436 réponses à ce sujet

[tbsking]

A voiced protagonist almost has to reduce the number of options. Voicing lines is far more expensive than text-based lines alone. Just imagine the number of dialogue trees throughout DA:O that you don't get to hear, compared to the same in ME.

[SymonDezyn]

I just don't quite understand the point of why they are changing all the things we love about this game. There are already enough generic RPGs out there; DAO was meant to, and did - bring back all the things RPG gamers love about RPGs. Customization, tactical real-time battle, decision making that affects your world, oh and did i mention CUSTOMIZATION???



I find it really sad that Bioware appears to be selling out to the masses, making DA2 more casual, and forgetting about all the devoted fans that already love Dragon Age the way it is.

[Fangirl17]

*sneaks into thread*....Hey devs,can my mage Hawke be an apostate pwease? :3....*runs away*

[tbsking]

SymonDezyn wrote...

I just don't quite understand the point of why they are changing all the things we love about this game. There are already enough generic RPGs out there; DAO was meant to, and did - bring back all the things RPG gamers love about RPGs. Customization, tactical real-time battle, decision making that affects your world, oh and did i mention CUSTOMIZATION???

I find it really sad that Bioware appears to be selling out to the masses, making DA2 more casual, and forgetting about all the devoted fans that already love Dragon Age the way it is.

I think it's still a little too early to say that they're making it more casual, at least not until we see some gameplay. But I agree with your first point. I've asked it before so I'll ask it again: Why would they change the exact things that made DA:O sell so well?

Modifié par tbsking, 13 juillet 2010 - 07:09 .

[ElvaliaRavenHart]

SymonDezyn wrote...

I just don't quite understand the point of why they are changing all the things we love about this game. There are already enough generic RPGs out there; DAO was meant to, and did - bring back all the things RPG gamers love about RPGs. Customization, tactical real-time battle, decision making that affects your world, oh and did i mention CUSTOMIZATION???

I find it really sad that Bioware appears to be selling out to the masses, making DA2 more casual, and forgetting about all the devoted fans that already love Dragon Age the way it is.

Might I also add the replay ability of this new game, with other origins involved besides human, the replay ability was through the roof, I can't believe they took this away.  I already have two dlc that I might play 2 - 3 times at the most.  I'm afraid DA2 will also be the same, very sad.  Since I have several playthroughs of Origins.  I plan on playing more.  With this new game, I just don't see it.    I'm not going to spend my money on something like this.  I don't mind spending a few bucks on dlc I'll play a few times, but I'm not going to spend 30 bucks for something that I'll only play once or twice, not going to do this unless more information will be forthcoming that says different.

Modifié par ElvaliaRavenHart, 13 juillet 2010 - 07:16 .

[MFCell]

If you, like many of us, are very unsatisfied with the direction Dragon Age 2 is taking, and did not ever care much for Mass Effect 1 and 2, and do not want to see DA2 look like SW:TOR, I beg you, please continue to come and make posts on these forums letting Bioware see how unhappy you are with their decision.

Bioware, I do not feel like you took your time to develop a proper sequel to Dragon Age. DA:O took 5 years to develop, how is it viable to make a proper sequel in 18 months? You guys should barely have the groundwork laid out for DA2, yet it is gonna release in March 2011? The words "rushed for the money" come to mind. Or maybe the EA Execs yelled at you when you said you wanted 3 to 5 years for a proper sequel?

Bioware, Bioware. Listen for a moment to a true fan, someone who has played DA for nearly a thousand hours, is near 100%, has beaten the game on nightmare, seen every main ending and DLC, and completed nearly every sidequest. Having Hawke as the main charachter may be the root of an AMAZING story, but to your fanbase, it just looks like a copout. To your fanbase, it looks like you decided the human warrior origin was the most popular, so you you just made Dragon Age 2 feature a human warrior. That's really what it seems like to me, that Hawke is the easiest "one size fits all" hero you could come up with.

I think, after all the researching I've done, my playtime in Mass Effect 1 and 2, and my playtime in Dragon Age(by far the most) leads me to beleive that Bioware is for once, making a mistake. Dragon Age stood out from the crowd because of 2 things. 1) It was IMMENSELY polished. Every line of dialogue and each scene played out exactly as the should have. The combat on PC was unmatched in any game to date. 2) It relied on tried and true game mechanics and moved them forward into the current generation of hardware.


Now as far as I can tell, you have removed both aspects of the game. You are not ( I repeat, there is NO WAY possible) for you to polish DA2 like you did with DA:O. So, the "amazingness" factor will be lower, as conversations don't hold the promise of multiple hidden dialogue options and areas have little depth besides questing through them. Hawke will spend 10 years in this game? How do you expect to polish 10 years of in game time in 18 months? By skipping VAST portions of it, therfore making Hawke less heroic, and making the game flow in a wierd way (think "and then, 2 years later")...

Dragon Age also relies on tried and true game mechanics. The RPG combat is nearly identical to KOTOR and Baldur's Gate. If any tweaks are made to this system, the result could be literally catastrophic for DA2. Having the game play like ME2 with a sword is going to absolutely destroy the team based combat experience that DA:O flaunts so heavily. With so many other aspects of the game going completely ME on us, I wonder what the console versions will turn out like. I can imagine people running around taking cover from fireballs and then running in and spamming the attack button. Like some freakish GoW/ME wanna be.

Really Bioware, this is a sink or swim kind of thing for you guys. If you screw this up trying to make more money off of it, then your fanbase can only assume the same for your next titles. How do you plan on stealing WoW's playerbase if you've already set your fans on fire with this simple announcement? You guys don;t seem to understand the idea behind consistency.

I have on question for you guys, and it is a really important one.

Why Bioware, WHY, do you think Starcraft 2 is a nearly EXACT replica of Starcraft 1? Why, also, does Starcraft 2 not feature the VASTLY popular "Heroes" aspect from Warcraft 3? Because Bioware, just like DA and ME, while Warcraft and Starcraft are VERY SIMILAR, they are also very different. It is those differences which define the two games. Not the similarities. By establishing an IP vastly different from the ME one, you created something very similar to the Starcraft/Warcraft duality. You must NOT close the gap betwen the two franchises, instead, you must ESTABLISH the gap between the two. You guys, as the developers, have the reigns on this project, and it seems to many people like you are making decisions that do not suit you in the long term, nor do they characterise the development style we are used to from Bioware.

Anyways, it's not my job to make sure you guys are doing you job right. If you guys screw this up royally, then by all means, that was your decision to do so. It can be you guys decision to run Bioware's sparkling reputation right into the ground, make sure that none of WoW's playerbase leaves for TOR, make sure DA2 in no way follows DA:O, make sure ME3 just ends in another reaper battle, the list goes on and on. The ball is always in you guys court, until release day. I really think that the decisions you guys have made recently, since DA:O, do not reflect the Bioware the made KOTOR so great, so many years ago.

Modifié par MFCell, 13 juillet 2010 - 07:40 .

[tbsking]

ElvaliaRavenHart wrote...

SymonDezyn wrote...

I just don't quite understand the point of why they are changing all the things we love about this game. There are already enough generic RPGs out there; DAO was meant to, and did - bring back all the things RPG gamers love about RPGs. Customization, tactical real-time battle, decision making that affects your world, oh and did i mention CUSTOMIZATION???

I find it really sad that Bioware appears to be selling out to the masses, making DA2 more casual, and forgetting about all the devoted fans that already love Dragon Age the way it is.

Might I also add the replay ability of this new game, with other origins involved besides human, the replay ability was through the roof, I can't believe they took this away.  I already have two dlc that I might play 2 - 3 times at the most.  I'm afraid DA2 will also be the same, very sad.  Since I have several playthroughs of Origins.  I plan on playing more.  With this new game, I just don't see it.    I'm not going to spend my money on something like this.  I don't mind spending a few bucks on dlc I'll play a few times, but I'm not going to spend 30 bucks for something that I'll only play once or twice, not going to do this unless more information will be forthcoming that says different.

Us poor saps on the PS3 have to pay sixty bucks.

I've only played beginning to end a few times, but I've started and stopped countless more (I'm a perfectionist). I'm afraid DA2 will be like Alpha Protocol in that once I've beaten it, I just don't feel like picking it up for a full playthrough again.

[AlanC9]

tbsking wrote...
 I've asked it before so I'll ask it again: Why would they change the exact things that made DA:O sell so well?

Are you sure those are actually the things that made DA:O sell? How do you know that?

Take the voiced protagonist; not a week goes by on the DA:O board without someone posting that the only thing he didn't like about the game was that the PC isn't voiced.

Modifié par AlanC9, 13 juillet 2010 - 07:41 .

[tbsking]

AlanC9 wrote...

tbsking wrote...
 I've asked it before so I'll ask it again: Why would they change the exact things that made DA:O sell so well?

Are you sure those are actually the things that made DA:O sell? How do you know that?

The origins system was the single most unique thing about the game. Critics all universally praised it as a different and novel idea. The return to tactical talent-based combats was also praised by critics as a return to the "golden era" of fantasy RPGs and was also a major draw for older RPG gamers. The idea that it was to be a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate and thus have many "vintage" RPG elements made it stand out in the modern RPG era, and brought it much critical accliam for it.

As a matter of fact, it did all of those things very well. By remaining a "vintage" style RPG it managed to become a big-name company occupying a now-niche genre generally only filled by small indy design companies that simply can't afford more complexity.

Can I know that those were the reasons it sold well short of asking every person that bought the game? No, I suppose I couldn't. But seeing as these were all features toted both by BioWare but also by critics who loved the game, I can say with some certainty that they were well-regarded and major draws.

Even if it they aren't the key reasons why the game sold, we do know that with those elements the game sold astoundingly well. The fact that they are remeving those features despite the fact that the game sold astoundingly well with them speaks to some major misjudgements on the part of the Executives at either EA or BioWare.

[Addai]

ElvaliaRavenHart wrote...

Might I also add the replay ability of this new game, with other origins involved besides human, the replay ability was through the roof, I can't believe they took this away.  I already have two dlc that I might play 2 - 3 times at the most.  I'm afraid DA2 will also be the same, very sad. 

I'm sure we'll hear that replaying Origins over and over never made Bioware any more money than your initial purchase.

Many of us spent nearly what we paid for Origins to buy a much more truncated and unsatisfying game called Awakening, so their calculation might turn out to be right.

[CLime]

MFCell wrote...

Bioware, I do not feel like you took your time to develop a proper sequel to Dragon Age. DA:O took 5 years to develop, how is it viable to make a proper sequel in 18 months? You guys should barely have the groundwork laid out for DA2, yet it is gonna release in March 2011? The words "rushed for the money" come to mind. Or maybe the EA Execs yelled at you when you said you wanted 3 to 5 years for a proper sequel?

And you know this from your years of experience in the video game industry.  Especially because DA:2 is being created entirely from the ground up, with no infrastructure already in place from any previous games in the series.

MFCell wrote...
Bioware, Bioware. Listen for a moment to a true fan, someone who has played DA for nearly a thousand hours, is near 100%, has beaten the game on nightmare, seen every main ending and DLC, and completed nearly every sidequest.
...
Why Bioware, WHY, do you think Starcraft 2 is a nearly EXACT
replica of Starcraft 1? Why, also, does Starcraft 2 not feature the
VASTLY popular "Heroes" aspect from Warcraft 3? Because
Bioware, just like DA and ME, while Warcraft and Starcraft are VERY
SIMILAR, they are also very different. It is those
differences which define the two games. Not the
similarities. By establishing an IP vastly different from the ME one,
you created something very similar to the Starcraft/Warcraft duality.
You must NOT close the gap betwen the two franchises, instead, you
must ESTABLISH the gap between the two. You guys, as the
developers, have the reigns on this project, and it seems to many people
like you are making decisions that do not suit you in the long term,
nor do they characterise the development style we are used to from
Bioware.

Just a guess, but maybe the other 99.99% of the audience that didn't spent "nearly a thousand" hours on Origins wouldn't be as satisfied with an exact replica in DA2.

MFCell...
Anyways, it's not my job to make sure you guys are doing you job right..

Indeed.

MFCell...

How do you plan on stealing WoW's playerbase if you've already set
your fans on fire with this simple announcement?

Clearly, you have never spent any time on the Blizzard forums.

Modifié par CLime, 13 juillet 2010 - 07:57 .

[CLime]

Double trouble.

Modifié par CLime, 13 juillet 2010 - 07:56 .

[MFCell]

CLime wrote...



Just a guess, but maybe the other 99.99% of the audience that didn't spent "nearly a thousand" hours on Origins wouldn't be as satisfied with an exact replica in DA2.

Or maybe, the fans would be like the SC2 fans, which has a MUCH MUCH larger playerbase than DA and ME combined and a lot have spent WAY MORE than a thousand hours playing, and be completely and totally excited that the game was more or less intact, simply with a new or continued story and updated graphics.

Modifié par MFCell, 13 juillet 2010 - 07:59 .

[tbsking]

MFCell wrote...

CLime wrote...



Just a guess, but maybe the other 99.99% of the audience that didn't spent "nearly a thousand" hours on Origins wouldn't be as satisfied with an exact replica in DA2.

Or maybe, the fans would be like the SC2 fans, which has a MUCH MUCH larger playerbase than DA and ME combined and a lot have spent WAY MORE than a thousand hours playing, and be completely and totally excited that the game was more or less intact, simply with a new story and updated graphics.

I'm inclined to agree. I was expecting in a DA2 a game that was a lot like DA:O with a new story. Instead, DA2 is sounding like a completely different sort of game that only shares the setting. For now, it sounds a lot like a game that I wouldn't be interested in had it not the Dragon Age title.

[AlanC9]

tbsking wrote...
The origins system was the single most unique thing about the game. Critics all universally praised it as a different and novel idea. The return to tactical talent-based combats was also praised by critics as a return to the "golden era" of fantasy RPGs and was also a major draw for older RPG gamers. The idea that it was to be a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate and thus have many "vintage" RPG elements made it stand out in the modern RPG era, and brought it much critical accliam for it.

As a matter of fact, it did all of those things very well. By remaining a "vintage" style RPG it managed to become a big-name company occupying a now-niche genre generally only filled by small indy design companies that simply can't afford more complexity.

So it was a success because it was a vintage style RPG, and it was also a success because it was innovative?

And somehow it's at the magical point where no changes in either direction could possibly make the game better?

Modifié par AlanC9, 13 juillet 2010 - 08:14 .

[tbsking]

AlanC9 wrote...

tbsking wrote...
The origins system was the single most unique thing about the game. Critics all universally praised it as a different and novel idea. The return to tactical talent-based combats was also praised by critics as a return to the "golden era" of fantasy RPGs and was also a major draw for older RPG gamers. The idea that it was to be a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate and thus have many "vintage" RPG elements made it stand out in the modern RPG era, and brought it much critical accliam for it.

As a matter of fact, it did all of those things very well. By remaining a "vintage" style RPG it managed to become a big-name company occupying a now-niche genre generally only filled by small indy design companies that simply can't afford more complexity.

So it was a success because it was a vintage style RPG, and it was also a success because it was innovative?

And somehow it's at the magical point where no changes in either direction could possibly make the game better?

The Origins was the innovation and that made it popular in critics' eyes. However, in terms of actual game content it was a throwback to the classic RPGs, like Baldur's Gate (which they said DA:O was  a spiritual successor to). So yes, it was vintage and innovative at the same time. By being a vintage style game, it then stood out quite considerably from all other moder RPGs.

I personally don't think the proposed changes would be better. I liked it because there was no PC voice, because of the dialogue system, and because of the character creation. The story was also good but as a wise man once said "BioWare doesn't get points for that anymore". What they are offering up is a game that doesn't have any of the things that I and other liked best about DA:O and suddenly I don't want it because it isn't a game that I would want to play.

Is it going to be a good game? I have no doubt. But will it be a game that I, and others on this very forum, want to play? No. It's already lost my interest. I only hope for a return to the very things that made Origins such a great game to play. Any changes they want to make to the graphics or the combat or other features like that are all fine to me, because the one thing that I absolutely loved about DA:O was the way it handled the character.

[FedericoV]

tbsking wrote...


I think it's still a little too early to say that they're making it more casual, at least not until we see some gameplay. But I agree with your first point. I've asked it before so I'll ask it again: Why would they change the exact things that made DA:O sell so well?

Are you sure that "true fans" know why DA:O has sold so well and what feature make the difference, with, I don't know... NWN2 or The Withcer? If I remember correctly those forum were filled with criticism and rants in the days after DA:O's publication, but still it sold more than 3 milions copies...

Maybe marketing was more important than the dialogue tree. Maybe romaces were more important than avaible races or origins. I'm not very much in marketing and video game date sims, but the fact is that we do not know. Imho, what players write in the bioware social network is not the best base to estabilish what made DA:O a best seller.

Maybe, just maybe, Bioware have a standard routine to decide the route they take with every game they publish, that involves both the creative and the marketing side. Maybe they have asked the market what feature was most liked in the game, before they begun the development of the sequel. Maybe, I say just maybe... they know what they're doing. Maybe, just maybe, they care about their fans, old and new alike.

Imho, DA2 would not be a proper sequel to DA:O if it does not contain the following aspects (a part from lore of course): storydriven gameplay, tactical and party based combat, party interaction, choice and consequences, a "deep" rule system. That's the bulk of most RPG for computers and console. Now we still do not know how those elements will be handled in the next game, so I really don't understand all the concerns.

Modifié par FedericoV, 13 juillet 2010 - 08:33 .

[DarkwanderStorm]

OMG THE CHOICE WHEEL DIFFERENT WAY TO ORGANIZE TEXT



PARADOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



-head explodes-

[Kami102]

DarkwanderStorm wrote...

OMG THE CHOICE WHEEL DIFFERENT WAY TO ORGANIZE TEXT

PARADOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-head explodes-

Yeah guys, I mean seriously

How is this:



ANY different than this:




<_<  Calm down people, jeez

[GammaRayJim]

tbsking wrote...

GammaRayJim wrote...

I think that this rush to judgment is a little extreme too. Barely anything has been released. A company's motives for the choices and directions that they take their product is ultimately their decision. That they listen at all through these forums is great but they are under no obligation to do anything that we want. We as consumers can choose not to purchase what they are offering and IMO based on what little info has been released that decision at this point would be a little premature.
David Gaider in another thread said something to the effect that they are telling a story about the world of Thedas and the Dragon Age. After I read that I immediately compared it to Steven Erikson "Malazan" series of fantasy novels that spans quite a few years and is told by different characters point of view. BUT it's all one story. The Malazan series split up the main characters and did not bring them back together again (those still alive) until the seventh novel. Hell book five didn't even have any of the main character but instead introduced a whole new set of them. Same can be said for Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series. Each chapter is told from the point of view of a specific character but it moves the whole story forward. I think maybe we should look at this as one big story be told from different points of view.
I also think this ten year story of Hawke maybe a good way to segue into the story of the Morrigan's child. What better way of filling the gap and age the child past the diaper years (boring) than with the story of someone else (just a theory).
Anyway I am looking forward to it either way. It really has for me been like playing all the fantasy novels I love to read.

And I'm all for making the Lord of the Rings of video game settings. But did any of those books leave the heavy implication that a character would return in the next? Did they end with the statement that "his tale is not yet over..." or did they leave each ending fairly clear that the character was alive/dead, with a happy/unhappy ending on the way, or that he at the very least has his tale all completed?

Because my main problem with DA2 is that the Warden's story isn't over. Just from my own tale:

Warden follows Morrigan
Architect is dead and Darkspawn still hate people
Possible Exalted March

And an Orlesian Warden's ending states that there are rumors of a Blight in Orlais and he never returns.

So what happened? As a smart person stated a few posts above, it would be highly inappropriate for Hawke to sum these lines up. I mean, Hawke doesn't care about Morrigan or her baby past the point where she's an enemy, nor is he responisble for preventing an end to the Darkspawn. These are all things that only make sense for the Warden to solve.

I couldn't agree with you more I got similar endings in my play throughs as well. And sure there are definitely loose threads to probably most everyones play thhroughs of Origins, Awakenings ect. All I am saying is that who is to say it is not over and that the writers have a very creative way of tying it into Hawke's story.

I would like to see my Wardens return and continue on the story but I am also curious about the world of Thedas and where the creators of this world are going to take us. Do I have concerns that my Warden's story will never truly be resolved...sure, but I am optimistic that somehow, someway it will. And until it is comfirmed that it isn't going to be I will continue to remain optimistic.

[MFCell]

I believe a lot of us are confused about the fact that our story was not over, yet we don't get to finish it, either.



I believe they call this, blowing smoke. Bioware was just blowing smoke when they told us the story was not over, when they had Morrigan leave us, when The Blight in Orlais was mentioned, it was all just blowing smoke.



I swear to god, if Hawke ends up in a relationship with Morrigan, I'm going to fly to Edmonton, and toilet paper your offices every night for MONTHS.

[tbsking]

FedericoV wrote...

tbsking wrote...


I think it's still a little too early to say that they're making it more casual, at least not until we see some gameplay. But I agree with your first point. I've asked it before so I'll ask it again: Why would they change the exact things that made DA:O sell so well?

Are you sure that "true fans" know why DA:O has sold so well and what feature make the difference, with, I don't know... NWN2 or The Withcer? If I remember correctly those forum were filled with criticism and rants in the days after DA:O's publication, but still it sold more than 3 milions copies...

Maybe marketing was more important than the dialogue tree. Maybe romaces were more important than avaible races or origins. I'm not very much in marketing and video game date sims, but the fact is that we do not know. Imho, what players write in the bioware social network is not the best base to estabilish what made DA:O a best seller.

Maybe, just maybe, Bioware have a standard routine to decide the route they take with every game they publish, that involves both the creative and the marketing side. Maybe they have asked the market what feature was most liked in the game, before they begun the development of the sequel. Maybe, I say just maybe... they know what they're doing. Maybe, just maybe, they care about their fans, old and new alike.

Imho, DA2 would not be a proper sequel to DA:O if it does not contain the following aspects (a part from lore of course): storydriven gameplay, tactical and party based combat, party interaction, choice and consequences, a "deep" rule system. That's the bulk of most RPG for computers and console. Now we still do not know how those elements will be handled in the next game, so I really don't understand all the concerns.

As I recall correctly, the marketing for DA:O was just horrible. The trailers when the game was finally nearing release were very much attrocious (and if you don't believe me Youtube the sex and violence trailer). The early CGI trailers and TV spots were okay, but misleading for some. From the video game magazine point of view, the major hyped point was the Origins.

And the reviews were all positive across the board, except for some that wanted the graphics to be James Cameron worthy. Here, the developers are changing some serious things about the game. Things that really defined the style of the first.

I'm not saying this game won't sell well, but I am saying it's a pretty dumb move to make such drastic changes when all signs point to the first one being good enough. I point again to the example of Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2. Very little was changed between the two, boats of cash and critical praise were made.

[TMZuk]

MFCell wrote...

I believe a lot of us are confused about the fact that our story was not over, yet we don't get to finish it, either.

I believe they call this, blowing smoke. Bioware was just blowing smoke when they told us the story was not over, when they had Morrigan leave us, when The Blight in Orlais was mentioned, it was all just blowing smoke.

I swear to god, if Hawke ends up in a relationship with Morrigan, I'm going to fly to Edmonton, and toilet paper your offices every night for MONTHS.

I'll send you a few extra rolls you can bring with you.

[MFCell]

Kami102 wrote...

DarkwanderStorm wrote...

OMG THE CHOICE WHEEL DIFFERENT WAY TO ORGANIZE TEXT

PARADOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-head explodes-

Yeah guys, I mean seriously

How is this:



ANY different than this:




<_<  Calm down people, jeez

Sigh. Ok.

If that wheel said NOTHING, absolutely nothing, and still had pickable options, you could play a char based on what sides of the wheel you pick.  If your good, pick the top right, evil, bottom right.  If your good and want to explore conversations, pick top left.  If your evil and want to explore conversations, pick bottom left. Want to move the convo along without problems? Pick the Middle right.

With pure dialogue options, you have to actually read and read INTO the comment to see what your saying.  It means that dialogue not only seems more realistic because you actually say what you picked, but you feel more connected to the charachter because your picking the option you think is best, not the option in the top right because your a good guy.

In short, dialogue wheel runs dialogue completely.

[tbsking]

I have no problem with a wheel, per se. It's not something that strikes me as too much different from a list. But I hate a voiced PC. It feels like you're giving me the illusion of a completely blank-slate character that I get to design from the ground up only for him to have a set sort of personality. If you're going to give me a voiced PC, then don't bother allowing me to think I have some control over him, just go ahead and write the cutscene so I can watch.