I don't mind that kind of hands-off combat in a game or two. It gives the game a different kind of strategy, and it's completely optional (I think you can set battle speed in the game so if you want really fast-paced menu selection you can always go for that kind of combat too, I suppose).
I enjoy all sorts of combat setups myself, though. KOTOR, FFXII, Ninja Gaiden, Gears, Pokemon even. I tend to be happy with the variety.
You know, sarcastically simplifying the plot like that doesn't make a point at all. You can do that to so many amazing films and then say "wow how cliche" but the point is you can't judge a plot on a 2-line synopsis. The character development and interaction is what keeps things interesting.
I can also go ahead and say something like "man crash-lands on the shores of an unfamiliar land. At first they see each other as enemies but eventually he adopts their way of life and and fights on their side. Woooo how cliche!" But that hardly does SHOGUN by James Clavell and justice, now does it?
By the way, I personally hated Xenosaga's character design and the way they told the story. The plot was fine, but the way it unfolded was convoluted and drawn-out to the point that I was very angry at the game designers. The game's story wasn't its biggest weakness by a long shot, but I really don't see how you can bring it up as an example of something "better" than FFXII's. Of course, that's subjective too, but at least my issues are with the storyTELLING and not the basic premise (there's almost NEVER an original premise in video games anyway).
It took me since Halloween to finally beat FFXII, so the length was definitely an issue, but on the other hand it gave me something to play for that long so I can't complain. I agree about the whole "lost in the story after taking a break" problem -- they needed a "Theater Mode" where you could replay cutscenes you've already seen. That would have made me happy because I liked them and it would have also served as a "recap" if anyone were to need one.
As for the combat system, it was basically an improved version of KOTOR's (the Gambits being the key difference, and a great one IMO).
FFXII is actually one of the best games in the series, if not THE best; however, it's one of those games that I think you need to really "immerse" yourself in to fully enjoy, and though I managed it many gamers I know did not. Some games (Elder Scrolls for instance) make that easier to do, I suppose.
Really though, much of your criticism was subjective, a matter of personal taste. So I certainly can't argue with much of it, though I must wholly disagree with the claim that in the game Square focused on graphics over story. FFXII has perhaps the most complex and fleshed-out story of any game I have played in the last few years. Heck, since Baldur's Gate 2 probably. The story may not be to one's liking, but it's definitely one they put a LOT of effort into. Not to mention a huge amount of relevant dialogue. Graphics over story? See Gears of War:-P (not that I mind; Gears is intense and fun as heck; FFXII satisfied me for "story" where Gears did for action).
Ok how the hell was I modded troll there? The post has gotten plenty of good, informative responses. Sheesh some folks just shouldn't get mod points I guess...
Heh, see, I personally never understood that. Why buy a giant TV with only SD in the first place:) it looks so much worse than on a "normal" size (say, at or below 32") TV where the image isn't overly blown up. Oh well, whatevs. Though as far as Wii vs 360 vs PS3 goes, I don't think people are really buying Wiis because they feel their TV isn't good enough for the 360 but just fine for the Wii... honestly, within the next few years (during this console generation) I imagine enough folks will have HDTVs to make Nintendo's choice seem more dubious.
By the way, that statistic you mentioned... I wonder how different it would look if one limited the "households" surveyed to those that have (or plan on buying shortly) a new-ish video game console. I mean, I'm thinking a large number of households with "standard" TVs aren't in the market for a video game console in the first place (let alone a Wii in particular)
Pulling advance screenings will help reduce piracy? Hah, yeah, absolutely. I wonder how many people in the MPAA are making their careers on spreading FUD about film piracy and pushing various "solutions" to it. Oh well, as if anyone other than movie critics really care about advance screenings much. I'm just surprised how aggressive and seemingly desperate MPAA/RIAA tactics have gotten in the last few months...
Meh. I've had an HDTV since before I bought even my original Xbox. We have that and a flat-panel nowadays. The thing is, I will have to choose: more "interesting" controls on the Wii, vs. better graphics on the 360, for every cross-platform title I'd want to buy.
Besides, HDTV is more widespread than you think, I'd say.
To claim that it's an "example of everything that's wrong with games nowadays" is a bit harsh and shortsighted IMO, no offense intended. It depends on what games one enjoys. One of my favorite games of the last generation, Ninja Gaiden for Xbox, had fantastic cinematics throughout the campaign and they most certainly didn't take away from the game. Rather, they were almost like a "reward" of sorts between chapters.
This year I played through Final Fantasy XII, and its biggest drawback (assuming one likes the game mechanics, etc. of course) is that it doesn't have a "Theater Mode" where you can re-watch its cutscenes (some of which are in-game graphics, others are gorgeous FMV).
The games you mention as your favorites are great, although I am more of a Baldur's Gate guy myself ~_^ Actually, Baldur's Gate had an opening cinematic featuring Sarevok, and interestingly enough that is the "image" of the character that stuck with you throughout the game.
That's actually an interesting phenomenon -- that even if you see a character's "cinematic" version for a few seconds in a game, that is the image of the character you remember best when looking back at the game.
As in-game graphics improve, pre-rendered cutscenes will be seen less and less, but for the time being, as long as they are well-done and well-integrated, they take nothing away from a game. Take, for instance, the ending of Shadow of the Collossus. In fact, if that were done with FFXII-style pre-rendered graphics, it would have been that much better IMO.
I can definitely think of some examples of poor integration/execution, though. Take Xenosaga, for instance. Hours upon hours of cutscenes to sit through, most of which are like a bad anime.
Yeah there really hasn't been a movie based on a game that ended up being any good... although Street Fighter was good for a laugh and most of the parts were well-cast (folks take that movie seriously for some reason...). But yah can't think of a good one. The best so far is probably Silent Hill, but it's nevertheless quite unsatisfying as well.
Well, a good one's gotta come out sooner or later. If Goldeneye and Riddick can be the exceptions to the games-based-on-movies-suck rule, then maybe we'll eventually see something go the other way around.
I agree that they are two different things, of course. But using higher-resolution textures than the screen resolution doesn't make sense to me, even if it weren't a question of hardware limitations (storage, bandwidth, etc.). Most textures are indeed the sizes you mention, and naturally since they are *below* screen resolution, it's clear that more HD space (and RAM) for textures can't hurt.
Anyway I think folks are losing sight of what I was replying to. I was asked why the storage requirements wouldn't continue to grow exponentially with console generations. Well, they *can* (heck you could make a 300-CD game years ago if you felt like it, just put in tons of assets...), but they don't have to. And one of the reasons they don't have to is that TV resolution isn't going up exponentially so I think texture size is eventually going to stop increasing much.
Actually last generation's Xbox supported 720p and 1080i. The Cube supported 480p only... speaking of which, that's the best the Wii does as well but I guess Nintendo's just weird like that.
Also, textures aren't higher for 1080p as opposed to 1080i, that's interlaced vs progressive display and doesn't mean there's more pixels in any texture image.
LOL good thing you posted as Anonymous Coward because that's just stupid to say. My response was to someone asking why games wouldn't necessarily take up exponentially more space through console generations. And one of the reasons is that TV resolution doesn't grow exponentially. Not even close, in fact.
Plus the original Xbox supported 1080i and 720p. Only the upcoming "Elite" will support 1080 progressive.
I believe that we're supposed to pick games to play without an Internet connection... otherwise I'd have chosen something like Guild Wars because I enjoy its PVP, heh
That's what's cool about Oblivion -- the Radiant AI is sophisticated enough that you could create scenarios in which you could have numerous outcomes based on how the NPCs choose to respond. And how they respond isn't always easy to predict. So, it's not so much about "finding something in a dungeon" -- I agree that that indeed would be boring (and why I never had any fun with NWN's toolkit) -- as it is about constructing scenarios which can "play themselves out" in interesting ways.
Well for starters, when texture resolution approaches TV resolution, you're done. Second, sound quality can only get so high before further improvements become negligible.
Really, you have PS2 games on multiple DVDs and you have Oblivion on one. I think some folks just are better at getting a lot of quality content onto one disc... or at least try harder.
Oblivion, as long as I'm allowed to take the Elder Scrolls Construction Set along as well. The fact that you can make your own EVERYTHING with the editor means there's near-infinite gameplay available.
Naturally I'm including Shivering Isles if I'm allowed. Great expansion, and tons of extra assets for the editor.
Lack of space on a DVD means to me that these guys aren't using the space well... to say that they're limited by 360 not being HD-DVD... it seems like maybe they're just lazy about how they're going about making the game look good visually. Either that or they're not compressing audio well.
I get the feeling that some devs are just better at using what space they have available. That is, I'm not so sure GTAIV is going to look and sound better than even Oblivion. I don't see it being larger...
Paid for itself = break even. From then on = profitable. So you've answered your own question.
Don't take what I said as a "dig" at SONY. The fact of the matter is, both Microsoft and SONY are fully capable of just saying "screw it we're bored of the gaming industry" and kill off that whole branch of business if they decided it's nothing more than a liability. SCE was something like $2 billion in the red at the end of the 2006 fiscal year. So, it's a genuine concern on my part. I believe SCE has more than broken even since its inception, but I wonder if, after the PS2 stops selling as well as it does now, if the PS3 will take over as the "profitable" item. (There's always the PSP, too, but that on its own probably isn't enough.)
Well, things are going according to plan it seems. Microsoft knew they'd lose a lot on the Xbox generation but would position themselves for profit in the next, and that's exactly what they've done.
Microsoft has LOTS of money, and can afford to make long-term investments that are in the billions-of-dollars range. Keyword: investments; they are not just throwing money away here. Their business model seems to be working, so good for them. (As long as it means I get to play good games on my 360 ^_^ otherwise I don't care)
I wonder what position SONY is in... is SCE looking to break even on the PS3 at *any* point in the future? Maybe, maybe not... the money they've spent on marketing alone, coupled with the losses on each console... the PS2 is probably covering a lot of that but I doubt it's anywhere near all of it.
I still haven't finished Twilight Princess and haven't even started Shivering Isles (Oblivion)... agh and then there's God of War 2 which I still need to grab. With Forza Motorsport for my 360 just around the corner, there's just no shortage of stuff to play so I'm glad I don't need to add to my "backlog." I haven't even unwrapped KOTOR 2 yet!
If all you have is a 360, Forza Motorsport 2 should be good enough to last until... Unreal Tournament 3 I suppose. Is that the next "big title" now that Mass Effect's been delayed?
For one thing, games are getting better and better when it comes to AI every year, and it's not "just" because it's hard. It's also because good AI is resource-intensive, both in terms of processing power and in terms of storage space (depending on what you want to do)... on and in terms of time it requires to develop.
A simple rules-based system that has a bunch of if-then triggers is sufficient for a lot of things, but once you get into sophisticated behavior the number of rules becomes simply to large to generate, and the process for selecting the best action nontrivial as rules get bunched together due to equivalence, etc.
Statistical learning systems (Bayesian, etc) can be very powerful, but have not been seen in games until recently (for a great example check out Forza Motorsport 2 coming out in May, for which the AI was developed in Cambridge, UK, the MS Research building next-door to where I took my lectures on comp. text and speech processing ^_^).
The main reason that game AI is not as advanced as folks might expect is that "sophisticated," learning AI takes a significant time to develop and train. Most importantly, it requires expertise that goes beyond just being able to code C++ or Java or CLIPS or what have you. People with this expertise don't go into game programming because there they get underpaid. Rather, they go to Google or Microsoft or Yahoo or make their own company. (Indeed, Forza's AI was developed by MS rather than a 3rd party middleware dev house.) Why? BECAUSE THE REAL MONEY IS IN SEARCH!!! That's where the AI experts go, folks.
My Xbox 360 broke, but it wasn't the HD that went bad. It was some "general hardware error." So I called them, they told me to send it no question asked, and sent me a working one back within a week. Very good service, and I just played some PC and PS2 in the meantime.
So, yes, quality is not so great as far as durability goes, but the customer service mitigates that dramatically.
Phil's reply to my question was somewhat avoidant... but I suppose that's to be expected. PS3 losing exclusives is a result of there being a relatively small number of PS3s out there (therefore a small potential audience for any title, however amazing). So if publishers want to even break even on a game, they currently need to go multiplatform to maximize their audience. Games are expensive nowadays, dev teams are bigger than ever and game devs command high-enough salaries.
You just said your income is in the top 5%... how does that invalidate even my unfounded assumption:-P
And wait, so are you saying that Chinese people haven't bought Vista because they "don't give a fuck" and because it makes their games run slower? I'm just throwing stuff out there, if you can actually provide us with something correct then please do. Saying you pay more for your colleagues at a restaurant is pointless.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't mind that kind of hands-off combat in a game or two. It gives the game a different kind of strategy, and it's completely optional (I think you can set battle speed in the game so if you want really fast-paced menu selection you can always go for that kind of combat too, I suppose).
I enjoy all sorts of combat setups myself, though. KOTOR, FFXII, Ninja Gaiden, Gears, Pokemon even. I tend to be happy with the variety.
You know, sarcastically simplifying the plot like that doesn't make a point at all. You can do that to so many amazing films and then say "wow how cliche" but the point is you can't judge a plot on a 2-line synopsis. The character development and interaction is what keeps things interesting. I can also go ahead and say something like "man crash-lands on the shores of an unfamiliar land. At first they see each other as enemies but eventually he adopts their way of life and and fights on their side. Woooo how cliche!" But that hardly does SHOGUN by James Clavell and justice, now does it? By the way, I personally hated Xenosaga's character design and the way they told the story. The plot was fine, but the way it unfolded was convoluted and drawn-out to the point that I was very angry at the game designers. The game's story wasn't its biggest weakness by a long shot, but I really don't see how you can bring it up as an example of something "better" than FFXII's. Of course, that's subjective too, but at least my issues are with the storyTELLING and not the basic premise (there's almost NEVER an original premise in video games anyway).
It took me since Halloween to finally beat FFXII, so the length was definitely an issue, but on the other hand it gave me something to play for that long so I can't complain. I agree about the whole "lost in the story after taking a break" problem -- they needed a "Theater Mode" where you could replay cutscenes you've already seen. That would have made me happy because I liked them and it would have also served as a "recap" if anyone were to need one.
:-P (not that I mind; Gears is intense and fun as heck; FFXII satisfied me for "story" where Gears did for action).
As for the combat system, it was basically an improved version of KOTOR's (the Gambits being the key difference, and a great one IMO).
FFXII is actually one of the best games in the series, if not THE best; however, it's one of those games that I think you need to really "immerse" yourself in to fully enjoy, and though I managed it many gamers I know did not. Some games (Elder Scrolls for instance) make that easier to do, I suppose.
Really though, much of your criticism was subjective, a matter of personal taste. So I certainly can't argue with much of it, though I must wholly disagree with the claim that in the game Square focused on graphics over story. FFXII has perhaps the most complex and fleshed-out story of any game I have played in the last few years. Heck, since Baldur's Gate 2 probably. The story may not be to one's liking, but it's definitely one they put a LOT of effort into. Not to mention a huge amount of relevant dialogue. Graphics over story? See Gears of War
Ok how the hell was I modded troll there? The post has gotten plenty of good, informative responses. Sheesh some folks just shouldn't get mod points I guess...
Heh, see, I personally never understood that. Why buy a giant TV with only SD in the first place :) it looks so much worse than on a "normal" size (say, at or below 32") TV where the image isn't overly blown up. Oh well, whatevs. Though as far as Wii vs 360 vs PS3 goes, I don't think people are really buying Wiis because they feel their TV isn't good enough for the 360 but just fine for the Wii... honestly, within the next few years (during this console generation) I imagine enough folks will have HDTVs to make Nintendo's choice seem more dubious.
By the way, that statistic you mentioned... I wonder how different it would look if one limited the "households" surveyed to those that have (or plan on buying shortly) a new-ish video game console. I mean, I'm thinking a large number of households with "standard" TVs aren't in the market for a video game console in the first place (let alone a Wii in particular)
Pulling advance screenings will help reduce piracy? Hah, yeah, absolutely. I wonder how many people in the MPAA are making their careers on spreading FUD about film piracy and pushing various "solutions" to it. Oh well, as if anyone other than movie critics really care about advance screenings much. I'm just surprised how aggressive and seemingly desperate MPAA/RIAA tactics have gotten in the last few months...
Meh. I've had an HDTV since before I bought even my original Xbox. We have that and a flat-panel nowadays. The thing is, I will have to choose: more "interesting" controls on the Wii, vs. better graphics on the 360, for every cross-platform title I'd want to buy.
Besides, HDTV is more widespread than you think, I'd say.
To claim that it's an "example of everything that's wrong with games nowadays" is a bit harsh and shortsighted IMO, no offense intended. It depends on what games one enjoys. One of my favorite games of the last generation, Ninja Gaiden for Xbox, had fantastic cinematics throughout the campaign and they most certainly didn't take away from the game. Rather, they were almost like a "reward" of sorts between chapters.
This year I played through Final Fantasy XII, and its biggest drawback (assuming one likes the game mechanics, etc. of course) is that it doesn't have a "Theater Mode" where you can re-watch its cutscenes (some of which are in-game graphics, others are gorgeous FMV).
The games you mention as your favorites are great, although I am more of a Baldur's Gate guy myself ~_^ Actually, Baldur's Gate had an opening cinematic featuring Sarevok, and interestingly enough that is the "image" of the character that stuck with you throughout the game.
That's actually an interesting phenomenon -- that even if you see a character's "cinematic" version for a few seconds in a game, that is the image of the character you remember best when looking back at the game.
As in-game graphics improve, pre-rendered cutscenes will be seen less and less, but for the time being, as long as they are well-done and well-integrated, they take nothing away from a game. Take, for instance, the ending of Shadow of the Collossus. In fact, if that were done with FFXII-style pre-rendered graphics, it would have been that much better IMO.
I can definitely think of some examples of poor integration/execution, though. Take Xenosaga, for instance. Hours upon hours of cutscenes to sit through, most of which are like a bad anime.
Yeah there really hasn't been a movie based on a game that ended up being any good... although Street Fighter was good for a laugh and most of the parts were well-cast (folks take that movie seriously for some reason...). But yah can't think of a good one. The best so far is probably Silent Hill, but it's nevertheless quite unsatisfying as well.
Well, a good one's gotta come out sooner or later. If Goldeneye and Riddick can be the exceptions to the games-based-on-movies-suck rule, then maybe we'll eventually see something go the other way around.
I agree that they are two different things, of course. But using higher-resolution textures than the screen resolution doesn't make sense to me, even if it weren't a question of hardware limitations (storage, bandwidth, etc.). Most textures are indeed the sizes you mention, and naturally since they are *below* screen resolution, it's clear that more HD space (and RAM) for textures can't hurt.
Anyway I think folks are losing sight of what I was replying to. I was asked why the storage requirements wouldn't continue to grow exponentially with console generations. Well, they *can* (heck you could make a 300-CD game years ago if you felt like it, just put in tons of assets...), but they don't have to. And one of the reasons they don't have to is that TV resolution isn't going up exponentially so I think texture size is eventually going to stop increasing much.
Actually last generation's Xbox supported 720p and 1080i. The Cube supported 480p only... speaking of which, that's the best the Wii does as well but I guess Nintendo's just weird like that.
Also, textures aren't higher for 1080p as opposed to 1080i, that's interlaced vs progressive display and doesn't mean there's more pixels in any texture image.
I don't think you know what exponents are...
LOL good thing you posted as Anonymous Coward because that's just stupid to say. My response was to someone asking why games wouldn't necessarily take up exponentially more space through console generations. And one of the reasons is that TV resolution doesn't grow exponentially. Not even close, in fact.
Plus the original Xbox supported 1080i and 720p. Only the upcoming "Elite" will support 1080 progressive.
I believe that we're supposed to pick games to play without an Internet connection... otherwise I'd have chosen something like Guild Wars because I enjoy its PVP, heh
That's what's cool about Oblivion -- the Radiant AI is sophisticated enough that you could create scenarios in which you could have numerous outcomes based on how the NPCs choose to respond. And how they respond isn't always easy to predict. So, it's not so much about "finding something in a dungeon" -- I agree that that indeed would be boring (and why I never had any fun with NWN's toolkit) -- as it is about constructing scenarios which can "play themselves out" in interesting ways.
Well for starters, when texture resolution approaches TV resolution, you're done. Second, sound quality can only get so high before further improvements become negligible.
Really, you have PS2 games on multiple DVDs and you have Oblivion on one. I think some folks just are better at getting a lot of quality content onto one disc... or at least try harder.
Oblivion, as long as I'm allowed to take the Elder Scrolls Construction Set along as well. The fact that you can make your own EVERYTHING with the editor means there's near-infinite gameplay available.
Naturally I'm including Shivering Isles if I'm allowed. Great expansion, and tons of extra assets for the editor.
Lack of space on a DVD means to me that these guys aren't using the space well... to say that they're limited by 360 not being HD-DVD... it seems like maybe they're just lazy about how they're going about making the game look good visually. Either that or they're not compressing audio well.
I get the feeling that some devs are just better at using what space they have available. That is, I'm not so sure GTAIV is going to look and sound better than even Oblivion. I don't see it being larger...
Paid for itself = break even. From then on = profitable. So you've answered your own question.
Don't take what I said as a "dig" at SONY. The fact of the matter is, both Microsoft and SONY are fully capable of just saying "screw it we're bored of the gaming industry" and kill off that whole branch of business if they decided it's nothing more than a liability. SCE was something like $2 billion in the red at the end of the 2006 fiscal year. So, it's a genuine concern on my part. I believe SCE has more than broken even since its inception, but I wonder if, after the PS2 stops selling as well as it does now, if the PS3 will take over as the "profitable" item. (There's always the PSP, too, but that on its own probably isn't enough.)
Well, things are going according to plan it seems. Microsoft knew they'd lose a lot on the Xbox generation but would position themselves for profit in the next, and that's exactly what they've done.
Microsoft has LOTS of money, and can afford to make long-term investments that are in the billions-of-dollars range. Keyword: investments; they are not just throwing money away here. Their business model seems to be working, so good for them. (As long as it means I get to play good games on my 360 ^_^ otherwise I don't care)
I wonder what position SONY is in... is SCE looking to break even on the PS3 at *any* point in the future? Maybe, maybe not... the money they've spent on marketing alone, coupled with the losses on each console... the PS2 is probably covering a lot of that but I doubt it's anywhere near all of it.
I still haven't finished Twilight Princess and haven't even started Shivering Isles (Oblivion)... agh and then there's God of War 2 which I still need to grab. With Forza Motorsport for my 360 just around the corner, there's just no shortage of stuff to play so I'm glad I don't need to add to my "backlog." I haven't even unwrapped KOTOR 2 yet!
If all you have is a 360, Forza Motorsport 2 should be good enough to last until... Unreal Tournament 3 I suppose. Is that the next "big title" now that Mass Effect's been delayed?
For one thing, games are getting better and better when it comes to AI every year, and it's not "just" because it's hard. It's also because good AI is resource-intensive, both in terms of processing power and in terms of storage space (depending on what you want to do) ... on and in terms of time it requires to develop.
A simple rules-based system that has a bunch of if-then triggers is sufficient for a lot of things, but once you get into sophisticated behavior the number of rules becomes simply to large to generate, and the process for selecting the best action nontrivial as rules get bunched together due to equivalence, etc.
Statistical learning systems (Bayesian, etc) can be very powerful, but have not been seen in games until recently (for a great example check out Forza Motorsport 2 coming out in May, for which the AI was developed in Cambridge, UK, the MS Research building next-door to where I took my lectures on comp. text and speech processing ^_^).
The main reason that game AI is not as advanced as folks might expect is that "sophisticated," learning AI takes a significant time to develop and train. Most importantly, it requires expertise that goes beyond just being able to code C++ or Java or CLIPS or what have you. People with this expertise don't go into game programming because there they get underpaid. Rather, they go to Google or Microsoft or Yahoo or make their own company. (Indeed, Forza's AI was developed by MS rather than a 3rd party middleware dev house.) Why? BECAUSE THE REAL MONEY IS IN SEARCH!!! That's where the AI experts go, folks.
My Xbox 360 broke, but it wasn't the HD that went bad. It was some "general hardware error." So I called them, they told me to send it no question asked, and sent me a working one back within a week. Very good service, and I just played some PC and PS2 in the meantime. So, yes, quality is not so great as far as durability goes, but the customer service mitigates that dramatically.
Phil's reply to my question was somewhat avoidant... but I suppose that's to be expected. PS3 losing exclusives is a result of there being a relatively small number of PS3s out there (therefore a small potential audience for any title, however amazing). So if publishers want to even break even on a game, they currently need to go multiplatform to maximize their audience. Games are expensive nowadays, dev teams are bigger than ever and game devs command high-enough salaries.
You just said your income is in the top 5%... how does that invalidate even my unfounded assumption :-P
And wait, so are you saying that Chinese people haven't bought Vista because they "don't give a fuck" and because it makes their games run slower? I'm just throwing stuff out there, if you can actually provide us with something correct then please do. Saying you pay more for your colleagues at a restaurant is pointless.