Going to try arguing both ways. Whether or not you feel this is directed at you is up to your own respective discretions.
People are going to disappointed when a delay is announced, of course they are. What's more, they have every reason to. Because disappointment is a neutral emotion: it's a response to a desire not being fulfilled. You can be disappointed when it rains on a field trip, when you miss your bus, or when a Terraria update is delayed. There's nothing whatsoever wrong with being disappointed, so telling people that "if they're disappointed, they're being entitled" is hogwash.
What is not a neutral emotion is indignation, and it depends on the context whether or not it's justified. Is it justified when it rains during a field trip? No, of course not, you can't blame the weather gods for that, because you don't have a right to good weather. Is it justified when your train arrives half an hour late? Yes, because you have a right to your train arriving on time and departing on time, as that's part of the service you are paying for. Is it justified when a release estimate isn't met? No, because you don't have a right to game developers correctly estimating when development is finished, the same way you don't have a right to meteorologists correctly predicting the weather or a company correctly estimating their annual profit (beforehand, of course): not just because you're not paying for them (that is not at all the argument I'm trying to make here), but because none of these three are in any way goals to be met, they're assumptions based on the current situation and what is still to happen.
The point is, indignation is justified when you are being treated unjustly. In the case of a release estimate being wrong, it isn't. Telling people that "if they're indignant, they're being entitled" does hold more value, but it's not the same thing as being disappointed. So don't be pissy at people for being disappointed. There's nothing wrong with that.
On the flip side of the coin, nobody here is being singled out for their stance towards Pipeworks. They're being singled out because their argumentation for their stance is being disagreed with. That literally is what civilised discussion is all about. Saying "People who are against Pipeworks are being run off" is simply twisting the reality, which is "People who are against Pipeworks, who are the minority, are providing arguments that the people who are in favour of Pipeworks, who are in the majority, are disagreeing with", in your favour. If you are not prepared to be disagreed with, then an internet forum is not the best place to hang around.
Finally, the "that is just your opinion" defence doesn't fly. Essentially what you're saying with that "you see it this way, I see it that way, and my way of seeing things is better than yours". If you're not open to other people's opinions, and dismiss arguments or facts as such, you literally can't be argued with. So don't do that.
