I am looking forward, if the game launches, to take a shit ship and go around stealing shinny ones.
...
Do you not see the problem with this idea ?
If these ships are THAT easy to steal, what makes you think you will not have it stolen from you within hours of you stealing it ?
Let's face it, 5% of the player base will own fancy ships, and the other 95% will be trying to steal them. It's an MMO, after all. And many will be trying to steal just so that they can destroy it to grief the "rich" players...
In all likelihood, stealing a ship will be made very difficult (if not impossible) in "safer" areas. Otherwise the game will just devolve into chaos.
Actually, it's much more likely that 5% will own fancy ships and 100% of that 5% will park them, just like people do in EVE.
Yep.
The kill of a rare ship is newsworthy .... never mind the OTHER 99.99 % that keep them in the hangar.
Hmmm ... in EVE even the death of a supercapital is NOT newsworthy anymore.
Anything smaller than capital FLEETS wiped out or Large Star Forts being destroyed does not raise eyebrows anymore.
And to the one upthread that said "what will a Rifter do compared to the pilot of a super ?". A point by a frigate has decided battles. That is NOT only CCP propaganda. That is EVE. (for those not familiar with EVE Online ... "having a point" means that a ship cannot flee .... and of course there are many ways to counter that IF you have the right ship/modules/skills at the right time ...). If a ship cannot flee, others come to rescue it and battles get bigger and bigger. Escalating engagements.
Funny that you leave out that CIG had to change their policy on that to spit into the soup of all those grey and black market profiteers that tried to take advantages of other gamers by selling oh-so-unique LTI ships at triple the price.
Yes, the same profiteers that are now the "teary eyed whales demanding their money back from bad bad CIG through forced refunds" ... until you find out that they had traded 120+ ships on the grey market.
Funny that you leave out that CIG had to change their policy on that to spit into the soup of all those grey and black market profiteers that tried to take advantages of other gamers by selling oh-so-unique LTI ships at triple the price.
Yes, the same profiteers that are now the "teary eyed whales demanding their money back from bad bad CIG through forced refunds" ... until you find out that they had traded 120+ ships on the grey market.
Have fun
You mean the black and grey market that CIG didn't do shit about for how long? They changed their policy a while ago when they still turned a blind eye to the markets so don't pull that crap here
I am looking forward, if the game launches, to take a shit ship and go around stealing shinny ones.
...
Do you not see the problem with this idea ?
If these ships are THAT easy to steal, what makes you think you will not have it stolen from you within hours of you stealing it ?
Let's face it, 5% of the player base will own fancy ships, and the other 95% will be trying to steal them. It's an MMO, after all. And many will be trying to steal just so that they can destroy it to grief the "rich" players...
In all likelihood, stealing a ship will be made very difficult (if not impossible) in "safer" areas. Otherwise the game will just devolve into chaos.
And like in almost all space games, by month 3 everyone who really wants it has fancy ships.
By Month 6 we will have billionaires (money earned in game).
By Month 12 trillionaires (money earned in game).
And thats only solo players ... orgs will reach those goals much sooner by pooling resources (which all boils down to "time invested" anyway).
No stealing needed for that result.
Although a LOT of stealing (or "board and slaughter") will happen.
From my personal experience ... about 25 % of all orgs I know have been founded around the idea of pirates in cheap ship swarms/wolfpacks overwhelming solo players with NPC crews in fancy big ships. Their reasoning ... even in safe areas ... what options does the advocacy have when the pirates have already boarded and keep the captured crew alive as hostages? Firing on those ships? Bringing in NPC marines ? The player pirates are confident that they will slaughter the NPC marines unless CIG makes them 100 % invulnerable (which they most likely wont). So the pirates will do their utmost to quickly board a ship ... up to and including ramming the engines and shield generators with kamikaze ships.
And some of those 25 % of orgs plan to do insurance fraud with their OWN big ships to essentially double and triple them. Will be interesting to see how CIG will react to that during Beta testing.
Have fun
Don't forget to tell everyone that this is all pulled from your rear end since you have no idea how the economy is going to work in this game
The correct answer is neither. In order to even be pay to win the game has to open first. You can't win a game that never starts. Right now SC is just pay for pictures of ships and endless development delays. Anyone still throwing money in this black hole kind of deserves to lose it.
The correct answer is neither. In order to even be pay to win the game has to open first. You can't win a game that never starts. Right now SC is just pay for pictures of ships and endless development delays. Anyone still throwing money in this black hole kind of deserves to lose it.
You seem to forget that quite a lot of people play (and enjoy) the current Alpha version of Star Citizen. Interestingly, they do that with dozens of fully flyable ship types ... NOT pictures of ships.
If you want evidence .... there are tenthousands of fan made Star Citizen videos on Youtube.
My reference to World of Tanks was purely about how I felt the ability
for people that don't have 40 hours a week to sink into a game have the
opportunity to spend some money to keep up (an early post called this
Pay2BeEqual) or drive a sexy tank they don't have 200 hours of game time
to earn. I think WoT has some similarities to SC because they are both
skill based games so having better equipment may help you but it will
NOT guarantee victory - which is very important and similar to real life
(I can have a better sports car than you but if you're a better driver
you'll probably be able to beat me on a road course). And it is
encouraging to me that they are doing well financially as it is a PC
game in what I would have considered a niche category, which at first
glance is how you could categorize Star Citizen. Its going to cost
significant money to make Star Citizen and more money to continue to run
it. I would love to see Star Citizen hit a 10 year anniversary like
Eve, and knowing that another online PC game is doing well makes me feel
confident that SC has the potential for longevity that I think everyone
would like to see (which was the context for my comments in the
article).
For the record here are my simple rules for what I'm aiming for with Star Citizen (and personal play preference).
1) NO grind - basic gameplay should be fun.
2) NO subscription to play.
Once you've bought the game you should be able to play and have fun
without paying another penny. Maybe this is from all the MMOs I signed
up for and then didn't have time to play yet still had to pay to keep my
character (I think I paid over 2 years of subs for both WoW and SWG
before I canceled, despite only playing them for the first month or so!)
3) NO unfair advantage to people with either too much money or too much time. I
think its disingenuous for people to claim that they should have a big
advantage just because they can commit 40 hours a week in play time over
someone that can only spend 4. Both types of player have purchased the
game and are both entitled to have fun. If I make a game that only
caters to people that have lots of time and nothing else I'm cutting out
a huge part of the audience. The same goes if I build a game that just
caters to people that have money to burn (The Asian P2W game style).
Just because someone plays one way doesn't mean everyone should play
that way. Some people will want to just spend a few hours dogfighting,
some may want spend dozens of hours doing trade runs and building up a
merchant empire. Others may just want to explore corners of the galaxy. A
big audience supplies lots of players to make the universe more
interesting. A big audience also spreads the costs of running the
persistent universe (as it costs money for new content and servers),
which in turn makes it cheaper for all.
4) NO Pay2Win - You
should never be able to buy anything with real money that you can't buy
in with in game credits. Once fully live SC in-game items will only be
purchasable with in-game credits. There will even be some items you can
ONLY earn by playing / flying missions. All you will be able to spend
money on that is gameplay related would be buying some in-game credits
as you don't want or don't have enough time to earn the credits you need
for your contemplated purchase. We'll cap purchase of in-game credits
to avoid someone unbalancing the game / economy. Finally as I point out
above skill will always play a factor - there will be no "magic
spaceship of death" that will sweep all before it, so while you may have
bought a more expensive spaceship / weapon a better pilot can still
beat you (this is where people with lots of time get an advantage as
they'll have spent a lot more time honing their combat skills!)
From my perspective my above 4 rules and solutions are the best
compromise that factors the need to make the game fun for people with
lots of time or little time, while allowing the game the ability to
cover its running costs based on player's actual engagement with the
game. I am confident we can balance all this in a way that works and
doesn't feel unfair to any one group. Contributing additional money
beyond your initial ship package will be entirely optional and not
required to have fun or progression (but if you do short cut once in a
while, know that you're money is going to support the development of the
game and on-going content!)
I hope this allays some concerns. If not, I ask that you wait to you
have a chance to actually play and see how everything will work and be
balanced before making your mind up.
-Chris"
Have fun
Isnt this the same guy who said stretch goals would not delay the release of the game back in 2013?
Isnt this also the guy who during an interview with rock-paper-shotgun said: " I do not want to have a ridiculous group of 300 to 400 people?
Isnt this also the same guy who said SQ42 would allow friends to jump in as wingmen or enemies?
Point is, anything Chris says is subject to change before the final launch of the game. Another point to consider is: How will the studio make money after the game is launched? If there is no subscription and buying bigger ships does not give an advantage, how will the studio with offices all over the world and 400+ employees make enough money to sustain itself? They can not sustain themselves just selling cosmetics and hanger trinkets.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
Point is, anything Chris says is subject to change before the final launch of the game. Another point to consider is: How will the studio make money after the game is launched? If there is no subscription and buying bigger ships does not give an advantage, how will the studio with offices all over the world and 400+ employees make enough money to sustain itself? They can not sustain themselves just selling cosmetics and hanger trinkets.
That was already explained since 2013 and reconfirmed years after, micro-transactions. The game is ruled by a single currency that you can earn and buy.
idk if you're just forgetful or pretend to be unaware of the monetization model of the game, I remember seeing this very same post and explaining it to you last year on this very same forum.
>>>> How will the studio make money after the game is launched? >>>
Deja vu.
Once again the same question.
Once again the same answers:
Micro Transactions.
Selling of starter ships packages (currently two - Aurora or Mustang)
Selling temporary buff items (e.g. ship tuning items that may give a +5 % temporary boost)
Additional Squadron 42 single player campaigns sold separately (the single player story currently is a 3 part story - as a backer i get the first two parts free.... which is twice the amount of missions i was pledging for during the start of the crowdfunding campaign). Part 2 is named "Behind Enemy Lines". Part 3 is currently unnamed. We know that other stories - with a non military focus - are planned.
Ship skins and decorative items
Merchandise (up to and including possible models, novels, animated series, movies....)
Pay to Win, and once the game is released (not alpha or beta, but true release) the gank fest will begin and the poor little guys with their starter ships will be ripped before they know whats going on by those that bought (aka paid) for better ships.
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
Of course it's P2W. Outside of shady asian mmos, it's the most pay to win game in existence They even make it easier for you to win and accept your money years in advance.
Pay to Win, and once the game is released (not alpha or beta, but true release) the gank fest will begin and the poor little guys with their starter ships will be ripped before they know whats going on by those that bought (aka paid) for better ships.
Yeah right...
New players with their starter ships will not be playing in the unmonitored areas where legal PvP is the default...
That doesn't stop ganking on monitored space? Add paid bounties over those players. Not enough? Make illegal PvP have consequences on insurance! See? Isn't that hard!
So you're trying to pass off a video that is almost 4 years old and then 2 other videos that are around a year old but pull their information from videos that are 3 years old and you're calling me ignorant?
Anyone who looks at the videos you posted can tell that you are just reaching. You can't trust things that CR said a month ago so why the hell would you trust info that is 3-4 years old?
My reference to World of Tanks was purely about how I felt the ability
for people that don't have 40 hours a week to sink into a game have the
opportunity to spend some money to keep up (an early post called this
Pay2BeEqual) or drive a sexy tank they don't have 200 hours of game time
to earn. I think WoT has some similarities to SC because they are both
skill based games so having better equipment may help you but it will
NOT guarantee victory - which is very important and similar to real life
(I can have a better sports car than you but if you're a better driver
you'll probably be able to beat me on a road course). And it is
encouraging to me that they are doing well financially as it is a PC
game in what I would have considered a niche category, which at first
glance is how you could categorize Star Citizen. Its going to cost
significant money to make Star Citizen and more money to continue to run
it. I would love to see Star Citizen hit a 10 year anniversary like
Eve, and knowing that another online PC game is doing well makes me feel
confident that SC has the potential for longevity that I think everyone
would like to see (which was the context for my comments in the
article).
For the record here are my simple rules for what I'm aiming for with Star Citizen (and personal play preference).
1) NO grind - basic gameplay should be fun.
2) NO subscription to play.
Once you've bought the game you should be able to play and have fun
without paying another penny. Maybe this is from all the MMOs I signed
up for and then didn't have time to play yet still had to pay to keep my
character (I think I paid over 2 years of subs for both WoW and SWG
before I canceled, despite only playing them for the first month or so!)
3) NO unfair advantage to people with either too much money or too much time. I
think its disingenuous for people to claim that they should have a big
advantage just because they can commit 40 hours a week in play time over
someone that can only spend 4. Both types of player have purchased the
game and are both entitled to have fun. If I make a game that only
caters to people that have lots of time and nothing else I'm cutting out
a huge part of the audience. The same goes if I build a game that just
caters to people that have money to burn (The Asian P2W game style).
Just because someone plays one way doesn't mean everyone should play
that way. Some people will want to just spend a few hours dogfighting,
some may want spend dozens of hours doing trade runs and building up a
merchant empire. Others may just want to explore corners of the galaxy. A
big audience supplies lots of players to make the universe more
interesting. A big audience also spreads the costs of running the
persistent universe (as it costs money for new content and servers),
which in turn makes it cheaper for all.
4) NO Pay2Win - You
should never be able to buy anything with real money that you can't buy
in with in game credits. Once fully live SC in-game items will only be
purchasable with in-game credits. There will even be some items you can
ONLY earn by playing / flying missions. All you will be able to spend
money on that is gameplay related would be buying some in-game credits
as you don't want or don't have enough time to earn the credits you need
for your contemplated purchase. We'll cap purchase of in-game credits
to avoid someone unbalancing the game / economy. Finally as I point out
above skill will always play a factor - there will be no "magic
spaceship of death" that will sweep all before it, so while you may have
bought a more expensive spaceship / weapon a better pilot can still
beat you (this is where people with lots of time get an advantage as
they'll have spent a lot more time honing their combat skills!)
From my perspective my above 4 rules and solutions are the best
compromise that factors the need to make the game fun for people with
lots of time or little time, while allowing the game the ability to
cover its running costs based on player's actual engagement with the
game. I am confident we can balance all this in a way that works and
doesn't feel unfair to any one group. Contributing additional money
beyond your initial ship package will be entirely optional and not
required to have fun or progression (but if you do short cut once in a
while, know that you're money is going to support the development of the
game and on-going content!)
I hope this allays some concerns. If not, I ask that you wait to you
have a chance to actually play and see how everything will work and be
balanced before making your mind up.
-Chris"
Have fun
Isnt this the same guy who said stretch goals would not delay the release of the game back in 2013?
Isnt this also the guy who during an interview with rock-paper-shotgun said: " I do not want to have a ridiculous group of 300 to 400 people?
Isnt this also the same guy who said SQ42 would allow friends to jump in as wingmen or enemies?
Point is, anything Chris says is subject to change before the final launch of the game. Another point to consider is: How will the studio make money after the game is launched? If there is no subscription and buying bigger ships does not give an advantage, how will the studio with offices all over the world and 400+ employees make enough money to sustain itself? They can not sustain themselves just selling cosmetics and hanger trinkets.
I've been saying that for a while now and the fans answer changes based on what new excuse CR comes up with
Arguing about semantics is pointless, in my opinion.
Everyone should decide for themselves whether they are ok with a system where ingame assets are purchasable with real world currency.
I am personally not ok with that, but that does not mean that the game is bad because of that. There are many people that do not mind at all.
Grind to win is the same for me, not ok with it. Thats just for people with to much time to waste, which is unfair to those that well..... Has a job and a family life, with little time to grind!
Play to win and pay to win are opposites of the same thing! Just different versions. What you need is balance!
Grind to win is the same for me, not ok with it. Thats just for people with to much time to waste, which is unfair to those that well..... Has a job and a family life, with little time to grind!
Play to win and pay to win are opposites of the same thing! Just different versions. What you need is balance!
MMO's lie on grind, that is just the deal with or without microtransations. If you don't have enough time, it will take up to years to reach end-game shiny stuff you want... What differs them is how you grind, what gameplay is there to back it up.
Say a legendary weapon on Guild Wars 2:
You can always put up money, convert to in-game currency and buy it instantly, does that makes Guild Wars 2 pay to win? No, you simply paid to advance and save yourself months and months of playing the game for getting the same thing.
The grindy nature is a default simply because of how long-term MMO's are when it comes to the endgame stuff, as they will catch up to the ones with too much time on their hands over those who play casually.
Is there any other game, that is actually released, that the biggest argument for it being pay to win is something other than pay to advance? Cosmetics are fine. XP potions are the devil. Raid level weapons in the shop are the bane of humankind. Anything that gives someone an advantage other than looking dapper is P2W and entire games are shit on for it here all day every day.
SC offers the equivalent of both XP pots and raid level weapons before the game is even fully released. The microtransactions that some think will sustain them are no different either. Pay cash to be able to obtain something faster? P2W in any P2W argument for any other game. Pay cash to get items that offer currently unknown advantages of a currently unknown duration? You mean, like XP pots? P2W in any argument about any other game.
Insurance existing indefinitely or for only a finite time for backers before the game is released or even after only throws more mud in the water. Another definite advantage that you can either only get, or get much faster, if you throw money at at. P2W anywhere else. I'm also interested to see how they will handle all the insurance fraud that will go on. You have to have the ships before you can "lose" them so any fix will likely be after the whales have duped their paid for ships and long before the grinders can afford one to dupe themselves.
Counter arguments that most guilds are going to do exactly what the much reviled Goon Squad does to gain a footing and power and, thus, paying for ships is only for status, are funny. Good, let the hate flow through you. The dark side will devour those who lack the power to control it
The answer is yes. P2W. P2A. Is there really a difference other than semantics and making the golden child sound a tiny bit better? And does it really matter? You win in an MMO/not MMO/coop/no coop single player game, depending on what the current argument or counter requires. Grats. "Winning" in MMOs is what set them down the path to where they are now. You kids gets off my LAN.
I can start the game with every ship they've made if I have the money. My friend who doesn't have the money will take a long time to get the ships he wants. If we both have good skills and have a lots of time to play I'm always going to be ahead of him and if one of my ships get destroyed I'll hop into another one I've bought. If one of his gets destroyed he has to take the time to work and buy another in-game. Who ever has the money can start with the best ships, weapons, vehicles, and weapons as opposed to someone having to work in-game to get them.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
The way it SHOULD work is you work to build up income to either build your ship or craft it out of parts.No way should a ship ever be bought outright from a virtual cash shop.So it is a fail design right out of the box no matter what you want to call it. EVERYTHING in a game world should be EARNED,crafted,bought from other players.Cash shops should offer anything NOT in game otherwise you ruin the entire reason of playing a character in a world.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I can start the game with every ship they've made if I have the money. My friend who doesn't have the money will take a long time to get the ships he wants. If we both have good skills and have a lots of time to play I'm always going to be ahead of him and if one of my ships get destroyed I'll hop into another one I've bought. If one of his gets destroyed he has to take the time to work and buy another in-game. Who ever has the money can start with the best ships, weapons, vehicles, and weapons as opposed to someone having to work in-game to get them.
Then you perhaps want to just join fleets of organizations that have many times their amount of members on ships, in fact the game has so many ships I don't think we would have issues making use of ships part of one Org Fleet.
Doing such allows the same jump the ones who bought ships part of the crowdfund and without having to buy a ship in-game. Now isn't that great?
Comments
The kill of a rare ship is newsworthy .... never mind the OTHER 99.99 % that keep them in the hangar.
Hmmm ... in EVE even the death of a supercapital is NOT newsworthy anymore.
Anything smaller than capital FLEETS wiped out or Large Star Forts being destroyed does not raise eyebrows anymore.
And to the one upthread that said "what will a Rifter do compared to the pilot of a super ?".
A point by a frigate has decided battles. That is NOT only CCP propaganda. That is EVE.
(for those not familiar with EVE Online ... "having a point" means that a ship cannot flee .... and of course there are many ways to counter that IF you have the right ship/modules/skills at the right time ...). If a ship cannot flee, others come to rescue it and battles get bigger and bigger. Escalating engagements.
We call it The Butterfly Effect
Have fun
Yes, the same profiteers that are now the "teary eyed whales demanding their money back from bad bad CIG through forced refunds" ... until you find out that they had traded 120+ ships on the grey market.
Have fun
They changed their policy a while ago when they still turned a blind eye to the markets so don't pull that crap here
https://starcitizen.tools/Economy
etc.
Have fun
If you want evidence .... there are tenthousands of fan made Star Citizen videos on Youtube.
Have fun
Isnt this also the guy who during an interview with rock-paper-shotgun said: " I do not want to have a ridiculous group of 300 to 400 people?
Isnt this also the same guy who said SQ42 would allow friends to jump in as wingmen or enemies?
Point is, anything Chris says is subject to change before the final launch of the game. Another point to consider is: How will the studio make money after the game is launched? If there is no subscription and buying bigger ships does not give an advantage, how will the studio with offices all over the world and 400+ employees make enough money to sustain itself? They can not sustain themselves just selling cosmetics and hanger trinkets.
idk if you're just forgetful or pretend to be unaware of the monetization model of the game, I remember seeing this very same post and explaining it to you last year on this very same forum.
mmorpg junkie since 1999
Deja vu.
Once again the same question.
Once again the same answers:
Micro Transactions.
Selling of starter ships packages (currently two - Aurora or Mustang)
Selling temporary buff items (e.g. ship tuning items that may give a +5 % temporary boost)
Additional Squadron 42 single player campaigns sold separately (the single player story currently is a 3 part story - as a backer i get the first two parts free.... which is twice the amount of missions i was pledging for during the start of the crowdfunding campaign). Part 2 is named "Behind Enemy Lines". Part 3 is currently unnamed. We know that other stories - with a non military focus - are planned.
Ship skins and decorative items
Merchandise (up to and including possible models, novels, animated series, movies....)
Have fun
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
Outside of shady asian mmos, it's the most pay to win game in existence
They even make it easier for you to win and accept your money years in advance.
..Cake..
New players with their starter ships will not be playing in the unmonitored areas where legal PvP is the default...
That doesn't stop ganking on monitored space? Add paid bounties over those players. Not enough? Make illegal PvP have consequences on insurance! See? Isn't that hard!
Anyone who looks at the videos you posted can tell that you are just reaching. You can't trust things that CR said a month ago so why the hell would you trust info that is 3-4 years old?
Play to win and pay to win are opposites of the same thing! Just different versions. What you need is balance!
Say a legendary weapon on Guild Wars 2:
You can always put up money, convert to in-game currency and buy it instantly, does that makes Guild Wars 2 pay to win? No, you simply paid to advance and save yourself months and months of playing the game for getting the same thing.
The grindy nature is a default simply because of how long-term MMO's are when it comes to the endgame stuff, as they will catch up to the ones with too much time on their hands over those who play casually.
SC offers the equivalent of both XP pots and raid level weapons before the game is even fully released. The microtransactions that some think will sustain them are no different either. Pay cash to be able to obtain something faster? P2W in any P2W argument for any other game. Pay cash to get items that offer currently unknown advantages of a currently unknown duration? You mean, like XP pots? P2W in any argument about any other game.
Insurance existing indefinitely or for only a finite time for backers before the game is released or even after only throws more mud in the water. Another definite advantage that you can either only get, or get much faster, if you throw money at at. P2W anywhere else. I'm also interested to see how they will handle all the insurance fraud that will go on. You have to have the ships before you can "lose" them so any fix will likely be after the whales have duped their paid for ships and long before the grinders can afford one to dupe themselves.
Counter arguments that most guilds are going to do exactly what the much reviled Goon Squad does to gain a footing and power and, thus, paying for ships is only for status, are funny. Good, let the hate flow through you. The dark side will devour those who lack the power to control it
The answer is yes. P2W. P2A. Is there really a difference other than semantics and making the golden child sound a tiny bit better? And does it really matter? You win in an MMO/not MMO/coop/no coop single player game, depending on what the current argument or counter requires. Grats. "Winning" in MMOs is what set them down the path to where they are now. You kids gets off my LAN.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
EVERYTHING in a game world should be EARNED,crafted,bought from other players.Cash shops should offer anything NOT in game otherwise you ruin the entire reason of playing a character in a world.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Doing such allows the same jump the ones who bought ships part of the crowdfund and without having to buy a ship in-game. Now isn't that great?