Here we go, folks… this is the post I’ve been reluctant to publish.

It is Round 3 of this week’s “Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass” Vs. Mode, a series that has filled my inbox with letters from people who say I’m rejecting a beauty of a game.

In Round 1 Newsweek’s N’Gai Croal praised the game’s controls and described his experience as a “Zelda” neophytye. I then explained why “Phantom Hourglass,” my 12th “Zelda,” wasn’t doing it for me.

In Round 2 N’Gai took me up on an offer to get a crash course in the two wonderful Nintendo 64 “Zelda” games, “The Ocarina of Time” and “Majora’s Mask.” I explained why “Phantom Hourglass,” my 12th “Zelda,” wasn’t doing it for me.

Today, Round 3 continues the previous round’s experimental approach (a transcript of a chat N’Gai and I had after the N64) crash course. I explain why “Phantom Hourglass,” my 12th “Zelda,” wasn’t doing it for me.

I’m being hard on myself. I’m not that much of a broken record, but I really felt stuck in this Vs. Mode. As I say in this round:

It’s kind of weird for me to proselytizing about “Zelda” for so long and then when we finally have a “Zelda” conversation to be the big “Zelda” doubter. Maybe it’s because I’m always going to be contrary about everything, but I think it really is that I got surprised by this crossroads that I found myself walking into.

The more I read what we talked about, the more conscious I am of just how anguished I sound in all of this. I’ve been a big “Zelda” fan for years, and the prospect that the series is either going south or that I have played too many “Zelda”s to appreciate them has unsettled me. I don’t want to be over “Zelda.”

Well, read on and see what you think. N’Gai talks about his issues with the “Zelda” gameplay formula, and how they relate to his feelings on “The Sims,” “GTA,” “Little Big Planet,” “Metal Gear” and “Halo 3“’s Forge.

I play my same sad tune. Here’s one comment from me — slightly rambling — that I wanted to highlight, because it speaks to my developing thoughts about the value of video game remakes as well as my long-time concerns about how hard it is for great game experiences I had in the past to be appreciated by gamers that come after me:

Totilo: … with “Madden” what I view EA as having done and the other football game developers, is they’ve essentially been able to work off of an ideal, which is real football and year after year after year try to come close to that. And really once they’ve reached that ideal and they’ve got football as realistically rendered or as successfully rendered as it needs to be for a video game that at that point there’s no need to make, to remake the engine, remake the graphics or remake anything other than to keep the rosters up to date, keep the uniforms up to date and so on. And you can see a lot of people saying that that’s all they’re seeing from some of the football company game developers anyway.

“Zelda” — it peaked. It’s been great already. It’s like the ideal “Zelda”s exist. They’re already out there. And in other forms of entertainment, once the ideal exists and companies have found a way to make money off of just re-releasing that ideal, finding a way to make that ideal relevant even if it means transferring it from VHS to DVD to downloadable or whatnot. And so, you know, clearly where I’m at is at a spot where I’m just saying, “Look, I’ve played the ideal ‘Zelda.’” I was able to play it in 1998 when, at the time, it was running on technology that blew my mind so my memory of that “Zelda” will always be a bit as an ultimate experience. Your memory of “Ocarina” will probably always be that, “hey this was a really good game.” That was an interesting artifact of history that you played in the year 2007 right after seeing “Ratchet and Clank [Future],” you know, HD quality graphics on my standard definition set. And so you probably actually haven’t experienced the ideal “Zelda” experience.

Read on. And check in later this week for Round 4, which will return to the original format and in which I will finally say some nice things about “Phantom Hourglass.” Hopefully I’ll have beaten the game by then. I’m at the final dungeon.

(These exchanges are mirrored on N’Gai’s “Level Up” bog.)

Note that where we last left off, N’Gai and I had just finished playing the N64 games and I was trying to get N’Gai to compare them to “Phantom Hourglass.”

Totilo: What I wanted to know is… I didn’t want to really review your playing of the game. This was really kind of a self-serving exercise here, because I’m the one sort of, well, I feel I’m at a more dire crossroads than you. You simply get a chance to decide whether or not “Zelda” is a blind spot in your gaming career to be embarrassed about or to feel vindicated that you could afford to skip it. But, for me, I’m at this crossroads where I’m like: “Am I correct in feeling that the world has had enough ‘Zelda,’ and am I correct in having the hubris to say that I know that Nintendo should move on?” Or am I a victim of my old age? And is it the case that, when I say, “Oh, this ‘Phantom Hourglass’ doesn’t have as good dungeons as the ‘Zelda’ in my day, am I onto something or not?

You’ve now played “Phantom Hourglass” dungeons. Therefore you’ve played 21st century “Zelda” Dungeons and you played 1998 “Zelda” dungeons. Are you saying, were they the same?

Croal: Were they the same? That’s tough.

Totilo: Am I just being crotchety in my old age here?

Croal: Well, I don’t know that I would use the dungeons themselves necessarily as an example of that. What I would say in their defense — and you can speak to this better because you played many more of them — is clearly they felt for a variety of reasons they needed to re-conceive “Zelda” for the DS. And I think the bulk of their inventiveness was based on — as much I’ve played the game, which isn’t as far as you: I just opened, I think, the northwest section of the map and am on a quest to sort of get through that area. I think they focused on the controls, which, as I’ve said in previous exchanges, I think are incredible. And if you believe in the inventive work that they’ve done in the past, I think you might want to look at this as the foundation.

Don’t necessarily judge them too harshly on this one, but reserve judgment until the next “Zelda” on the DS. Because I think these controls — now that they’ve got that in place — I think they might be in a position to be now more inventive with the game play as opposed to the controls.

Totilo: Well, I felt that the dungeons in “Wind Waker” were lacking. I actually enjoyed the overworld. I liked the kind of desolate sea that you sail through and I felt that that was sort of a really interesting way of emphasizing the thrill of exploration and the thrill of discovering the unknown that a lot of “Zelda”s can have. And in that case giving you that broad expanse of ocean is a really exciting and thrilling offering. I thought the dungeon design was not so hot for … in “Wind Waker.” I felt like the dungeon was improved in “Twilight Princess,” but I felt the over world was uninteresting. It was far less interesting than the “Ocarina of Time“’s [and] far, far less interesting than the very dense world of Termina in “Majora’s Mask” and less magical than the ocean in “Wind Waker.”

I’m at a point now playing “Phantom Hourglass” where I feel, “Okay, I’ve been playing a bunch of these and if I’m being disappointed by significant portions of each of the last few — if I’m feeling that each of these significant portions is falling short of a mark that earlier “Zelda”’s completely bulls-eyed — then that’s where my unease with the franchise is coming from. And so I hear what you’re saying: “Be patient, they are working on controls.” And they certainly did an impeccable job with those controls, but I can’t help but shake the feeling that any sort of work of fiction — even video games — eventually reaches a peak. Then that formula is set. That formula can become exhausted. And with a series like “Zelda” that has reached such heights in the past… It feels like it’s not original to declare that it is on the downside. I mean, I have…

I wasn’t with you when you were playing with dungeons in “Phantom Hourglass,” but to go back to the question I was asking you earlier, did you find the same magic in the “Phantom Hourglass” dungeons that you found in the Deku Tree [one in "Ocarina"]?

Croal: I really like the dungeons in… let’s just make sure we’re speaking of the same thing, as opposed to the caves in “Phantom Hourglass.” I really liked the dungeons. So the Temple of the Ocean King: I really liked the time element. It has the whole thing like where the Phantom Hourglass in about 10 minutes and you can add more time later on.

Totilo: And you’re a fan of backtracking so I know you love going back to the dungeon four or five more times.

Croal: So, yeah, exactly. And it was one of those things that I didn’t expect to like, but again — and I said this early on — the controls are what’s driving me to play this and the mechanics around the map, the whole thing with the safe zones that stop time and keep you safe from the enemies on their path and then you step out of it and it starts up again. And then the pots you sort of throw down, create new areas, which will stop time and things like that. But there’s like an almost like a stealth “Metal Gear“-ish kind of quality to it and you know that’s one of my signpost games.

So as much as I really, I shouldn’t like the dungeons because of my aversion to circularity there’s something about it that had that — just that right sense of “I can get it the next time.” Like, “I didn’t get it this time, time ran out on me” or “I got killed and, now, next time I know what I need to do.” And I think part of that is being able to draw notes to yourself on the map. And so you’ve got these mnemonics as you’re going through, and you’re like, “Okay, next time I’m going to get it, next time I’m going to get it, next time I’m going to get it and I got it.” It’s tough enough and frustrating enough and it was a challenge, but it didn’t take me so long that I got impatient and said enough of this, I’m putting it down.

Totilo: All right, so now that you have a bunch of “Zelda”s current in your mind — which is unusual for you because you barely have sampled the series, — and now in the last week, in the last couple of days you have played chunks of two “Zelda”s and you’ve played a little bit of “Majora’s Mask,” so you’ve played three, do you feel that there is a universal thing in “Zelda” that you can only go so far in appreciating, but can’t feel compelled to play farther in? Or do you see a possibility that Nintendo could make a “Zelda” for you that you would want to play from beginning to end, voluntarily even if you weren’t forced to by [me]?

Croal: I think the likeliest system that would be on would be on the DS, because of the way the game is designed for it, in terms of the game play sessions they design around. It’s broken up enough that my impatience would be spread out over a long enough period of time that there’s not enough frustration to sort of say, “Let me stop playing it.” It’s in there, I pick it up, I break it out, I play it, I put it away.

I think that would work, but I think, no, it’s kind of like … it’d be kind of like me saying “Is there a ‘Sims‘ that I would play extensive amounts of?” I’ve said this to Will [Wright] himself, I’ve said, you know, “I love the ‘Sims’ games conceptually,” but, I said this before, “I see games with my hands. We see games with our hands, and if the hands stop — if that space between what I’m doing with the controller and what I’m seeing on screen, that space between them — if that’s not gripping me, that’s my personal taste.” And so I don’t play the “Sims” games all the way through. I’m skeptical about whether I’ll play “Spore” either even though I think it’s genius.

It’s the same way I feel about this, is that there’s something about that whole sort of “There’s an area you can’t access, go do this quest and that and the other and then come back to it and whatever.” I mean I recognize there is a genius about that, it’s perfectly valid, very good, it doesn’t speak to me ultimately.

Totilo: It’s almost like life to you?

Croal: I’d have to think about that for a little bit longer than we have [in this conversation].

Totilo: Yeah, see you’d probably … I think that probably does go to certain people’s tastes in other aspects of life. I wonder if it does really relate, because there are those for whom there’s nothing finer than, say, going to the gym. You have sort of your experience quantified. You’re going for a number. At least when you’re younger you can expect linear progression, bar injury, an advancement. I see that as the idea, at least the way you’re taught, [of] schools: you advance, like sort of again, linear progression. [Compare that to] circularity. I’m not really sure where the archetype for that comes from. It’s probably some sort of play theory that comes out of something else.

It’s interesting though, because you talk about not liking the “Sims” and you identify it as a controls thing. Clearly there’s no linearity in that game short of the linearity that you could bring to it by setting the quest for yourself, or a goal for yourself that you get these two people to fall in love. Later versions of the “Sims” added career goals for the characters, but you say, “I won’t play ‘Spore’ all the way through.” Well, I guess the whole idea of “Spore” is there isn’t really an “all the way through,” and the very lack of a goal, the lack of a clear linear channel for you might be the thing that bars you from playing it. It’s much more [of an obstacle for you] than the actual controls.

Croal: Well, it’s actually not, I should be more clear, it’s not the controls. It’s what I’m being asked to do.

Totilo: Right, the dynamics.

Croal: The dynamics of it.

Totilo: It’s that moving a mouse around, pointing at a couple people to cook, go to the bathroom, get in the car or to build furniture out of that or whatever. Because, I mean not to be too unfair to “The Sims,” but no matter how you describe it, it’s going to sound dull. Even the people who like it would probably admit that. … Clearly those kind of open-ended activities aren’t really your thing.

I mean, just because I like “Zelda” more than you do, in general I don’t find myself a huge lover of “The Sims.” I also am looking for a little bit more of a channel, a goal for myself to pursue and to go down and those games don’t have it,. They have sort of discouraged me from really playing too deeply. I liked “Sim City” back in the day, though maybe there the unspoken goal is building a city just so you can wreck it.

Croal: Well, if we’re digressing slightly — and we’ll get back on track in a second — but I mean what’s interesting is that so we’re both sort of not personally that interested in playing “Sims,” but we’re both really excited about “Little Big Planet,” you know, and I’m personally wanting to spend some more time messing around with Forge in “Halo 3.” Why do you think it is?

Totilo: Yeah, I’m not as excited as you on this. I mean I’m excited because I think “Little Big Planet” is beautiful, and it looks like it’ll be joyful to play. But I’m more excited about starting to play other levels that people make for me — mainly the levels the game designers make for me — than I am to make any levels myself. And I don’t want to [make my own levels in] Forge in “Halo 3″ because I don’t want to build stuff.

I’d like to have the experience just kind of presented and for me to experience whatever the journey is that the designer put me on. I guess that’s what I like about the circularity of “Zelda” is that it kind of gives you a little bit of liberty — or maybe just the illusion of liberty, which ultimately every game is giving you the illusion of liberty — but it’s presenting you an illusion of liberty, allowing you to kind of randomize your priorities just a little bit. But they’re generally expertly designed enough that they eventually funnel you into these very specific activities that I found are usually very well paced and very enjoyable.

So the disappointment for me in what I find to be the lesser of the “Zelda”s is where the things that I’m being funneled into — they’re just not as magical. It’s sort of like, “Okay designers I’ve trusted you to let me run astray, but now that I’ve kind of gathered myself and gone to the new place that I know you ultimately wanted me to get to I don’t feel like you’ve rewarded me.” It’s kind of a strange relationship to have with the game designer of the game, when you’re playing this open ended game. Because, really, I should be appreciating and enjoying the fact that they’ve let me run astray, but I’ve got this kind of weird thing where I’m actually saying, “Okay I’m tolerating it, but I’m enjoying it — it’s kind of this strange combination of feelings, but that all is kind of against the backdrop of knowing, as I was just saying, that it’s kind of an illusion of liberty and freedom that you’re given in these games.

“Grand Theft Auto” [has the] same thing. Ultimately you can’t do anything you ever really want to do in a [real] city or that your id would ever want to do in a city, but you certainly can do a wider range than you can in a lot of other games. And you’re celebrating the fact that designers allow you to do this. For me when I play “GTA” I’m also assuming and expecting and hoping that they’re eventually going to require me or compel me to do something specific and that that specific thing will be good. So when they have a level that has wonky controls and you’re sort of bottlenecked and you can’t get beyond that, it’s so maddening. It’s like “Hey guys, I’ve played around in your sandbox. I’ve had fun with all these other things that you’ve presented. I’m getting the most out of your game. I’m now coming to the next threshold before I can get to the next part of your sandbox. And you’ve now stymied me by not polishing this aspect as much as you sort of polished the rest.” It’s sort of like a frustration there.

Croal: So you sort of pushed back a bit on my discussion of the fiction. [Editor's Note: In Round Two, N'Gai and I discussed whether the "Men-In-Tights" aspect of "Zelda" was giving him problems, and if the subject matter of "GTA" has had greater success in compelling him to play a circular, back-tracking style of game.]

I mean I can’t speak for other game players besides myself, but that is a game that, okay, the freedom aspect is relatively unprecedented for a game. So I get that that tapped a lot of people, but the controls — certainly before, I mean there’s a reason why “San Andreas” is the game I played the most of and the others I maybe got through two, three, four, five missions is because the controls are just sort of — I mean I’m fighting this game. If you see games with your hands then that’s like looking at a screen that’s perpetually out of focus, you know, so I can only get so far.

And the “Zelda” games, I mean again whether it was.. so you’re right the Z-targeting I was having trouble with, but that was really more of a function of, as you pointed out, where I entered [the gaming secne] and on what systems I entered and played games on. Like we used to do in analog days, but that’s not a problem at all. And in fact as I sort of keep saying, the controls in “Phantom Hourglass” — for me, even as there’s a part of me that I recognize the game is charming, I resist the fiction on a certain level. Like that’s not enough of a motivator for me to keep playing. The controls definitely are. Like it’s a joy to play this game, and that’s why I hope that other developers for the DS are going to study this game. Because I really think that these controls have applications for games well beyond the “Zelda” fiction. So if there’s nothing else that Eiji Aonuma and Nintendo have given us with this game, it’s a gift in terms of the controls they designed and I really think that other developers need to study this closer.

Totilo: What would you like to see Aonuma and his team do next? Take the controls that they were able to sort of build atop the “Zelda” foundation and then to go and make a better “Zelda”? Or would you like them to take the controls that they built atop the “Zelda” foundation and now move those controls into some brand new game experiences?

Croal: Me personally?

Totilo: Yeah.

Croal: Well, again resisting the fiction as I do, selfishly I’d say, “Try your hand at another fiction.” But I think the question you’re asking is a bit deeper than that, which is what should incredibly talented artists and teams, you know, what does it mean when they either are forced to — we don’t know that for a fact — or by choice restrict themselves to working on a single series.

I mean it’s interesting to contrast that to the team that did “Ico” and “Shadow of the Colossus” because “Shadow of Colossus” didn’t turn into the game that people thought it was. People loved it anyway, but people thought, when they first saw it — with the horse and the bow and arrow — they thought that this was going to be “Zelda” for the PS2, And it turned out not to be that. It was a very sort of pure, stripped down ,focused game design, but coming off of “Ico,” for the, say, 500,000 people worldwide who bought that game and loved it — a lot of us would’ve been happy with “Ico 2,” but that team, Ueda-san and his team, they didn’t make that game.

Totilo: Right, “Nico” as it was rumored for a while …

Croal: Exactly. He didn’t play that game and so what I’m hearing from you is a desire for Nintendo to rethink how they’re doing, dealing with the Zelda franchise and maybe walk away from it for a while, let us miss it, maybe remake some of the other ones, which have exemplary game design and spif it up for a new generation. And then have Eiji Aounma’s team to do something different.

Totilo: Yeah, and I guess to wrap this up I just need to go and ask you one more time to help me figure this out: to what extent do you think that the feeling that I’m having is the byproduct of having played so many more, so many of these games already? And is my fatigue of “Zelda” and my disappointment with the new ones something that people are going to have when “Gran Turismo” hits its 15th iteration? Is it a feeling that you suspect “Final Fantasy” fans might be having at some point soon? Or is this something that you think is unique to “Zelda”?

Do you think it’s something that you’ve identified it as something that’s just happening for me personally?

Or is this just that this is a sort of a transition game, “Phantom Hourglass,” because as you’re saying maybe they kind of fell back a little bit on dungeons as long as they were focusing on other things?

Is it the game? Is it me? Or is this a universal experience that gamers are going to have more and more as we see franchises get sort of deeper into iteration and existence?

Croal: Well, I’d say it’s you. I think, no it’s definitely you because I think that people respond to the familiar in different ways. I mean we’ve talked about this ever since our very first Versus Mode where I defended “God of War 2,” saying they didn’t need to do anything beyond the gameplay — the gameplay was great, just give me more of it in a different setting, different context. You said, “I want invention, I want more and more new and that’s your thing.” It’s like you know you’re constantly looking for the shock of the new. I respond to the new as well, but I also respond to things done well and games are a young enough medium to…

Totilo: Hey, I respond to things done well…

Croal: Okay, you do, but there are a lot of, there are so few games ultimately — even if we’re having a great year, a great fall like we are now and we’re seeing some very good games — there’s still relative to the number of games released, there’s still so few games that do things really, really well that for me I sort of, you know, it’s what I call the Shake-Your-Ass Model Of Game Criticism. It’s like that’s what I look for first and, I think that, for you, after playing 12 Zeldas, the familiarity is getting to be a bit much and that’s completely understandable.

It could be like a long running TV series or a movie franchise that’s sort of worn out its welcome and the creator has not found enough ways to reinvent it, to keep it fresh for you. The thing is, I think a lot of game players tend to be a bit more Pavlovian in their response to games in franchises that they love. They like that itch being scratched in the way that that team or that franchise scratches that itch and they’re perfectly fine with going back to it. So on the business level, for Nintendo or for Square Enix they’re going to keep going back to it and tinker around the edges. But I mean, how different is that from “Madden“? You know a lot of people give EA a hard time and “Zelda,” the “Zelda” units don’t come out as often as the Madden’s, but what’s wrong with Nintendo taking a big of an EA sports approach to the Zelda’s when there are fans that love those games?

Totilo: Well some would say “Madden” is based on the game of football. The game of football kind of got locked in place before they even ever made a “Madden,” you know, what I’m saying? So, like, they figured out the shape of the ball and they put what you should wear, you know, barring some rule changes here or there. Football got solidified. And football, in some ways, is as much a narrative as “Zelda” is, because, really, they’re both that sort of the narrative of what happens on the field. Of course football is a set of rules and so a different narrative occurs for every game. “Zelda” is not really defining a set of rules that’s being kind of remixed every time [you play it.] A new experience has been set down by the creator for each game.

But with “Madden ” what I view EA as having done and the other football game developers, is they’ve essentially been able to work off of an ideal, which is real football and year after year after year try to come close to that. And really once they’ve reached that ideal and they’ve got football as realistically rendered or as successfully rendered as it needs to be for a video game that at that point there’s no need to make, to remake the engine, remake the graphics or remake anything other than to keep the rosters up to date, keep the uniforms up to date and so on and you can see a lot of people saying that that’s all they’re seeing from some of the football company game developers anyway.

“Zelda” — it peaked. It’s been great already. It’s like the ideal “Zelda”s exist. They’re already out there. And in other forms of entertainment, once the ideal exists and companies have found a way to make money off of just re-releasing that ideal, finding a way to make that ideal relevant even if it means transferring it from VHS to DVD to downloadable or whatnot.

And so, you know, clearly where I’m at is at a spot where I’m just saying, “Look, I’ve played the ideal ‘Zelda.’” I was able to play it in 1998 when, at the time, it was running on technology that blew my mind so my memory of that “Zelda” will always be a bit as an ultimate experience. Your memory of “Ocarina” will probably always be that, “hey this was a really good game.” That was an interesting artifact of history that you played in the year 2007 right after seeing “Ratchet and Clank,” you know, HD quality graphics on my standard definition set. And so you probably actually haven’t experienced the ideal “Zelda” experience. You’re sort of seeing it at the cutting edge of technology [on Wii and DS] and design [on the N64] simultaneously.

I don’t really know where it sort of leaves me other than I guess I’m looking for new franchises that will feel fresh, and it’s not such a terrible thing to feel compelled to look for new stuff.

Croal: But to put a fine point on it because that’s what I like to do, you’re talking about when it peaked. I mean I would say that what you’re actually articulating is that not only has it peaked, but there’s been a number of games that you found relatively disappointing since the peak . For instance, if I’m not mistaken, for you and your wife the peak season of The Wire was the first season …

Totilo: I think so, yeah, the third season was pretty good too and the fourth season. Everything but the second season — multiple peaks. The Wire is a mountain range of quality. But yeah, I think the first season is our favorite.

Croal: And you’re excited about season 5?

Totilo: Yes.

Croal: Coming in January.

Totilo: Yes, but I don’t know if I, I don’t know if they can make season 15 and 14, season 12 as good as the first four seasons. Even if, you know, the only thing we’ll have to confront is that, if nine years from now we don’t watch television and we watch holographic displays and the problem is “Well that great Wire season one was only rendered in flat TV panels and we need to find some new way to bring it back.” Yeah, I mean I said in our first [round] that some of this may just be a byproduct of me getting older. This is a byproduct of age and it’s certainly, you know, as depressing as that thought might be, so be it.

Of course I feel bad for those folks who can’t experience the earlier “Zelda”s in their, sort of in their glory and for whom “Phantom Hourglass” might be their first. I would just simply recommend get to that Virtual Console, download “Ocarina of Time,” get through that Deku Tree dungeon the way N’Gai did. If he can do it, you can do it too and –

Croal: Are you saying I’m weaksauce?

Totilo: No, I’m just saying that if you’re man enough to kind of deal with the old school framerate and some fairly low res graphics.

Croal: And an old-school controller. Again this was on the original N64.

Totilo: I’m not telling people to go that far. I’m not saying to bust out the rumble pack and, you know, have to blow on the cartridge to make it work. I’m saying Virtual Console. Of course, if you want to play “Majora’s Mask” you do need to go the extra route and get yourself a cartridge and play it on the old system. But yeah I think people should go back and decide for themselves and I would just love to see more people talking about this kind of, this feeling and not be shy about questioning your cherished game series.

It’s kind of weird for me to proselytizing about “Zelda” for so long and then when we finally have a “Zelda” conversation to be the big “Zelda” doubter. Maybe it’s because I’m always going to be contrary about everything, but I think it really is that I got surprised by this crossroads that I found myself walking into.

Croal: And I think that more people should consider what you said about remaking games and where that can fit in. It’s historically been seen as a cash-in and I think that’s been understandable because it has been. But because of the difference — because games are built on shifting sands of technology in a way that’s different from music and movies — it’s a way of preserving the history of great games and sort of bringing them to life for a new generation that might, you know.. just like that there’s some people today who don’t watch black and white movies right and, you know, colorizing may have been a bit misguided, but it sort of speaks to that similar thing. So I think that idea that you have, which would be similar to almost like the director’s cut re-release of Blade Runner or things like that. The Criterion Edition of things. I think that’s something that game developers should consider, and I think there’s money to be made there as well as preserving the history of games for people who may feel like it’s too much of a barrier and sort of go back to the old controllers and the old visuals.

Totilo: There we go, well onto the next round.