 Horty’s argument has been criticized from various angles: one may, e.g., question whether the same applies to non-standard semantics for \(\OB\) (Broersen &amp; van der Torre 2003; McNamara 2004b), or one may argue that very similar issues also arise in context where no agency is involved (Danielsson 2002). Finally, it should be noted that at the syntactic level, relatively little changes to the basic properties of the (now agent-relative) operator \(\OB\): it will still be a KD-type normal modal operator. However, its interaction with other such modal operators, and the relation between obligations of different agents and groups can now be studied in much more fine-grained  terms.[73]  Moreover, Horty’s incorporation of game-theoretic ideas into the semantics of deontic logic opens up a whole range of new possibilities for logical investigations, a suggestion from Bartha 2002 that was taken up in Tamminga 2013.