On which of these floor plans can we continue to build?

The use of "resistant to advice" is slowly becoming overused: I really struggle when someone has their own opinion (for example about the staircase) to accuse them of being resistant to advice. For example, I only want a straight staircase too: Our decision. Period.

But not possible with a house depth of 8.5 meters without making significant compromises!

But not possible with a house depth of 8.5 meters without making significant compromises!

I do not share that opinion. And you are not the one making the "compromises."

I do not share that opinion. And you are not the one making the "sacrifices".

You forget: I am planning and overseeing it. Can the planner not care?
The original poster saw the bottlenecks and also did not approve of them.
This is not about your house. I can also assign points.

You forget: I plan and see it. Can the planner not care?
The OP saw the bottlenecks and also did not approve of them.
This is not about your house. I can also make points.

Then you did speak up in the "right" part: where it is constructive. That’s exactly about seeing or pointing out bottlenecks. What the OP then does with it, however, is his decision. After all, it is HIS house and not ypg's...
To be clear: criticism per se is not annoying – on the contrary. What is annoying are the lectures when it concerns things the decision maker is quite aware of: For example, in another thread, there is a lengthy discussion about whether a chimney makes sense... a pointless discussion without added value for the OP: Whoever wants one – knowing the possible disadvantages – can do it. So what. It doesn’t bother anyone.
The case with the straight staircase is also a good example: If you want such a staircase and are aware of the reported disadvantages (if they are indeed felt to be such by the OP): then why keep digging?

Gathering opinions is usually a sign that the OP questions themselves, actively engages with other opinions and options. But that does not necessarily mean that one has to abandon one’s own opinion and submit to a dictate from opponents. Thinking for oneself still seems sensible to me. Deciding for oneself too.

By the way, I find both your and kahos’s statements helpful and thoughtful: you actively engage with the questions and bring in your own opinions, experiences, and options – exactly what is needed here and what helps the OP perhaps find better solutions.

Sorry - Respect your opinion, but I think you’re taking some of the momentum out of the thread with your proclamation for freedom of speech. I can neither see that the OP is interested in fireplaces nor that he insists on a straight staircase.

We don’t really see the budget of just under 450 for the house with land and additional costs as much of a bargain.

Including land, that’s hard to judge. In Munich they’d probably kill you for that. In Hinterpommeritz, probably not.

We (my wife even less than me) somehow can’t really imagine squeezing our terrace between our house wall and the neighbor’s garage, whereas 5-6 meters is as much as some terraced and semi-detached houses have.

No one said that either. How do you come up with such nonsense?

Collecting opinions is generally a sign that the OP questions themselves, actively engages with other opinions and options. However, this does not necessarily mean that one has to abandon their own opinion and submit to a dictate from the opponents. I still find thinking for oneself sensible. Also deciding for oneself.

I completely agree with you. You can point out where there are deficiencies or how improvements can be implemented; then the OP can gladly take over the reflection on the brainstorming – also the decision to implement the advice and/or to question it further.

But honestly?... sometimes it really is quite unfortunate when justified criticism is not accepted.