Microsoft slammed by Sony for Xbox 360 publishing rules

A report that suggests Microsoft has some pretty strict policies on publishing Xbox 360 and Xbox Live Arcade games has come under attack by a Sony Playstation executive. Several days ago, Eurogamer reported that Microsoft's policies could allow them to refuse to release a game on its Xbox Live Arcade downloadable service if it appears first on Sony's Playstation Network. Microsoft also strongly suggests that multi-platform retail games have the same content across all of the game's version. If a PS3 game has any extra content, Microsoft reserves the right to not publish an Xbox 360 version of that game.

Those restrictions have caused some fighting words to come out of a Sony Playstation representative. IndustryGamers.com reports that Rob Dyer, Sony Computer Entertainment America's senior vice president of Publisher Relations, claims Microsoft is "protecting an inferior technology" with their restrictions for game developers. Dyer says, "I think they want to dumb it down and keep it as pedestrian as possible so that if you want to do anything for Blu-ray or you have extra content above 9 gigs or you want to do anything of that nature, you’d better sure as heck remember that Microsoft can't handle that."

Dyer also claims, " ... any time we’ve gone out and negotiated exclusive content of things that we’ve announced at things like DPS or E3, publishers are getting the living crap kicked out of them by Microsoft because they are doing something for the consumer that is better on our platform than it might be perceived on theirs." Ultimately, Dyer would like to see more game publishers make a stand against Microsoft's policies. He says, "... it’s only going to dumb down what could potentially come out for a number of these games. And whether people are willing to stand up to Microsoft on this stuff or not is up to that publisher and they do it at their own risk."

While it may be Microsoft's policy to discourage PS3 exclusive content on multi-platform games there are some exceptions. A recent one is the April release of Mortal Kombat, where the PS3 version had Kratos (from Sony's God of War series) as an exclusive fighter. The Xbox 360 version of the fighting game had no such exclusive.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Third party cases for iPhone 5 suggest 4 inch screen

Next Story

Animated Google Doodle honors Freddie Mercury's 65th

62 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

The way I see it, Microsoft is doing damage control after HD-DVD flopped. They'll do whatever they can to make themselves seem on par, even force developers to make crappier cross-platform games.

SpyderCanopus said,
The way I see it, Microsoft is doing damage control after HD-DVD flopped. They'll do whatever they can to make themselves seem on par, even force developers to make crappier cross-platform games.

Microsoft never intended to use the HD-DVD for games, did they? If they did they would have integrated the drive in the console itself…

MFH said,

Microsoft never intended to use the HD-DVD for games, did they? If they did they would have integrated the drive in the console itself…
+1

Just another clueless comment from SpyderCanopis...

Solid Knight said,

It came from Nintendo's failures.


I dunno... I remember a lot of exclusivity. In fact Sega failed because they didn't play as dirty as Sony did... And Microsoft isn't playing nearly as dirty. I think more than anything Sony is upset that they ca no longer play as dirty because they no longer are #1...

Yeah, and I'm sure Sony encourages exclusive content be made for the 360... What a load of crap. I am getting really tired of Sony whining every time they lose marketshare to better products. How about they stop releasing half baked products and poor copies of services?

Haha, this is coming fro the company (Sony) that paid the movie studios 500 Million dollars to release exclusively on Blu-Ray and not HDDVD essentially killing the format. Oh, Sony, if you were better then it wouldn't matter because the deva would tell MS to pound sand but since you are NOT better the debs have to listen to the platform that produces money. So go ahead and blame MS but in reality if you were better it would be a non issue.

To be honest, I completely understand both sides of this.

Microsoft's is simple - protecting their interests. They don't want the 360 to be an afterthought, a bit like the Wii whereby if a title hits the platform, it's cut down and missing content.

Sony, of course, feels this is unfair to them as the PS3 could indeed have more content thanks to the extra space on a disk, as well as other reasons.

I don't think it's anything new, though. I believe the 360/PS3 relationship has always been a bit like this.

Kushan said,
To be honest, I completely understand both sides of this.

Microsoft's is simple - protecting their interests. They don't want the 360 to be an afterthought, a bit like the Wii whereby if a title hits the platform, it's cut down and missing content.

Sony, of course, feels this is unfair to them as the PS3 could indeed have more content thanks to the extra space on a disk, as well as other reasons.

I don't think it's anything new, though. I believe the 360/PS3 relationship has always been a bit like this.

Just because BluRay has more space on a single Disc, there is no reason the developer can't release more than one DVD for the XBox 360 version, especially now that the XBox has the option to load the game to the HD. Developers could also provide the extra content via a download, and it would 'meet' Microsoft's requirements.

I don't see Sony as truly having a point, especially when they have their own specific restrictions and policies for the PS3 as well.

Sony:- is this all you can wimper about XLA (little downladable games) compared to your choice of using blu-ray...Sony you dictate you want a cut from every game sale and if I recall correctly you charge for YOUR dev kit to game houses, MS does not, do you hear MS whining about your strict compliance for your systems......errr no.
Sony should STFU and concentrate on ensuring what happened to them recently can never happen again, Ill trust MS with my CCard details, you, I wouldnt let you have my postcode, never mind any of my ccards!

The blu ray part comes from the "Microsoft also strongly suggests.... multi platform retail games have the same content.... or they will reject the rights to publish"

Not sure if that still relates to xbla or not, but sounds like they mean all disc based in addition.

Seems like logical business practice to stay ahead in the game, Sony just needs something to entice developers to go against those rules.

This Applies to XBLA games only .So isn't the whole Blu ray argument kind of moot . Since XBLA is actually downloaded content

gawicks said,
This Applies to XBLA games only .So isn't the whole Blu ray argument kind of moot . Since XBLA is actually downloaded content

Only a small portion of the article relates to XBLA. The rest is about Bluray and Microsoft only allowing games on the XBOX that offer the same gaming content as the PS3.

Of course, as I recall in that same Carmack interview, he said Microsoft did penalize games for coming on more than one disc. Rage was originally going to be on only 2 discs for the 360. The biggest problem for the 360, IMO, is the lack of a standardized harddrive... the core/arcade model really needs to be discontinued, but even then the damage is done. Developers cannot rely on there being a harddrive, which would've negated any real advantage that BR has in my opinion. Why bother with disk size when you can install to the HDD?

I'm not sure what the big deal is, exactly. According to John Carmack a few years ago, SCEA has similar policies - if a game comes out on the 360 first, then the game *must* have extras for the PS3 version in order to be released here. It seems somewhat hypocritical for Sony to complain about this, especially since their policy was around first and for the higher risk retail market.

All I read from this article is a lot of whinging coming from Sony. Their argument that Microsoft is protecting an 'inferior technology' is ridiculous. Seriously, has there been a game that needed to use more than the 9 gigs that couldn't come on multiple discs? Sony decided to forge ahead with their alternative disc storage platform and now crying because Microsoft doesn't want promote Sony's technology? Really Sony, cry me a river...

Sranshaft said,
All I read from this article is a lot of whinging coming from Sony. Their argument that Microsoft is protecting an 'inferior technology' is ridiculous. Seriously, has there been a game that needed to use more than the 9 gigs that couldn't come on multiple discs? Sony decided to forge ahead with their alternative disc storage platform and now crying because Microsoft doesn't want promote Sony's technology? Really Sony, cry me a river...

I think it has less to do with the disc format, and more to do with how Microsoft treats developers. They're scaring developers away from making better games that won't run on the XBox 360 because of its limitations.

The reason people like Bluray holding so much, is because discs cost money. They cost money to make and they cost money to ship. For every game that has to span multiple discs, that's twice as many discs (minimum) to make AND ship. When you're making and shipping millions of copies of a game, that's millions of discs that you had to pay to have made, and millions of discs worth of weight that you had to pay to have shipped. It's not just about the novelty that "Ooo I only have to have one disc", it's also about how much money and effort developers have to put into making their games accessible and affordable across all platforms.

CoMMo said,
I think it has less to do with the disc format, and more to do with how Microsoft treats developers.

This is why we need both of them in the market, so far as I'm concerned. I wouldn't trust Sony or Microsoft to have the market to themselves (or Nintendo for that matter). Both platforms are large enough where a company could flip one the bird, then do a version for one console and the personal computer market.

CoMMo said,

The reason people like Bluray holding so much, is because discs cost money. They cost money to make and they cost money to ship. For every game that has to span multiple discs, that's twice as many discs (minimum) to make AND ship. When you're making and shipping millions of copies of a game, that's millions of discs that you had to pay to have made, and millions of discs worth of weight that you had to pay to have shipped.

You cannot be any more wrong. Have you seen the Blu-Ray disc prices?Blu-ray disks cost 5-10 times more than DVDs.

gawicks said,
Also doesn't this apply for only XBLA which are simply downloaded games( as I posted below). Sony is just whimpering

While it did touch on games offered through XBLA, the majority of the article was Sony's executive whinging about Microsoft's reluctance to include Bluray with their console. From the article:

Microsoft also strongly suggests that multi-platform retail games have the same content across all of the game's version. If a PS3 game has any extra content, Microsoft reserves the right to not publish an Xbox 360 version of that game.

Those restrictions have caused some fighting words to come out of a Sony Playstation representative. IndustryGamers.com reports that Rob Dyer, Sony Computer Entertainment America's senior vice president of Publisher Relations, claims Microsoft is "protecting an inferior technology" with their restrictions for game developers. Dyer says, "I think they want to dumb it down and keep it as pedestrian as possible so that if you want to do anything for Blu-ray or you have extra content above 9 gigs or you want to do anything of that nature, you'd better sure as heck remember that Microsoft can't handle that."

RealFduch said,

You cannot be any more wrong. Have you seen the Blu-Ray disc prices?Blu-ray disks cost 5-10 times more than DVDs.

+1

And shipping two DVDs (in the same case) costs no more than shipping one BD.

Fezmid said,

+1

And shipping two DVDs (in the same case) costs no more than shipping one BD.


wrong. Two discs are heavier than one, Sherlock. You also use double the ink to print the label, and have the dev costs so that your game supports spanning into multiple discs.

gonchuki said,
You also use double the ink to print the label

Compare the price for ink with the difference between DVDs and BRs and you notice how unimportant that is.

BTW: a DVD weights about 15g. It really doesn't matter - this stuff is shipped in containers, not via normal mail!

gonchuki said,

wrong. Two discs are heavier than one, Sherlock. You also use double the ink to print the label, and have the dev costs so that your game supports spanning into multiple discs.

And yet it was normal practice not many years ago (When all of these costs would have been higher)... Hmmm...

Fezmid said,

And shipping two DVDs (in the same case) costs no more than shipping one BD.

Everyone loves swapping discs. My favorite thing to do when gaming.

SpyderCanopus said,

Everyone loves swapping discs. My favorite thing to do when gaming.


Ever heard of something like an install? Guess what on a PC you may have multiple discs and don't even need one to play the game…

MFH said,

Ever heard of something like an install? Guess what on a PC you may have multiple discs and don't even need one to play the game…

Install your 9 gig dvd onto a 4GB xbox. Hehe

SpyderCanopus said,

Install your 9 gig dvd onto a 4GB xbox. Hehe


I don't own any console and honestly 4gig?? Who cut the XBox-Harddrive in several pieces

BTW: I still have to find a PC game that needs more than 1 DVD - 1 DVD is enough to smash the PS3^^

RealFduch said,

You cannot be any more wrong. Have you seen the Blu-Ray disc prices?Blu-ray disks cost 5-10 times more than DVDs.

Was just about to say the same thing. Blu-ray prices are insane.

CoMMo said,

I think it has less to do with the disc format, and more to do with how Microsoft treats developers. They're scaring developers away from making better games that won't run on the XBox 360 because of its limitations.

The reason people like Bluray holding so much, is because discs cost money. They cost money to make and they cost money to ship. For every game that has to span multiple discs, that's twice as many discs (minimum) to make AND ship. When you're making and shipping millions of copies of a game, that's millions of discs that you had to pay to have made, and millions of discs worth of weight that you had to pay to have shipped. It's not just about the novelty that "Ooo I only have to have one disc", it's also about how much money and effort developers have to put into making their games accessible and affordable across all platforms.

Ok, on the Discs, DVDs are far cheaper than BluRay to produce.

As for the developers, they are NOT the ones complaining. They know that even 2 or 3 DVDs shipped is not a factor in costs. They also know that online content is an area the XBox does well, and they often ship add-ons and additional content via XBox Live, so it cost them nothing to produce.

BluRay is more of a 'headache' for developers because of the pre-loading/installing that is necessary on the PS3 to get the same load times as the XBox running the game off the DVD. This takes work, and extra time to factor what to load and cache, where they don't have to worry about it on the XBox, as the XBox even automatically does HD pre-caching of the DVD on the fly using Windows NT predictive caching.

The only advantage BluRay gives developers is the ability to ship higher quality 'cut-scenes', which are just the pre-rendered movies, and not game play. (They can't even use the BluRay's extra storage for higher quality textures, as the PS3's GPU is limited to lower resolution textures than the XBox 360.)

This is Sony, finding something to make news about, not developers in an uproar. If the developers TRULY were upset about this or found it limiting, Microsoft would do something different, as Microsoft regards developers highly.

Even as this articles states, games that 'violate' these provisions, have NOT been stopped or held back by Microsoft. It is just legal jargon that gives Microsoft the right to withhold distributing a game for a company that might have malicious intent, and releases a title that intentionally tries to make the XBox 360 look bad. (Without this clause, Sony could release a multi-platform game, that looks like pac-man on the XBox and looks like awesome on the PS3 on purpose.)

gonchuki said,

wrong. Two discs are heavier than one, Sherlock. You also use double the ink to print the label, and have the dev costs so that your game supports spanning into multiple discs.

Hey Sherlock....bulk shipping is not going to cost more because there are two discs. Most bulk shipping below 5lbs/2kgs gets the same rate, so even three discs is not going to affect their shipping rates.

MFH said,

I don't own any console and honestly 4gig?? Who cut the XBox-Harddrive in several pieces

BTW: I still have to find a PC game that needs more than 1 DVD - 1 DVD is enough to smash the PS3^^

The witcher 2 has several DVDs...and the quality of that game is amazing...

JustAnotherTechie said,
Tell you what Sony, why don't you release a Blu-ray disc-worth of customer data to prove how much better it is?
^that

I'd compare this to Microsofts exclusive rights with some titles to have new content a month early. Maybe its about time Sony threw some of its weight around too? *Sigh

TheHub said,
I'd compare this to Microsofts exclusive rights with some titles to have new content a month early. Maybe its about time Sony threw some of its weight around too? *Sigh
Sony's got a significantly better (or at least extensive) first and second party lineup than MS, which is where they've really thrown their weight/resources around the most. Plus they've eaten humble pie first, allowing Valve onto PSN with Steam. We'll have to see how this develops, but so long as it ultimately benefits all of us gamers, regardless of platform, I'm happy.

At least its not whole titles that are exclusive. True, 3rd party exclusives are much rarer now, and I'm quite happy with that. No "platform penalty" like in past generations - I'd say the vast majority of great games are on both systems ^_^

TheLegendOfMart said,
Why is it microsofts fault developers wont make use of the extra Blu-Ray space.

Yes it is. All multiplatform games are basically technically limited by the X360. The PS3 can handle a lot more in general but only PS3 exclusive games ever make proper use of all the resources they have available.

Ambroos said,

Yes it is. All multiplatform games are basically technically limited by the X360. The PS3 can handle a lot more in general but only PS3 exclusive games ever make proper use of all the resources they have available.

Well, it's because Xbox became the primary platform. Can't blame devs for that. And you shouldn't "blame" MS for doing a good work.

And while at "handeling a lot more"... wrong. If you see exclusive PS3 titles wich look significantly better than Xbox exclusives then please show me some examples. Only vague example (altough not platform exclusive) i can think of is FFXIII and the "significantly" part does not apply even to that.

Edited by deleted_acc, Sep 5 2011, 10:40am :

Ambroos said,

Yes it is. All multiplatform games are basically technically limited by the X360. The PS3 can handle a lot more in general but only PS3 exclusive games ever make proper use of all the resources they have available.

Wrong, it is only limited in disc space. Yet only a fraction of all the games on the Xbox 360 used more than one disc and 9 out of 10 multiplatform released titles perform better on the Xbox 360. The PS3 is far more limiting and 'inferior technology' with it's split RAM and uncommon architecture, that is why so many ports on the platform are so horrible.
This is just pathetic Sony mudslinging because they are behind everyone this gen and used to be top dog with the PS2.
MS stole their thunder and Sony never got it back and now MS are playing hard ball and Sony can't keep up any more watching their stock crumble 42% over a year.
"Everything Sony touches turns to mediocrity" was a headline yesterday on another tech site and they are right.

Edited by Thief000, Sep 5 2011, 10:53am :

Thief000 said,

Wrong, it is only limited in disc space. Yet only a fraction of all the games on the Xbox 360 used more than one disc and 9 out of 10 multiplatform released titles perform better on the Xbox 360. The PS3 is far more limiting and 'inferior technology' with it's split RAM and uncommon architecture, that is why so many ports on the platform are so horrible.
This is just pathetic Sony mudslinging because they are behind everyone this gen and used to be top dog with the PS2.
MS stole their thunder and Sony never got it back and now MS are playing hard ball and Sony can't keep up any more watching their stock crumble 42% over a year.
"Everything Sony touches turns to mediocrity" was a headline yesterday on another tech site and they are right.


+1 To everything you said. Sony whines like no other company. They are such poor losers.

Morden said,

Well, it's because Xbox became the primary platform. Can't blame devs for that. And you shouldn't "blame" MS for doing a good work.

And while at "handeling a lot more"... wrong. If you see exclusive PS3 titles wich look significantly better than Xbox exclusives then please show me some examples. Only vague example (altough not platform exclusive) i can think of is FFXIII and the "significantly" part does not apply even to that.

Dude PS3 blows xbox out of the water when it comes to graphics. When your games are 25GB (or more) you get better images at higher resolutions.

SpyderCanopus said,

Dude PS3 blows xbox out of the water when it comes to graphics. When your games are 25GB (or more) you get better images at higher resolutions.


By that logic even a netbook would blow the PS3 away as they have more than 160gig of space…
Mather of fact: Way more important is how you can utilize the power of the console, something that the PS3s architecture actually seems to make pretty hard…

Thief000 said,
Wrong, it is only limited in disc space. Yet only a fraction of all the games on the Xbox 360 used more than one disc and 9 out of 10 multiplatform released titles perform better on the Xbox 360. The PS3 is far more limiting and 'inferior technology' with it's split RAM and uncommon architecture, that is why so many ports on the platform are so horrible.
This is just pathetic Sony mudslinging because they are behind everyone this gen and used to be top dog with the PS2.
MS stole their thunder and Sony never got it back and now MS are playing hard ball and Sony can't keep up any more watching their stock crumble 42% over a year.
"Everything Sony touches turns to mediocrity" was a headline yesterday on another tech site and they are right.
While I agree Sony is quite the crybaby. The article is covering the rules Microsoft forces upon developers, which are bull****. They shouldn't disallow games if they appeared on Sony's network first, or if they contain something that the Xbox doesn't.

MFH said,

By that logic even a netbook would blow the PS3 away as they have more than 160gig of space…
Mather of fact: Way more important is how you can utilize the power of the console, something that the PS3s architecture actually seems to make pretty hard…

If it was 160GB of 1080P video cut-scenes and had a nice video card, yea.

MFH said,

By that logic even a netbook would blow the PS3 away as they have more than 160gig of space…
Mather of fact: Way more important is how you can utilize the power of the console, something that the PS3s architecture actually seems to make pretty hard…

If it was 160GB of 1080P video cut-scenes and had a nice video card, yea.

SpyderCanopus said,

Dude PS3 blows xbox out of the water when it comes to graphics. When your games are 25GB (or more) you get better images at higher resolutions.


I thought it was the other way around... Xbox had the better graphics chip, while PS3 had the better CPU (albeit a CPU much more difficult to program for).

SpyderCanopus said,

Dude PS3 blows xbox out of the water when it comes to graphics. When your games are 25GB (or more) you get better images at higher resolutions.

Okay "dude", then please show me pics of multiplatform games where the ps version blows away the xbox one.
Waiting...

Morden said,

Okay "dude", then please show me pics of multiplatform games where the ps version blows away the xbox one.
Waiting...

This article explains why there aren't many. Because MS muscles developers into making the game crappier on the other platforms.

SpyderCanopus said,

This article explains why there aren't many. Because MS muscles developers into making the game crappier on the other platforms.


Yeah, I'm sure it has nothing to do with Sony making it harder to develop for and all around poorly designing the console... I'm sure that's Microsoft's fault too.

Ambroos said,

Yes it is. All multiplatform games are basically technically limited by the X360. The PS3 can handle a lot more in general but only PS3 exclusive games ever make proper use of all the resources they have available.

L.A. Noire came out on both platforms, only it was on 3 DVDs for the xbox 360, but that's neither here nor there.

This sort of thing annoys me, because who ultimately loses out, the consumer, not Sony, not MS, it is us, if we chose to get a 360, and certain games are not on it because of this nonsese, we lose, if other games are dumbed down so they're the same on both PS3 and xbox, then PS3 owners lose because they couldn't have something much better.

All of these companies need to pull their ****ing heads out of their asses and wake up, do what's right for your consumers, and the money will roll in.

Ambroos said,

Yes it is. All multiplatform games are basically technically limited by the X360. The PS3 can handle a lot more in general but only PS3 exclusive games ever make proper use of all the resources they have available.

Really?

Wow, the developers that are having to fight with the DX9 class GPU in the PS3 would have a few words for you.

For years developers have been having to code 'up' from the GPU limitations in the PS3, and it is still the LOWEST common denominator when developing multi-platform games.

Any CPU advantages the PS3 has in theory is instantly offset by the 'tricks' that are employed to compensate for the GPU's lack of features - which is a long list.

The Xenos GPU in the XBox 360 is a DX10/DX11 class video card, and is the FIRST video card to introduce these concepts, with a unified shader, a new onboard DMA model with a new BUS and memory transfer technology.

(It is what all DX10 and DX11 video cards are design on, and ironically things like CUDA 2.x and OpenCL's graphical GP-GPU features are ONLY possible because of the Xenos GPU design that was design by Microsoft engineers - go look it up, ATI credits them with the design.)

The XBox 360 DirectX version had features more advanced than DX10 on the PC because of the Xenos, it wasn't until DX11 that the multi-platform PC and the XBox 360 titles could port easily if the developer did use the full extent of the XBox GPU features.

So in terms of a development, up until DX11 and Windows 7, the order of technical abilities were in this order, starting with the lowest capabilities to the highest for graphics.

**Lowest**
PS3
OpenGL on Mac/Linux
OpenGL on Windows
DirectX10 on Windows
XBox 360
**Highest**

The XBox GPU always supported DirectCompute and Tensellation technologies, as a couple of simple examples.

And you argue that it is the XBox that is the limiting console? Wow...


I know people think that BluRay gives the PS3 some magical advantage, but this isn't how it works.

BluRay does have more storage, but it is significantly slower. Which also means PS3 users eat up HD space because speed crucial content has to be pre-loaded onto the HD to meet the same load times as the XBox 360 that runs the game directly from the DVD with a bit of Windows NT HD caching to help.

This lets the XBox 360 users have extra HD space to 'download' any additional content that was optional or didn't fit on the original DVD. (Halo Reach is a good example as the additional download content is almost another DVD itself.)

The additional BluRay storage is also wasted on 'gameplay' because of the GPU limitations in the PS3 won't let it load as high of resolution textures as the XBox 360, so it can't even leverage the extra space for crisper textures. (Go look at a head to head site and notice that in close up gameplay with high resolution textures, the XBox 360 has the ability to load much more detailed graphics. Force Unleashed in a quick good example if you want a specific game that was 'limited' by the PS3 texture sizes that was a GPU limitation.

The PS3 GPU is just a Geforce 7900 that is even underclocked. (Which is why it is a DX9 class/generation GPU technology, unlike the Xenos that is even more advanced than DX10 class/generation GPUs.)

BluRay only adds higher quality 'cut scenes' because of the extra storage. Which if you follow a PS3 fanboi site, they will point out how awesome the cut scenes are on the PS3 and sometimes even mislead people by showing a cut scene as 'evidence' the PS3 is better at graphics, when it pre-rendered graphics (a movie) they are showing.


The PS3 is a great BluRay player, but with the GPU limitations it struggles to keep up with the XBox 360, wasting any extra CPU advantage it has to augment the GPUs missing capabilities.

thenetavenger said,

The PS3 GPU is just a Geforce 7900 that is even underclocked.

Maybe MS should have underclocked their GPU too so users get less RRoD ...

SpyderCanopus said,

Dude PS3 blows xbox out of the water when it comes to graphics. When your games are 25GB (or more) you get better images at higher resolutions.

LOL. No, it doesn't.