<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_05_0818204</id>
	<title>Motion Control To Lengthen Console Hardware Cycles</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1244193480000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>With the recent E3 demonstrations of new motion-based control for consoles &mdash; <a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/06/01/212249/Microsoft-Debuts-Full-Body-Controller-less-Gaming-At-E3?from=rss">Microsoft's Natal</a>, <a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/06/03/132254/Sony-Unveils-PS3-Motion-Controller?from=rss">Sony's Motion Controller</a>, and Ubisoft's <a href="http://gizmodo.com/5278566/wii-getting-natal+style-camera-motion-gaming-but-not-from-nintendo">camera-based system for the Wii</a> &mdash; analysts now <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news\_index.php?story=23905">expect the current console generation to last longer than normal</a>. Microsoft exec Shane Kim said he expects the Xbox 360 to last until around 2015, in part due to Natal and <a href="http://www.edge-online.com/news/new-services-will-add-\%E2\%80\%9Cyears\%E2\%80\%9D-to-xbox-360\%E2\%80\%99s-life">new services</a> available through Xbox Live. Signal Hill's Todd Greenwald thinks <a href="http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/analyst-sees-no-end-to-current-hardware-cycle">this cycle may not need to end at all</a>:
<i>"Microsoft and Sony have invested so much in their current hardware line, as have third party publishers, that we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch. For all of these reasons, we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past, and don't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest, and 2012 to 2013 more likely (if at all &mdash; if new services like OnLive take off, or if Xbox Live and PlayStation Network become more and more robust, there may not be a need for another console cycle).'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the recent E3 demonstrations of new motion-based control for consoles    Microsoft 's Natal , Sony 's Motion Controller , and Ubisoft 's camera-based system for the Wii    analysts now expect the current console generation to last longer than normal .
Microsoft exec Shane Kim said he expects the Xbox 360 to last until around 2015 , in part due to Natal and new services available through Xbox Live .
Signal Hill 's Todd Greenwald thinks this cycle may not need to end at all : " Microsoft and Sony have invested so much in their current hardware line , as have third party publishers , that we do n't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch .
For all of these reasons , we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past , and do n't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest , and 2012 to 2013 more likely ( if at all    if new services like OnLive take off , or if Xbox Live and PlayStation Network become more and more robust , there may not be a need for another console cycle ) .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the recent E3 demonstrations of new motion-based control for consoles — Microsoft's Natal, Sony's Motion Controller, and Ubisoft's camera-based system for the Wii — analysts now expect the current console generation to last longer than normal.
Microsoft exec Shane Kim said he expects the Xbox 360 to last until around 2015, in part due to Natal and new services available through Xbox Live.
Signal Hill's Todd Greenwald thinks this cycle may not need to end at all:
"Microsoft and Sony have invested so much in their current hardware line, as have third party publishers, that we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch.
For all of these reasons, we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past, and don't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest, and 2012 to 2013 more likely (if at all — if new services like OnLive take off, or if Xbox Live and PlayStation Network become more and more robust, there may not be a need for another console cycle).
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220017</id>
	<title>Re:Blu-Ray...</title>
	<author>EdZ</author>
	<datestamp>1244200920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The major failing of current motion control systems (wiimote, Natal, whatever the PS3 system is called) is that there's no feedback. You're waving about, and simply hope that the game gets it right. By removing the layer of abstraction the controller provides, you're making things LESS immersive by starkly revealing that the game cannot respond to you in ways other than the visual or the audio. <br>
Until cheap, reliable haptic control systems emerge (not a for about half a decade if things like the Falcon, and the cost of more flexiable systems, is anything to go by), motion control will be limited in usefulness to a few casual games that don't require fast and accurate responses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The major failing of current motion control systems ( wiimote , Natal , whatever the PS3 system is called ) is that there 's no feedback .
You 're waving about , and simply hope that the game gets it right .
By removing the layer of abstraction the controller provides , you 're making things LESS immersive by starkly revealing that the game can not respond to you in ways other than the visual or the audio .
Until cheap , reliable haptic control systems emerge ( not a for about half a decade if things like the Falcon , and the cost of more flexiable systems , is anything to go by ) , motion control will be limited in usefulness to a few casual games that do n't require fast and accurate responses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The major failing of current motion control systems (wiimote, Natal, whatever the PS3 system is called) is that there's no feedback.
You're waving about, and simply hope that the game gets it right.
By removing the layer of abstraction the controller provides, you're making things LESS immersive by starkly revealing that the game cannot respond to you in ways other than the visual or the audio.
Until cheap, reliable haptic control systems emerge (not a for about half a decade if things like the Falcon, and the cost of more flexiable systems, is anything to go by), motion control will be limited in usefulness to a few casual games that don't require fast and accurate responses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220167</id>
	<title>Could've happened last generation</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1244202600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Back in 2004 Nintendo were famously <a href="http://uk.cube.ign.com/articles/491/491054p1.html" title="ign.com">going to extend the GC life cycle with new peripherals for the forseeable future</a> [ign.com], including a mysterious <a href="http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/nintendo-plans-to-unveil-new-cube-peripheral-at-e3" title="gamesindustry.biz">EyeToy rival</a> [gamesindustry.biz]. Said peripheral, presumably, turned into the Wii controller. So obviously this is an idea that's been considered in the past. I guess the GC seemed too aged, at the time, for them to actually go through with that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in 2004 Nintendo were famously going to extend the GC life cycle with new peripherals for the forseeable future [ ign.com ] , including a mysterious EyeToy rival [ gamesindustry.biz ] .
Said peripheral , presumably , turned into the Wii controller .
So obviously this is an idea that 's been considered in the past .
I guess the GC seemed too aged , at the time , for them to actually go through with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in 2004 Nintendo were famously going to extend the GC life cycle with new peripherals for the forseeable future [ign.com], including a mysterious EyeToy rival [gamesindustry.biz].
Said peripheral, presumably, turned into the Wii controller.
So obviously this is an idea that's been considered in the past.
I guess the GC seemed too aged, at the time, for them to actually go through with that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220473</id>
	<title>How many watts?</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1244206020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why can't your computer be powered partly by a bicycle wheel, while the computer monitors your exercise and requests power from time to time? Don't pedal when the computer tells you to, and your computer shuts down.</p></div><p>Good luck keeping up the pedaling long enough to finish downloading the 8 GB game you bought. Or are you talking about a mass migration away from desktop PCs and 150-watt consoles in favor of machines that sip power like laptops and Wii consoles?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ca n't your computer be powered partly by a bicycle wheel , while the computer monitors your exercise and requests power from time to time ?
Do n't pedal when the computer tells you to , and your computer shuts down.Good luck keeping up the pedaling long enough to finish downloading the 8 GB game you bought .
Or are you talking about a mass migration away from desktop PCs and 150-watt consoles in favor of machines that sip power like laptops and Wii consoles ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why can't your computer be powered partly by a bicycle wheel, while the computer monitors your exercise and requests power from time to time?
Don't pedal when the computer tells you to, and your computer shuts down.Good luck keeping up the pedaling long enough to finish downloading the 8 GB game you bought.
Or are you talking about a mass migration away from desktop PCs and 150-watt consoles in favor of machines that sip power like laptops and Wii consoles?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219853</id>
	<title>Nintendo Lessons</title>
	<author>Tom</author>
	<datestamp>1244199060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just their way of saying "it took us a while, but we think we realized that higher polycounts and more visual effects alone don't make good games and don' sell consoles".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just their way of saying " it took us a while , but we think we realized that higher polycounts and more visual effects alone do n't make good games and don ' sell consoles " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just their way of saying "it took us a while, but we think we realized that higher polycounts and more visual effects alone don't make good games and don' sell consoles".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789</id>
	<title>Blu-Ray...</title>
	<author>VinylRecords</author>
	<datestamp>1244198040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think I'll care about my PS3 having a motion sensor. I only play fighting games, Metal Gear Solid, and Ratchet &amp; Clank. No real need or want for motion control from me. I have a Wii and I barely touch the thing anymore (wow I just typed that then paused then laughed) and won't until Mario Galaxy 2 comes out.</p><p>The reason my PS3 has longevity is because it plays Blu-Rays, it won the format war, and unless some new disc type comes along or digital downloads with all of the extra content of a BD come along my PS3 will be around for quite some time playing fighting games and serving as my BD player.</p><p>Motion control is just a gimmick and a casual consumer driven aspect of consoles. The life blood of gaming, less casual, more hardcore gamers, are the ones who play games like Oblivion, Unreal Tournament, Starcraft, Diablo, etc. because you aren't going to see companies like Blizzard all of the sudden shifting their entire focus to motion control games and fans aren't demanding it either. If SONY and MS are going to focus entirely on casual mommy daddy crowds and really young children then I will be trashing my consoles and going entirely back to PC gaming (aside from using my PS3 as a BD player and my Wii/360 as coasters).</p><p>Seriously, Chrono Trigger, God of War, Virtu Fighter, these games are long term titles and classics because they were built to me amazing from the ground up. People still play the SNES for Chrono Trigger. MS and SONY honestly think that motion controller = instant classics?</p><p>We saw Resident Evil 4 come out on the Wii with rave reviews for its new motion controlling scheme. And where did that put Resident Evil 5? Oh yeah on the 360 and PS3. Stop trying to steal Nintendo's kiddie and casual fan base and appeal to your more active crowd please SONY and MS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think I 'll care about my PS3 having a motion sensor .
I only play fighting games , Metal Gear Solid , and Ratchet &amp; Clank .
No real need or want for motion control from me .
I have a Wii and I barely touch the thing anymore ( wow I just typed that then paused then laughed ) and wo n't until Mario Galaxy 2 comes out.The reason my PS3 has longevity is because it plays Blu-Rays , it won the format war , and unless some new disc type comes along or digital downloads with all of the extra content of a BD come along my PS3 will be around for quite some time playing fighting games and serving as my BD player.Motion control is just a gimmick and a casual consumer driven aspect of consoles .
The life blood of gaming , less casual , more hardcore gamers , are the ones who play games like Oblivion , Unreal Tournament , Starcraft , Diablo , etc .
because you are n't going to see companies like Blizzard all of the sudden shifting their entire focus to motion control games and fans are n't demanding it either .
If SONY and MS are going to focus entirely on casual mommy daddy crowds and really young children then I will be trashing my consoles and going entirely back to PC gaming ( aside from using my PS3 as a BD player and my Wii/360 as coasters ) .Seriously , Chrono Trigger , God of War , Virtu Fighter , these games are long term titles and classics because they were built to me amazing from the ground up .
People still play the SNES for Chrono Trigger .
MS and SONY honestly think that motion controller = instant classics ? We saw Resident Evil 4 come out on the Wii with rave reviews for its new motion controlling scheme .
And where did that put Resident Evil 5 ?
Oh yeah on the 360 and PS3 .
Stop trying to steal Nintendo 's kiddie and casual fan base and appeal to your more active crowd please SONY and MS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think I'll care about my PS3 having a motion sensor.
I only play fighting games, Metal Gear Solid, and Ratchet &amp; Clank.
No real need or want for motion control from me.
I have a Wii and I barely touch the thing anymore (wow I just typed that then paused then laughed) and won't until Mario Galaxy 2 comes out.The reason my PS3 has longevity is because it plays Blu-Rays, it won the format war, and unless some new disc type comes along or digital downloads with all of the extra content of a BD come along my PS3 will be around for quite some time playing fighting games and serving as my BD player.Motion control is just a gimmick and a casual consumer driven aspect of consoles.
The life blood of gaming, less casual, more hardcore gamers, are the ones who play games like Oblivion, Unreal Tournament, Starcraft, Diablo, etc.
because you aren't going to see companies like Blizzard all of the sudden shifting their entire focus to motion control games and fans aren't demanding it either.
If SONY and MS are going to focus entirely on casual mommy daddy crowds and really young children then I will be trashing my consoles and going entirely back to PC gaming (aside from using my PS3 as a BD player and my Wii/360 as coasters).Seriously, Chrono Trigger, God of War, Virtu Fighter, these games are long term titles and classics because they were built to me amazing from the ground up.
People still play the SNES for Chrono Trigger.
MS and SONY honestly think that motion controller = instant classics?We saw Resident Evil 4 come out on the Wii with rave reviews for its new motion controlling scheme.
And where did that put Resident Evil 5?
Oh yeah on the 360 and PS3.
Stop trying to steal Nintendo's kiddie and casual fan base and appeal to your more active crowd please SONY and MS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219843</id>
	<title>Longer console lifecycle will kill them</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1244198940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you consider the fact that most games are constantly looking for the latest and greatest, whether it be hardware or software or (god help us) controllers, there will be only negative results from the lengthening of the console lifecycle. By extending the life of these boxes, console manufacturers are going to face the waning interest of consumers.</p><p>In some respects, the decision to keep current consoles longer makes some sense. There has not been any serious change in gameplay since the earliest consoles from Nintendo came out (this is not perfectly true, but I'll come back to that later). In order to keep interest alive, more powerful consoles were needed to bring the graphics capabilities into sync with the gameplay. Now, with the latest batch of consoles, we have seen that level reached. There will still be a few more tweaks that could be applied: anti-aliasing is one technological hurdle that hasn't been tackled satisfactorily.</p><p>In effect, the development of consoles has been dictated by the needs of the games. Unfortunately, these games have needed better graphics more than anything else. So what we have now is the situation where graphics are really good, but gameplay has not improved.</p><p>Now to come back to the issue of gameplay. There have been only a few true quantum leaps in gameplay. 3D, independent cooperative gaming (as opposed to simple team-play which has been around since R-type), and the latest is motion control as introduced in the Wii. Motion control has been around a long time, but until Wii no one has been able to make it a success. Nintendo used to have a motion activated controller, but it never took off. Para Para Paradise was interesting, but very limited in scope and popularity. And though there were fighting games which attempted to use motion sensors for input, these were also widely criticized. It was the Wii which was able to break through the closed-mindedness and create games that were fun and realistic to the gaming world.</p><p>But what is next? What is the next quantum leap in gaming? Without it, there can't be any new consoles that do anything more than make graphics better. But if console manufacturers think that gamers are going to sit idly by twiddling their thumbs on old consoles, they are going to be in deep trouble. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. It's better for them to release new consoles, even if it means nothing more than better graphics. The alternative is to simply lose the interest of the gaming public.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you consider the fact that most games are constantly looking for the latest and greatest , whether it be hardware or software or ( god help us ) controllers , there will be only negative results from the lengthening of the console lifecycle .
By extending the life of these boxes , console manufacturers are going to face the waning interest of consumers.In some respects , the decision to keep current consoles longer makes some sense .
There has not been any serious change in gameplay since the earliest consoles from Nintendo came out ( this is not perfectly true , but I 'll come back to that later ) .
In order to keep interest alive , more powerful consoles were needed to bring the graphics capabilities into sync with the gameplay .
Now , with the latest batch of consoles , we have seen that level reached .
There will still be a few more tweaks that could be applied : anti-aliasing is one technological hurdle that has n't been tackled satisfactorily.In effect , the development of consoles has been dictated by the needs of the games .
Unfortunately , these games have needed better graphics more than anything else .
So what we have now is the situation where graphics are really good , but gameplay has not improved.Now to come back to the issue of gameplay .
There have been only a few true quantum leaps in gameplay .
3D , independent cooperative gaming ( as opposed to simple team-play which has been around since R-type ) , and the latest is motion control as introduced in the Wii .
Motion control has been around a long time , but until Wii no one has been able to make it a success .
Nintendo used to have a motion activated controller , but it never took off .
Para Para Paradise was interesting , but very limited in scope and popularity .
And though there were fighting games which attempted to use motion sensors for input , these were also widely criticized .
It was the Wii which was able to break through the closed-mindedness and create games that were fun and realistic to the gaming world.But what is next ?
What is the next quantum leap in gaming ?
Without it , there ca n't be any new consoles that do anything more than make graphics better .
But if console manufacturers think that gamers are going to sit idly by twiddling their thumbs on old consoles , they are going to be in deep trouble .
They are damned if they do and damned if they do n't .
It 's better for them to release new consoles , even if it means nothing more than better graphics .
The alternative is to simply lose the interest of the gaming public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you consider the fact that most games are constantly looking for the latest and greatest, whether it be hardware or software or (god help us) controllers, there will be only negative results from the lengthening of the console lifecycle.
By extending the life of these boxes, console manufacturers are going to face the waning interest of consumers.In some respects, the decision to keep current consoles longer makes some sense.
There has not been any serious change in gameplay since the earliest consoles from Nintendo came out (this is not perfectly true, but I'll come back to that later).
In order to keep interest alive, more powerful consoles were needed to bring the graphics capabilities into sync with the gameplay.
Now, with the latest batch of consoles, we have seen that level reached.
There will still be a few more tweaks that could be applied: anti-aliasing is one technological hurdle that hasn't been tackled satisfactorily.In effect, the development of consoles has been dictated by the needs of the games.
Unfortunately, these games have needed better graphics more than anything else.
So what we have now is the situation where graphics are really good, but gameplay has not improved.Now to come back to the issue of gameplay.
There have been only a few true quantum leaps in gameplay.
3D, independent cooperative gaming (as opposed to simple team-play which has been around since R-type), and the latest is motion control as introduced in the Wii.
Motion control has been around a long time, but until Wii no one has been able to make it a success.
Nintendo used to have a motion activated controller, but it never took off.
Para Para Paradise was interesting, but very limited in scope and popularity.
And though there were fighting games which attempted to use motion sensors for input, these were also widely criticized.
It was the Wii which was able to break through the closed-mindedness and create games that were fun and realistic to the gaming world.But what is next?
What is the next quantum leap in gaming?
Without it, there can't be any new consoles that do anything more than make graphics better.
But if console manufacturers think that gamers are going to sit idly by twiddling their thumbs on old consoles, they are going to be in deep trouble.
They are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
It's better for them to release new consoles, even if it means nothing more than better graphics.
The alternative is to simply lose the interest of the gaming public.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219979</id>
	<title>Re:Blu-Ray...</title>
	<author>Elrond, Duke of URL</author>
	<datestamp>1244200500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah... but it's all about money, and Microsoft and Sony want a piece of that pie.</p><p>There's no doubt that the "hardcore crowd" can make a company money.  When Blizzard releases something, it's practically guaranteed to generate vast quantities of cash.  But there are a lot more gamers out there than just the hardcore crowd.</p><p>I'm fairly confident that games for... let's call them "seasoned gamers"... won't be going away.  Making these games makes people money, presumably enough of it otherwise they would have stopped long ago.  But the focus on these gamers is gone and it's not coming back.  The wider focus on more casual gamers is here to stay.  They're not going away and neither are games for them.</p><p>What does this mean for seasoned gamers?  There will be a lot more chaff to sort through to find the good games.  The Wii is all the proof you need of this.  It also means that there will probably be fewer games targeted at the seasoned crowd simply because there are more areas to cover.  No longer is the workload focused entirely on the hardcore.</p><p>So, it's not the end times, not at all.  There will be a lot more lousy games, to be sure, some so bad you can't help but think they give a particular platform a bad name.  But, if all the consoles have this, the shame will be spread around generously.  And there will still be games that us veteran gamers will want to play.  Good games, though they'll be harder to find.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah... but it 's all about money , and Microsoft and Sony want a piece of that pie.There 's no doubt that the " hardcore crowd " can make a company money .
When Blizzard releases something , it 's practically guaranteed to generate vast quantities of cash .
But there are a lot more gamers out there than just the hardcore crowd.I 'm fairly confident that games for... let 's call them " seasoned gamers " ... wo n't be going away .
Making these games makes people money , presumably enough of it otherwise they would have stopped long ago .
But the focus on these gamers is gone and it 's not coming back .
The wider focus on more casual gamers is here to stay .
They 're not going away and neither are games for them.What does this mean for seasoned gamers ?
There will be a lot more chaff to sort through to find the good games .
The Wii is all the proof you need of this .
It also means that there will probably be fewer games targeted at the seasoned crowd simply because there are more areas to cover .
No longer is the workload focused entirely on the hardcore.So , it 's not the end times , not at all .
There will be a lot more lousy games , to be sure , some so bad you ca n't help but think they give a particular platform a bad name .
But , if all the consoles have this , the shame will be spread around generously .
And there will still be games that us veteran gamers will want to play .
Good games , though they 'll be harder to find .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah... but it's all about money, and Microsoft and Sony want a piece of that pie.There's no doubt that the "hardcore crowd" can make a company money.
When Blizzard releases something, it's practically guaranteed to generate vast quantities of cash.
But there are a lot more gamers out there than just the hardcore crowd.I'm fairly confident that games for... let's call them "seasoned gamers"... won't be going away.
Making these games makes people money, presumably enough of it otherwise they would have stopped long ago.
But the focus on these gamers is gone and it's not coming back.
The wider focus on more casual gamers is here to stay.
They're not going away and neither are games for them.What does this mean for seasoned gamers?
There will be a lot more chaff to sort through to find the good games.
The Wii is all the proof you need of this.
It also means that there will probably be fewer games targeted at the seasoned crowd simply because there are more areas to cover.
No longer is the workload focused entirely on the hardcore.So, it's not the end times, not at all.
There will be a lot more lousy games, to be sure, some so bad you can't help but think they give a particular platform a bad name.
But, if all the consoles have this, the shame will be spread around generously.
And there will still be games that us veteran gamers will want to play.
Good games, though they'll be harder to find.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28309269</id>
	<title>Re:How many watts?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244826060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>150W of power from bicycling isn't that crazy. With training, most people could keep that up for a few hours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>150W of power from bicycling is n't that crazy .
With training , most people could keep that up for a few hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>150W of power from bicycling isn't that crazy.
With training, most people could keep that up for a few hours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221729</id>
	<title>OnLive</title>
	<author>aweiland</author>
	<datestamp>1244213700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do people really expect this to take off any time soon?  Do you realize the infrastructure that's going to be needed to be deployed regionally to make this work?  In it's current state is nearly maxes out a basic cable connection.  I just don't foresee it becoming standard any time soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do people really expect this to take off any time soon ?
Do you realize the infrastructure that 's going to be needed to be deployed regionally to make this work ?
In it 's current state is nearly maxes out a basic cable connection .
I just do n't foresee it becoming standard any time soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do people really expect this to take off any time soon?
Do you realize the infrastructure that's going to be needed to be deployed regionally to make this work?
In it's current state is nearly maxes out a basic cable connection.
I just don't foresee it becoming standard any time soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220995</id>
	<title>Sensible next consoles.</title>
	<author>Brit\_in\_the\_USA</author>
	<datestamp>1244209980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As I see it the sensible next gen console step for MS and Sony is to just expand on their current technology rather than starting again from scratch and waiting 1-2 years for Developers to catch up.
<br> <br>
If Sony's PS4 was a PS3 with 2 cell chips and latest Nvidia Graphics (say 260 derived) and the Xbox (3?) upgraded to a 6-8 core power PC chip from the current 3 core device with latest generation ATI graphics (derived form their latest DirectX11 chip) then maintaining backwards comaptibility should be relatively straight forward compared to the present v last generation (where both Sony and MS changed graphics chip technology and CPU technology). As such all the SDK and debug tools could be carried over in an updated form. Developers could hit the ground running....</htmltext>
<tokenext>As I see it the sensible next gen console step for MS and Sony is to just expand on their current technology rather than starting again from scratch and waiting 1-2 years for Developers to catch up .
If Sony 's PS4 was a PS3 with 2 cell chips and latest Nvidia Graphics ( say 260 derived ) and the Xbox ( 3 ?
) upgraded to a 6-8 core power PC chip from the current 3 core device with latest generation ATI graphics ( derived form their latest DirectX11 chip ) then maintaining backwards comaptibility should be relatively straight forward compared to the present v last generation ( where both Sony and MS changed graphics chip technology and CPU technology ) .
As such all the SDK and debug tools could be carried over in an updated form .
Developers could hit the ground running... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I see it the sensible next gen console step for MS and Sony is to just expand on their current technology rather than starting again from scratch and waiting 1-2 years for Developers to catch up.
If Sony's PS4 was a PS3 with 2 cell chips and latest Nvidia Graphics (say 260 derived) and the Xbox (3?
) upgraded to a 6-8 core power PC chip from the current 3 core device with latest generation ATI graphics (derived form their latest DirectX11 chip) then maintaining backwards comaptibility should be relatively straight forward compared to the present v last generation (where both Sony and MS changed graphics chip technology and CPU technology).
As such all the SDK and debug tools could be carried over in an updated form.
Developers could hit the ground running....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28228643</id>
	<title>Yeah but</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244203680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>we've had 1st person shooters since the late 90's and The Sims since 2000 &amp; Sandbox gameplay since 1999 (Shenmue). As far as I see it's been 10 years since hardware's enabled new forms of gameplay. I haven't seen anything new in this generation. At least the PS2 gen felt like it was perfecting what was started with the PS1. This gen just feels like a rehash. Heck, even the Wii is just the Powerglove with more sensors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we 've had 1st person shooters since the late 90 's and The Sims since 2000 &amp; Sandbox gameplay since 1999 ( Shenmue ) .
As far as I see it 's been 10 years since hardware 's enabled new forms of gameplay .
I have n't seen anything new in this generation .
At least the PS2 gen felt like it was perfecting what was started with the PS1 .
This gen just feels like a rehash .
Heck , even the Wii is just the Powerglove with more sensors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we've had 1st person shooters since the late 90's and The Sims since 2000 &amp; Sandbox gameplay since 1999 (Shenmue).
As far as I see it's been 10 years since hardware's enabled new forms of gameplay.
I haven't seen anything new in this generation.
At least the PS2 gen felt like it was perfecting what was started with the PS1.
This gen just feels like a rehash.
Heck, even the Wii is just the Powerglove with more sensors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220377</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221787</id>
	<title>PS3 held back by Xbox360, Wii under-used</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1244213940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From what we keep reading, we haven't even seen what the PS3 is really capable of. We keep hearing about games being made for Xbox360 then ported to PS3, with the Xbox360 being the baseline, etc.</p><p>Also, with the new Metroid game, we finally see what the Wii is capable of and it's far from cartoony graphics.</p><p>In any case, what matters is games and how far can developers push the hardware. I have a Wii for Zelda and Metroid games, and I'll probably be getting a PS3 to play FF XIV Online. I sure hope I can transfer my character from FF XI Online...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From what we keep reading , we have n't even seen what the PS3 is really capable of .
We keep hearing about games being made for Xbox360 then ported to PS3 , with the Xbox360 being the baseline , etc.Also , with the new Metroid game , we finally see what the Wii is capable of and it 's far from cartoony graphics.In any case , what matters is games and how far can developers push the hardware .
I have a Wii for Zelda and Metroid games , and I 'll probably be getting a PS3 to play FF XIV Online .
I sure hope I can transfer my character from FF XI Online.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what we keep reading, we haven't even seen what the PS3 is really capable of.
We keep hearing about games being made for Xbox360 then ported to PS3, with the Xbox360 being the baseline, etc.Also, with the new Metroid game, we finally see what the Wii is capable of and it's far from cartoony graphics.In any case, what matters is games and how far can developers push the hardware.
I have a Wii for Zelda and Metroid games, and I'll probably be getting a PS3 to play FF XIV Online.
I sure hope I can transfer my character from FF XI Online...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221009</id>
	<title>The next gen</title>
	<author>8tim8</author>
	<datestamp>1244210160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;... we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch.</p><p>Man, wouldn't it be funny if Nintendo did a hardware refresh in a year or so and called it a next generation machine?  They could make it backwards compatible to the Wii, have simultaneous releases for both systems, but distract Sony and MS to no end.  But would it be the Wii2, or the WiiII (or Wiii)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; ... we do n't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch.Man , would n't it be funny if Nintendo did a hardware refresh in a year or so and called it a next generation machine ?
They could make it backwards compatible to the Wii , have simultaneous releases for both systems , but distract Sony and MS to no end .
But would it be the Wii2 , or the WiiII ( or Wiii ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;... we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch.Man, wouldn't it be funny if Nintendo did a hardware refresh in a year or so and called it a next generation machine?
They could make it backwards compatible to the Wii, have simultaneous releases for both systems, but distract Sony and MS to no end.
But would it be the Wii2, or the WiiII (or Wiii)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220373</id>
	<title>I Like This</title>
	<author>ChinggisK</author>
	<datestamp>1244205300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe this time they will have time to come down in price enough for me to actually be able to afford to buy one of each before the next generation comes around.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe this time they will have time to come down in price enough for me to actually be able to afford to buy one of each before the next generation comes around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe this time they will have time to come down in price enough for me to actually be able to afford to buy one of each before the next generation comes around.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222389</id>
	<title>Re:Longer console lifecycle will kill them</title>
	<author>somersault</author>
	<datestamp>1244216700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While improvements in graphics are nice, improvements in processing capability and storage space for physics simulation, collision detection, freeroaming and/or destructible environments are the things that have been responsible for most of the improvements in gameplay over the last few years. More realistic control systems do make games more fun. Think of using a steering wheel compared to a joypad - the joypad is often a lot easier because of the tiny motions necessary to go from lock to lock for counter-steering and such, but the steering wheel is much more fun. Same with having a full joystick and throttle setup for flight sims. Wii Fit has shown that people are happy to be up and active while playing games too. If there was some 360 degree motion sensing treadmill attachment that let you actually do all the walking and running etc in games then I would definitely buy one (though games would need a headset too to really be able to work with it, then you could add rumble and gradient capability to the treadmill, etc), even if it cost a thousand pounds - it would be a lot more fun than a normal treadmill or going for a jog etc. Then there would be no need for artificial limits to a character's ability to sprint in games like GTA etc. Games could be true RPGs where you improve your own health and skill rather than some arbitrary numbers for your character's stats. In beat'em'ups you wouldn't have to get pissed off that a character takes so long to break a combo sequence or throw a kick etc because it would be all your own movements. Obviously unhealthy or disabled people wouldn't quite like that idea so much, but they could still use conventional control methods.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While improvements in graphics are nice , improvements in processing capability and storage space for physics simulation , collision detection , freeroaming and/or destructible environments are the things that have been responsible for most of the improvements in gameplay over the last few years .
More realistic control systems do make games more fun .
Think of using a steering wheel compared to a joypad - the joypad is often a lot easier because of the tiny motions necessary to go from lock to lock for counter-steering and such , but the steering wheel is much more fun .
Same with having a full joystick and throttle setup for flight sims .
Wii Fit has shown that people are happy to be up and active while playing games too .
If there was some 360 degree motion sensing treadmill attachment that let you actually do all the walking and running etc in games then I would definitely buy one ( though games would need a headset too to really be able to work with it , then you could add rumble and gradient capability to the treadmill , etc ) , even if it cost a thousand pounds - it would be a lot more fun than a normal treadmill or going for a jog etc .
Then there would be no need for artificial limits to a character 's ability to sprint in games like GTA etc .
Games could be true RPGs where you improve your own health and skill rather than some arbitrary numbers for your character 's stats .
In beat'em'ups you would n't have to get pissed off that a character takes so long to break a combo sequence or throw a kick etc because it would be all your own movements .
Obviously unhealthy or disabled people would n't quite like that idea so much , but they could still use conventional control methods .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While improvements in graphics are nice, improvements in processing capability and storage space for physics simulation, collision detection, freeroaming and/or destructible environments are the things that have been responsible for most of the improvements in gameplay over the last few years.
More realistic control systems do make games more fun.
Think of using a steering wheel compared to a joypad - the joypad is often a lot easier because of the tiny motions necessary to go from lock to lock for counter-steering and such, but the steering wheel is much more fun.
Same with having a full joystick and throttle setup for flight sims.
Wii Fit has shown that people are happy to be up and active while playing games too.
If there was some 360 degree motion sensing treadmill attachment that let you actually do all the walking and running etc in games then I would definitely buy one (though games would need a headset too to really be able to work with it, then you could add rumble and gradient capability to the treadmill, etc), even if it cost a thousand pounds - it would be a lot more fun than a normal treadmill or going for a jog etc.
Then there would be no need for artificial limits to a character's ability to sprint in games like GTA etc.
Games could be true RPGs where you improve your own health and skill rather than some arbitrary numbers for your character's stats.
In beat'em'ups you wouldn't have to get pissed off that a character takes so long to break a combo sequence or throw a kick etc because it would be all your own movements.
Obviously unhealthy or disabled people wouldn't quite like that idea so much, but they could still use conventional control methods.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220179</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>Nursie</author>
	<datestamp>1244202780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, it's a hell of a lot more than macho posturing.</p><p>The GFX on the Wii look pretty poor on a decent sized 1080p capable panel. The Wii is sorely underpowered for today's display tech.</p><p>Now, it's still good fun, but I really don't buy into this horrible fanboyish meme that seems to hae taken hold, that the two are somehow exclusive. You CAN have both. There is no reason that bad graphics make good games. A Wii or other machine with Wii-like controllers and Wii-like games but with and updated GFX hardware would be great.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , it 's a hell of a lot more than macho posturing.The GFX on the Wii look pretty poor on a decent sized 1080p capable panel .
The Wii is sorely underpowered for today 's display tech.Now , it 's still good fun , but I really do n't buy into this horrible fanboyish meme that seems to hae taken hold , that the two are somehow exclusive .
You CAN have both .
There is no reason that bad graphics make good games .
A Wii or other machine with Wii-like controllers and Wii-like games but with and updated GFX hardware would be great .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, it's a hell of a lot more than macho posturing.The GFX on the Wii look pretty poor on a decent sized 1080p capable panel.
The Wii is sorely underpowered for today's display tech.Now, it's still good fun, but I really don't buy into this horrible fanboyish meme that seems to hae taken hold, that the two are somehow exclusive.
You CAN have both.
There is no reason that bad graphics make good games.
A Wii or other machine with Wii-like controllers and Wii-like games but with and updated GFX hardware would be great.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220827</id>
	<title>Cause and effect, people...</title>
	<author>hal2814</author>
	<datestamp>1244208960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Motion controls are NOT lengthening the current console life cycle.  That wasn't implied in the article and the notion itself is absurd.  Analyst believe that because the console makers are devoting significant time and effort to producing new hardware for consoles that will be 3-4 years old by the time that hardware is released, it is a sign the console makers are planning on stretching out the usual console life cycle.  Motion detection is not the cause.  Motion detection hardware is being shown as evidence of a hypothesis that at least Sony has publicly confirmed long ago: video game consoles will be released at a slower pace than previously.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Motion controls are NOT lengthening the current console life cycle .
That was n't implied in the article and the notion itself is absurd .
Analyst believe that because the console makers are devoting significant time and effort to producing new hardware for consoles that will be 3-4 years old by the time that hardware is released , it is a sign the console makers are planning on stretching out the usual console life cycle .
Motion detection is not the cause .
Motion detection hardware is being shown as evidence of a hypothesis that at least Sony has publicly confirmed long ago : video game consoles will be released at a slower pace than previously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Motion controls are NOT lengthening the current console life cycle.
That wasn't implied in the article and the notion itself is absurd.
Analyst believe that because the console makers are devoting significant time and effort to producing new hardware for consoles that will be 3-4 years old by the time that hardware is released, it is a sign the console makers are planning on stretching out the usual console life cycle.
Motion detection is not the cause.
Motion detection hardware is being shown as evidence of a hypothesis that at least Sony has publicly confirmed long ago: video game consoles will be released at a slower pace than previously.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219865</id>
	<title>XBox 360 looks promising</title>
	<author>moon3</author>
	<datestamp>1244199240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The three general purpose cores (3.2GHz each) on X360 is what gives Microsoft the edge here. You can have Natal on core 2, your game on core 1 and system on core 3, everything runs smooth and relaxed. That means the extension like Natal can really be complex and well done. On PS3 you have only 1 general purpose core, that gives you some perspective of limited options.. This architectural advantage gives Microsoft headroom for future improvement.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The three general purpose cores ( 3.2GHz each ) on X360 is what gives Microsoft the edge here .
You can have Natal on core 2 , your game on core 1 and system on core 3 , everything runs smooth and relaxed .
That means the extension like Natal can really be complex and well done .
On PS3 you have only 1 general purpose core , that gives you some perspective of limited options.. This architectural advantage gives Microsoft headroom for future improvement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The three general purpose cores (3.2GHz each) on X360 is what gives Microsoft the edge here.
You can have Natal on core 2, your game on core 1 and system on core 3, everything runs smooth and relaxed.
That means the extension like Natal can really be complex and well done.
On PS3 you have only 1 general purpose core, that gives you some perspective of limited options.. This architectural advantage gives Microsoft headroom for future improvement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222751</id>
	<title>Re:Why it won't work.</title>
	<author>somersault</author>
	<datestamp>1244218080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sony's system literally can't be any worse than the Wii for pointing - they could do exactly the same trick that the Wii does if they want, and in reality they can do better if you can somehow define exactly where your TV is in relation to the camera, how big it is etc. The only reason Wii games seem better for pointing than the Sony tech demo is because they show a crosshair on screen, whereas the guy in the tech demo often had to physically control an object on screen and then guess where it was pointing. When it actually came to using something with a crosshair (the crossbow demo), it was just the same as the Wii-mote - and like I said, it has the level of tracking precision to work more like a light gun if they wanted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sony 's system literally ca n't be any worse than the Wii for pointing - they could do exactly the same trick that the Wii does if they want , and in reality they can do better if you can somehow define exactly where your TV is in relation to the camera , how big it is etc .
The only reason Wii games seem better for pointing than the Sony tech demo is because they show a crosshair on screen , whereas the guy in the tech demo often had to physically control an object on screen and then guess where it was pointing .
When it actually came to using something with a crosshair ( the crossbow demo ) , it was just the same as the Wii-mote - and like I said , it has the level of tracking precision to work more like a light gun if they wanted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sony's system literally can't be any worse than the Wii for pointing - they could do exactly the same trick that the Wii does if they want, and in reality they can do better if you can somehow define exactly where your TV is in relation to the camera, how big it is etc.
The only reason Wii games seem better for pointing than the Sony tech demo is because they show a crosshair on screen, whereas the guy in the tech demo often had to physically control an object on screen and then guess where it was pointing.
When it actually came to using something with a crosshair (the crossbow demo), it was just the same as the Wii-mote - and like I said, it has the level of tracking precision to work more like a light gun if they wanted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219757</id>
	<title>OnLive making up for Hardware ageing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244197560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"if new services like OnLive take off, or if Xbox Live and PlayStation Network become more and more robust, there may not be a need for another console cycle" --</p><p>How would great online service and downloadable content make up for the hardware staying the same? Thats like saying "Hey, we have the internet now: where people can download games and movies instead of going to the store to buy them. Lets just stop making faster CPU's and GPU's and let people be content with what they have."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" if new services like OnLive take off , or if Xbox Live and PlayStation Network become more and more robust , there may not be a need for another console cycle " --How would great online service and downloadable content make up for the hardware staying the same ?
Thats like saying " Hey , we have the internet now : where people can download games and movies instead of going to the store to buy them .
Lets just stop making faster CPU 's and GPU 's and let people be content with what they have .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"if new services like OnLive take off, or if Xbox Live and PlayStation Network become more and more robust, there may not be a need for another console cycle" --How would great online service and downloadable content make up for the hardware staying the same?
Thats like saying "Hey, we have the internet now: where people can download games and movies instead of going to the store to buy them.
Lets just stop making faster CPU's and GPU's and let people be content with what they have.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219815</id>
	<title>The next-gen console to rule all consoles...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244198580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't the XBox 720 on the drawing board at Microsoft?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the XBox 720 on the drawing board at Microsoft ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the XBox 720 on the drawing board at Microsoft?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28226277</id>
	<title>Easiest Job Ever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244232480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, anyway I can get paid to take obvious generalities and make baseless predictions? 2011 at the earliest, oh god it's as if there's a six year console cycle! No one could ever have predicted that, no siree.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , anyway I can get paid to take obvious generalities and make baseless predictions ?
2011 at the earliest , oh god it 's as if there 's a six year console cycle !
No one could ever have predicted that , no siree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, anyway I can get paid to take obvious generalities and make baseless predictions?
2011 at the earliest, oh god it's as if there's a six year console cycle!
No one could ever have predicted that, no siree.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224201</id>
	<title>Re:Longer console lifecycle will kill them</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244223420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is only really true for Microsoft and Sony. Nintendo has made a business model that allows for big profits out of the gate. As sales begin to trail off, it makes financial sense for Nintendo to release new hardware, because their investment has already paid off. The give-away-the-razor strategy of Sony and MS means that their profits peak later in the cycle. This leaves them far less flexibility.</p><p>I mean look at Sony touting PS2 sales numbers. They are desperate for something to turn a profit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is only really true for Microsoft and Sony .
Nintendo has made a business model that allows for big profits out of the gate .
As sales begin to trail off , it makes financial sense for Nintendo to release new hardware , because their investment has already paid off .
The give-away-the-razor strategy of Sony and MS means that their profits peak later in the cycle .
This leaves them far less flexibility.I mean look at Sony touting PS2 sales numbers .
They are desperate for something to turn a profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is only really true for Microsoft and Sony.
Nintendo has made a business model that allows for big profits out of the gate.
As sales begin to trail off, it makes financial sense for Nintendo to release new hardware, because their investment has already paid off.
The give-away-the-razor strategy of Sony and MS means that their profits peak later in the cycle.
This leaves them far less flexibility.I mean look at Sony touting PS2 sales numbers.
They are desperate for something to turn a profit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220207</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224061</id>
	<title>Re:Some genres just weren't possible on the 8-bits</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244222820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>The hardware is good enough for good games. It has been since the Commodore 64.</p></div><p>Could the Commodore 64 have run a first-person shooter like the <i>Doom</i> or <i>Quake</i> or <i>Unreal</i> series in real time? (Probably not; no 3D rasterizing hardware nor sufficiently fast CPU.)</p> </div><p>Mercenary: Escape from the Targ</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The hardware is good enough for good games .
It has been since the Commodore 64.Could the Commodore 64 have run a first-person shooter like the Doom or Quake or Unreal series in real time ?
( Probably not ; no 3D rasterizing hardware nor sufficiently fast CPU .
) Mercenary : Escape from the Targ</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hardware is good enough for good games.
It has been since the Commodore 64.Could the Commodore 64 have run a first-person shooter like the Doom or Quake or Unreal series in real time?
(Probably not; no 3D rasterizing hardware nor sufficiently fast CPU.
) Mercenary: Escape from the Targ
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220377</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219903</id>
	<title>Re:Blu-Ray...</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1244199660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a cultural change, games requiring motion.  In ten years, any game controlled by a gamepad will be considered unplayable, and gamers will be known for fine physiques.  I've been wanting this to happen for a long time.  Why can't your computer be powered partly by a bicycle wheel, while the computer monitors your exercise and requests power from time to time?  Don't pedal when the computer tells you to, and your computer shuts down.  Expansion kits for arms and torso exercises.<p>Oh, right - this discriminates against the disabled.  Well, it was a good idea while it lasted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a cultural change , games requiring motion .
In ten years , any game controlled by a gamepad will be considered unplayable , and gamers will be known for fine physiques .
I 've been wanting this to happen for a long time .
Why ca n't your computer be powered partly by a bicycle wheel , while the computer monitors your exercise and requests power from time to time ?
Do n't pedal when the computer tells you to , and your computer shuts down .
Expansion kits for arms and torso exercises.Oh , right - this discriminates against the disabled .
Well , it was a good idea while it lasted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a cultural change, games requiring motion.
In ten years, any game controlled by a gamepad will be considered unplayable, and gamers will be known for fine physiques.
I've been wanting this to happen for a long time.
Why can't your computer be powered partly by a bicycle wheel, while the computer monitors your exercise and requests power from time to time?
Don't pedal when the computer tells you to, and your computer shuts down.
Expansion kits for arms and torso exercises.Oh, right - this discriminates against the disabled.
Well, it was a good idea while it lasted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28225893</id>
	<title>Re:The next-gen console to rule all consoles...</title>
	<author>creimer</author>
	<datestamp>1244230500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Still no answer to my question.  The mods are being redundant today. Here's a <a href="http://www.videogamesblogger.com/2007/03/13/next-xbox-720-to-launch-in-2011-2012-according-to-microsoft.htm" title="videogamesblogger.com">blog post</a> [videogamesblogger.com] to chew on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Still no answer to my question .
The mods are being redundant today .
Here 's a blog post [ videogamesblogger.com ] to chew on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still no answer to my question.
The mods are being redundant today.
Here's a blog post [videogamesblogger.com] to chew on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220629</id>
	<title>Re:Blu-Ray...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244207400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The life blood of gaming, less casual, more hardcore gamers, are the ones who play games like Oblivion, Unreal Tournament, Starcraft, Diablo, etc.</p></div></blockquote><p>
You call that hardcore? Those sound pretty mainstream to me. Think again: Actraiser, Shinobi, Alien Soldier, Ikaruga, Mark of the Wolves, Metal Slug, Zillion, Killer7, Ico, Snatcher... now those are hardcore!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The life blood of gaming , less casual , more hardcore gamers , are the ones who play games like Oblivion , Unreal Tournament , Starcraft , Diablo , etc .
You call that hardcore ?
Those sound pretty mainstream to me .
Think again : Actraiser , Shinobi , Alien Soldier , Ikaruga , Mark of the Wolves , Metal Slug , Zillion , Killer7 , Ico , Snatcher... now those are hardcore !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The life blood of gaming, less casual, more hardcore gamers, are the ones who play games like Oblivion, Unreal Tournament, Starcraft, Diablo, etc.
You call that hardcore?
Those sound pretty mainstream to me.
Think again: Actraiser, Shinobi, Alien Soldier, Ikaruga, Mark of the Wolves, Metal Slug, Zillion, Killer7, Ico, Snatcher... now those are hardcore!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28231831</id>
	<title>lol</title>
	<author>Nyder</author>
	<datestamp>1244293500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>oh yes, a motion detector is going to magicly make the consoles last longer.</p><p>um, how about the high cost to make the consoles?  Or the longer development time for games?</p><p>Or how about when everyone in the USA gets FIOS (even though comcast is trying to keep us copper connected), and we actually have some decent latencies, gaming can end up being played on big ass servers somewhere and streamed to your console?</p><p>The current generation of consoles are probably going to be the last because they are too expensive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>oh yes , a motion detector is going to magicly make the consoles last longer.um , how about the high cost to make the consoles ?
Or the longer development time for games ? Or how about when everyone in the USA gets FIOS ( even though comcast is trying to keep us copper connected ) , and we actually have some decent latencies , gaming can end up being played on big ass servers somewhere and streamed to your console ? The current generation of consoles are probably going to be the last because they are too expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh yes, a motion detector is going to magicly make the consoles last longer.um, how about the high cost to make the consoles?
Or the longer development time for games?Or how about when everyone in the USA gets FIOS (even though comcast is trying to keep us copper connected), and we actually have some decent latencies, gaming can end up being played on big ass servers somewhere and streamed to your console?The current generation of consoles are probably going to be the last because they are too expensive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>Jurily</author>
	<datestamp>1244199000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is the XBox 360/PS3 really the pinnacle of console gaming for the next 5 years?</p></div><p>The hardware is good enough for good games. It has been since the Commodore 64. The problem is, games are more and more boring.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the XBox 360/PS3 really the pinnacle of console gaming for the next 5 years ? The hardware is good enough for good games .
It has been since the Commodore 64 .
The problem is , games are more and more boring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the XBox 360/PS3 really the pinnacle of console gaming for the next 5 years?The hardware is good enough for good games.
It has been since the Commodore 64.
The problem is, games are more and more boring.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220031</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>Balinares</author>
	<datestamp>1244201100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Have we really reached the point where "Good enough is"</p><p>No. I'd say we reached it one generation ago. More precisely: one generation ago is when we've reached the point where <i>style</i> matters more than polycount. Not saying that next-gen games aren't awfully pretty: some are. What I'm saying, though, is that there are many ways to go for pretty, and polycount and high-resolution aren't fundamental to a good number of those. See Okami, for instance.</p><p>I suspect this is the lesson Nintendo learned. Last generation, they had (arguably) the best hardware, and while they made the most money of all three console hardware makers (owing to their policy not to sell at a loss), the GameCube is not a terribly big commercial success. So they went a different road this time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Have we really reached the point where " Good enough is " No .
I 'd say we reached it one generation ago .
More precisely : one generation ago is when we 've reached the point where style matters more than polycount .
Not saying that next-gen games are n't awfully pretty : some are .
What I 'm saying , though , is that there are many ways to go for pretty , and polycount and high-resolution are n't fundamental to a good number of those .
See Okami , for instance.I suspect this is the lesson Nintendo learned .
Last generation , they had ( arguably ) the best hardware , and while they made the most money of all three console hardware makers ( owing to their policy not to sell at a loss ) , the GameCube is not a terribly big commercial success .
So they went a different road this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Have we really reached the point where "Good enough is"No.
I'd say we reached it one generation ago.
More precisely: one generation ago is when we've reached the point where style matters more than polycount.
Not saying that next-gen games aren't awfully pretty: some are.
What I'm saying, though, is that there are many ways to go for pretty, and polycount and high-resolution aren't fundamental to a good number of those.
See Okami, for instance.I suspect this is the lesson Nintendo learned.
Last generation, they had (arguably) the best hardware, and while they made the most money of all three console hardware makers (owing to their policy not to sell at a loss), the GameCube is not a terribly big commercial success.
So they went a different road this time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221047</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>bwalling</author>
	<datestamp>1244210400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Two thoughts:

First, it's not 720 or 1080, but the Wii really doesn't look that bad.  Outside of the first 10 minutes of playing any game, I generally forget completely about the quality of the graphics.  It's a first impression that doesn't mean much.  The same actually goes for the motion controls - they make it easier to learn, but that only matters for a short period.  After that, I'm just playing the game.

Second, both paradigms have their problems.  With the Wii, sometimes going ga-ga over motion controls leads to crappy games.  With the PS3/360, sometimes going ga-ga over graphics leads to crappy games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Two thoughts : First , it 's not 720 or 1080 , but the Wii really does n't look that bad .
Outside of the first 10 minutes of playing any game , I generally forget completely about the quality of the graphics .
It 's a first impression that does n't mean much .
The same actually goes for the motion controls - they make it easier to learn , but that only matters for a short period .
After that , I 'm just playing the game .
Second , both paradigms have their problems .
With the Wii , sometimes going ga-ga over motion controls leads to crappy games .
With the PS3/360 , sometimes going ga-ga over graphics leads to crappy games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two thoughts:

First, it's not 720 or 1080, but the Wii really doesn't look that bad.
Outside of the first 10 minutes of playing any game, I generally forget completely about the quality of the graphics.
It's a first impression that doesn't mean much.
The same actually goes for the motion controls - they make it easier to learn, but that only matters for a short period.
After that, I'm just playing the game.
Second, both paradigms have their problems.
With the Wii, sometimes going ga-ga over motion controls leads to crappy games.
With the PS3/360, sometimes going ga-ga over graphics leads to crappy games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220179</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219755</id>
	<title>That early?</title>
	<author>Daemonax</author>
	<datestamp>1244197440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm still waiting for the price of a PS3 to come down to a ridiculous price, right now they have a ludicrous price.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm still waiting for the price of a PS3 to come down to a ridiculous price , right now they have a ludicrous price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm still waiting for the price of a PS3 to come down to a ridiculous price, right now they have a ludicrous price.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221901</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>Deag</author>
	<datestamp>1244214480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really the commodore 64 met all your requirements? Really? Do yourself a favor, take of the rose tinted glasses, and play a modern game for a while. You can pause the game and wait for half an hour before you can play it if it makes you more comfortable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really the commodore 64 met all your requirements ?
Really ? Do yourself a favor , take of the rose tinted glasses , and play a modern game for a while .
You can pause the game and wait for half an hour before you can play it if it makes you more comfortable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really the commodore 64 met all your requirements?
Really? Do yourself a favor, take of the rose tinted glasses, and play a modern game for a while.
You can pause the game and wait for half an hour before you can play it if it makes you more comfortable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222269</id>
	<title>Re:Blu-Ray...</title>
	<author>IrquiM</author>
	<datestamp>1244216220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What feedback solutions are you looking for?</p><p>I imagine a controller for PS3 with rumble enabled would actually provide "OK" feedback response.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What feedback solutions are you looking for ? I imagine a controller for PS3 with rumble enabled would actually provide " OK " feedback response .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What feedback solutions are you looking for?I imagine a controller for PS3 with rumble enabled would actually provide "OK" feedback response.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220207</id>
	<title>Re:Longer console lifecycle will kill them</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1244203140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not convinced that the "waning interest of consumers" actually exists outside of a niche. Console manufacturers make the most money during the tail-end of the cycle, when the console is affordable by the massmarket and is being produced at a profit or at least a significantly smaller loss. The manufacturers actually don't make a whole lot of money during the period in which it's being sold to "gamers [...] constantly looking for the latest and greatest". Those customers are a necessary part of getting the word out, but the people that Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are really keen to please are the people who grab the system and a half-dozen three-year-old games for $300 at Walmart.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not convinced that the " waning interest of consumers " actually exists outside of a niche .
Console manufacturers make the most money during the tail-end of the cycle , when the console is affordable by the massmarket and is being produced at a profit or at least a significantly smaller loss .
The manufacturers actually do n't make a whole lot of money during the period in which it 's being sold to " gamers [ ... ] constantly looking for the latest and greatest " .
Those customers are a necessary part of getting the word out , but the people that Microsoft , Sony and Nintendo are really keen to please are the people who grab the system and a half-dozen three-year-old games for $ 300 at Walmart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not convinced that the "waning interest of consumers" actually exists outside of a niche.
Console manufacturers make the most money during the tail-end of the cycle, when the console is affordable by the massmarket and is being produced at a profit or at least a significantly smaller loss.
The manufacturers actually don't make a whole lot of money during the period in which it's being sold to "gamers [...] constantly looking for the latest and greatest".
Those customers are a necessary part of getting the word out, but the people that Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are really keen to please are the people who grab the system and a half-dozen three-year-old games for $300 at Walmart.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28262145</id>
	<title>Re:Some genres just weren't possible on the 8-bits</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244489040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>     Two games you should research:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 1) Ballblazer<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2) Sublogic Flight Simulator</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Ballblazer was a very fast-paced, 3d basically soccer game, where your ship would try to propel this ball through a goal, and you'd block the opponent from knocking it through your goal; the 2 players would have a split-screen 3D view of the field, it really looked good.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Flight Simulator didn't look great but managed to run on a 1mhz Atari 8-bit computer.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I do obviously see your point though, I'm sure these both used tricks, 3d hardware is easier to use in general.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two games you should research :           1 ) Ballblazer           2 ) Sublogic Flight Simulator           Ballblazer was a very fast-paced , 3d basically soccer game , where your ship would try to propel this ball through a goal , and you 'd block the opponent from knocking it through your goal ; the 2 players would have a split-screen 3D view of the field , it really looked good .
            Flight Simulator did n't look great but managed to run on a 1mhz Atari 8-bit computer .
            I do obviously see your point though , I 'm sure these both used tricks , 3d hardware is easier to use in general .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>     Two games you should research:
          1) Ballblazer
          2) Sublogic Flight Simulator
          Ballblazer was a very fast-paced, 3d basically soccer game, where your ship would try to propel this ball through a goal, and you'd block the opponent from knocking it through your goal; the 2 players would have a split-screen 3D view of the field, it really looked good.
            Flight Simulator didn't look great but managed to run on a 1mhz Atari 8-bit computer.
            I do obviously see your point though, I'm sure these both used tricks, 3d hardware is easier to use in general.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220377</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220657</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>Xugumad</author>
	<datestamp>1244207580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; The GFX on the Wii look pretty poor on a decent sized 1080p capable panel.</p><p>They look like a smeared mess, IMHO.</p><p>What bothers me isn't that it can't do HD, but that it doesn't even do an on-board upscale. If it did the upscale as graphics were written into the image buffer, it could get a MUCH better upscaling than any TV could do to the content, by understanding it better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The GFX on the Wii look pretty poor on a decent sized 1080p capable panel.They look like a smeared mess , IMHO.What bothers me is n't that it ca n't do HD , but that it does n't even do an on-board upscale .
If it did the upscale as graphics were written into the image buffer , it could get a MUCH better upscaling than any TV could do to the content , by understanding it better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; The GFX on the Wii look pretty poor on a decent sized 1080p capable panel.They look like a smeared mess, IMHO.What bothers me isn't that it can't do HD, but that it doesn't even do an on-board upscale.
If it did the upscale as graphics were written into the image buffer, it could get a MUCH better upscaling than any TV could do to the content, by understanding it better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220179</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221537</id>
	<title>Re:2015?</title>
	<author>Lord Ender</author>
	<datestamp>1244212740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, console graphics already look dated. Waiting until 2015 for the next version would be a big boost to PC gaming. NVIDIA and AMD sure aren't going to stop releasing graphics hardware, so people who want a modern gaming experience will have no choice but to go to the PC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , console graphics already look dated .
Waiting until 2015 for the next version would be a big boost to PC gaming .
NVIDIA and AMD sure are n't going to stop releasing graphics hardware , so people who want a modern gaming experience will have no choice but to go to the PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, console graphics already look dated.
Waiting until 2015 for the next version would be a big boost to PC gaming.
NVIDIA and AMD sure aren't going to stop releasing graphics hardware, so people who want a modern gaming experience will have no choice but to go to the PC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219849</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>The Nipponese</author>
	<datestamp>1244199000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thankfully we've come to the point where network firmware upgrades keep the the console UX fresh. On top of that, Microsoft has been gradually adding specs to the 360 over the years. I am constantly surprised by the number of people who "just bought another one" because their previous 360 was lacking HDMI, or just didn't want to go through the hassle of M$ replacing it after falling prey to the RRoD. How long will be before M$ just says, "ok, let's add a new GPU to the existing hardware and call it the Ultra model?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thankfully we 've come to the point where network firmware upgrades keep the the console UX fresh .
On top of that , Microsoft has been gradually adding specs to the 360 over the years .
I am constantly surprised by the number of people who " just bought another one " because their previous 360 was lacking HDMI , or just did n't want to go through the hassle of M $ replacing it after falling prey to the RRoD .
How long will be before M $ just says , " ok , let 's add a new GPU to the existing hardware and call it the Ultra model ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thankfully we've come to the point where network firmware upgrades keep the the console UX fresh.
On top of that, Microsoft has been gradually adding specs to the 360 over the years.
I am constantly surprised by the number of people who "just bought another one" because their previous 360 was lacking HDMI, or just didn't want to go through the hassle of M$ replacing it after falling prey to the RRoD.
How long will be before M$ just says, "ok, let's add a new GPU to the existing hardware and call it the Ultra model?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751</id>
	<title>Good enough is?</title>
	<author>Canazza</author>
	<datestamp>1244197380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have we really reached the point where "Good enough is"<br>Is the XBox 360/PS3 really the pinnacle of console gaming for the next 5 years?<br>With the Wii selling bucketloads more initially than anything else, despite having inferior graphics hardware, have the other two finally realised that Faster chips, bigger numbers and impressive specs are really just nothing more than macho posturing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have we really reached the point where " Good enough is " Is the XBox 360/PS3 really the pinnacle of console gaming for the next 5 years ? With the Wii selling bucketloads more initially than anything else , despite having inferior graphics hardware , have the other two finally realised that Faster chips , bigger numbers and impressive specs are really just nothing more than macho posturing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have we really reached the point where "Good enough is"Is the XBox 360/PS3 really the pinnacle of console gaming for the next 5 years?With the Wii selling bucketloads more initially than anything else, despite having inferior graphics hardware, have the other two finally realised that Faster chips, bigger numbers and impressive specs are really just nothing more than macho posturing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220507</id>
	<title>Does the PS Eye need a general purpose core?</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1244206380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>On PS3 you have only 1 general purpose core</p></div><p>The hypervisor in PS3 Other OS runs on a SPE core, not the general purpose core. I'd imagine that the new motion control system could likewise have an SPE dedicated to it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On PS3 you have only 1 general purpose coreThe hypervisor in PS3 Other OS runs on a SPE core , not the general purpose core .
I 'd imagine that the new motion control system could likewise have an SPE dedicated to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On PS3 you have only 1 general purpose coreThe hypervisor in PS3 Other OS runs on a SPE core, not the general purpose core.
I'd imagine that the new motion control system could likewise have an SPE dedicated to it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219865</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220977</id>
	<title>640K</title>
	<author>Alsee</author>
	<datestamp>1244209920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With the recent demonstrations of new 640K RAM computers, analysts now expect the current computer generation to last longer than normal. Signal Hill's Todd Greenwald thinks this cycle may not need to end at all: "Microsoft and Sony have invested so much in their current hardware line, as have third party publishers, that we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch. For all of these reasons, we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past, and don't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest, and 2012 to 2013 more likely if at all, there may not be a need for another computer cycle."</p><p>-</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the recent demonstrations of new 640K RAM computers , analysts now expect the current computer generation to last longer than normal .
Signal Hill 's Todd Greenwald thinks this cycle may not need to end at all : " Microsoft and Sony have invested so much in their current hardware line , as have third party publishers , that we do n't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch .
For all of these reasons , we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past , and do n't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest , and 2012 to 2013 more likely if at all , there may not be a need for another computer cycle .
" -</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the recent demonstrations of new 640K RAM computers, analysts now expect the current computer generation to last longer than normal.
Signal Hill's Todd Greenwald thinks this cycle may not need to end at all: "Microsoft and Sony have invested so much in their current hardware line, as have third party publishers, that we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch.
For all of these reasons, we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past, and don't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest, and 2012 to 2013 more likely if at all, there may not be a need for another computer cycle.
"-</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28225887</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1244230440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I HOPE so.  The fact that MS and Sony are scrambling for the leftovers of Nintendo's market might indicate that.<br> <br>

The graphically weakest console won this gen.  It won last gen.  Arguably it won the gen before.  I would rather see new features, new directions, than simply upping clock speeds.<br> <br>

For one thing, the increased graphics are putting a huge burden on developers.  They can't take risks on a 360 or PS3 game; it's a huge investment, like making a major motion picture... yet the product really isn't particularly more FUN than a DS game whipped out by a 5-man shop.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I HOPE so .
The fact that MS and Sony are scrambling for the leftovers of Nintendo 's market might indicate that .
The graphically weakest console won this gen. It won last gen. Arguably it won the gen before .
I would rather see new features , new directions , than simply upping clock speeds .
For one thing , the increased graphics are putting a huge burden on developers .
They ca n't take risks on a 360 or PS3 game ; it 's a huge investment , like making a major motion picture... yet the product really is n't particularly more FUN than a DS game whipped out by a 5-man shop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I HOPE so.
The fact that MS and Sony are scrambling for the leftovers of Nintendo's market might indicate that.
The graphically weakest console won this gen.  It won last gen.  Arguably it won the gen before.
I would rather see new features, new directions, than simply upping clock speeds.
For one thing, the increased graphics are putting a huge burden on developers.
They can't take risks on a 360 or PS3 game; it's a huge investment, like making a major motion picture... yet the product really isn't particularly more FUN than a DS game whipped out by a 5-man shop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224795</id>
	<title>Definitely true in my case</title>
	<author>tompaulco</author>
	<datestamp>1244225640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I absolutely agree with the article. If they decide to go motion control, then my current console will last me as long as they continue manufacturing it because I have no interest in upgrading to motion control.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I absolutely agree with the article .
If they decide to go motion control , then my current console will last me as long as they continue manufacturing it because I have no interest in upgrading to motion control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I absolutely agree with the article.
If they decide to go motion control, then my current console will last me as long as they continue manufacturing it because I have no interest in upgrading to motion control.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219857</id>
	<title>Wii will release out of cycle with the other two.</title>
	<author>miffo.swe</author>
	<datestamp>1244199120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While Sony and Microsoft has largely lost money so far on their consoles Nintendo has made bucketloads, ney truckloads of money on the Wii. Nintendo can now upgrade their console up to par with Sony and Microsoft for a much smaller cost than Microsoft and Sony can upgrade theirs.</p><p>The big question i have is if Nintendo will focus on making the controls for Wii better and more accurate or if they have other gimmicks up their sleeve.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While Sony and Microsoft has largely lost money so far on their consoles Nintendo has made bucketloads , ney truckloads of money on the Wii .
Nintendo can now upgrade their console up to par with Sony and Microsoft for a much smaller cost than Microsoft and Sony can upgrade theirs.The big question i have is if Nintendo will focus on making the controls for Wii better and more accurate or if they have other gimmicks up their sleeve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While Sony and Microsoft has largely lost money so far on their consoles Nintendo has made bucketloads, ney truckloads of money on the Wii.
Nintendo can now upgrade their console up to par with Sony and Microsoft for a much smaller cost than Microsoft and Sony can upgrade theirs.The big question i have is if Nintendo will focus on making the controls for Wii better and more accurate or if they have other gimmicks up their sleeve.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221999</id>
	<title>Re:Longer console lifecycle will kill them</title>
	<author>Gravatron</author>
	<datestamp>1244215020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd save the rise of realistic physics also allowed for new gameplay opportunities.  Games like Half-life 2 and LittleBigPlanet showed the power of true physics, by making the gameworld truly interactive, and for allowing the creations of worlds that behave as the user would really expect them to.  This opens up all kinds of gameplay possibilities.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd save the rise of realistic physics also allowed for new gameplay opportunities .
Games like Half-life 2 and LittleBigPlanet showed the power of true physics , by making the gameworld truly interactive , and for allowing the creations of worlds that behave as the user would really expect them to .
This opens up all kinds of gameplay possibilities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd save the rise of realistic physics also allowed for new gameplay opportunities.
Games like Half-life 2 and LittleBigPlanet showed the power of true physics, by making the gameworld truly interactive, and for allowing the creations of worlds that behave as the user would really expect them to.
This opens up all kinds of gameplay possibilities.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220197</id>
	<title>This cycle will be long, but not for that reason</title>
	<author>Bitmanhome</author>
	<datestamp>1244202900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason there's no new hardware from the console maker is that there is no new hardware from the chip makers.  We hit the GHz ceiling a couple years ago, and as a result today's chips aren't better by enough to make it worthwhile.</p><p>I suspect MS and Sony want to see where the multi-core thing is going (CPUs support a dozen complex threads, while GPUs support a few hundred simple threads.)  Will one line of chips take over the other?  Will we find masses of simple cores are better than a few complex cores?  Or will we find it's worth keeping a few complex cores on every chip?</p><p>Once we (or at least our researchers) can see where this is going, then the next-gen hardware development will start up again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason there 's no new hardware from the console maker is that there is no new hardware from the chip makers .
We hit the GHz ceiling a couple years ago , and as a result today 's chips are n't better by enough to make it worthwhile.I suspect MS and Sony want to see where the multi-core thing is going ( CPUs support a dozen complex threads , while GPUs support a few hundred simple threads .
) Will one line of chips take over the other ?
Will we find masses of simple cores are better than a few complex cores ?
Or will we find it 's worth keeping a few complex cores on every chip ? Once we ( or at least our researchers ) can see where this is going , then the next-gen hardware development will start up again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason there's no new hardware from the console maker is that there is no new hardware from the chip makers.
We hit the GHz ceiling a couple years ago, and as a result today's chips aren't better by enough to make it worthwhile.I suspect MS and Sony want to see where the multi-core thing is going (CPUs support a dozen complex threads, while GPUs support a few hundred simple threads.
)  Will one line of chips take over the other?
Will we find masses of simple cores are better than a few complex cores?
Or will we find it's worth keeping a few complex cores on every chip?Once we (or at least our researchers) can see where this is going, then the next-gen hardware development will start up again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221801</id>
	<title>Re:The next gen</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1244214000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wii Too (play on words, "we play too/Wii 2").</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wii Too ( play on words , " we play too/Wii 2 " ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wii Too (play on words, "we play too/Wii 2").</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221009</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222009</id>
	<title>Re:That early?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244215080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Barf: They've gone to plaid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Barf : They 've gone to plaid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Barf: They've gone to plaid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219755</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220291</id>
	<title>A non article if ever I saw one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244204280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's see:</p><blockquote><div><p>we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch.</p></div></blockquote><p>No, they're not going to start over from scratch. The cost of starting a new hardware platform is sufficiently high that they'll build upon their existing platforms in an evolutionary way, given how much red ink the MS and Sony platforms have bled. More powerful GPUs, more powerful CPUs (probably a higher core count, maybe a clock speed bump, possibly the return of out of order execution for the PS3 and Xbox's successor, more RAM, and maybe higher capacity media (almost certainly for the Xbox, possibly not for the PS3.)</p><blockquote><div><p>For all of these reasons, we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past, and don't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest, and 2012 to 2013 more likely</p></div></blockquote><p>Uh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... guys<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... look at the hardware release cycle in the past. Five to six years. When did these consoles come out? 2005, 2006? Wouldn't that make it 2011? Sheesh.</p><p>My feeling is that the first to the block with a new hardware platform will be Nintendo. The Wii was a very careful balancing act: more power than the Gamecube, but not so much as to push the initial costs into the stratosphere. They'll almost certainly do the same for the Wii's successor. Backwards compatibility with the Wii is pretty much certain. Gamecube compatibility? Maybe, but they may drop it to save a few bucks. Multi core? Perhaps, but it'll be multi core in the same way that desktop CPUs are multi core: full blown out of order execution, rather than sticking to strict in-order execution to cut down on the transistor count. More powerful GPU (possibly full HD compatibility this time, certainly 720p at a minimum.) More RAM. The usual list. What's going to be interesting with the Wii's successor will be what they end up doing with interfacing - Nintendo have always pushed the boundaries in their controllers, whilst Microsoft and Sony follow along behind.</p><p>After a year or two, maybe three, of Nintendo's new platform being on the market, we'll see Microsoft and Sony upgrade their systems. Or maybe they'll just throw new controllers at them and keep the existing hardware platform the same, which would mean that their "upgrades" would come much sooner than otherwise would be the case.</p><p>In any case, the winners will be the customers (in that more grunt comes at a lower price), and the losers will be the gaming studios as they try to cope with the demands inherent in developing for more powerful systems.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see : we do n't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch.No , they 're not going to start over from scratch .
The cost of starting a new hardware platform is sufficiently high that they 'll build upon their existing platforms in an evolutionary way , given how much red ink the MS and Sony platforms have bled .
More powerful GPUs , more powerful CPUs ( probably a higher core count , maybe a clock speed bump , possibly the return of out of order execution for the PS3 and Xbox 's successor , more RAM , and maybe higher capacity media ( almost certainly for the Xbox , possibly not for the PS3 .
) For all of these reasons , we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past , and do n't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest , and 2012 to 2013 more likelyUh ... guys ... look at the hardware release cycle in the past .
Five to six years .
When did these consoles come out ?
2005 , 2006 ?
Would n't that make it 2011 ?
Sheesh.My feeling is that the first to the block with a new hardware platform will be Nintendo .
The Wii was a very careful balancing act : more power than the Gamecube , but not so much as to push the initial costs into the stratosphere .
They 'll almost certainly do the same for the Wii 's successor .
Backwards compatibility with the Wii is pretty much certain .
Gamecube compatibility ?
Maybe , but they may drop it to save a few bucks .
Multi core ?
Perhaps , but it 'll be multi core in the same way that desktop CPUs are multi core : full blown out of order execution , rather than sticking to strict in-order execution to cut down on the transistor count .
More powerful GPU ( possibly full HD compatibility this time , certainly 720p at a minimum .
) More RAM .
The usual list .
What 's going to be interesting with the Wii 's successor will be what they end up doing with interfacing - Nintendo have always pushed the boundaries in their controllers , whilst Microsoft and Sony follow along behind.After a year or two , maybe three , of Nintendo 's new platform being on the market , we 'll see Microsoft and Sony upgrade their systems .
Or maybe they 'll just throw new controllers at them and keep the existing hardware platform the same , which would mean that their " upgrades " would come much sooner than otherwise would be the case.In any case , the winners will be the customers ( in that more grunt comes at a lower price ) , and the losers will be the gaming studios as they try to cope with the demands inherent in developing for more powerful systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see:we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch.No, they're not going to start over from scratch.
The cost of starting a new hardware platform is sufficiently high that they'll build upon their existing platforms in an evolutionary way, given how much red ink the MS and Sony platforms have bled.
More powerful GPUs, more powerful CPUs (probably a higher core count, maybe a clock speed bump, possibly the return of out of order execution for the PS3 and Xbox's successor, more RAM, and maybe higher capacity media (almost certainly for the Xbox, possibly not for the PS3.
)For all of these reasons, we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past, and don't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest, and 2012 to 2013 more likelyUh ... guys ... look at the hardware release cycle in the past.
Five to six years.
When did these consoles come out?
2005, 2006?
Wouldn't that make it 2011?
Sheesh.My feeling is that the first to the block with a new hardware platform will be Nintendo.
The Wii was a very careful balancing act: more power than the Gamecube, but not so much as to push the initial costs into the stratosphere.
They'll almost certainly do the same for the Wii's successor.
Backwards compatibility with the Wii is pretty much certain.
Gamecube compatibility?
Maybe, but they may drop it to save a few bucks.
Multi core?
Perhaps, but it'll be multi core in the same way that desktop CPUs are multi core: full blown out of order execution, rather than sticking to strict in-order execution to cut down on the transistor count.
More powerful GPU (possibly full HD compatibility this time, certainly 720p at a minimum.
) More RAM.
The usual list.
What's going to be interesting with the Wii's successor will be what they end up doing with interfacing - Nintendo have always pushed the boundaries in their controllers, whilst Microsoft and Sony follow along behind.After a year or two, maybe three, of Nintendo's new platform being on the market, we'll see Microsoft and Sony upgrade their systems.
Or maybe they'll just throw new controllers at them and keep the existing hardware platform the same, which would mean that their "upgrades" would come much sooner than otherwise would be the case.In any case, the winners will be the customers (in that more grunt comes at a lower price), and the losers will be the gaming studios as they try to cope with the demands inherent in developing for more powerful systems.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220377</id>
	<title>Some genres just weren't possible on the 8-bits</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1244205360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The hardware is good enough for good games. It has been since the Commodore 64.</p></div><p>Could the Commodore 64 have run a first-person shooter like the <i>Doom</i> or <i>Quake</i> or <i>Unreal</i> series in real time? (Probably not; no 3D rasterizing hardware nor sufficiently fast CPU.) Could the Nintendo Entertainment System have run a social simulator like <i>The Sims</i> or <i>Animal Crossing</i>? (Probably not; enough battery-backed RAM on a cartridge to save the state of a town was cost prohibitive during the NES's commercial era.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The hardware is good enough for good games .
It has been since the Commodore 64.Could the Commodore 64 have run a first-person shooter like the Doom or Quake or Unreal series in real time ?
( Probably not ; no 3D rasterizing hardware nor sufficiently fast CPU .
) Could the Nintendo Entertainment System have run a social simulator like The Sims or Animal Crossing ?
( Probably not ; enough battery-backed RAM on a cartridge to save the state of a town was cost prohibitive during the NES 's commercial era .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hardware is good enough for good games.
It has been since the Commodore 64.Could the Commodore 64 have run a first-person shooter like the Doom or Quake or Unreal series in real time?
(Probably not; no 3D rasterizing hardware nor sufficiently fast CPU.
) Could the Nintendo Entertainment System have run a social simulator like The Sims or Animal Crossing?
(Probably not; enough battery-backed RAM on a cartridge to save the state of a town was cost prohibitive during the NES's commercial era.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220367</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>CoccoBill</author>
	<datestamp>1244205300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Have we really reached the point where "Good enough is"</p></div><p>No, we haven't. As we know, both the PS3 and the Xbox360 are struggling with true 1080p content, most games advertized as 1080p actually run at a horizontal resolution lower than 1920. We need faster consoles still to take full advantage of the current FullHD displays.</p><p>Obviously none of this has anything to do with how good the actual games are, and as Nintendo has shown quite vividly, the actual playability of the games matter more than eye candy. However, I don't see these two issues to contradict each other one bit, why can't we have games that are creative, fun AND look good?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have we really reached the point where " Good enough is " No , we have n't .
As we know , both the PS3 and the Xbox360 are struggling with true 1080p content , most games advertized as 1080p actually run at a horizontal resolution lower than 1920 .
We need faster consoles still to take full advantage of the current FullHD displays.Obviously none of this has anything to do with how good the actual games are , and as Nintendo has shown quite vividly , the actual playability of the games matter more than eye candy .
However , I do n't see these two issues to contradict each other one bit , why ca n't we have games that are creative , fun AND look good ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have we really reached the point where "Good enough is"No, we haven't.
As we know, both the PS3 and the Xbox360 are struggling with true 1080p content, most games advertized as 1080p actually run at a horizontal resolution lower than 1920.
We need faster consoles still to take full advantage of the current FullHD displays.Obviously none of this has anything to do with how good the actual games are, and as Nintendo has shown quite vividly, the actual playability of the games matter more than eye candy.
However, I don't see these two issues to contradict each other one bit, why can't we have games that are creative, fun AND look good?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220731</id>
	<title>Its upgradable now</title>
	<author>Quantus347</author>
	<datestamp>1244208240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now that the consoles are getting upgradeable, with downloadable content, upgradeable hard drives, etc. you can upgrade quite a bit of the console, to keep up with the ever increasing game needs.  And where in the recent cycles consoles became outdated largely as new game storage media became available, and games required more and more data, now the consoles have the ability to store the game, in part or in whole, on its own hard drive.  <br> <br>The only thing I see that might replace the current consoles soon would be a modular system that could fully upgrade memory, video hardware, control devices,  etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that the consoles are getting upgradeable , with downloadable content , upgradeable hard drives , etc .
you can upgrade quite a bit of the console , to keep up with the ever increasing game needs .
And where in the recent cycles consoles became outdated largely as new game storage media became available , and games required more and more data , now the consoles have the ability to store the game , in part or in whole , on its own hard drive .
The only thing I see that might replace the current consoles soon would be a modular system that could fully upgrade memory , video hardware , control devices , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that the consoles are getting upgradeable, with downloadable content, upgradeable hard drives, etc.
you can upgrade quite a bit of the console, to keep up with the ever increasing game needs.
And where in the recent cycles consoles became outdated largely as new game storage media became available, and games required more and more data, now the consoles have the ability to store the game, in part or in whole, on its own hard drive.
The only thing I see that might replace the current consoles soon would be a modular system that could fully upgrade memory, video hardware, control devices,  etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219869</id>
	<title>Why it won't work.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244199300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft's Tech (impressive on reel, but lacking in meat-space) and Sony's Tech (impressive for tracking 1:1, but not for pointing) won't ever be able to reach the market penetration that the Wii has right now.</p><p>If you are a game company with a cool and fun game idea, and you want to use motion tech, you're going to pick the Wii, and motion plus if you need the extra precicion. The technology and packaged piece of hardware actually exists, is a dirt-cheap add-on to the system you already have, and will be hitting shelves in a month. The penetration won't be there with ~$80 for Natal, or for a PS3 camera + two tracking sticks (with tech inside equal to two Motion-plus Wiimotes).</p><p>It doesn't make any financial sense, and the odds of a software company making a compelling, core experience with these products in the first place is plain silly.</p><p>When a company is designing a game, one of the first decisions they make is definitely not "how can we limit the reach of our product to as few customers as possible?".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's Tech ( impressive on reel , but lacking in meat-space ) and Sony 's Tech ( impressive for tracking 1 : 1 , but not for pointing ) wo n't ever be able to reach the market penetration that the Wii has right now.If you are a game company with a cool and fun game idea , and you want to use motion tech , you 're going to pick the Wii , and motion plus if you need the extra precicion .
The technology and packaged piece of hardware actually exists , is a dirt-cheap add-on to the system you already have , and will be hitting shelves in a month .
The penetration wo n't be there with ~ $ 80 for Natal , or for a PS3 camera + two tracking sticks ( with tech inside equal to two Motion-plus Wiimotes ) .It does n't make any financial sense , and the odds of a software company making a compelling , core experience with these products in the first place is plain silly.When a company is designing a game , one of the first decisions they make is definitely not " how can we limit the reach of our product to as few customers as possible ?
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft's Tech (impressive on reel, but lacking in meat-space) and Sony's Tech (impressive for tracking 1:1, but not for pointing) won't ever be able to reach the market penetration that the Wii has right now.If you are a game company with a cool and fun game idea, and you want to use motion tech, you're going to pick the Wii, and motion plus if you need the extra precicion.
The technology and packaged piece of hardware actually exists, is a dirt-cheap add-on to the system you already have, and will be hitting shelves in a month.
The penetration won't be there with ~$80 for Natal, or for a PS3 camera + two tracking sticks (with tech inside equal to two Motion-plus Wiimotes).It doesn't make any financial sense, and the odds of a software company making a compelling, core experience with these products in the first place is plain silly.When a company is designing a game, one of the first decisions they make is definitely not "how can we limit the reach of our product to as few customers as possible?
".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222051</id>
	<title>Re:The next gen</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1244215260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And then MS could release the NeoNatal to counter the new Wii.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And then MS could release the NeoNatal to counter the new Wii .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And then MS could release the NeoNatal to counter the new Wii.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221009</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220479</id>
	<title>Re:Blu-Ray...</title>
	<author>alta</author>
	<datestamp>1244206080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>fine physiques?</p><p>No, sorry, wrong.</p><p>Games will be controlled by the mind, and gamers will be known by their gelatinous forms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>fine physiques ? No , sorry , wrong.Games will be controlled by the mind , and gamers will be known by their gelatinous forms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fine physiques?No, sorry, wrong.Games will be controlled by the mind, and gamers will be known by their gelatinous forms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219845</id>
	<title>Yes, Please!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244198940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh if only everyone in the console business were as stupid as to let the platform die a long slow horrible death for lack of hardware updates. PC gaming would reign unchallenged and everything would be good in the world.</p><p>I fear that is not the case, though. Consumers must be fleeced on a regular basis in exchange for "new" hardware, lest their wallets grow fat and constrict blood flow to their arses, prompting them to stand up and effectively removing them from the couch-dwelling demographic which is console gaming's core audience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh if only everyone in the console business were as stupid as to let the platform die a long slow horrible death for lack of hardware updates .
PC gaming would reign unchallenged and everything would be good in the world.I fear that is not the case , though .
Consumers must be fleeced on a regular basis in exchange for " new " hardware , lest their wallets grow fat and constrict blood flow to their arses , prompting them to stand up and effectively removing them from the couch-dwelling demographic which is console gaming 's core audience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh if only everyone in the console business were as stupid as to let the platform die a long slow horrible death for lack of hardware updates.
PC gaming would reign unchallenged and everything would be good in the world.I fear that is not the case, though.
Consumers must be fleeced on a regular basis in exchange for "new" hardware, lest their wallets grow fat and constrict blood flow to their arses, prompting them to stand up and effectively removing them from the couch-dwelling demographic which is console gaming's core audience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221717</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>Deag</author>
	<datestamp>1244213640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well "Good enough" for now. The last update to consoles brought HD compatibility with the now standard HD TV, and good use of internet connection. Without both of those consoles would look like backward technology.</p><p>But we certainly haven't reached good enough for gaming in general. Games do look good enough, but the worlds they simulate need more power.<br>For example, go to the top of a building in GTA IV and look into a street in the distance, it is empty. That game does a good job of having an illusion of a busy city, but it really is just that. Four blocks away from you there is nothing.</p><p>Wouldn't it be great if every brick in every building was simulated, and having ten million entities walking around the city with you, rather than the 50 odd that follow you around at the moment.</p><p>Of course you don't need all this to have a fun game, some of the better games on the 360 are geometry wars and braid, both of which are 2D. And the success of the Wii speaks for itself.</p><p>But I think it would be sad if the development of more immersive environments stalled here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well " Good enough " for now .
The last update to consoles brought HD compatibility with the now standard HD TV , and good use of internet connection .
Without both of those consoles would look like backward technology.But we certainly have n't reached good enough for gaming in general .
Games do look good enough , but the worlds they simulate need more power.For example , go to the top of a building in GTA IV and look into a street in the distance , it is empty .
That game does a good job of having an illusion of a busy city , but it really is just that .
Four blocks away from you there is nothing.Would n't it be great if every brick in every building was simulated , and having ten million entities walking around the city with you , rather than the 50 odd that follow you around at the moment.Of course you do n't need all this to have a fun game , some of the better games on the 360 are geometry wars and braid , both of which are 2D .
And the success of the Wii speaks for itself.But I think it would be sad if the development of more immersive environments stalled here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well "Good enough" for now.
The last update to consoles brought HD compatibility with the now standard HD TV, and good use of internet connection.
Without both of those consoles would look like backward technology.But we certainly haven't reached good enough for gaming in general.
Games do look good enough, but the worlds they simulate need more power.For example, go to the top of a building in GTA IV and look into a street in the distance, it is empty.
That game does a good job of having an illusion of a busy city, but it really is just that.
Four blocks away from you there is nothing.Wouldn't it be great if every brick in every building was simulated, and having ten million entities walking around the city with you, rather than the 50 odd that follow you around at the moment.Of course you don't need all this to have a fun game, some of the better games on the 360 are geometry wars and braid, both of which are 2D.
And the success of the Wii speaks for itself.But I think it would be sad if the development of more immersive environments stalled here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219747</id>
	<title>2015?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244197260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>An xbox wouldn't even last until 2015...</htmltext>
<tokenext>An xbox would n't even last until 2015.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An xbox wouldn't even last until 2015...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221599</id>
	<title>Economy</title>
	<author>dontPanik</author>
	<datestamp>1244213160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think another important thing to think about is that the economic problems we're having right now are going to stop people from buying a new console, if any company was going to put one out.<br>
Really, It would just be suicide to try to make a PS4 right now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think another important thing to think about is that the economic problems we 're having right now are going to stop people from buying a new console , if any company was going to put one out .
Really , It would just be suicide to try to make a PS4 right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think another important thing to think about is that the economic problems we're having right now are going to stop people from buying a new console, if any company was going to put one out.
Really, It would just be suicide to try to make a PS4 right now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224943</id>
	<title>Rose Colored Sunglasses</title>
	<author>psbrogna</author>
	<datestamp>1244226300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Uh huh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and my car's observed fuel efficiency is what the manufacturer advertises it should be, CRTs used to have the viewable area that their advertisements said they did, hard drives last as long as the MTBF's listed in their specs... and I'm sure we'll all live happily ever after.
<p>
If you pull my other leg it plays Jingle Bells.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh huh ... and my car 's observed fuel efficiency is what the manufacturer advertises it should be , CRTs used to have the viewable area that their advertisements said they did , hard drives last as long as the MTBF 's listed in their specs... and I 'm sure we 'll all live happily ever after .
If you pull my other leg it plays Jingle Bells .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh huh ... and my car's observed fuel efficiency is what the manufacturer advertises it should be, CRTs used to have the viewable area that their advertisements said they did, hard drives last as long as the MTBF's listed in their specs... and I'm sure we'll all live happily ever after.
If you pull my other leg it plays Jingle Bells.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220385</id>
	<title>such an industry so many problems</title>
	<author>CheshireFerk-o</author>
	<datestamp>1244205360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you dont seem to understand that about 70\% of households do not have a hdtv. that entire arguement is moot. my wii is hooked up thru an rf modulator still. not everyone has the kind of cash for the newest hardware(consoles) and displays to keep up with their shinyness. what it comes down to is gameplay and fun. sure the ps3 is real slick hardware, but i cant afford one, and i dont really see more than a handful of games i'd really be interested in. the 360... well its a m$ product and i wouldnt play it if you gave me one, the controller is awkward and they charge you to play online. sure they have a bunch of great titles but 70\% of those have pc versions, which is always the best platform. if someone would/could settle on a good hardware system for the consoles then there would be a no-brainer must have. but using the special chips they produce for these things like they are now is crazy costly. they(360) might have had it right this time around, if they didnt take cost cutting measures and put out crap hardware. the ideal console would be 100\% backwards compatible because it is just updated hardware to the previous generation, like gc/wii. instead of spending millions making some weird propriety code/chip every 7-8years upgrading a building ontop of what you have would keep costs down and the players happy. but what do i know ive only been gaming for 24 of my 26years on earth.</p><p>why m$ and sony think their rabid consumers would go for motion control, i havent a clue. wouldnt those people already own a wii?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you dont seem to understand that about 70 \ % of households do not have a hdtv .
that entire arguement is moot .
my wii is hooked up thru an rf modulator still .
not everyone has the kind of cash for the newest hardware ( consoles ) and displays to keep up with their shinyness .
what it comes down to is gameplay and fun .
sure the ps3 is real slick hardware , but i cant afford one , and i dont really see more than a handful of games i 'd really be interested in .
the 360... well its a m $ product and i wouldnt play it if you gave me one , the controller is awkward and they charge you to play online .
sure they have a bunch of great titles but 70 \ % of those have pc versions , which is always the best platform .
if someone would/could settle on a good hardware system for the consoles then there would be a no-brainer must have .
but using the special chips they produce for these things like they are now is crazy costly .
they ( 360 ) might have had it right this time around , if they didnt take cost cutting measures and put out crap hardware .
the ideal console would be 100 \ % backwards compatible because it is just updated hardware to the previous generation , like gc/wii .
instead of spending millions making some weird propriety code/chip every 7-8years upgrading a building ontop of what you have would keep costs down and the players happy .
but what do i know ive only been gaming for 24 of my 26years on earth.why m $ and sony think their rabid consumers would go for motion control , i havent a clue .
wouldnt those people already own a wii ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you dont seem to understand that about 70\% of households do not have a hdtv.
that entire arguement is moot.
my wii is hooked up thru an rf modulator still.
not everyone has the kind of cash for the newest hardware(consoles) and displays to keep up with their shinyness.
what it comes down to is gameplay and fun.
sure the ps3 is real slick hardware, but i cant afford one, and i dont really see more than a handful of games i'd really be interested in.
the 360... well its a m$ product and i wouldnt play it if you gave me one, the controller is awkward and they charge you to play online.
sure they have a bunch of great titles but 70\% of those have pc versions, which is always the best platform.
if someone would/could settle on a good hardware system for the consoles then there would be a no-brainer must have.
but using the special chips they produce for these things like they are now is crazy costly.
they(360) might have had it right this time around, if they didnt take cost cutting measures and put out crap hardware.
the ideal console would be 100\% backwards compatible because it is just updated hardware to the previous generation, like gc/wii.
instead of spending millions making some weird propriety code/chip every 7-8years upgrading a building ontop of what you have would keep costs down and the players happy.
but what do i know ive only been gaming for 24 of my 26years on earth.why m$ and sony think their rabid consumers would go for motion control, i havent a clue.
wouldnt those people already own a wii?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219819</id>
	<title>Overly Optimistic?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244198580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"he expects the Xbox 360 to last until around 2015" - I don't any 360 will last that long - they'll RROD themselves way before then!</htmltext>
<tokenext>" he expects the Xbox 360 to last until around 2015 " - I do n't any 360 will last that long - they 'll RROD themselves way before then !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"he expects the Xbox 360 to last until around 2015" - I don't any 360 will last that long - they'll RROD themselves way before then!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224369</id>
	<title>Re:Good enough is?</title>
	<author>The End Of Days</author>
	<datestamp>1244224080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>games are more and more boring</p></div></blockquote><p>No, you're just getting older.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>games are more and more boringNo , you 're just getting older .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>games are more and more boringNo, you're just getting older.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221009
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222269
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221999
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221009
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221717
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220179
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220377
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220629
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28228643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220377
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28225887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220507
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220657
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220179
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219979
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28262145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220377
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28225893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0818204_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28309269
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221009
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222051
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28225893
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219819
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220167
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221787
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219851
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224369
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220377
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28262145
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224061
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28228643
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221901
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28225887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220179
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220657
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221047
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220373
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220731
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219747
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221537
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220507
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222389
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28221999
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220207
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28224201
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220197
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220017
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222269
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219903
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220479
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220473
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28309269
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220629
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220385
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28220291
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219755
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222009
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0818204.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28219869
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0818204.28222751
</commentlist>
</conversation>
