Advertisement
How answers get graded
Early Access answers age quickly. Each claim therefore carries a source, a check date, a version boundary and a condition that sends the page back to draft.
The source ladder
| Source | Weight | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Developer changelog | Publishable alone | Patch notes and developer posts on the official Steam news feed. The strongest source available for a game this new. |
| Developer achievement text | Publishable alone | Achievement names and descriptions written by the developer and published on Steam. First-party wording about what the game tracks. It is authoritative about the condition it states and silent about everything else, so a missing achievement is never treated as proof that a mechanic does not exist. |
| Official store data | Publishable alone | Structured first-party records published by the platform itself: store categories, the Workshop hub, item metadata. Authoritative about what the platform records, and silent about intent — a Single-player category says what the game ships with, not what is planned. |
| Publisher guide | Publishable alone | Documentation produced or linked by the publisher, such as the Beginner's Guide referenced from the official announcements. |
| Official wiki | Use with version check | The publisher-hosted wiki is useful documentation, but it is community-contributed and can lag a patch. Version-sensitive claims are checked against changelogs where possible. |
| Independent walkthrough | Use with version check | A recorded playthrough, cited only for game text that is legible on screen in the footage. The build shown in the recording is stated, and the claim is checked against changelogs released since. |
| Community mod listing | Attributed only | A Workshop item’s own description, written by its author. It is first-party about the mod and second-hand about the game, so it is published only as an attributed statement about that mod, never as documentation of how the game behaves. No mod is installed or tested here. |
| Developer channel | Destination only | A place the developer names in an official post — a suggestion board, a chat server, a form. Authoritative about where the developer says to go, and silent about everything that happens there. Cited as a published destination, never as a page whose contents were read here. |
| Two independent players | Publishable together | Two accounts that reached the same conclusion separately. Copies of one post, or reposts of the same thread, count once. |
| Single report | Draft only | One player, one thread, no corroboration. Recorded as an open question so it can be checked later. |
| Generated aggregator | Rejected | Pages that restate each other without citing anything. Being first in a search result is not evidence. |
What happens to a question that fails the gate
It becomes a draft. A draft keeps sourced fragments and open questions, but it has no quick answer, carries noindex/nofollow, stays out of the sitemap, and receives no link from an indexable page. Of the 25 evidence-carded questions checked for build 0.5.5, 25 passed and 0 did not.
Both questions that were held back at launch — the route to the Anomaly and the Vacuum unload controls — cleared the gate on 22 August 2026, once the developer changelog was found to name the Vacuum input directly and the publisher guide was found to document objective markers. Nothing is held back at the moment. That is a statement about today’s evidence, not a promise: a contradiction moves a page back to draft.
Rules this site holds itself to
- No claimed playthrough. Nothing here is presented as first-hand play, because none of it is.
- No screenshots taken from other people. The diagrams on this site are drawn from scratch.
- Version-stamped. Every answer names the build it was checked against, because a patch can invalidate it overnight.
- Unknowns stay visible. Where the evidence stops, the page says so instead of filling the gap with a plausible sentence.
- Corrections are structural. If a source turns out to be wrong, the page goes back to draft rather than being quietly edited.
Known gaps in the research itself
- The official wiki is publisher-hosted but community-contributed. Its pages are treated as documentation, not as a developer changelog, and version-sensitive details still need a freshness check.
- Two comments in one discussion are weaker than two independently produced walkthroughs. Same-thread agreement is recorded, but it does not automatically turn a route into a verified answer.
- Sources from the 2025 demo period are treated as expired and are only cited to mark them as outdated.
Confirmed changes to published claims are recorded in the public corrections log.