base. You think he'd have more robust ways to implement ARG given his background, but instead you get this slop that permeates the entire code base. Yeah, that actually that's also that's probably even a better point is that he chooses to make it sloppy for that element when he could do it based off of his reputation and history that he's developed. He could do it a much more interesting and and clean way. Thank you for like taking the time to even answer these questions with this video. And I just want to clarify that the way that I like dumb things down to make it easier for me to understand for for other people. Would you say that that's, you know, accurate enough? Yeah, I think everything we've discussed today, like you've been able to summarize it well. Perfect. All right. Thank you, man. Talk to you later. See you. Now, that wrapped up our conversation that we had about the clips that had been surfacing today in regard to what Pirate had to say about CJ's videos. Now, I highly recommend that you check out his videos as they go way more in-depth than even what we covered in those clips, and he really does address each point point by point. I think it was most useful for me to try to help summarize so that a lot of people that aren't coders can understand the points that he was making and why Pirates, you know, refutes or or counterpoints don't add up. And now, this is just me speaking. I didn't bring this up to coding Jesus. Pirate was legitimately just lying about coding Jesus and his experience and who he is. Like his reputation calling him a grifter. You can't back that up with his YouTube channel. Nearly 600 videos and this is truly the first time that he has covered drama. If he wants to call someone a grifter, you could make the argument infinitely better talking about me or just about any other, you know, more Pegasus if he's touched this or sensitive society. Like these are just coming off the dome. But like any of us, it would make so much more sense. And if anything, it's just more telling of this being an ego check more than anything that he jumps to an ad homonym attack because he can't actually contest with the arguments that CJ's making because they're sound. And because CJ is willing to admit when he's wrong or out of his depth and willing to even have the conversation. And as you heard from him, even if Pirate complains about the fact that people don't reach out, when people do, he rejects it. whether it be coding Jesus, me, or just about I'm sure anybody else that has made the attempt outside of Charlie and Joshua Strife. And even then, they didn't get much of a response themselves. That's it for the video today. I hope you guys learned something new. I'm interested to hear your thoughts. Lastly, if you're still here by the end of the video, consider subscribing. It really helps out the channel. You know, you've seemingly enjoyed the video. Uh, leave it a like if you want this to get out to more people. But most importantly, just thank you for taking the time to watch this video. And again, please be sure to check out Coding Jesus. He has some really, really useful insight about all of this. That's all I had for you today. Hope you guys enjoyed it. See you later. Peace. Bye.