winning and losing is a very relative term. When you're playing a game with a small number of people and those games are often, are often sort of phrased in terms of winners and losers. Most athletic games are that way. Many board games are that way. But there are lots of games where that doesn’t matter so much. The example of Asteroids, right, you can’t win Asteroids. More rocks will come forever and there is no winning. And one of the things that really made Asteroids work was its top 10 list. Can you get yourself on the top 10 board and leave your initials up there? That ended up being a goal for many people. So, instead Asteroids ends up having a lot of potential goals. Maybe getting on the top 10 list at all, maybe getting on the number one spot on the top 10 list, maybe meeting your personal best in the game, maybe just hitting some numerical threshold “Can I get to 200,000 points?” or “Can I get to the part where the small flying saucer comes out? Can I hit the small flying saucer because he’s really hard to hit.” Different games have different goals and objectives. And the, the key thing is that, that people have a goal they’re going for and they meet it. And lots of games, look at World of War Craft. There’s no winning World of War Craft but there is - it is kind of a chain of goals that kind of goes on and on and that’s part of what’s engaging to people about it is that you don’t run out of goals. That there’s a variety of goals, new goals come. Sometimes you have multiple goals in parallel. So, the idea of just winning a given game, you know it’s one kind of goal structure but it, but it’s only one of many.