You two should get a room, lol.

This isn't the first time software that claims to be free has been commercialized; it's not a matter of personal opinion but a legal one. US laws, along with international agreements on intellectual property and trademark use, allow you to use and distribute it for profit or non-profit purposes, and this game is distributed under those terms, whether we like it or not. Anyway, I agree with Stan. Trying to sell an open-source project on a massive platform like Steam should have at least been discussed with the development team or the lead developer, not for legal reasons but rather ethical ones. For example, I would have talked to the Wildfiregames studio and proposed a mechanism of paying for DLC while the game is free to download, and splitting the profits between the developers and the publishing team (myself), who is also in charge of advertising and other tasks. This would have created a mutual benefit where none currently exists, and it would have benefited everyone. I think that would have been the right thing to do. But I mention again, the 0AD project license is already defined and that license allows anyone to distribute the software and sell it as long as they hand over the source code: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney And in https://play0ad.com/ says: The message on the official website is clear: if someone is selling 0AD, you can still download it for free. However, this doesn't mean that someone can't be selling 0AD, or that they're a bad person or the devil for putting a price on something that's free. In the case of Steam, people are free to pay to maintain the convenience of using 0AD on Steam, Steam Deck, Steam Machine, compatibility with community-created controllers, using the Steam social network to share games, etc., or they can simply download it for free from the official website and deal with dependencies, manual updates, Wayland scaling issues, and so on. People will still be free to choose. This is similar to a sales scenario where a bag of flour at the market might cost you $1, but at the store across the street, it might cost $4. The store owner isn't being exploitative; you're simply paying for the convenience of not having to travel almost two hours to the market, paying tolls and spending money on gas while the sun beats down on your skin. The $3 difference isn't for the product's value, but for the convenience of having it right at your doorstep. In this case, having 0ad at a reasonable price wouldn't be considered theft. The price isn't for the software itself, but for the work involved in publishing it, paying Steamworks, and completing all the paperwork. I really hope that Wildfiregames will release it on Steam someday, but if someone else does it and charges for it, I won't judge them; on the contrary, I'll congratulate them. Remember the case of nexuiz, xonotic and the 2012 steam version, when the leader of the classic PC nexuiz project sold the rights and thanks to the fact that the game was published under a gnu gpl2 license (just like 0ad) they were able to create two forks, one called xonotic that is still free and another modified by the company illfonic implementing cryengine and that launched on steam and charges for each download. What would scare me a bit is if Microsoft claimed some patent issues with the game mechanics (similar to Age of Empires). Since it's a free game, there's no way to make a legal claim because there's no malicious intent, but if it's sold, that's a different story. By example: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8882594B2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US20070207844 https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030008696A1/en

Sorry for the late reply. I use Bluetooth earbuds. Soundcore Aerofit to be exact. Whenever they're connected, there's 2 output options that pop up. a "stereo" option which gives clear audio, but I can't use them as a mic for voice chat. The other lets me use the mic but makes the audio kind of eh. I'll try to start the game then connect them and see if that fixes anything. If not, I'll try finding an old headset or something and go from there.

Ground plan for the village of Grøntoft in its last year. Grøntoft existed from around 450 to 150 BC. For most of the period it comprised of 12-20 buildings and accommodated around 50 people and 70-80 animals: Aerial photo of the fortified settlement in Borremose, Himmerland. Borremose is known for and identified with a former fortified settlement dating from the Pre-Roman Iron Age (400-100 BC). It was constructed during the 4th century BC, as one of the largest structures of its kind in Northern Europe, but was already abandoned during the 2nd century BC, when the houses were burned down and the whole site levelled to the ground.  A plan showing the fortified settlement Lyngsmose, Ringkøbing. The rectangular houses are protected by a moat. There had been 15 long houses and two small houses. It is believed that around 8-10 people lived in each house, which means that there were around 120-150 people living in the village. The settlement was occupied between the 3rd century BC and the 1st century AD.  Reconstruction of the Iron Age village of Hodde, which was located between Varde and Grindsted. As can be seen, Hodde was somewhat larger than Grøntoft. At its greatest extent it included 22 farms, blacksmiths and potters workshops. The village Hodde existed in the last century before the birth of Christ. It was a large village; at its peak, it included 27 farms with 53 houses and 200 to 300 inhabitants. Each farm was surrounded by a fence and the whole village was surrounded by a palisade as high as a person.  Feddersen Wierde is an ancient terp settlement in Wremen (Lower Saxony, Germany), model displayed in the museum Burg Bederkesa. It was inhabitated from the 1st century BC to the 5th century AD. The village was built on a terp (artificial mound for flood protection), with multiple farms and longhouses evolving towards a hierarchical structure (central chief's house). Traces of collective dwellings, agriculture and livestock farming across several phases. But thanks for the effort. I think that if a linguistic dictionary said that the ancient Germanic peoples traveled on camels, you would believe it without hesitation. 

I do check my info and make an effort I shouldn’t even do because I’m really not interested in arguing if the accepted Proto-Germanic reconstruction is wrong, which it isn’t, and what you have to check is your tone. Re-read my comments and realise that it’s not me stating you are “defending something weird that nobody talks about”, that’s you when for example called BS on the opinions I quoted from experts in the field. “Once again” it is you who acts like a condescending 12-year-old brat that feels the disgusting need to make pseudo-patronising “Brandolini's law” comments.   It's not my fault if you can’t check info properly, just go to https://archive.org/details/diealthochdeutsc01steiuoft/page/n7/mode/2up, the column header meanings are on page 1. From there (and volume 3) you get the Sg. 911 and Sg. 242, which are dated from the very late 8th century (around 790 AD) and the 8th-11th centuries, respectively, as can be checked in https://www.e-codices.unifr.ch. It took me 20 minutes, no library needed (perfect place to make a condescending comment, I know, but lets have some class, shall we?). I only missed giving more span to the latter, because, again, I really don’t give a darn about spending time questioning the accepted reconstruction. I’m just giving evidence on why things are how they are, while you keep digressing towards centuries apart changes and ignoring any source that contradicts you regarding what matters: Proto-Germanic, from 500 BC to 1 BC.   The only relevant thing is if haimaz is better or not for what is wanted. Nothing else. Luckily, I think I found exactly what’s needed: https://folksprak.org/common/material/pdf/A-Grammar-of-Proto-Germanic.pdf, which states that the Germans did not form villages but rather lived in isolated homesteads. Old Norse heimr, Old English hām and Old High German heim mean house or home, while Gothic uses haimos (only appearing in accusative plural) for village, and translates agrós 'land' to þaurp 'land, lived-on property', like Old Norse þorp 'farm, estate'. In West Germanic it means 'village', as in Old English þorp, Old High German dorf. In Gothic weihs 'village' also translates agrós.   This is exactly what I meant with the demographic change, þurpą means what we need because there were no such things as proper villages, and both it and wīhsą seem to refer to whatever was there, call it land, property, farm, estate, with surely an extended family or more, and in the eyes of the Romans. I don’t see how any of them would be smaller or less appropriate than haimaz (taking from ON, OE and OHG). All this is exactly what the preferential reconstructions (are ordered entries important or not? Or is it just cherry-picking?) from the PGmc dictionary are telling us: haimaz is “house” first, “home” second, and “village” last, for þurpą the order is “village, settlement”, “gathering of people, crowd”, and “cleared land”, and for wīhsą it’s just “village, settlement”. All fits perfectly. If one travels in time it will look like a big farm or estate, conceptually it was the closest you could get to a village. They were not thinking in Phase I, II and III. And, as I said before, some branches kept it literal, while others kept the concept (which is what matters), and depending on each word.   You are not going to convince me that the dictionary is wrong because, considering the source I cited and all the methodologies used that go way beyond your knowledge, it just isn't. If you have a problem with that, just take it to the ones that put it together, and use whatever word you want, I have better things to do honestly.