we really have a -- a thing about having a consistency within the, having some like consistent anchors within the worlds that we create. Because I think when you’re creating a fantasy and every fantasy is different in how they -- how they tweak these levers, but for us it was sort of -- it was important for us to have Sack Boy as the, and particularly in LittleBigPlanet 1 as the only -- is the only sort of physical -- physical shape and character. Not, I mean, one reason would be it is simpler for us to build. But, and we -- we felt that it was incredibly versatile and that, yeah, we could spend time allowing it to be tweaked in a thousand different ways. But it just wasn’t necessary. It was a constraint that we were happy to -- to use when we, well, a constraint we were happy to work within when we realized how powerful it was. And that, I think, that’s one of the things as games makers you sort of need to do sometimes is like how far do we push this. Do we push it so far that we spend all of our energy changing this or is it good enough? Like, and that’s really, like I love it when our creative director, Mark, is -- just says to me, “No, you know, that is good enough. We don’t need to do the 5,000 things to that. Or even two more. It is now ready.” And you’re like, okay, great. That’s excellent. And I think that’s the thing that we definitely did with Sack Boy and Sack Girl was try -- was keep it simple, keep the shape there. Allow people to express themselves. But it was even more interesting that they all had the same canvas. And to see that within that same canvas how much difference that they were able to create. And that, you know, we were -- we were happy with that.
