This is a weird nitpick tbh.
You absolutely can take a "complete" thing and add more to it. Minecraft has been a "complete" game for over a decade now. Following its completion came a decade's worth of new content.
In no way am I nitpicking at anything. I asked a simple question that received a simple answer and all these other comments started coming in, and the conversation just went that way.
I view that word in it's literal definition.
I play games like Paladins, and such, that regularly get new updates. I know they're labeled, marketed and sold as "completed" games, "with in-game purchases", but if they're constantly getting new content, then they aren't truly "completed."
And if people used the versions numbering system correctly, then anything after 1.0 would designate the main story of the game is completed (majalis stated in a previous comment that they plan on giving this game a 1.0 when that time comes, so they understand this), but anything else added isn't part of the main story/game. It would just be extra added bonuses. Game not completed, but the 1.0+ lets people know the main part of the game is done.
"On the market" doesn't mean "completed", and neither does "played for a decade."
I don't care how it's labeled or marketed.
If a game has a completed tag it shouldn't have any major bugs. That isn't the case with many games I see on here.
1.0 is out, game gets the completed tag slapped on it, and it's buggy AF. So, there are 12 bug fixes in the next year, cause it took the dev that long to find and fix all the bugs.
I get it. You're going off of what is considered the norm, but that doesn't mean the norm is correct. lol
The team is just Maj and Alis. Also, Merry Christmas, you green shortstack lover.
