EA doesn't hate you! Sure, UO2 and UXO were both cancelled. But don't worry, EA's doing something... another UO expansion. Yup. The second I saw UXO was dead I saw this coming, for sure... honestly, I saw this cancellation coming too. And they said the exact same thing they did after canning UO2 -- "we want to refocus our efforts on making UO great!"... how long do they think they can keep this game going as a modern title? Running it as a nostalgia game is fine, and probably what it is, but I wonder how long they can keep the game running like this...
Quote:Smashing Success
How Microsoft created a franchise phenomenon and Nintendo ignored one.
June 29, 2004 - I have a question for you and I want you to roll it over for a second. What will be the biggest game of this year? Throw away your prejudices this once and realistically consider the contenders. Whether you're a Microsoft, Nintendo or Sony fan, I believe there's a good chance that your answer will be the same: Halo 2.
The first-person shooter sequel was, after all, the talk of the Electronics Entertainment Expo 2004, winning a number of awards for its acclaimed Xbox Live-enhanced multiplayer mode, and it dazzled crowds with its single-player element last year. The hype has not died down since May, either. Halo 2 continues to dominate the rankings at GameStats. It's clear the game has the hardcore audience hypnotized with anticipation.
But it doesn't stop there. Walk into your local game retailer and the guy behind the desk, the one with the sweat stains under his arms, will tell you all about it. "Halo 2 is going to kick your ass," he'll say, with a not-so-bright grin on his face. At least, that's what he told me.
Justin Timberlake also wants Halo 2 and he doesn't have any sweat stains under his arms. He's got groupies there -- or, that is, Cameron Diaz. The pop superstar recently traveled to developer Bungie's office to catch a first glimpse of the sequel in motion, and Microsoft was right there to promote that truth. I read about it in Entertainment Weekly along with millions of others. That mainstream audience is there and it has taken notice. Master Chief has become a Microsoft juggernaut.
When you think about it -- when you really stop to examine what Microsoft and Bungie have done -- you can't help but be impressed. Here you had this developer that was originally popular for its Macintosh games. You had this publisher that was completely new to the console market. And the two of them created a title that outsold every last offering on GameCube by at least a million units, including a game with all of Nintendo's mascot powerhouses combined.
But I'm getting slightly ahead of myself so let me hit the rewind button. Three years ago Nintendo, just before the launch of GameCube and Xbox, was sitting in what it thought was a pretty position. It had a powerful, robust piece of hardware. It had a decent launch lineup. But mostly, it had mascots. And to be more specific it had Super Smash Bros. Melee, which was billed as its flagship game -- and, I think, for damned good reason. The fighter, a sequel to the N64 hit of the same series, was absolutely packed full of classic and wholly popular Nintendo icons. Mario. Luigi. Link. Samus. Pikachu. Something for every Nintendo fan, really.
When Nintendo showcased Super Smash Bros. Melee for the first time at 2001's E3 event, fanboys cheered as if their favorite football team had scored the Super Bowl-winning touchdown. This enthusiasm carried over to the Regular Joes. Consumers bought GameCube not because they wanted to play Luigi's Mansion, but because they wanted to fight it out against friends with some of their favorite Nintendo superstars.
Just look at the data. Super Smash Bros. Melee is, even today, GameCube's most popular game. The title has sold through some 2.3 million units in the US alone, according to NPD tracking through May. That figure doesn't quite compete with the success of Halo, which has sold more than 3.3 million copies through the same period, but it's no slouch either, especially when you factor in Xbox's larger installed base. Super Smash Bros. Melee outsold Super Mario Sunshine. Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker, Pikmin, and Metroid Prime. It outsold every Resident Evil title on GameCube. It outsold every Madden title on GameCube. I could go on.
So my question is, in the midst of all this Halo 2 hype, where the hell is my Super Smash Bros. Melee sequel?
Nintendo cannot cling to old answers. It cannot say that it's not a company interested in making "cookie-cutter sequels," a catch phrase company president Satoru Iwata has used in the past. After all, the majority of its big 2004 and 2005 games are, in fact, sequels. Metroid Prime 2. Pikmin 2. Resident Evil 4. A new Zelda for 2005. And sometime after that, a new Mario game.
Has Nintendo chosen to consciously ignore what has been its most successful franchise this generation, and if so, why? I certainly can't come up with a logical answer. I try to imagine the scenario and my brain immediately reminds me that there are 80-plus people working at Hal, the company that created the hit fighter, and there are no announced titles in development by the studio. This leads me to suspect that it could, dare I say it, be working on a major Super Smash Bros. Melee sequel.
It would certainly make sense from a business standpoint. SSBM continues to be one of GameCube's more popular titles on a monthly basis, regardless of its age. But even if a sequel is underway, I can't understand Nintendo's decision to keep quiet on the subject, especially when Microsoft is trumpeting the arrival of Halo 2. Why not do the same? Why not generate some hype? Why not let Nintendo fans know that GameCube's most popular franchise has not been forgotten?
It's not as if Nintendo fans have lost interest. All it took was the inclusion of Link as a playable fighter in Namco's Soulcalibur II to make the GameCube version of the game the highest seller. That's right, it beat out both the PS2 and Xbox builds in sales. In fact, GCN Soulcalibur II outsold the Xbox version by nearly 200,000 units, according to NPD data through May.
Perhaps Nintendo believes that if it shows a Smash Bros. sequel too early, competitors will copy its ideas. Like they did, I guess, for Super Mario Sunshine. Do you all remember the wave of water-backpack-themed games that hit the market after Nintendo released its platformer? Oh, you don't? Well, there's a reason for that. How about all of the real-time strategy games with cute critters that flooded retail shelves after Nintendo released Pikmin? Wait -- that didn't happen.
Whatever the reason, any way you slice it this is bad news for Nintendo and its fans. Nintendo's biggest franchise has seemingly been put away, stored in the closet as it works on something else, and the fans who gobbled up the fighter shortly after system launch can only wait. And why, I have no idea. I can only hope that somewhere a sequel is being worked on, or mulled over, or at least contemplated, and that Nintendo does have a plan to maintain interest and to build hype.
What would be scary to me is the alternative: that Nintendo could simply forget about the franchise that single-handedly sold GameCube to consumers.
-- Matt Casamassina
Quote:July 01, 2004
A reply to Matt Casamassina, IGN
Hi, it's Chris. I think we should talk.
What’s your full first name? Matteo? Matthew? Mattias? Doesn’t matter. I’ll just call you Matt. I read your article, Matt. You criticized Nintendo for not capitalizing on the popularity of Super Smash Bros: Melee, while Microsoft’s Halo 2 is so popular even Justin Timberlake enjoys it. In fact, Justin Timberlake is dating Cameron Diaz. You certainly don’t see Cameron Diaz getting pounded by someone that plays Cubivore.
Matt, I have to be honest. Your article comes across as someone fuming over the fact that their favorite game doesn’t have a new sequel. That’s fine. I mean, I’m not going to write a serious article about why Nintendo should make a sequel to Ice Hockey, but sometimes people get overly excited when talking about something they love. However, you made an assertion that should make everyone pause and wonder - wonder why you think Nintendo is hurting themselves by not releasing another entry in the Super Smash Bros series.
In your tagline, it says that Nintendo ignored a franchise phenomenon while Microsoft created one. Well, kudos to MS, they have one. How many does Nintendo have? Mario, Zelda, Metroid…believe me, I could go on. And I will! Fire Emblem, Custom Robo…oh, those don’t count because they’re only popular in Japan? Okay, how about the newly christened Pikmin, the pink one, Kirby, and the ever popular Pokemon…no, too cute? Well, okay, we’ll stick with Mario, Zelda, and Metroid, then. And not F-Zero, or Donkey Kong, or…ahem. Plus, I promise not to talk about any GameBoy Advance incarnations, or the planned DS incarnations, because your focus was on the Cube.
Mario, through its existence, has seen more spin-offs than anyone could ever have anticipated, plus plenty of straight sequels. This generation, when Mario wasn’t enjoying the Sunshine, he was having a Party, playing Golf or Tennis, or going Kart racing. He’s even going to star in an upcoming RPG adventure that looks good on Paper and will probably be even better in execution. Mario’s brother, Luigi, has even managed to exorcise ghosts in a Mansion.
The Zelda franchise has been healthy. Aside from the popular Wind Waker, the multiplayer puzzler Four Swords and Tetra’s Trackers (the latter seen in Japan), have been released, and Nintendo even had two different promotions which gave free versions of classic Zelda games to gamers. Plus, there’s a new Zelda in the works due out by next year.
Metroid, on the other hand, hasn’t been so hot…unless you count Metroid Prime and the upcoming sequel to Prime. Metroid Prime relaunched a franchise that hadn’t seen a game since rappers wore glittery pants and had clocks around their necks.
You might say Nintendo is neglecting a franchise in Super Smash Bros, but I’m here to tell you Nintendo’s lucky if it has time to sleep with all the attention its been giving their other franchises.
The main point in your argument was that Super Smash Bros: Melee is one of Nintendo’s best selling titles, and Nintendo/Hal should be working on a sequel to it right this very second. Well, sure, SSB:M did well, but don't forget that it was released in December 2001. I think, perhaps, that it has had a head start over other titles, wouldn’t you agree? Super Mario Sunshine, a game released in August 2002, actually outsold SSB:M for all of 2002 (according to NPD Funworld).
Of course, we’d have to look at what else Nintendo released at the same time as SSB:M. Let’s see…Luigi’s Mansion and Wave Race: Blue Storm. LucasArts released Rogue Leader and Sega released Super Monkey Ball, and that about covers it for exclusives. They’re not bad games, but they’re not blockbuster console sellers, either. In fact, some would say Nintendo’s launch titles were a bit weak. Matt, do you think SSB:M would have been the highest selling launch title if a new Mario or Zelda was released at the same time? What about Metroid?
If you want to get down to finances, and you want Nintendo to sell the most, then SSB:M isn’t your answer. A fighting game made up of other game’s mascots isn’t something to build your fortunes on. The big franchise names out of all three consoles, three years in a row, have been Grand Theft Auto and Madden (and Pokémon, but I promised not to talk about GBA games). Would you prefer it if Nintendo and its friends scrapped Samus and Link and focused on trying to top a free-roaming crime game and a football blockbuster? Somehow, that doesn’t scream Nintendo’s style.
Don’t worry, though, Nintendo is doing alright for itself. According to NPD Funworld, Nintendo’s GameCube had a 40% unit sales increase in 2003 over 2002, while the PS2 had a 25% decline and Xbox broke even. Nintendo’s corporate retail revenues increased 16% in 2003 compared to the year before. If you ignore the two Pokémon titles at the #2 and #3 slots in the best selling games list of 2003, you will see a Nintendo game at #5…which is…let me see…why, yes, it’s The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker.
And this is just the U.S. Sure, it’s the largest market for video games in the world, but it’s not Nintendo’s sole bread and butter. Nintendo routinely has games in the top ten for weekly sales in Japan, while Microsoft is lucky to crack the top twenty. Halo sales topped at 75,000 in Japan, by the way (MSN).
Still you persist. Bungie and Microsoft, you claim, are the greatest duo since Sonny and Cher. So, what has Bungie been up to since Halo? Halo 2? Nothing else? What about other MS first party developers? Rare? Micro Forté? Excuse me if I don’t concede victory to Microsoft.
Nevertheless, you say Halo 2 has all of the hype while Nintendo has nothing. You’ll have to excuse me, Matt, if I don’t let Nintendo’s success or failure rest on the shoulders of Justin Timberlake, who is so inept with women that he opened up a can of worms during the Super Bowl. Or maybe it was a can of boob. Either way, he’s an idiot. I will give more consideration to the next fart that passes out of my ass than I will Justin Timberlake’s video game preferences. And excuse me if I’m not dying for preteen queen Justin Timberlake to be associated with Nintendo.
But back to the hype. You ask the readers, Matt, why Nintendo isn’t trying to drown out Halo 2. You were at E3. You heard every jaw drop at the sign of one game. It wasn’t Halo 2. It was the new Zelda title. It’s coming out in 2005, and the few minutes of footage have already caused a bigger stir than all of the months Halo 2 has been in development. If by “dropping the ball” you meant Nintendo is “grabbing our balls and shaking them like a madman,” then you would be correct.
All things considered, I would be willing to say the new “mature” Zelda will outsell Halo 2. It’s a mighty big claim, considering the massive mainstream appeal of the Halo “franchise” that you cling to like a wet t-shirt to a large bosom, but this new Zelda is something fans have been wanting since before the first Halo. Wind Waker was great, to be sure, and it sold tremendously, but it’s not what people desired in the bottom of their hearts.
Soul Calibur II on the Cube outsold the Xbox and PS2 versions because of the exclusive Link addition, as you pointed out. Yet somehow you come to the conclusion that this means Nintendo fans want a new fighting game, and not that they are enamored with the Zelda franchise. If you put Link in MVP Baseball on the GameCube, it would outsell the other console versions, too. It’s not the type of game, but the character. People make connections with characters. There’s only so much that can be done in the First-Person Shooter genre, especially with nameless figures that have no emotional connection with the fanbase. The Zelda universe, on the other hand, is only limited by what the imagination can conceive and how to express that through the technology. Sure, the core values are the same, but Ocarina of Time, Majora’s Mask, Wind Waker and Four Swords are diverse from each other in a way Halo’s sequels could never, ever be.
SSB:M did well because it took our favorite mascots and pitted them together. But it’s a diversion, a treat, a side attraction. It should not be the centerpiece of the system, anymore than Mario Kart. As I said, if Nintendo had launched with a main franchise title, it would have seriously outperformed SSB:M. And don’t get me wrong, Matt, I like the series. But it’s better suited for a once-in-a-console-generation release, like Mario Tennis or Paper Mario. I’d much rather have a new Zelda or Metroid or flagship Mario title than I would a new SSB:M, and I suspect many fans would concur.
I know this Halo 2 thing bothers you, Matt. Don’t worry about it. In ten years, people will still be playing Zelda. If the Halo franchise is doing half as well Zelda, and if it is not just a memory, then that will be a tremendous achievement. If you had bothered to ask which is more important, a 27 year old buying Halo or a 7 year old buying Super Mario Sunshine, I would have answered the latter. I was once a 7 year old, sitting on the floor in front of my TV, jumping and swaying with the action as I navigated a portly plumber over pipes and chasms. I’m still doing that today, although not necessarily on the floor, and in 15 years, that child will still be playing Mario at the age of 22. I somehow doubt the 42 year old will still be playing Halo.
Nintendo builds for the future while satisfying the present. It’s worked for the longest time, and it will continue to work. Trust me. Nintendo and its cohorts are focusing on the parts of its illustrious franchises that need to be released.
Posted by Chris at July 1, 2004 05:57 PM
Quote:Miyamoto: DS Wireless Internet Access Possible
But Nintendo will only pursue DS-to-DS connections for the time being.
July 13, 2004 - In an interview with Earthbound creator Shigesato Itoi, Nintendo game development guru Shigeru Miyamoto said that, with the proper software, the Nintendo DS system could be used as an Internet terminal via wireless LAN. But, he added, Nintendo's main focus would be to use the DS' wireless connection capability to link multiple DS systems for multiplayer gameplay.
The interview, which is being posted piece-by-piece on Itoi's personal home page, http://www.1101.com, covers various topics like first-person shooters and Yuji Naka. In the most recent update, Itoi asked: "This is more of a technical question than a game-fan question, but when Nintendo announced the DS, they said that it would use the Wireless LAN (IEEE802.11) standard. So, for example, does this mean that you would be able to connect to the Internet?"
Miyamoto replied, "That's right. Well, what Nintendo has always been pursuing is mostly the connection of DS systems. But, if you had wireless LAN in your home, and an application or an OS was released that connected to it, it would be possible to use the DS as an Internet terminal."
Miyamoto went on to add that Nintendo generally tries to avoid situations in which the user is faced with too many potential snags in setting up gameplay. "We don't want to be telling users, 'If you don't connect that, it won't work' or 'If you don't have one of these, too bad.' If we can, we want you be able to just buy the machine itself, and have fun with a new type of play."
The DS' designers, noted Miyamoto, were thinking of cramming even more functionality into the unit. But ultimately they realized that they had to sell the hardware at what would be considered a reasonable price, eventually settling on the announced specifications.
Find out what Nintendo's doing with the wireless internet functions on the DS.
In an interview recently posted on the website of Earthbound creator Shigesato Itoi, Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto made some comments about the Nintendo DS's 802.11 (also known as WiFi) wireless functionality. According to Mr. Miyamoto, the possibility of a wireless internet connection on the Nintendo DS is there, but Nintendo is not currently developing any software that will enable to DS to access it. Apparently, Nintendo is leaving this part up to third-parties. He said that Nintendo is not interested in developing internet software for the DS. The company is very interested in keeping the DS an "out of the box" experience that will require no accessories, such as a wireless router to link systems over the internet via broadband connections.
Mr. Miyamoto was quoted as saying: "We added the wireless LAN (IEEE802.11) to the DS mainly for the handhelds to communicate between each other, but if someone releases appropriate software that allows it to connect to wireless LAN access points, it could also be used to connect to the Internet."
Update: There has been a lot of confusion surrounding Mr. Miyamoto's quote. Apparently Miyamoto-san is only saying that Nintendo will not be making an application to browse the internet over the DS. They are only interested in using the WiFi to link DS systems in remote areas. According to a close friend of PGC, independent gaming journalist Chris Kohler, "If you look at the questions that Itoi asks, he's talking about using the DS as a web browser. He says it's a 'technical' question, not a 'game fan' question. And he asks if the 'specs' of the machine would be enough to support its use as an 'Internet terminal,' as Miyamoto puts it." Thanks to Chris for clearing this up for everybody.
At the risk of sounding like the total nerd that I am, in the 30th or so repeat of the first episode of Futurama, I noticed something... Guess who saw Nibbler's shadow right when Fry falls into the cryogenic freezer thingy? That's right, me, I saw it. Now you know. I mean, what, were they actually thinking the story through from the start as opposed to just coming up with things randomly?
Good news, mostly. On the good side, Fallout lives. On the bad side, it's not a Black Isle-influenced developer -- it's Bethesda, makers of The Elder Scrolls, not Troika (main developer is the creator of the first Fallout. Makers of Arcanum and The Temple of Elemental Evil.), Obsidian (mostly escapees of Black Isle's other team (IWD, Torment), working on KOTOR II), Bioware, or, maybe, InXile (the founder of Interplay's new company... but not so much BIS people...). So that means that it'll be different... I wonder how much it'll end up playing like Fallout. Great, great RPG... I hope it stays like it is! But, reading this, that's unlikely. I doubt it'll be isometric, for sure, and turn-based combat? I wouldn't bet much on it. But I think that Fallout with realtime combat wouldn't be the same Fallout so I really, really hope that they keep a turnbased combat system.
Oh, and being the TES developers they'll have to work on making a coherent and not too long story. Fallout always has had a large open-ended element but it has also had a good main story to follow... TES doesn't exactly match up in that category.
Quote:July 12, 2004 - In an move sure to bring sizzling joy to PC gamers everywhere, Bethesda Softworks has just announced that it has obtained the rights to develop and publish Fallout 3, as well as additional games in the Fallout franchise, on the PC and across all consoles. The company obtained the rights from Interplay, the original home of the lauded post-apocalyptic RPG series.
Very few details on Fallout 3 have been revealed, but it's tantalizing to speculate on what Bethesda can do with the license, given their success with The Elder Scrolls series. A Bethesda spokesman clarified that the company has been looking at acquiring the Fallout license for some time. Additionally, Bethesda explained that the only definite platform for Fallout 3 is the PC, though given that the new license rights allow for development and publication on all consoles, it's safe to assume Bethesda has plans in this space as well.
"We're extremely excited about this opportunity and what it means both for Bethesda and for Fallout fans around the world," said Vlatko Andonov, president of Bethesda Softworks. "Fallout is one of the great RPG franchises. Millions of Fallout games have been sold worldwide, and fans have been eagerly awaiting the release of a Fallout 3 title. Bethesda's proven expertise in this genre, building on our experience and the tremendous success we have enjoyed with our cutting-edge Elder Scrolls series, will enable us to create the next chapter of Fallout that is worthy of the franchise."
Bethesda will develop Fallout 3 alongside the next Elder Scrolls title, both under the direction of Todd Howard.
"We are overjoyed," said Howard. "Fallout is one of my favorite games, and we plan to develop a visually stunning and original game for Fallout 3 with all the hallmarks of a great RPG: player choice, engaging story, and non-linearity."
As these things usually go, Bethesda's big announcement of course leaves plenty of questions to be answered, and the company is keeping most details under wraps for now, including game details and possible release schedule. Information is sure to be revealed as development progresses, and you can bet we'll be bothering the good folks at Bethesda for more tasty details in the meantime. Stay tuned.
Quote:July 12, 2004 - As our readers likely already know, Bethesda Softworks has just announced that it will develop and publish Fallout 3, as well as possible future Fallout titles, finally reinvigorating a PC RPG franchise which had too long remained dormant.
Fallout and Fallout 2, released in 1997 and 1998 respectively, quickly became two of the most acclaimed RPG titles created for the PC. Their gritty post-apocalyptic setting, compelling story, and superb art direction gained plenty of enthusiastic fans while raising the standard for the RPG genre in general.
Since the release of Fallout 2, hopes and speculation for a third title in the series have been rampant. Original developer Black Isle was allegedly at work on a third game, with many assuming that its mysterious "Van Buren" project was indeed Fallout 3. With that studio's closure, however, the fate of Fallout 3 became uncertain, with the only hope being Interplay's assurance that the Fallout franchise was far from dead.
Today's announcement should give Fallout fans -- and fans of RPGs in general -- plenty to be excited about. With the acclaimed Elder Scrolls series, and Morrowind in particular, the folks at Bethesda have proved themselves more than capable of developing masterful RPGs.
What does a Bethesda-produced Fallout entail? We caught up with the company's Pete Hines for more details.
IGNPC: We'll just start with the tough questions first. Exactly what is the game and when is it coming out?
Pete Hines: When it's coming out we're way too far out to talk about. What is the game? The real answer I can give is that we're intending to make Fallout 3, the sequel to Fallout 2. We've licensed the rights to Fallout, which includes everything except the MMO project Interplay announced a few weeks ago. Our intention is to do Fallout 3, and whatever you would think that to mean is probably exactly what it is.
IGNPC: Fallout 3 as a sequel to the PC titles, as opposed to Interplay's action-RPG titles.
Pete Hines: Right. We're not doing a follow-up to Brotherhood of Steel.
IGNPC: Interplay is still working on the Fallout MMORPG it had announced. Does this mean Interplay still owns the Fallout intellectual property?
Pete Hines: Yes. We've licensed the rights to Fallout 3 as well as sequels -- Fallout 4, Fallout 5.
IGNPC: Can you tell us how long Bethesda has had its eye on Fallout?
Pete Hines: A pretty long time. For the majority of five years we've said, internally, that if we could pick another game to develop internally, it's been that we could do a great Fallout game. It's something we've talked about internally for a very long time.
IGNPC: Is Fallout 3 something that Bethesda is making its own?
Pete Hines: Absolutely. It's being developed by us, by Bethesda Softworks. It isn't being developed externally. It's being managed by Todd Howard, who is also the executive producer of The Elder Scrolls.
IGNPC: So we can assume that whatever work was done over at Black Isle on Fallout 3 -- the "Van Buren" project -- is not being used?
Pete Hines: It's a little too early to talk about whether we'd be using any assets.
IGNPC: But gamers can assume this will be a continuation of the Fallout storyline.
Pete Hines: Yes.
IGNPC: Can we expect something similar to the work done on Morrowind, in terms of that style of game experience?
Pete Hines: Again, it's early to say, but it wouldn't be a leap of faith to say that we plan to use technologies in development otherwise. You could make some fairly safe leaps of faith that it would be similar in style. We're not going to go away from what it is that we do best. We're not going to suddenly do a top-down isometric Baldur's Gate-style game, because that's not what we do well.
IGNPC: You've confirmed that Fallout 3 is definitely coming to PC. Can you clarify console plans?
Pete Hines: Our intention is to do a multiple platform title. Which platforms that will be, it's too early to say.
IGNPC: I assume you also can't say whether we're talking about current- or next-generation consoles.
Pete Hines: Yes, that would be premature.
IGNPC: What does this mean for Bethesda going forward?
Pete Hines: We've got another very cool role playing license to work with, and we plan to continue to strengthen our position as one of the leading creators of cool role-playing games for multiple platforms. That's our desire, and we think that Fallout 3 points us in the right direction to do that.
IGNPC: Can you give us an idea of when we can expect more details?
Pete Hines: It's going to be a ways out. We haven't even announced the next Elder Scrolls project yet. Obviously we've been doing something for a while. From a development standpoint, from a gamers-making-Christmas-lists standpoint, it's very early at this stage to be talking specifics. When we have more info, we'll certainly let people know.
