 Hi, I am Daniel Solis. I'm our director by day, game designer by night. I'm going to be talking to you about very, very old games. I mean, like really super old games that are at least 1,000 years old. And when you think about old games, you may think of stuff like chess, for example. But chess is actually, in its modern form, only about 800 years old. So it's kind of like a toddler a little bit when you think about ancient games. And the funny thing is, when you're hanging around game designers, there's this common refrain you'll hear sometimes when a subject of chess comes up. Let's say that chess could never be published today. Why? The box isn't big enough. The box doesn't make enough noise when you shake it. You can't just pick up off a game shelf and feel the weight of it. Because that's what sells. This is the short-term market drive that drives game design right now. But it wasn't always the case. In ancient times, games really survived by their minimalism, by their elegance, by their ability to be played across language barriers, and transported very easily. And when you think about this kind of minimalist aesthetic, one of the older games that still exist today is Go. But again, it's actually pretty young. It's only about 2,000 years old. And compared to some games that have not fared as well, it's actually pretty young. So when you think about some really old games, you've got to look way back to Babylon. This game was founded in the tunes of ancient Babylon just, I don't know how many thousands of years ago. But no one knows how to play it. You kind of look at it as software obsolescence a little bit. But the language just wasn't backwards compatible, you know? And there have been attempts to try to make it playable to my modern players. But it's really just a guess. We don't really know. And it's a shame, I thought, that some games that, whether or not they may be good, we don't know just because we can't play them now. And so I thought, well, what if there were more of a long-term market drive? A way to get game designers to start thinking about long-term games, less about short-term quarterly profits. So I started the 1,000-year game design challenge. I offered a $1,000 prize for a contest that lasted about a year for game designers to create new games that they believe would still be played 1,000 years from now. And you may wonder how I judge this. Well, first, I judge by access. Can you play this game with as many people as possible with as few materials as possible and as many places as possible? And I looked at some games like Moncala, which can be played with pits in dirt. And I also looked at elegance. Can the game be played with few rules that are easily understood but take a long time to master? So it's kind of an old chestnut that's the key to elegance, that you can learn it in just a couple of minutes. But it's still fun every time you play. And that was the third game I played. And that was the third criteria that I used. And I measured fun basically by the amount of public play I saw whenever a submission came in. I was just like, right, how many people are actually playing this because in order to be played 1,000 years from now, it has to be played today. And what was nice is that I got a lot of coverage from the contest. The Long Now Foundation even took notice of it. And if you know anything about them, they're very, very much concerned about things that are going to still be here 10,000 years from now. And Jay McGonigal said a little thing. But ultimately, the winner was Take Back Toe by James Ernest, who is kind of a popular game designer. And this is a lovely game, and I can teach it to you after the talk. Happy to teach anyone. But really, what set this entry apart was the little note that James added to his rules at the end. Mass-producing entertainment is a gamble. It's a convoluted way for creators to protect their intellectual property by selling it in a way that is prohibitively expensive to counterfeit. I've decided to try a different gamble. His gamble was to release his game on the Creative Commons license. So you can go to his site, CheapAss.com, and for free, as the name suggests, get these rules. And you can play this game without even a board. You don't even need any of the components that you see, which is one of the nice things about it. But it's really just the first step in letting a game last 1,000 years. Because right now, we have the means to preserve the hardware of games. But if you look at either of these displays, do you really know how to play any of these things? Do you really get a sense of the gameplay experience just by looking at this hardware? And you really don't. The Museum of Modern Art just had this challenge dealt to them when they accepted, for the first time, 14 video games into their collection. And how do you really translate the experience of an 8-hour, 10-hour, 12-hour game into a museum display? And it had some interesting solutions I can tell you about it after the talk. But really, the way you keep games alive is by play. Find games that are on the Creative Commons license right now. Seek them out. Have a list of links coming up in a second. Play them. Keep them alive. Teach them to other people, learn them, and share them. Thanks.