KEY
Bold:	Interviewer
Regular:	Respondent
[ ]:	Uncertain word(s)

Hi.
Hello.
Hello.  How are you?
Hi.  I'm good.  How are you?
Yes.  A month ago, two months ago, I was in Quebec, but now I'm living in the South of France.
Oh, great.  Well yeah, I'd scheduled it for that time, and then on the train this morning, I suddenly thought, oh no, I'm probably going to be ringing her in the middle of the night.  So anyway, I'm glad we were right in the first place.
No problem (laughs).
That's great, thank you.  So, hi, I'm Chris.  Nice to meet you.  I will switch to audio now, simply because it helps with our connection and it makes sure that the interview runs smoothly, if that's okay with you.
Okay, perfect.
So there we go, I've turned my video off.  So, thank you for agreeing to be interviewed for our project.  I'm going to give you a little bit of information about the project, but you've had the things that we've sent you, so if you've got any more questions, feel free to ask.  But essentially, Gaming Horizons is a European funded project where we're looking at and listening to the discourses around video gaming, their role in education, society and wider culture.  We're trying to explore the ways in which they're understood by experts from different groups.  So we're talking to researchers, gamers, game developers—
Oh, sorry, I need to turn off the email speakers because there's so much noise coming inside.  Okay, just a second.
No worries.
Okay, that will be, I suppose, okay.  If not, we've got a lot of bling-blings arriving.
(Laughs) No worries.
Just a second.  Okay, that's okay.  Sorry.
No worries.  That's fine.  So yeah, we're interviewing experts, researchers, gamers, developers, educators, policymakers, to get a sense of how people think about video games in their context, how people think about video games in terms of society.
Does that make sense?  Is that okay?  Does that give you a brief outline of what we're doing?
Yeah, yeah, and this is what Jeff told me when introducing the project and introducing the idea of the interview.
That's brilliant.  Lovely.  Excellent.  So the idea is you're one of about sixty people we're talking to.  It's not a strict set list of questions.  It's basically going to be, today, a bit of a discussion, largely with your input rather than mine, and I'll basically just give you some prompts or some questions for you to be able to give your perspective on these issues, if that's okay?
Hm-hm.
I've sent you the consent form.  If you can let us have that back at some point, that would be great.  Just for the tape, I just need your verbal consent that you know this is being recorded.
Okay, perfect.  No problem.
Thank you very much.  The transcript of your talk will be anonymised, your name won't feature in it, and it will be put alongside the other experts that we're discussing so we can look at the kind of wider discourses that are going on around video games.  Is that okay?
It's perfect, hm-hm.
Great, thank you very much.  So I will begin then.  If we could start by thinking about, mainly, your background.  Could you give me an outline of your background and your interest in video games in your context?
Hm-hm, yes.  My background is I'm not a pure disciplinary person because I have made studies both in computer science, management, psychology and education, and games are in the intersection of these different fields.  
Because I'm from an interdisciplinary background, I think it was quite natural also to go to this type of research that is intrinsically, from my point of view and many colleagues, something that requires you to work with colleagues from different disciplines.  But I think there has been also different aspects that also made that possible was the Games and Learning Alliance Network of Excellence in which I met Jeffrey Earp, the colleagues from Genoa, colleagues from the Coventry University and other European partners.  
This project was just a blast because it was thirty partners all working together from different perspectives.  That was not only different disciplines within the academic partners, but also there were companies working on the project.  Looking at this diversity made me realise the richness of these fields and the potential in terms of research and the impact that games will have on education.
Brilliant.  So there's something about that cross-disciplinary kind of crosscutting thing about video games that's kind of rich and something you value, being able to bring different people together?
Yeah, exactly, and making something new.  I think, in game studies, game designers and some of the game players, not all, but some players have a creative side.  Then it's not just studying something that is already fixed, like colleagues who are doing very interesting work but it's something that is already starting to be well-known as how to learn to write or how – it is something that is existing.  
I think one aspect from my preference as a researcher and other researchers I meet in the field is that there's an interest for novelty and there's an interest for creating something new that could be meaningful.  It's about, also, learning through creation, research – not only actual research but also creation oriented research, that's research oriented to creation.
That sounds great.  When you're talking about the creation there, are you talking about the creation of the video games themselves by people?
Yeah, the creation of games or the creation of layers of information systems that allow us to look at what is happening in games, or creation of new contexts, pedagogical new contexts, for using existing games.  Because of the complexity and the richness of using games in education, there's not a single procedure to follow and there's always the need to consider what are the contextual factors that should be taken into account for the best integration of games.
I think that's something interesting because it's something that requires at each creation, at each perspective, to study something that is not the same, this kind of richness that from my point of view is also interesting.  Even if we’re having just the one game, the many ways this game could be used in education is just fantastic.  We can see through specific examples that there's a lot of aspects from the teacher's perspective, from the player's perspective, from many perspectives, that should be taken into account to understand the play activity.
That's great.  That idea of creativity and richness is really interesting, and that's kind of a very distinct perspective you're coming from with the use of video games, talking about them as their creative potential.  Have you got any kind of examples from your research or the work you've done that could kind of pull apart that creativity?  Give us an example of any particular games or any particular uses.
Yeah.  In the last year, I shifted to the game creation processes as a learning process, making games to learn.  But what has been very interesting and we have run a graduate course for Masters and PhD students in the field of game design.  We are looking at the way these students are collaborating together to create games and how this game creation process is related to the so-called 21st Century skills.  And how, during the game creation process, they are focusing on a problem from a design thinking perspective, then focusing on something that is relevant not only in education as an artificial topic but something that is relevant in society.
For example, one of the teams was focused on intergenerational relations between kids and grandparents that are often separated in distance.  How they can make a game that is suitable and playful both for the kids and for the grandparents.  Then it's being aware  about the needs and doing research about the problem that is addressed by the game and engaging and unlocking collaboration, problem solving skills, creativity, but also computational thinking when they engage in the programming side of the creation of the game as a way to solve a problem.  
Something that is very rich in terms of the skills is also a great field of opportunity for development because they start from something that is real and problematic and then show they're engaged in creating a solution that requires them to make an effort to put together things that are complex and requires to be simplified and requires to be mixed up together.  These kinds of small games, despite they are very small, it's not about the game result that it’s not professional, but it's about the process in which the students learn through following the process of game creation.
That's great, thank you.  So it sounds like you're talking about the value around the creation of games, around collaboration around that creation.  It sounds like there's ideas there of kind of social value through developing skills around the creation of games.  So that's all very interesting and that's all very valuable for our research.  So, thank you.
In terms of you've talked a lot about creating games so far, do you have a perspective or ideas about playing games rather than creating them?
Hm-hm, yes, we've developed small serious games at this other business school in relation to finance for learning about assets and liabilities.  And what they learned was… well, we failed (laughs).  We succeeded in terms of learning performance and the students were learning better, but we failed in terms of the gaming experience.  The game was not perceived as playful by the students.  
But then it was something that was very interesting in terms of research because we learnt in the hardest way possible that it's not because you as a researcher or the game designer or a… well, you want to create a game, in this case a serious game, but it's not because this is your pedagogical invention that you will succeed in terms of the learner/player perception.  We thought the application was a game, but when analysing what was the game experience, that was totally a failure because not only was it not considered as playfulness but it was considered even more boring and constraining than traditional classrooms (laughs).  
It was something that… well, it is something that we observed after that it is not only a problem we had had but it's something that is still there and there's still a lot of games that are pretending to be game but from a learner/player perspective are not considered as games.  It's something that we shall raise awareness of, that what we are considering it a game, so we accept that something is a game if it's just that the game designer says that?  Or shall we ensure that the game is perceived as a game by the audience?  But this is one of the learnings from the failure that we had in the last years.
That's really interesting, how you've just talked about a project where the learning was successful but you perceived it as a failure because of the lack of playfulness.  So there you're talking about playfulness as a component of video games, playfulness being important in terms of video games.  I'm wondering if you can talk a bit about what the value of that playfulness might be.  If you felt it was a failure that that wasn't there, why would you want that playfulness to be there?
I think game-based learning is about more than ever is about – the game experience, the playfulness experience, it's about aiming to achieve a learning experience that is not only positive but also engaging, and something that is pleasant and something that is positive.  
I think there's something related to how to improve the learning experience in a way that it's not only learning by suffering or by boring methods or by requiring a lot of intrinsic moderation because it's not an activity that is interesting.  But it's about how we can create learning situations that are engaging the player in a way that is risk-free and then they can try different attempts and it's not a problem, where they can learn also through failure and they can engage with others in a common, in a joint challenge.  
Well, it's about the learning experience that is created that from that perspective is also because we learn better when kids or grownups are in a context of feeling good.  There's wellness involved with that and they are feeling that it's okay to fail.  They are feeling that they can explore and it's not negative judgements when they are exploring new things, because we learn better in this playful way.
I think something that we should consider is how we can integrate games or game components to the learning situations and move from this kind of traditional way of teaching and learning that is quite [0:17:55] to a way that takes into account the learning experience from a learner centred perspective.
That's great.  There's lots of different directions I could take the conversation in now (laughs).
Yeah (laughs).
I'm going to just remain with the idea of experience there, if that's okay, and you talked about gaming as a way of generating or enabling a particular learning experience, and we talked about playfulness.  Are there particular mechanisms within video games that you think are particularly good at doing that?  Are there particular types of games or aspects of games that you think are particularly good for enhancing that experience?
Hmm, yeah, and in the GALA Network, one of the works we have conducted – and I think Jeffrey Earp was part of it also; yeah, for sure, now I remember – we analysed one of the game mechanics that is working well both in offline games and sports and also in online games is this inter-group cooperation and inter-group competition.  It's not about saying we should focus on collaboration or competition; it's about how we can mix both of them and make sure that the learners collaborate together within their team.  But they are engaged in a competition because of this – this is engaging also, against other teams and how we can connect both levels by ensuring the learners learn together, and in a cooperative way within their teams, their small teams.  But also, they are engaged and comparing results and trying to make the best possible way because they are competing with other teams.
This is one of the aspects we highlighted, and this is something that is not revolutionary.  This is a simple soccer or other team-based game where there's these mechanics that ensure that, inside the group, there's cooperation and we learn from that.  But also there's the mechanics of competition against other groups.  That means also that the group creates a feeling of group because they are against another group and they're also developing their feeling of being together and winning as a group.
That's interesting.  From what you're speaking about there, it sounds like you're talking about video games as part of a kind of social experience with multiple players.  Is that right?
Yeah.  The more open and complex the game is, I think there are some more opportunities for learning at the higher order skills.  In these games, there's both the individual accountability but also the team-based cooperation, and we are against other teams.  
When there's these different levels and when we are combining these different levels, I think we can achieve higher order skills that require learners to engage in a metacognitive process, in developing strategies, in thinking how they can plan their actions of each of the team members to achieve an objective.  We require a guild together, to collaborate together to achieve a certain objective, this is the kind of complex problem solving that is also important in our society.  It's about recreating a certain kind of complexity for making them prepare for other situations that are similar to that.
That's interesting, thank you.  I think you referred earlier – correct me if I'm wrong – but I think you referred earlier to the game that you said hadn't been very successful as a serious game, and serious or applied games are terms that are used to describe different types of games.  Then there's the kind of game that people often refer to as entertainment games.  Now, in the idea of playfulness you're talking about, I'm wondering how you see the relationship between serious games and entertainment games.
Yeah, I think the distinction is about the intention of the game designers.  When Minecraft was developed it was not about education and they didn't say this was an educational serious game, but because educators started to integrate it in the classroom, it became a game used in education.  
I think it's a label that was initially introduced by the game designers, saying that these are serious games are not, because of their intentions.  But I think what is more interesting, even, is considering what is actually done at the play site, that is independent of the initial purposes of the game designers, how a game is used in education.  
I think it's not about accepting that because the game designers say that these are serious games that they are serious games, or because it's something that is released as a mainstream game in the commercial channel, that it is something that is not good for education.  It’s about working with teachers and educators and looking at what games independent of the initial label could bring to the classroom.
So the category or serious or entertainment might be more about how it's played and how it's used than the actual game itself?
Yeah, I think so.  I think that we showed that—  I said that while there are serious games that have specifically looked for that and they are succeeding on that, that also works out that for example, Civilisation was not intended primarily for education but there are teachers that are using that and they are using that in a meaningful way.  It's about, yes, the real play activity and the way the game is integrated in education and not only the game intentions.
Yeah, that makes sense.  Thank you.  We've talked a lot about kind of what we would perceive as the positive aspects of gaming and video games.  In your opinion, is there a kind of flipside to that?  Is there a negative side to games and gaming?  Are there potential dangers or ethical things we need to think about in terms of gaming?
I think, for the negative side, there's first the perception of games by educational actors.  That is something that we shall work with because not all persons have a positive image  of games and there's the confusion between these extreme cases of persons addicted to games and all these kinds of things.  
First, that's something that is not easy because the perception of games is not mainstream, the idea of game-based learning, at least, in the context I have been working on in France, Quebec, Canada and Spain.  That could be something negative because sometimes teachers are doing things that are fantastic but parents are not accepting or are afraid of doing things, or their colleagues are not accepting.  
The other side is because this is technology, it’s about also technology, there's all the problems or the disadvantage of technology that is a matter of resources or having the devices, having the resources to pay the developer or to pay for an existing game.  Well, there's all that aspect that is not specific to games but is something that is common on all technologies, the disappearing of [solo sense 0:27:29] and this kind of thing.  I think it's something we shall work on because persons who are already stressed with technologies, when they introduce serious games, it's the same thing; they are stressed, not because of the idea of learning by using games, but because of the technological side.  
I think we shall still work on developing these digital skills and this acceptance of problems that happen at different moments when using technologies that means that it's okay to engage in something new and it's okay that it's not working at certain moments and it's okay that we can fail in the classroom when introducing new things.  It's about, I think, a culture of innovation.
So there's lots of challenges, but ways in which we can overcome them and ways in which we need to think about using technologies in the classroom?
Hmm, yeah.  From the player's side, there is this myth of digital narrative that now research has proved that it's not that.  With colleagues of Coventry University, when  we were looking at how older adults were using games, that was fantastic because we observed that there's a high diversity of uses and interests and skills, not only among older players, but also younger players.  
The idea that this is something that is age related is something that is a myth, and we looked further at the actual play we can see that there are persons from different ages that are interested, persons that are not interested at all, persons who are afraid of technologies, persons who are very tech savvy.  There's a lot of diversity.
One of the questions or reflections I'm working on in the last times is about technology diversity and acceptance that not everyone wants to use technology and maybe it's okay.  It's not because digital game-based learning could be positive and have an advantage that we should require that all teachers embrace this kind of novelty, and we shall not require that everyone do the same methodologies, but how we can move into a system where there's different diversity of learners and also diversity of teachers and diversity of learning methodologies, and not trying to impose innovations onto some teachers that are good at doing the more traditional things.
I see.
Well (laughs) a big reflection from the epistemological perspective, but something that we have been, at least on the side of saying we should convert the teachers to that, they should be trained to do that.  And the more it is going on, the more I think it's important that we have diversity of things, and persons who love that go this way and we support them, and persons who prefer to do other kinds of innovations could be also engaged in other perspectives.  I don't know, have you addressed that on the project?
I think by thinking about, I suppose, getting perspectives like yours and considering to what extent people are talking about those things.  And your perspective there, it sounds like you're saying there's a lot of value to using video games and there's a lot of value towards showing educators, or working with educators, to see that value.  But equally, we don't want to enforce a playful video games approach on every educator or every individual because that, perhaps in itself, wouldn't be an ethical thing to do.
So I think your perspective and the fact that you're highlighting that is quite an important thing, and I would say that's an ethical point because, if we assume every learner is the same and everyone loves playfulness and everyone loves video games, then, well, ethically, we're making a judgement there on how people learn, how people live their lives.  Whereas talking as you have about them being a pedagogical approach that people can take, seems to take a slightly different ethical standpoint.
So I think, by seeking voices, that's how we're trying to take account of that.  Does that make sense?
Hm-hm, yeah.  It will be very interesting to read, when you have finished all the interviews, all the different perspectives in the community.  I think it's part also of the richness of digital learning studies.  The perspective and the position or point of view of different persons is quite diverse also.
Absolutely.  And what's interesting for me is I've largely been interviewing people like yourself, people doing and involved in research around video games, but some things are very similar between what you've been saying and what others are saying, and then each person has a slightly different perspective.  I'd be interested in your perspective as someone involved in research on how you feel the kind of research you do is valued, how it fits in terms of being research with an impact.  So I suppose I'm talking about how your research is thought of by others.  Do you have an opinion on that?
How research is…?  Sorry?
I will clarify.  What I mean is, how do you feel research around video games is valued?  Is it valued by society?  Is it valued by universities?  Is it valued by educators?
Yeah, I think, as most research, it's not arriving at the end-user, at the teacher, and the teachers are not often engaged in looking at what are the results of research before deciding to engage in this kind of novelties.  But I think there may be players of educational agencies and these kinds of blogs that are disseminating research results in a more [passable 0:34:37] way that are doing a lot, or making possible to different persons to make available different results.  I think it's important, even to develop in a higher way, in a more advanced way, this layer of dissemination between the research productions and the type of readings, magazines and blogs that are disseminating that for educators.
The other aspect is, I think it's interesting at this moment on the game studies that there is also that acknowledgement that there's not only positive ethics.  Maybe ten years ago it was very enthusiastic literature on how everything will change with games and maybe it was not the most critical perspective in the field.  Now there's meta-analysis that has been developed and the idea that we should look not only at games as units but also games in terms of the components, the learning in game mechanics and other specific aspects that is making research in game studies more critical and less enthusiastic than some years ago.
I don't know what is your perspective, if you are feeling that it is getting better.  From your project, is this something that you have a perception of?  What is your insight?
I think what we've done is quite a large literature review over time of different kinds of perspectives on gaming.  I think it's probably fair to say – and I think you've identified there – as more research is done, then it becomes clearer that there's not going to be a kind of transformation of learning, there's not going to be some kind of radical shift in how people learn and how video games are used.  And that's probably changed over time because we know more about how these things are used.
So I think I'd go with what you've said there and agree that there was an idea, maybe, that technology, maybe video games, would lead to a radical change and a radical shift in education, and maybe that narrative hasn't played out.  I think maybe some people still stick with that narrative, while others – and you've talked about the kind of analysis that's been done of research – maybe there's a more, from some people, realistic, or you talked about more critical – I'd go with that – a more critical approach to how video games have potential in certain situations.
Yeah, some persons that are still on the narrative of selling that and not concerning – so the aspects that could be negative, hm-hm.
And I think there are also people who would still take a kind of deterministic perspective in talking about, like, change being inevitable and this is going to happen, so we've got to put up with it.  But the actual kind of thing that you've talked about, about understanding that this way of doing things shouldn't necessarily be assumed to be inevitable and being imposed on people is an important thing to consider, really.
We've talked a bit there about how things have changed, how you've seen, maybe, a more critical approach to the use of video games.  Can you kind of make any predictions as to how things might move in the area of video games and education, learning, society?  So, any kind of predictions for research for the future, I suppose.
I'm not sure I am having all the necessary vision to make predictions, but only a trend but it’s I'm biased because this is something that interests me and it's probably something I found more references also.  It's about not only playing games but also learning through making games.  It's about also the link between digital games and making digital games and computational thinking and learning to programme small games.
I think there is something there that is kind of a trend that is appearing in these last years, but I have not a big perspective on other aspects that other colleagues are working on, like how virtual reality, augmented reality and these kinds of other technologies will impact the field.  I think that there's something there, but I know less about this aspect.
No, but that's interesting.  You've identified there kind of research around new emerging technologies, but also the idea that things might be shifting, or there might be more interest in what we started talking about there, the creative aspect, the creation of games.  So no, that's very helpful.  That's very useful.
I'm nearing the end of our talk because we're almost at forty minutes now.  I suppose I've got two questions left.  The first is, is there anything in this area that we've not talked about that you think you would like to talk about?  Are there any questions I've not asked, basically?
No, I think it's okay.  One of the works I'm doing with the PhD students is on motivation.  And I think one of the myths in the field is that there is something that is assumed these games are something that motivates students, that we are looking further into the aspect of the self-determination theory.  We have observed that, well, there's a need for a lot of studies, especially when they are coming from colleagues in the field of computer science, with a less psychological or educational science perspective, there’s the function of motivation that should appear with games.  I think there's something that should be advanced on that.  
We are working on that, but there's a lot of work to be done to help move forward in the way we are looking at motivation and games and linking it to the literature that already exists on psychology and not just making rapid assumptions on the idea that the games will motivate kids.  Because this is something that is sometimes happening, but sometimes it's not the case and games are not very well accepted by very scholarly oriented students that love to learn in a more traditional way.
Excellent.  So you're saying there that motivation has been an assumption that's been made around video games that maybe we need to be more critical about?
Exactly.  Exactly.  We need to be sure to integrate psychological methods and the psychological theories and the work that has already been learned on motivation to look at motivation in games, not going through it as an assumption that doesn't take into account what is existing in the motivational literature.
Thank you for that.  I suppose, finally, do you ever play video games yourself?  We've talked a lot about research around games, but do you play games?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I am playing games and I have passed through different phases.  I'm not a player of online MMORPG but I have played a lot of SimCity.  I love construction games, like SimCity.  All the Sims series is terrific.  I have been playing also Minecraft.  I have been playing a little Pokémon Go, but just for curiosity.  It was something that I was playing a little bit, going out and looking at how persons were playing together and, well, it was very – and after I skip it rapidly.  
I had the chance that one person in my family, when I was a kid, was working in a computer company and they brought us a cassette – I don't know, what is the name? Record tapes with video games to be run on a Commodore and these kinds of devices…
Yeah, yeah, brilliant (laughs).
…and playing Prince of Persia and these kinds of arcade games.  I have been loving to play games, and because he was one of the persons more literate in the family and having, I guess, a position in a company, video games were looked at in our family as something intelligent and something that intelligent persons make.  I think it's something that facilitated our parents to play games, to have after the Game Boy and all the different devices that came after.  I really loved that certain moment playing with the Connect, but it was just a period, just some months.  
I would say I'm not a person who is playing the same type of games every time.  It depends on the moment of my life, this moving to one thing or another.
That's really interesting.  You've mentioned some things that I've experienced in my life as well.  When you mentioned Prince of Persia and the Game Boy, they're all things that have kind of featured in my life as well.  So do you think your experience of video games has kind of fed directly into your interest in using them in other contexts as well?
Sorry, I did not—
Sorry.  I was saying, do you think that you growing up with video games, is that something that's influenced your interest in researching video games?
Yes, I think it's something because, well, being a woman, it's considered to be a talent in the technology sector because there's an assumption that we have never been on programming, and I have done three years of programming, of computer programming.  And then I also say that because, if not, persons are assuming that you don't know nothing about programming.  Persons are assuming that you haven't had the devices and played with different devices when you were a kid.  But there’s a lot of things that because I had the opportunity to have this experience, it made me more confident when colleagues were challenging me on what I knew and testing the competencies and authority.  
But now I'm more on this idea of the founder of Girls Who Code and these kinds of discourses that are, like, how we can help girls and women to feel confident even if they don't have all the competencies and experience.  It's about how we change attitudes and make sure that we are not required to demonstrate that we have done a lot for it to be relevant on what we are saying.  But also considering that we shall not justify at every moment all that we have done, we do it to make sure that… well, help to develop a little bit of assertiveness.
Hmm.  Do you think those gender perspectives are changing over time?  Are you seeing changes?
I am very concerned about, even going back, some changes.  Maybe it was the experience in North America, but also while I practising I started feeling the same, is that maybe it's worse than some years ago (laughs).  I have the feeling, and there's also data on the fact that there's less girls applying to scientific fields, that there's something that is making it worse and the gender difference are more important.  
I had the opportunity to meet the different games community in Brooklyn.  I don't know if you are in contact with them?
No, I don't think we are.  Is that the Different Games community, you said?
Different Games community.  I can give you a contact with that because they are an amazing community that is trying to influence big gaming companies to take into account diversity in games.  Not only in terms of gender, but also in terms of age, in terms of—  Well, they are looking at how games, as a cultural expression of society could improve these kinds of things.
I think there's a lot of things that should be advanced and we should be aware that persons who are making games are mostly white, young males, and what is appearing in games is this kind of specific vision of the world that is having these category of persons, and persons from different categories are less represented in games.
Yeah, which is clearly an issue.  If you could put me in contact with them, that would be great.  If you could send me any contact details…
Yeah, it'd be a pleasure, hmm.
…that would be fantastic.  They sound exactly the kind of—
It's so amazing.  The Different Games Conference is something that is held in Brooklyn in New York every year.  They are funding possibilities in case there’s not funding from another organisation and it's just fantastic, both in the way the conference is organised but also the community that is working there.  It really is something I would recommend.
That's great, thank you.  I've just googled their web page actually and found them.  I'm working with researchers, but we've got other people working with the developers and games, and it's possible that we have made contact.  But that's really good of you to flag those up.  Thank you very much.  They sound very interesting.
I'm aware of the time.  We're over-running.  I just want to say, firstly, thank you for speaking to me.  It's been fascinating to talk to you and get your perspective, and it's been really valuable.  Did Jeff mention an event that we're holding in Brussels?
No (laughs).
Okay.  I will send you the information, but basically we're holding an event on the 19th of July in Brussels, which we would like to invite you to if you're available.  But I will send you the details in a few minutes.  I'll email it to you so you can have a look.  But basically, it's another opportunity for discussion that's going to involve lots of different people, lots of different people who we've talked to on the project.  So, please, if you are interested in that, do get back to me because it would be great to see you there.
Oh, I will look at my agenda and I'll confirm.
Yeah, see how busy you are at the time.
Thank you for the interview and be in contact if you require any other information.  Don't hesitate to contact me.
You've been incredibly helpful.  Thank you ever so much.  It's been a pleasure to talk to you.
And nice talking to you.  Have a nice day.
Thank you very much.  Bye-bye.
Bye-bye.