Yeah, absolutely, we need to innovate. But I think it's sort of a third. Each one is keeping the good part. One third is improving on what you have. And one third is innovating, and coming up with new things. And it - if you start constantly innovating, it becomes a different game after a while, and you really want to keep holding onto that. That very - that one thing that is your - your game. And in JC, it's obviously the chaos, and destruction, and so on. So, yeah, it's - I don't think - there is such a thing as over-innovating. So, I think you have to be a little bit careful when you start building onto a game that is already out there. Because, and especially listen to what your players actually like. I mean, in Just Cause, for example, adjusting to JC 2, quite a few players actually played through the whole campaign. But we have players that have spent 5, 600 hours in the game, and not playing the story. So, it's - it's the story what we should focus on. Maybe not, because it's also one of the most expensive parts of a game, is cut scenes, and story, and so on. But if you - if your players don't want to have that, then we don't - we can focus on what they actually wanted to have, and that's more chaos and destruction in this case. So, I've seen some data on the - on some of the biggest games out there. And it's quite eye opening, when you see how the drop-off rate is. Not many - not many players play actually through a game. And I've been, I mean, that's - that's a game you need to end. Some games need to end, but not all of them. And it's important to give the player context, and then allow them to - I kind of lost it there.