The earliest arcade games had scores. They were designed so that players would get addicted and keep pumping in quarters, and your score could keep going up and up, but there was no way to beat the game. When your time ran out or you ran out of lives, it was game over. And then if you kept going, the game wasn't over. That was the ultimate reward for the game, not to be over. The first game I ever saw that didn't say 'game over' at the end was Chop lifter- it said 'The End' as if it were a movie. And it ended when all of the 64 hostages were either rescued or dead. And so 'the end' wasn't a victory, it wasn't a defeat, it was just saying 'this story is over.' And that really opened my eyes to the fact that if you're playing a game on your home computer, on a machine that you own, there's no slot for quarters, so the game designers didn't have to create a mechanism to try and get you to keep putting quarters in indefinitely, it could actually be a closed experience. And I think really, in terms of designing games now, the sky's the limit: there are games that go on forever, there are games that you play for five minutes and that's it , there are games that can take two hours or six hours to play through to the end. So really what the ending means, that really depends on the game. You can have a game where you can win, but the outcome is ironically tragic, even heartbreaking, and you can have games where you lose but that loss is satisfying.