AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Related Topics > Games

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2013-07-09, 11:35   Link #461
Dextro
He Without a Title
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Age: 27
Send a message via Skype™ to Dextro
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenade_beta View Post
*sigh* In the past, Sony had games. Sure, maybe not Pokemon level, but they had all kinds of brands, like Crash (I liked that game). But Sony raise brands worse than I raise plants and they are left with depending completely on third-parties just to survive.
The problem with Sony's old brands like Crash and Spyro is that they didn't own the rights to them so they can't do whatever they want with them. Why do you think Crash is missing from Sony's Smash Bros clone?
__________________

Dextro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-09, 13:08   Link #462
serenade_beta
マジ天使
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dextro View Post
The problem with Sony's old brands like Crash and Spyro is that they didn't own the rights to them so they can't do whatever they want with them. Why do you think Crash is missing from Sony's Smash Bros clone?
Yeah, I know. Either way, it is a shame Crash died off like that. It could have been Sony's Mario (in a platformer meaning)... maybe.
__________________

-Tried to start a blog --> http://tdnshumi.blogspot.com/ (Mainly about video games)
-R.I.P. Hiroshi Yamauchi, Gaming wouldn't have been the same without you (9/19/13)
serenade_beta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-09, 16:27   Link #463
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
But you aren't paying attention to the discussion at hand. Your argument is that the WiiU base doesn't buy third party games.
Not quite. My argument is that the Wii U's buyers are primarily in it for Nintendo games. That they're not buying third-party games is inherent in the sales figures, and is only incidental to my points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
Our argument is that there aren't any third party games for the WiiU. Therefore, if one were to look at this strictly in terms of console exclusives, Nintendo offers far more. Thus, if the third party developers got their heads out of their asses and actually put third party games on the system, people would buy it, because it would then offer both third party games and the best console exclusives.
I think that this isn't the entire picture. Publishers have released games on the Wii U. They didn't sell, so what more do you expect them to do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
The fact that people who want third party games do not buy the WiiU is precisely because third party developers do not make games for it. And a single game is not going to do it. A committment is necessary.
I think that it's a lot more likely that these gamers don't buy Wii Us because the console doesn't interest them. If they already have access to the PS3 and 360 versions of the games, why would they want to spend an extra $300-350+ to do the same thing on a similar system? All other consoles have their selling points, but what's the Wii U's?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
Like you said, that isn't "trying", that's half-assing. Ensure the fans that the games will come out. All of the games. Then, they will purchase it. Ubisoft, at least, sounds like they're giving it a legitmate shot. And I dearly hope that it succeeds, just to prove to the other idiots that you shouldn't neglect fans.
Half-assed efforts should at least receive half-assed sales. Historically, half-assed releases for console launches performed decently. For the Wii U, they outrigh flopped. Why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
Source data on "most" WiiU buyers having a PS360?
There's no hard statistics on it, but it makes a lot of sense given the gaming market, game sales figures, and the historical pattern for early adopters. There are about 2.5 million Wii U owners out there, and most of them spent $300-350 or more on a console that has relatively few games available. The chances are that a large number of these gamers would have picked up either a 360 or a PS3 for around the same price some time in the last 6-7 years.

If we look at the prototypical buyer who doesn't one of the above two consoles, and I can only think of only two distinct possibilities: primarily PC users like myself or Wii-only gamers. Neither group seems to be very likely to prefer buying AAA games on the Wii U. I suspect that a lot of the launch ports were feelers to see how conducive these two groups were to those purchases, and whether there were many hardcore gamers on the system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by serenade_beta View Post
Yeah, I know. Either way, it is a shame Crash died off like that. It could have been Sony's Mario (in a platformer meaning)... maybe.
That was way back in the PSX days when Sony was less interested in controlling the intellectual property, and so Crash Bandicoot is now with Activision and Spyro is with Ubisoft (and still gets new games!). Rachet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, and Sackboy are Sony's mascots nowadays - with Sackboy being Sony's Mario (insofar as far as they're willing to push the image). I imagine that Kat from Gravity Rush will join them sometime soon.
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-09, 16:56   Link #464
Tokkan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 26
Send a message via MSN to Tokkan
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
That was way back in the PSX days when Sony was less interested in controlling the intellectual property, and so Crash Bandicoot is now with Activision and Spyro is with Ubisoft (and still gets new games!).
Actually Spyro's also with Activision, although they retooled the Spyro IP into being the Skylanders franchise.
__________________
Tokkan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-09, 17:04   Link #465
GDB
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
All other consoles have their selling points, but what's the Wii U's?
Console exclusives that are generally seen as better than console exclusives Sony and Microsoft have. And when the other consoles' selling points are, generally, "already there", that's not much of a selling point. A keeping point, sure, but not a selling point.

But I'm done arguing this. You keep twisting the argument to suit your needs by changing it from what's plausible to what's actually happening, when the original argument was and has been what would be plausible if the developers weren't being stubborn.
GDB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-09, 17:31   Link #466
Xagzan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokkan View Post
Actually Spyro's also with Activision, although they retooled the Spyro IP into being the Skylanders franchise.
Not that us old Spyro fans are particularly pleased with that.
Xagzan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-09, 20:42   Link #467
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokkan View Post
Actually Spyro's also with Activision, although they retooled the Spyro IP into being the Skylanders franchise.
Heh. The more you know. Hasn't Skylanders been selling better than the Spyro games did?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
Console exclusives that are generally seen as better than console exclusives Sony and Microsoft have.
Again, that's great for Nintendo fans, but it doesn't do much for non-fans.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
And when the other consoles' selling points are, generally, "already there", that's not much of a selling point. A keeping point, sure, but not a selling point.
Wrongo. The other consoles' selling points are: price, huge game library, plenty of high-population multiplayer games, and it's a good chance that one's friends would already be playing on one of those systems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GDB View Post
when the original argument was and has been what would be plausible if the developers weren't being stubborn.
That's not much of an argument if it ignores the developers' financial realities.
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-09, 21:51   Link #468
Shadow5YA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
Wrongo. The other consoles' selling points are: price, huge game library, plenty of high-population multiplayer games, and it's a good chance that one's friends would already be playing on one of those systems.
The Wii was quite affordable, especially compared to the PS3's former 599 US Dollars.

The games are a circular chicken-or-egg argument. Why didn't developers make exclusives with the same effort and quality as they did for the PS360? The Wii didn't have anywhere near as many problems as the Wii U does now. Third parties still supported primarily Sony.

Even when Nintendo has Platinum Games making Bayonetta for the WiiU now, plenty of people are complaining why it isn't on a Playstation or Xbox console. There's this mentality that Sony and Microsoft are where the third party games have to be at, and I highly doubt it's all Nintendo's fault considering their Gamecube and earlier lineups.
Shadow5YA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-09, 23:04   Link #469
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow5YA View Post
The Wii was quite affordable, especially compared to the PS3's former 599 US Dollars.

The games are a circular chicken-or-egg argument. Why didn't developers make exclusives with the same effort and quality as they did for the PS360?
Yes, and the price was one of the big reasons why it managed to catch fire. However, the drawback of that lower price was weaker power and a very different audience than that which existed on the 360 and the PS3. Add to this the fact that most publishers making AAA games would use a multiplatform release to try to recoup costs. End result? The Wii version would look and play significantly worse than on the versions did. They also sold less, so the AAA publishers scaled back accordingly.

It's not a chicken-or-egg situation at all. It's the responsibility of the console maker to design their product so that the third-parties can sell their games. For example, the Xbone isn't conducive to JRPGs, so we shouldn't expect very publishers to make them for that platform. If Microsoft wants that market, then they're going to have to commit resources to prove that it's viable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow5YA View Post
The Wii didn't have anywhere near as many problems as the Wii U does now. Third parties still supported primarily Sony.
They supported Sony early on because the PS2 was king and the PS3 looked like a likely successor to that. They supported the PS3 later on because PS3 owners bought their games. It's as simple as that - an audience that buys a publisher's games will get more of those games made.

Let's not forget that the PS3 still had fewer exclusives than the 360, and that up until about 2009, the 360 versions tended to look and play quite a bit better. And still PS3 games sold, with Sony making sacrifices to claw back to parity.

As for the Wii, the third-party games that sold best were titles like Skylanders and Let's Dance, so more of them got made. Where's the problem with that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow5YA View Post
Even when Nintendo has Platinum Games making Bayonetta for the WiiU now, plenty of people are complaining why it isn't on a Playstation or Xbox console. There's this mentality that Sony and Microsoft are where the third party games have to be at, and I highly doubt it's all Nintendo's fault considering their Gamecube and earlier lineups.
I wouldn't read too much into it. Platinum games in general, and Bayonetta in particular, have a fervent fanbase. These fans tend to be quite different from Nintendo fans, and some vocal members didn't want to have to buy a Wii U to support one of their favorite games. Imagine the reaction of something similar like if a lesser Nintendo franchise like F-Zero or Star Fox split off and became exclusive to the Xbone.
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-10, 00:11   Link #470
Angelic Cross
Soul-eating Librarian
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Within the stacks. . .waiting to devour you. . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
They supported the PS3 later on because PS3 owners bought their games. It's as simple as that - an audience that buys a publisher's games will get more of those games made.
That's bullshit. If that was all it took, then the third parties should have given all of those many people who bought their "test games" on the Wii and made them successful in sales (like the RE4 port) the types of games they wanted instead of more bullshit games for "tests" (continuing with RE games on the Wii as an example, light gun games instead of RE games with RE4's gameplay).
Angelic Cross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-10, 00:21   Link #471
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
You're right, that's not quite all that it takes. Resident Evil 4 was a port from the Gamecube, so it ran well on the Wii. If Capcom had a large business making Gamecube games at that point, I'm sure that the Wii would have seen a lot of them.

However any games that were meant for the PS3 and 360 could only be ported over with severe compromises or not done so at all. A lack of power has consequences, and this is one of them.

At least Capcom tried to make a few games to play to what they perceived to be the Wii's strengths. What really did you expect them to do? Make brand new games from ground up with as much budget as they would assign for a PS3 game?



I'm not sure why we're dwelling on the Wii when it enjoyed an infinitely better position than the Wii U.
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-10, 20:32   Link #472
Angelic Cross
Soul-eating Librarian
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Within the stacks. . .waiting to devour you. . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
At least Capcom tried to make a few games to play to what they perceived to be the Wii's strengths. What really did you expect them to do? Make brand new games from ground up with as much budget as they would assign for a PS3 game?
No, I expected them to at least stick to the genres the people wanted. They could have easily done that for example with RE4 engine without using as much resources as a PS3 game and yet they went with a damn light gun game. And we kept seeing this with every other third party who pulled the test game crap.
Angelic Cross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-10, 21:44   Link #473
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Capcom thought that a game playing to the strengths of the Wii would sell better. They were wrong, but they were also not going to divert resources away from Resident Evil 5's development. And that's where the story of the Wii's lack of hardcore support really lies. The other platforms could share resources, and were therefore allocated far more resources. It certainly doesn't help that this style of game tended to sell worse than they did on PS360. There's probably a lesson for the Wii U there as well.
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-10, 23:26   Link #474
Shadow5YA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
You're right, that's not quite all that it takes. Resident Evil 4 was a port from the Gamecube, so it ran well on the Wii. If Capcom had a large business making Gamecube games at that point, I'm sure that the Wii would have seen a lot of them.

However any games that were meant for the PS3 and 360 could only be ported over with severe compromises or not done so at all. A lack of power has consequences, and this is one of them.

I'm not sure why we're dwelling on the Wii when it enjoyed an infinitely better position than the Wii U.
Because lack of geniune third party support and the mentality that follows it is not something that originated with the WiiU - it started from the Wii, if not earlier.

It's not just PS360 games, but PS2 games that never made it to Nintendo consoles as well.

Sure, I can understand why high powered HD games like Metal Gear Solid 4 had to be on the PS3, but then why did Kingdom Hearts 2 never get ported? The Wii sure as hell could have handled those graphics.

The same issue applies to Sega for Sonic Unleashed, who felt the need to make an inferior gimmicky version for the Wii when the later Sonic Colors proved that the Wii could have easily handled the same level of graphics and 3D "Rush" style gameplay as seen in daytime PS360 daytime levels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
At least Capcom tried to make a few games to play to what they perceived to be the Wii's strengths. What really did you expect them to do? Make brand new games from ground up with as much budget as they would assign for a PS3 game?
...yes?

Put in a half-assed effort and you get poor sales. They tried outsourcing development of the newest Devil May Cry (DmC), and look where it got them.

I'm not expecting a game with Metal Gear Solid 4 or Final Fantasy XV level graphics. I just want a complete game that plays like a full game instead of feeling like I'm playing reskinned version of Link's Crossbow Training.

A Wii game does not have to rely on motion controls either. Some of the Wii's first party titles don't even do that. Sega's Sonic Colors didn't rely on motion either, and that game was heralded as the game that revived the Sonic franchise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
Capcom thought that a game playing to the strengths of the Wii would sell better. They were wrong, but they were also not going to divert resources away from Resident Evil 5's development. And that's where the story of the Wii's lack of hardcore support really lies. The other platforms could share resources, and were therefore allocated far more resources. It certainly doesn't help that this style of game tended to sell worse than they did on PS360. There's probably a lesson for the Wii U there as well.
The 360 has Kinect and the PS3 has Move now. If they were seriously experimenting on the success of motion controlled games, they would have included Kinect or Move supported versions of their games on the PS360, but they didn't. For example, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Ring of Fates could have been played on the PS3 with Move, but it was never ported because they never cared about motion controls to begin with. They just thought it was the easiest way to put a "Wii-flavor" to the game, so that's what they did.


It's pretty clear to me that they weren't "playing to the strengths of the Wii" but hoping for some easy money with minimal effort, then blamed the failure of their half-assed effort on the medium instead of... you know, themselves for never caring in the first place.

Last edited by Shadow5YA; 2013-07-10 at 23:44.
Shadow5YA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-10, 23:59   Link #475
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow5YA View Post
Because lack of geniune third party support and the mentality that follows it is not something that originated with the WiiU - it started from the Wii, if not earlier.
Complain about the Wii if you want, but it did get the third-party titles that sold. The Wii U has not been able to sell any third-party titles in comparison.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow5YA View Post
...yes?
That doesn't seem reasonable when Nintendo's stated reason for the Wii's weak specs was that they didn't want games to have large budgets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow5YA View Post
The 360 has Kinect and the PS3 has Move now. If they were seriously experimenting on the success of motion controlled games, they would have included Kinect or Move supported versions of their games on the PS360, but they didn't. For example, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Ring of Fates could have been played on the PS3 with Move, but it was never ported because they never cared about motion controls to begin with. They just thought it was the easiest way to put a "Wii-flavor" to the game, so that's what they did.
The difference is that the motion games were developed while the Wii was a new thing. By the time the Kinect and Move came out, the 360 and the PS3's strengths and weaknesses were well understood. And so it's easier to design games to cater to the known audiences.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow5YA View Post
It's pretty clear to me that they weren't "playing to the strengths of the Wii" but hoping for some easy money with minimal effort, then blamed the failure of their half-assed effort on the medium instead of... you know, themselves for never caring in the first place.
Umbrella Chronicles sold over a million copies, so I'm not sure how much of a failure it was.

Compare Capcom's output on the Wii vs. the Wii U and it's obvious that support for the former is vastly stronger. I suspect that Nintendo won't even be able to pay for another Monster Hunter title on the Wii U.
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-11, 00:25   Link #476
Shadow5YA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
That doesn't seem reasonable when Nintendo's stated reason for the Wii's weak specs was that they didn't want games to have large budgets.
Super Smash Bros Brawl.

It doesn't need to be Metal Gear Solid or FFXV level with top of the line graphics - just something reasonable with a lot of effort put behind it.

And again, there are third parties that don't even make games that require top of the line graphics but are still PS360 exclusive. Why wasn't Disgaea on the Wii?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
The difference is that the motion games were developed while the Wii was a new thing. By the time the Kinect and Move came out, the 360 and the PS3's strengths and weaknesses were well understood. And so it's easier to design games to cater to the known audiences.
You can make a Wii(U) or Nintendo-styled game without relying on the motion controls.

Namco did this during the Gamecube generation by making Tales of Symphonia with cel-shaded graphics.
Sega just took out their "dark and edgy" story from Sonic Unleashed and kept things simple for Sonic Colors on the Wii. They're also following suit for Sonic Lost World - the story is kept simple, the graphics are bright and colorful, making it appealing to kids, and they're even including things like the figure-8 style run for old fans.
Hideki Kamiya made Viewtiful Joe with cartoony cel-shaded graphics as well.

If third parties feel they must conform to the notion of a "Nintendo" game, then the way to do it (at least the way I see it) is to make an easy to play, hard to master game that appeals to all ages, from children to adults. The motion controls and games like Wii Sports is only a part of the "easy to play" experience, and even Nintendo knows that it isn't necessary for every type of game. It certainly wasn't mandatory for Brawl.

Yet the majority of other third parties somehow think the motion controls are mandatory? Considering how poor some games like the RE4 port implemented them, I don't buy it. Monetary resources weren't the only thing lacking from their "attempts" on the Wii.
Shadow5YA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-11, 01:29   Link #477
4Tran
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow5YA View Post
Super Smash Bros Brawl.
I'm not sure what this has to do with the point about Wii titles not getting the kind of budget that PS3 titles got.


You seem to be complaining an awful lot about the Wii, but I'm not seeing how any of this really pertains to the Wii U. Are you trying to imply that third-party games are selling a lot better there than we've been led to believe?
__________________
The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won...
4Tran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-11, 01:41   Link #478
Shadow5YA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
I'm not sure what this has to do with the point about Wii titles not getting the kind of budget that PS3 titles got.
You pointed out the console's hardware limitations as one reason why third parties don't put much resources into their Wii titles, then cite Nintendo stating that they don't want their games to have high budgets.

Brawl is one counterexample. It may not be Metal Gear Solid level, but it doesn't have to be. You can still make a high budget game for Nintendo consoles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
You seem to be complaining an awful lot about the Wii, but I'm not seeing how any of this really pertains to the Wii U. Are you trying to imply that third-party games are selling a lot better there than we've been led to believe?
I'm trying to imply that third parties don't put much effort into Wii or Wii U games. It's not that they can't, but they just won't. The WiiU being weaker is not an excuse for less effort. Not every game or third party system focuses on HD graphics that require the PS4's power. What's their excuse?

I also listed Wii/PS3/360 generation games as examples because despite the WiiU already being out and the PS4 and Xbox One coming soon, they're not out yet so that generation is still too young to make final calls. Lack of third party support however is not something that started with the WiiU. It got even worse, yes, but comparing poor to very poor isn't saying much.
Shadow5YA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-11, 02:49   Link #479
Sides
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow5YA View Post
I'm trying to imply that third parties don't put much effort into Wii or Wii U games. It's not that they can't, but they just won't. The WiiU being weaker is not an excuse for less effort. Not every game or third party system focuses on HD graphics that require the PS4's power. What's their excuse?
The excuse is scalability of the engines the third parties have used last generation. If we pick capcom for example, Basra3 was multiplatform for PS3 and Wii, using MT framework light(? or something) and it worked. On the other hand engines like UE3, cryengine and all those internal engines, used by most the third parties, were only designed for PS3 and 360 in mind, even the pc ports were really lacking, most of them were just brute forced to run on PC, wasting a lot of resources.
Engines this generation should be scalable for all platforms, despite the power gap, the consoles this generation aren't that different, unlike Wii to PS3 to X360. As soon as the PS4 and Xbone are out prepare to see a lot of porting between all three platforms. Honestly most devs probably just want to work on one platform, if there is a magic software (scalable engines!) that converts the game to another platform they will do it, because it is free money. the shittalk on gaming sites and magazines are really just made up to attract clicks and ad revenues.
Sides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-11, 04:45   Link #480
Angelic Cross
Soul-eating Librarian
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Within the stacks. . .waiting to devour you. . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Tran View Post
Capcom thought that a game playing to the strengths of the Wii would sell better. They were wrong, but they were also not going to divert resources away from Resident Evil 5's development.
Oh please, you're telling me they couldn't have made an RE4-style side game reusing assets from RE4 and the budget they used for the light gun games without severely impacting RE5's development? Well that just indicates to me Capcom's stupidity in budgeting practices.
Angelic Cross is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
nintendo

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.