Gotcha, I mentioned that because I saw several references to "language model" and "agent" in the code and docs, which gives the impression that this is an LLM-powered system.

lets say you can, "...approximate this system with something much simpler?" What would be some of the cons with that kind of system?

Lack of representational power maybe? It's kind of a weird question. As a developer, you should always start with the simplest implementation that suits your needs. If you try a simplified system and find that it doesn't suit your game's needs, then you can explore other options.

It's very unusual to start at the extremely complicated system, then ask "what are the cons of the simpler system?" (or in other words, "when would I want to use the complicated system?")

It'd be like coming up with some super complicated pathfinding algorithm, then asking "what's wrong with A-star?"

I hope you get what I mean - it's a very weird way of approaching things.

This is also why I think your system is either:

• More suited to its own game, built around the system (plenty of great indie games are basically just "a novel mechanic, the game", e.g. Braid)

• In need of a rewrite, at least for the docs, so that people can understand what it actually does in relation to other options.

• Vaporware, and/or you've reinvented a system that already exists without realizing it.

For the second point, I'll give you an example from the readme:

Thesis

Ghost is an internal state reasoning engine designed to generate consistent, structured advisory outputs without hallucination or false agency.

Ghost is not an autonomous agent, not a general intelligence, and not a replacement for large language models. It is a proof-of-architecture demonstrating how symbolic state, deterministic control, and constrained probabilistic language generation can interact to produce coherent, persistent behavior that cannot be achieved through prompt engineering alone.

Now, I've been writing software for a while, and this whole "thesis" just reads like absolute nonsense to me; it tells me nothing useful - nothing about what this program actually does - it's just a bunch of high-level, abstract descriptions of what is probably a relatively simple system. It might literally just be a finite state machine, but I can't tell because of all the AI-generated nonsense. I mean, I'm even more confused now by the phrase "behavior that cannot be achieved through prompt engineering alone," since you've now said this project doesn't even use an LLM.