Well, I, I think there's a high cost of entry to games. Um, if you want to make AAA games, you know, you're going to be spending at least ten million if not more, um, because of coding, um, and sort of the - you know, sort of the, the barriers, um, that that can create, um, especially if you really just aren't familiar or aren't comfortable with code. Um, you know, the fact that you need sizable teams, you know, depending on - so, it's not to say that there aren't games that are made by one person or all these things. But there are a variety of barriers in, in the way. Some, um, systems are, are lowering them significantly, you know. So, it might be Steam. It might be IOS or Android or some of these other things. And so you're starting to see, you know, more people, different people break in. But I think that's the biggest thing. And the people who have access to the means of production, you know, to use a, uh - to, to use a political term - um, are increasingly conservative. Making big budget games is very risky. Uh, and they tend to draw on a lot of the same cultural, um, influences. So, whether it's Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down, Lord of the Rings, uh, anime, uh, super heroes, comic books, you know, that kind of stuff - so, if that's the limit, if that sort of bounds and defines - and then, of course, sort of where games have been before, right? So, the more that that's what is defining games, the more you're going to see, at least in AAA, a lot of games that are - that are fairly similar. In terms of violence, I think you have to look at the broad landscape of games and sort of say it's like, well, there's tons of puzzle games out there. There are tons of kids' games out there. There's a lot of stuff out there that isn't violent, right? Um, you know, there are a lot of money - games in the Top Ten. There are a lot of games, um, that make money that are violent. But, to me, that's not something I tend to worry about too much in that sense. What I do worry about is to sort of say, well, you know, what else can we do, right? And I think part of the challenge is, is that a violent interaction, people - the audience understands that, and the developer knows how to create that. To do things that, you know, you - imagine a world where, you know, you had autonomous AI characters that could understand you and respond to you and that kind of thing. I think, if you could sort of will that into the world, I think games would be very different in a short period of time, right? But at the same time, do you really need to wait for that system to be perfected in order to start pushing things in that direction? I think, you know, the reaction that I had and many people had to, say, playing BioShock Infinite, where, you know, it takes a bit longer to get a gun and it was sort of like, okay, feeling a little bit antsy but not too much, really like in the world, and, you know, being up on Columbia and seeing all these things, and then all of a sudden it's like I've got this, uh - you know, this buzz saw thing on my hand, this hook, and I'm shredding guys' faces. And all of a sudden I'm realizing, wait. Actually, I was having a good time playing like the adventure game version of this game that it had been up to this point. I didn't want to shred people's faces. Like I actually don't want to do that. So, in BioShock Infinite, they did a fantastic job inverting a number of the creative values from the original BioShock. So, the original BioShock is set underwater. BioShock Infinite is set high up in the sky. BioShock 1 is, you know, dark and depressing. You know, Columbia is like bright and airy. Um, uh, Rapture is sort of abandoned and entirely filled with people who are hostile. The Splicers were hostile immediately. Columbia has sort of ordinary, average citizens. So, in BioShock, when you arrive in Rapture in the bathysphere and then all of a sudden there's a Splicer trying to like cut its way inside and you're freaking out and you - you're not able to do anything, by the time they're sort of teaching you, you know, the, the, the, the one-hand, two-hand mechanic of, you know, shock them and then bash them with the wrench, you're ready to take out a Splicer. And they had done such a good job inverting those values that, when it came time to kill someone in, uh, Columbia in BioShock Infinite, it wasn't actually something I wanted to do. And not everyone had that reaction, right? But there were a nontrivial number of people who did. And it doesn't mean - you know, somebody was saying, "Well, should BioShock Infinite have been a shooter?" That's not for - that's not my place to say. They know the kind of game they're making. But, you know, I think there is - there is a desire for, um, people who have the most money, um, to make games, to explore things that are different. And, uh, technology is one access, but there - access along which they do it. But there has to be the will to do it. And I think right now it's a time where, uh, publishers and developers are challenged to take risks because, um, of how risky it is.