Allan Adham, BlizzCon 2018 "we have many of our best developers now working on new mobile titles across all of our IPs. some are with external parties... many are being developed internally." + Show Spoiler +
Blizzard's Declining Player Base On PC 46 Million MAUs a year ago. 37 Million MAUs today.
Three months ago Blizzard had 37 million MAUs. Blizzard released the major WoW expansion. WoW is a big money maker for Blizzard and they claimed it sold several million copies. And yet, Blizzard's player base remained steady at 37 million MAUs. Blizzard's PC player base is bleeding users.
Good Mobile Outcome Diablo on Switch is 95% as good as Diablo on Console. Its a damn good port... it feels like Diablo3 wasn't even made for PC or Console. The Switch version is so good it feels like the game from Day 1 was intended for Switch.
Where Have The High Profile Devs Disappeared? David Kim, Dustin Browder and several other top developers have disappeared to other projects. Where are they? Probably working on mobile games. Dustin Browder is a VP. He worked on 2 big PC games then got promoted to VP. So they were happy with his work. Where is he? Probably working on a mobile game.
I can't blame any one who earns their living making games wanting to work on mobile. Its where the money is.
Blizzard's PC User base is in decline. It has been declining for a while now. Its not like they've hired thousands of new people. Nothing new was announced at Blizzcon for PC and its not like BLizzard makes 10 new PC games a year the way EA does. Therefore, they are moving employees from PC to Mobile and shifting more emphasis to Mobile.
Wait. Is this the same forum that spouted unending vitriol at David Kim every single balance patch?! And Dustin Browder took his own share of grief here for simplifying SC2 (what does he know, he's a Command and Conquer dev). Now you suddenly miss him? Wouldn't you rather they fuck up whatever mobile title you think they're working on than that they fuck up Diablo 4, Warcraft 4 or whatever your idea of what Blizzard should release next for PC is?
So yeah, you're being hyperbolic. Blizzard hasn't released a new PC game in a while, and of course WoW numbers were going to drop off at some point. Overwatch also isn't the new hot multiplayer game that all the kids play (that's Fortnite now, and some other snowflake tomorrow), but it has a solid fanbase. Users dropping off is only natural. They'll come back when Blizzard releases a new AAA title. Mobile games aren't AAA titles, but Blizzard has shown they can do mobile games quite successfully (hearthstone). Whether it's your thing or not, there is no real reason why Blizzard can't do different types of games at once. Amazingly, they can develop Diablo 4 and Diablo: Immortal at the same time.
On November 10 2018 03:04 Acrofales wrote: They'll come back when Blizzard releases a new AAA title. Mobile games aren't AAA titles,
Blizzard rarely releases AAA titles.
Blizzard maximized its PC revenue a few years ago. They've had a few years now to replace that revenue and even grow beyond the max they hit a while ago. They have failed to do so. How many more years do we have to wait for this new PC AAA title? we can wait.. ATVI investors can not wait.
ATVI is all about double digit or better revenue growth. And that is mobile.. not PC. PCs massive growing days are over.
it'll be interesting to see if there is a GSL in 2019. maybe we can get Tastosis commentating some Clash of CLans games?
On November 10 2018 03:04 Acrofales wrote: So yeah, you're being hyperbolic. Blizzard hasn't released a new PC game in a while,
i provided the #s. 46 million down to 37 million. revenue is down as well. in ATVI's world anything less than 6% revenue growth is very bad news. Otherwise investors can stick their money some place else and take way less risk.
They can wait if there's something short term to supplement the income while the AAA are coming down the pipeline. I think you're overall being extremely hyperbolic.. They're expanding into mobile, extensively, thats for sure. I don't think that means we'll see no AAA games. It'll be a huge part of their business like every other AAA company like Nintendo, EA, Ubisoft, SquareEnix, etc. Although, unfortunately, I'm not sure if RTS is included in that AAA future. (They do have an MMO mobile RTS in the works)
I find it strange because I dont think Activision proper has started pushing out mobile games yet (that we know of)? It's just a couple CoD games?
On November 10 2018 03:36 lestye wrote: I think you're overall being extremely hyperbolic.. They're expanding into mobile, extensively, thats for sure. I don't think that means we'll see no AAA games.
exactly where am i wildly hyperbolic? you realize the tastosis comment is a joke right?
We don't see many AAA PC games now. The pace of AAA game development is not accelerating.
do you consider Diablo:Switch a AAA game or a mobile game or? its a portable, handheld Diablo3 and its really, damn good.
i think Diablo3:Switch defies categorization. However, it is definitely not a PC game.
No Diablo Immortal on PC. Just plain, No. I appreciate Blizzard's honesty. It lets me know where their priorities are.
I'm 100% okay with Blizzard also developing mobile titles, as it doesn't seem to be preventing them from working on PC titles. More power to them, especially as this is likely to expand our community of Blizzard fans
On November 10 2018 03:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I'm 100% okay with Blizzard also developing mobile titles, as it doesn't seem to be preventing them from working on PC titles. More power to them, especially as this is likely to expand our community of Blizzard fans
It never will. Developing for PC is nothing like developing for phones. They are completely different markets without a lot of cross over in design concepts. This is just Blizzard broadening their portfolio.
On November 10 2018 03:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I'm 100% okay with Blizzard also developing mobile titles, as it doesn't seem to be preventing them from working on PC titles. More power to them, especially as this is likely to expand our community of Blizzard fans
It never will. Developing for PC is nothing like developing for phones. They are completely different markets without a lot of cross over in design concepts. This is just Blizzard broadening their portfolio.
Works for me, and I'm sure it works for millions of others!
A WoW expansion occurs every 2 years. Beyond that the last Blizzard AAA title was Overwatch. Released in May 2016. It was first announced at Blizzcon 2014. So it took 18 months after its 1st Blizzcon appearance before getting released on PC.
Nothing was announced for PC at Blizzcon 2018. Therefore, its safe to assume no new PC games will be released for the next 12 months. Should a PC game get announced at BlizzCon 2019 then its at least 1 year before the game is launched.
So Blizzard's next big PC offerings will arrive in 2 years. The WoW expansion and maybe another game. That is a big IF though seeing as Blizzard hasn't announced anything yet.
in the meantime, look for Blizzard's MAU's and revenue to continue to decline over the next two years and look for ATVI to demand cost-cutting especially when ATVI's MAU's are declining.
i think we'll see Blizzard's MAU's fall by approximately 5 million in the next year. Revenue will fall with it. The one big thing that can stop this is a really good Diablo:Immortal release in the next 12 months.
None of this is surprising for anyone who follows video game developing and the process involved. Some games take longer than others and Blizzard is a studio that is known for taking its time.
On November 10 2018 04:13 Plansix wrote: None of this is surprising for anyone who follows video game developing and the process involved. Some games take longer than others and Blizzard is a studio that is known for taking its time.
i'm just trying to help out someone who is contemplating an Iron Condor play on ATVI. It helps to put it in writing to solidify my thought process.
On November 10 2018 04:22 Dangermousecatdog wrote: AAA is a meaningless buzzword used to create hype. It has no bearing on the quality of the game. I don't know why you guys keep using it.
that is a good point. Blizzard makes PC games. Saying Blizzard makes AAA PC Games adds nothing and just muddies up the convo.
On November 10 2018 03:36 lestye wrote: I think you're overall being extremely hyperbolic.. They're expanding into mobile, extensively, thats for sure. I don't think that means we'll see no AAA games.
exactly where am i wildly hyperbolic? you realize the tastosis comment is a joke right?
We don't see many AAA PC games now. The pace of AAA game development is not accelerating.
do you consider Diablo:Switch a AAA game or a mobile game or? its a portable, handheld Diablo3 and its really, damn good.
i think Diablo3:Switch defies categorization. However, it is definitely not a PC game.
I think the tone of doom and gloom in your posts seem to imply they're abandoning PC when Alan Adham says they're not in the same video.
I don't think the lack of Diablo Immortal on PC means they dont care about PC, I think it more has to do with.... Immortal looking really barebones and lackluster if played on PC?
On November 10 2018 04:22 Dangermousecatdog wrote: AAA is a meaningless buzzword used to create hype. It has no bearing on the quality of the game. I don't know why you guys keep using it.
AAA is your typical big budget game with like a 100-300 sized team. Not a typical 15 man job like most mobile games are.
If I say AAA, I mean your traditional, big budget, 60 dollar retail game.
On November 10 2018 04:55 lestye wrote: I think the tone of doom and gloom in your posts seem to imply they're abandoning PC when Alan Adham says they're not in the same video.
i didn't provide doom and gloom. i provided #s. i think Blizzard will lose 5 million MAUs over the next year. ATVI is losing MAUs and Blizzard is the segment losing the most. ATVI stock has gone from $83 to $54 since Morhaime quit. I have not seen a decline this sharp in ATVI in 5 years.. possibly ever..but i'm too lazy to research the entire history of ATVI.
ATVI is not closing up shop. However, its reasonable to assume ATVI will engage in cost cutting for Blizzard. They won't cut costs for projects that service the giant growing market of mobile games.
I also stated, I suspect that high profile developers like David Kim and Dustin Browder with many years of tenure and 10+ years industry experience .... who probably have higher salaries compared to the standard Blizzard developer... are probably following the money and working on mobile games now.
With a new president in charge its a lot easier to execute layoffs and shut down stuff. For example, the GSL is not Brack's "baby". Therefore, he can evaluate the GSL's performance in a more objective, impersonal way. He doesn't go to GSL games. Morhaime and his employees may have promised GSL would go on for 10 years after LotV was released.. but Morhaime is no longer in charge.
we are living in a Brave New Blizzard World! any one got some soma ?
you know that the nasdaq and the general stock market fell like 10% in Oct too right? I doubt it has much to do with diablo immortal or morhaime leaving etc
On November 10 2018 04:22 Dangermousecatdog wrote: AAA is a meaningless buzzword used to create hype. It has no bearing on the quality of the game. I don't know why you guys keep using it.
AAA is your typical big budget game with like a 100-300 sized team. Not a typical 15 man job like most mobile games are.
If I say AAA, I mean your traditional, big budget, 60 dollar retail game.
And...that would be the most pointless definition ever, which we all know you just made up just now.
Is there such a thing as a AA game? An A game? Is there a B, or a C or a D? It's just meaningless marketing speak to make hype.
What if they were $40? What if they had a team of 25-99 guys, but charged $60? What if it was a mobile game with 100 sized team? Are those AAA or not?
There actually is a broad definition for AAA game, which necessarily includes Blizzard games:
"AAA (pronounced "triple-A") is an informal classification used for video games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, typically having higher development and marketing budgets." ~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)
As Blizzard is certainly a major publisher and developer of PC games, their major titles should be viewed as AAA games.
That part of the definition doesn't imply success or popularity, although a few lines later it says "The term is analogous to the film industry term "blockbuster".[1]", which- according to *that* Wiki- is "A blockbuster is a work of entertainment – especially a feature film, but also other media – that is highly popular and financially successful."
I think this supplementary clarification also implies that major Blizzard titles are AAA games, as they are consistently popular and successful.
I also think that having semantics arguments over what "AAA" perfectly means is a waste of time.
Considering all this and the reality that mobile games are an incredibly popular and lucrative market, I'm not at all concerned with Blizzard additionally tapping that vertical as they also continue to succeed in the PC and console domains.
On November 11 2018 01:28 SoleSteeler wrote: you know that the nasdaq and the general stock market fell like 10% in Oct too right? I doubt it has much to do with diablo immortal or morhaime leaving etc
this is an important fact to bring up. i'd like to address it. The stock market has had bigger drop offs during ATVI's history and ATVI didn't fall by 30%+
ATVI has a pretty high implied volatility. the slightest sign of increased risk.. and ATVI investors ran for cover.
On November 11 2018 02:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There actually is a broad definition for AAA game, which necessarily includes Blizzard games:
"AAA (pronounced "triple-A") is an informal classification used for video games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, typically having higher development and marketing budgets." ~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)
As Blizzard is certainly a major publisher and developer of PC games, their major titles should be viewed as AAA games.
That part of the definition doesn't imply success or popularity, although a few lines later it says "The term is analogous to the film industry term "blockbuster".[1]", which- according to *that* Wiki- is "A blockbuster is a work of entertainment – especially a feature film, but also other media – that is highly popular and financially successful."
I think this supplementary clarification also implies that major Blizzard titles are AAA games, as they are consistently popular and successful.
I also think that having semantics arguments over what "AAA" perfectly means is a waste of time.
Considering all this and the reality that mobile games are an incredibly popular and lucrative market, I'm not at all concerned with Blizzard additionally tapping that vertical as they also continue to succeed in the PC and console domains.
1) it's wikipedia 2) Wikipedia says it's an informal classification 3) Even by Wikipedia's definition, it still doesn't match up to lestyle defintion 4) Wikipedia's definition is so nebulous that it is most certainly a meaningless marketing PR buzzword to create hype over that lots of money was spent to create marketing PR 5) Citation needed (hey it IS wikipedia afterall!)
6) By your defintion Hearthstone is an AAA game as it AAA "neccesarily include Blizzard games". By Lestyle definition, it most certainly is not.
Well I think from a financial standpoint this was the right move from Blizzard, I think the way they're adding more fuel to the Blizzcon fire is retarded by them. This is what happens when financial experts are running your game developing firm instead of devs. The company quickly gets out of touch with their previous player base, possibly even burning bridges, just to please investors which are the real customers instead of the average joe who was delegated to the role of a cashcow.
Announcing Diablo Immortal during Blizzcon was a mistake, and now telling people "OuR BeSt DeVs ArE wOrKiNg On ThEsE PrOjEcTs" and that they have multiple of these in the works each for one of their franchises is just another PR disaster. But apparently, Blizzard doesn't care about PR in the west as much anymore.
What Blizzard knows and cares about is, them sweet monies in the Eastern market. Asia LOVES mobiles games and there are just so many diablo ripoffs on the market that Blizz wants to put out there their game and slap on their real "BlizzardTM" badge on it and get as big as possible piece of that pie. Noone can really blame them. I just wish they didn't basically show a middle finger to the whole western diablo fanbase while doing this on Blizzocn where all the hardcore, PC fans of the game gather.
On November 11 2018 02:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There actually is a broad definition for AAA game, which necessarily includes Blizzard games:
"AAA (pronounced "triple-A") is an informal classification used for video games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, typically having higher development and marketing budgets." ~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)
As Blizzard is certainly a major publisher and developer of PC games, their major titles should be viewed as AAA games.
That part of the definition doesn't imply success or popularity, although a few lines later it says "The term is analogous to the film industry term "blockbuster".[1]", which- according to *that* Wiki- is "A blockbuster is a work of entertainment – especially a feature film, but also other media – that is highly popular and financially successful."
I think this supplementary clarification also implies that major Blizzard titles are AAA games, as they are consistently popular and successful.
I also think that having semantics arguments over what "AAA" perfectly means is a waste of time.
Considering all this and the reality that mobile games are an incredibly popular and lucrative market, I'm not at all concerned with Blizzard additionally tapping that vertical as they also continue to succeed in the PC and console domains.
1) it's wikipedia 2) Wikipedia says it's an informal classification 3) Even by Wikipedia's definition, it still doesn't match up to lestyle defintion 4) Wikipedia's definition is so nebulous that it is most certainly a meaningless marketing PR buzzword to create hype over that lots of money was spent to create marketing PR 5) Citation needed (hey it IS wikipedia afterall!)
6) By your defintion Hearthstone is an AAA game as it AAA "neccesarily include Blizzard games". By Lestyle definition, it most certainly is not.
Neither includes hearthstone as the Wikipedia definition explicitly mentions "higher marketing and development budgets". And hearthstone production was pretty cheap, although I don't know what the marketing budget is. Same for HotS.
Now stop by a pedant as everybody instantly has an idea what you mean with AAA title, just as everybody knows what you mean with blockbuster, even if it fails miserably like Justice League.
On November 11 2018 04:17 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
On November 11 2018 02:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There actually is a broad definition for AAA game, which necessarily includes Blizzard games:
"AAA (pronounced "triple-A") is an informal classification used for video games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, typically having higher development and marketing budgets." ~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)
As Blizzard is certainly a major publisher and developer of PC games, their major titles should be viewed as AAA games.
That part of the definition doesn't imply success or popularity, although a few lines later it says "The term is analogous to the film industry term "blockbuster".[1]", which- according to *that* Wiki- is "A blockbuster is a work of entertainment – especially a feature film, but also other media – that is highly popular and financially successful."
I think this supplementary clarification also implies that major Blizzard titles are AAA games, as they are consistently popular and successful.
I also think that having semantics arguments over what "AAA" perfectly means is a waste of time.
Considering all this and the reality that mobile games are an incredibly popular and lucrative market, I'm not at all concerned with Blizzard additionally tapping that vertical as they also continue to succeed in the PC and console domains.
1) it's wikipedia 2) Wikipedia says it's an informal classification 3) Even by Wikipedia's definition, it still doesn't match up to lestyle defintion 4) Wikipedia's definition is so nebulous that it is most certainly a meaningless marketing PR buzzword to create hype over that lots of money was spent to create marketing PR 5) Citation needed (hey it IS wikipedia afterall!)
6) By your defintion Hearthstone is an AAA game as it AAA "neccesarily include Blizzard games". By Lestyle definition, it most certainly is not.
Neither includes hearthstone as the Wikipedia definition explicitly mentions "higher marketing and development budgets". And hearthstone production was pretty cheap, although I don't know what the marketing budget is. Same for HotS.
Now stop by a pedant as everybody instantly has an idea what you mean with AAA title, just as everybody knows what you mean with blockbuster, even if it fails miserably like Justice League.
On November 11 2018 02:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There actually is a broad definition for AAA game, which necessarily includes Blizzard games:
Seems like DPB disagrees with you. Maybe not everybody instantly has an idea what you mean eh?
On November 11 2018 04:17 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
On November 11 2018 02:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There actually is a broad definition for AAA game, which necessarily includes Blizzard games:
"AAA (pronounced "triple-A") is an informal classification used for video games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, typically having higher development and marketing budgets." ~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)
As Blizzard is certainly a major publisher and developer of PC games, their major titles should be viewed as AAA games.
That part of the definition doesn't imply success or popularity, although a few lines later it says "The term is analogous to the film industry term "blockbuster".[1]", which- according to *that* Wiki- is "A blockbuster is a work of entertainment – especially a feature film, but also other media – that is highly popular and financially successful."
I think this supplementary clarification also implies that major Blizzard titles are AAA games, as they are consistently popular and successful.
I also think that having semantics arguments over what "AAA" perfectly means is a waste of time.
Considering all this and the reality that mobile games are an incredibly popular and lucrative market, I'm not at all concerned with Blizzard additionally tapping that vertical as they also continue to succeed in the PC and console domains.
1) it's wikipedia 2) Wikipedia says it's an informal classification 3) Even by Wikipedia's definition, it still doesn't match up to lestyle defintion 4) Wikipedia's definition is so nebulous that it is most certainly a meaningless marketing PR buzzword to create hype over that lots of money was spent to create marketing PR 5) Citation needed (hey it IS wikipedia afterall!)
6) By your defintion Hearthstone is an AAA game as it AAA "neccesarily include Blizzard games". By Lestyle definition, it most certainly is not.
Neither includes hearthstone as the Wikipedia definition explicitly mentions "higher marketing and development budgets". And hearthstone production was pretty cheap, although I don't know what the marketing budget is. Same for HotS.
Now stop by a pedant as everybody instantly has an idea what you mean with AAA title, just as everybody knows what you mean with blockbuster, even if it fails miserably like Justice League.
On November 10 2018 04:22 Dangermousecatdog wrote: AAA is a meaningless buzzword used to create hype. It has no bearing on the quality of the game. I don't know why you guys keep using it.
AAA is your typical big budget game with like a 100-300 sized team. Not a typical 15 man job like most mobile games are.
If I say AAA, I mean your traditional, big budget, 60 dollar retail game.
And...that would be the most pointless definition ever, which we all know you just made up just now.
Is there such a thing as a AA game? An A game? Is there a B, or a C or a D? It's just meaningless marketing speak to make hype.
What if they were $40? What if they had a team of 25-99 guys, but charged $60? What if it was a mobile game with 100 sized team? Are those AAA or not?
I have no clue why you're fighting me on this. There's obvious differences between super high budget games from Blizzard and Rockstar and games from smaller, but not indie studios.
If every single game Blizzard made from now on had a mobile and a Playstation Vita port, clearly that game's technical budget couldn't possibly be big.
I don't think "AAA" is a hype term at all, it just means a lot of resources/money/budget went into a game.
I don't think Diablo:Immortal "for all ages" content was some internal inspirational artistic vision by a few Blizzard employees. This game looks more like a creation influenced by the corporate overlords.
Adham stated Blizzard employees are now playing mobile games for "hours and hours". He made it sound like it just organically happened. I doubt that. Because Mobile is a massive growth area the big bonus money is in mobile and not in Starcraft 2's next Warchest. So, Blizzard employees "find themselves" playing mobile games for hours on end.
afaik AAA denomination comes from financial denomination for banks or states or financial products, it is a rating given to these by financial rating corporations, it means afaik that the investment is considered pretty much guaranteed to give returns. (there is an actual business of giving these ratings so you might try and buy your rating etc which is part of what happened during 2008 crash iirc) when i think of it in terms of gaming industry, i think big money and little risk, generally not the actual best games : P i tend to even think of it like plague of the industry tbh (associated with redoing tried formulas, simplification, quantity over quality, and focus on production value and marketing plus advertisement, franchising etc, generally how games go from great to meh or even bad, similar to cinema or music.. it is almost antinomic with creativity which is the main factor for making great games haha)
On November 11 2018 04:17 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
On November 11 2018 02:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There actually is a broad definition for AAA game, which necessarily includes Blizzard games:
"AAA (pronounced "triple-A") is an informal classification used for video games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, typically having higher development and marketing budgets." ~https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)
As Blizzard is certainly a major publisher and developer of PC games, their major titles should be viewed as AAA games.
That part of the definition doesn't imply success or popularity, although a few lines later it says "The term is analogous to the film industry term "blockbuster".[1]", which- according to *that* Wiki- is "A blockbuster is a work of entertainment – especially a feature film, but also other media – that is highly popular and financially successful."
I think this supplementary clarification also implies that major Blizzard titles are AAA games, as they are consistently popular and successful.
I also think that having semantics arguments over what "AAA" perfectly means is a waste of time.
Considering all this and the reality that mobile games are an incredibly popular and lucrative market, I'm not at all concerned with Blizzard additionally tapping that vertical as they also continue to succeed in the PC and console domains.
1) it's wikipedia 2) Wikipedia says it's an informal classification 3) Even by Wikipedia's definition, it still doesn't match up to lestyle defintion 4) Wikipedia's definition is so nebulous that it is most certainly a meaningless marketing PR buzzword to create hype over that lots of money was spent to create marketing PR 5) Citation needed (hey it IS wikipedia afterall!)
6) By your defintion Hearthstone is an AAA game as it AAA "neccesarily include Blizzard games". By Lestyle definition, it most certainly is not.
Neither includes hearthstone as the Wikipedia definition explicitly mentions "higher marketing and development budgets". And hearthstone production was pretty cheap, although I don't know what the marketing budget is. Same for HotS.
Now stop by a pedant as everybody instantly has an idea what you mean with AAA title, just as everybody knows what you mean with blockbuster, even if it fails miserably like Justice League.
On November 11 2018 02:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: There actually is a broad definition for AAA game, which necessarily includes Blizzard games:
Seems like DPB disagrees with you. Maybe not everybody instantly has an idea what you mean eh?
Its absolutely clear, to anyone even mildly socialized to video games discourse or most any of the people bestowed with the gift of common sense, what 'AAA' is used to signify in this context. You might as well get in a fight over the definition of 'yellow' or 'three' so if you're so inclined go register yourself up a course in semantics, philosophy or linguistics or someshit.
EPT
