<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_18_0413257</id>
	<title>Massively Single-Player Gaming?</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1247912640000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Massively is running an article discussing <a href="http://www.massively.com/2009/07/16/redefining-mmos-massively-singleplayer/">the trend in recent MMOs to enable and encourage solo play</a>. Where the genre's early offerings, like <em>Everquest</em> and <em>Ultima Online</em>, were heavily dependent on finding other people to interact with, it's common for today's games to allow players to experience most of the content by themselves. Quoting:
<i>"It is human nature to want to be the center of attention or at least feel like the hero on some level. It's also not too far of a stretch to call members of our species generally selfish. How can you really deliver this experience if you force your players to ask for help all the time? I think this was simply a natural progression of the genre in trying to appeal to our natural traits. ... Finally, I believe it all comes down to the mighty dollar. Audiences grew and so followed the market and competition. Suddenly, you couldn't make MMOs on the cheap anymore (though a stalwart few still try). Not only are game studios focused on appealing to the solo casual gamer to maximize earnings, they also want to build in artificial time sinks to make players stick around."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Massively is running an article discussing the trend in recent MMOs to enable and encourage solo play .
Where the genre 's early offerings , like Everquest and Ultima Online , were heavily dependent on finding other people to interact with , it 's common for today 's games to allow players to experience most of the content by themselves .
Quoting : " It is human nature to want to be the center of attention or at least feel like the hero on some level .
It 's also not too far of a stretch to call members of our species generally selfish .
How can you really deliver this experience if you force your players to ask for help all the time ?
I think this was simply a natural progression of the genre in trying to appeal to our natural traits .
... Finally , I believe it all comes down to the mighty dollar .
Audiences grew and so followed the market and competition .
Suddenly , you could n't make MMOs on the cheap anymore ( though a stalwart few still try ) .
Not only are game studios focused on appealing to the solo casual gamer to maximize earnings , they also want to build in artificial time sinks to make players stick around .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Massively is running an article discussing the trend in recent MMOs to enable and encourage solo play.
Where the genre's early offerings, like Everquest and Ultima Online, were heavily dependent on finding other people to interact with, it's common for today's games to allow players to experience most of the content by themselves.
Quoting:
"It is human nature to want to be the center of attention or at least feel like the hero on some level.
It's also not too far of a stretch to call members of our species generally selfish.
How can you really deliver this experience if you force your players to ask for help all the time?
I think this was simply a natural progression of the genre in trying to appeal to our natural traits.
... Finally, I believe it all comes down to the mighty dollar.
Audiences grew and so followed the market and competition.
Suddenly, you couldn't make MMOs on the cheap anymore (though a stalwart few still try).
Not only are game studios focused on appealing to the solo casual gamer to maximize earnings, they also want to build in artificial time sinks to make players stick around.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743163</id>
	<title>Re:The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>fractoid</author>
	<datestamp>1247909100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>8 hours a week is hardcore? Maybe for Tetris or Wii Bowling. 'Casual' MMO players can play anywhere up to 30 hours a week, I don't believe it's possible to play an MMO game at a 'hardcore' level if you have either a job or a partner.</htmltext>
<tokenext>8 hours a week is hardcore ?
Maybe for Tetris or Wii Bowling .
'Casual ' MMO players can play anywhere up to 30 hours a week , I do n't believe it 's possible to play an MMO game at a 'hardcore ' level if you have either a job or a partner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>8 hours a week is hardcore?
Maybe for Tetris or Wii Bowling.
'Casual' MMO players can play anywhere up to 30 hours a week, I don't believe it's possible to play an MMO game at a 'hardcore' level if you have either a job or a partner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739731</id>
	<title>It's the D-Bags...</title>
	<author>MogNuts</author>
	<datestamp>1247920140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's because of the d-bags. We love the idea of all the new content, ever-changing worlds, new quests, new gear, or trading for awesome gear you can't normally get at your level. Then we play with people and remember that it's still the same thing as playing with online as it ever was--awful. D-bags, cheaters, impatient people, and all the other awful people online. Just think, the same trolls and flamebaiters and morons who post random comments on forums/articles (excluding<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.; those people make<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./ trolls look like saints) are the same people you'll be playing with on an MMO.</p><p>Hence the single-player MMO--providing all the benefits with none of the drawbacks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's because of the d-bags .
We love the idea of all the new content , ever-changing worlds , new quests , new gear , or trading for awesome gear you ca n't normally get at your level .
Then we play with people and remember that it 's still the same thing as playing with online as it ever was--awful .
D-bags , cheaters , impatient people , and all the other awful people online .
Just think , the same trolls and flamebaiters and morons who post random comments on forums/articles ( excluding / .
; those people make ./ trolls look like saints ) are the same people you 'll be playing with on an MMO.Hence the single-player MMO--providing all the benefits with none of the drawbacks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's because of the d-bags.
We love the idea of all the new content, ever-changing worlds, new quests, new gear, or trading for awesome gear you can't normally get at your level.
Then we play with people and remember that it's still the same thing as playing with online as it ever was--awful.
D-bags, cheaters, impatient people, and all the other awful people online.
Just think, the same trolls and flamebaiters and morons who post random comments on forums/articles (excluding /.
; those people make ./ trolls look like saints) are the same people you'll be playing with on an MMO.Hence the single-player MMO--providing all the benefits with none of the drawbacks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28747455</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1248015420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There is nothing that I enjoy doing 40+ hours per week.</p></div><p>I don't know about you, but I enjoy sleeping 40+ hours per week.</p><p>Well, in all seriousness, though, the weakness in your argument is that a job does not necessarily entail doing the same thing every day, under the same circumstances, in the same environment, with the same people and all that.</p><p>Chances are that there's always menial and repetitive tasks that have to be taken care of in every job - chances are there's always going to be some routine, some boredom. But not every job involves the same routine every day without there ever being any challenges or changes.</p><p>I don't think there's any job where you'll literally love every minute of it, always, without exception, but there sure are jobs where you won't be bored out of your skull because you're always doing the same thing for 40+ hours a week, every week.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is nothing that I enjoy doing 40 + hours per week.I do n't know about you , but I enjoy sleeping 40 + hours per week.Well , in all seriousness , though , the weakness in your argument is that a job does not necessarily entail doing the same thing every day , under the same circumstances , in the same environment , with the same people and all that.Chances are that there 's always menial and repetitive tasks that have to be taken care of in every job - chances are there 's always going to be some routine , some boredom .
But not every job involves the same routine every day without there ever being any challenges or changes.I do n't think there 's any job where you 'll literally love every minute of it , always , without exception , but there sure are jobs where you wo n't be bored out of your skull because you 're always doing the same thing for 40 + hours a week , every week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is nothing that I enjoy doing 40+ hours per week.I don't know about you, but I enjoy sleeping 40+ hours per week.Well, in all seriousness, though, the weakness in your argument is that a job does not necessarily entail doing the same thing every day, under the same circumstances, in the same environment, with the same people and all that.Chances are that there's always menial and repetitive tasks that have to be taken care of in every job - chances are there's always going to be some routine, some boredom.
But not every job involves the same routine every day without there ever being any challenges or changes.I don't think there's any job where you'll literally love every minute of it, always, without exception, but there sure are jobs where you won't be bored out of your skull because you're always doing the same thing for 40+ hours a week, every week.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739667</id>
	<title>Solo Play Should be Offline Play</title>
	<author>RobotRunAmok</author>
	<datestamp>1247919060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For every sword-and-sorcery or sci-fi themed MMO, there is an offline game, designed from the ground up for solo players.  When MMO developers start compromising to accommodate the solo players, the gameplay for the group players is inevitably compromised.</p><p>Eve, happily, has resisted this so far, simply because so much of the gameplay flows out of the free-flow Wild West dynamics and economics.  You want to be a solo pirate?  G'head, Bunky, nothing's stopping you (you'll only catch other startled n00bs, you'll die a lot, and the time v. reward curve will suck, but nothing stops you).  The "end game" for Eve is in highly solo-hostile "0.0 space," but there is so much to do in the NPC-policed "Empire Space" that even a soloist shouldn't be able to complain.  The soloist always has the option of buying the better gear from his richer grouping brother, but won't be able to derive the best benefit from it (i.e., maximize money made per hour) unless he takes that gear into places where -- if he travels solo -- someone will take it away from him very quickly.  The killboards are filled with solo players in their expensive "Marauders" being dragged down by gangs of players in throwaway cruisers and frigates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For every sword-and-sorcery or sci-fi themed MMO , there is an offline game , designed from the ground up for solo players .
When MMO developers start compromising to accommodate the solo players , the gameplay for the group players is inevitably compromised.Eve , happily , has resisted this so far , simply because so much of the gameplay flows out of the free-flow Wild West dynamics and economics .
You want to be a solo pirate ?
G'head , Bunky , nothing 's stopping you ( you 'll only catch other startled n00bs , you 'll die a lot , and the time v. reward curve will suck , but nothing stops you ) .
The " end game " for Eve is in highly solo-hostile " 0.0 space , " but there is so much to do in the NPC-policed " Empire Space " that even a soloist should n't be able to complain .
The soloist always has the option of buying the better gear from his richer grouping brother , but wo n't be able to derive the best benefit from it ( i.e. , maximize money made per hour ) unless he takes that gear into places where -- if he travels solo -- someone will take it away from him very quickly .
The killboards are filled with solo players in their expensive " Marauders " being dragged down by gangs of players in throwaway cruisers and frigates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For every sword-and-sorcery or sci-fi themed MMO, there is an offline game, designed from the ground up for solo players.
When MMO developers start compromising to accommodate the solo players, the gameplay for the group players is inevitably compromised.Eve, happily, has resisted this so far, simply because so much of the gameplay flows out of the free-flow Wild West dynamics and economics.
You want to be a solo pirate?
G'head, Bunky, nothing's stopping you (you'll only catch other startled n00bs, you'll die a lot, and the time v. reward curve will suck, but nothing stops you).
The "end game" for Eve is in highly solo-hostile "0.0 space," but there is so much to do in the NPC-policed "Empire Space" that even a soloist shouldn't be able to complain.
The soloist always has the option of buying the better gear from his richer grouping brother, but won't be able to derive the best benefit from it (i.e., maximize money made per hour) unless he takes that gear into places where -- if he travels solo -- someone will take it away from him very quickly.
The killboards are filled with solo players in their expensive "Marauders" being dragged down by gangs of players in throwaway cruisers and frigates.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28753803</id>
	<title>Re:And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1248081180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man, your posts are giving me hope.  For games. For humanity.</p><p>
&nbsp; I've seen far too many +5 posts in this topic that just made me want to OD on something.  He likes his job and everyones problems will be solved if they just find themselves a job they are passionate about. I like soloing MMOs because I can't stand the other players. WTF? These things are just logical contradictions to me, does not compute. It's like 2+2=5 for certain values of 2.  I take them to their conclusion and wonder what the point of any of it is.  But then I read something like your posts and I remember, even if the mods don't seem to notice.</p><p>Keep up the faith! Someday we'll be lead to the land of good games and tolerable occupations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , your posts are giving me hope .
For games .
For humanity .
  I 've seen far too many + 5 posts in this topic that just made me want to OD on something .
He likes his job and everyones problems will be solved if they just find themselves a job they are passionate about .
I like soloing MMOs because I ca n't stand the other players .
WTF ? These things are just logical contradictions to me , does not compute .
It 's like 2 + 2 = 5 for certain values of 2 .
I take them to their conclusion and wonder what the point of any of it is .
But then I read something like your posts and I remember , even if the mods do n't seem to notice.Keep up the faith !
Someday we 'll be lead to the land of good games and tolerable occupations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, your posts are giving me hope.
For games.
For humanity.
  I've seen far too many +5 posts in this topic that just made me want to OD on something.
He likes his job and everyones problems will be solved if they just find themselves a job they are passionate about.
I like soloing MMOs because I can't stand the other players.
WTF? These things are just logical contradictions to me, does not compute.
It's like 2+2=5 for certain values of 2.
I take them to their conclusion and wonder what the point of any of it is.
But then I read something like your posts and I remember, even if the mods don't seem to notice.Keep up the faith!
Someday we'll be lead to the land of good games and tolerable occupations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745019</id>
	<title>Re:Online worlds FTW; online players suck.</title>
	<author>Veggiesama</author>
	<datestamp>1247930820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see richness and depth in online games. Most of the worlds are ridiculously large, but they take a regular game's worth of content and stretch it for hundreds of hours. For instance, you might fight a wolf at level 1, but you'll fight that same wolf at level 50, but now he's reskinned and slightly larger. You'll still be collecting wolf pelts the whole way through. Nothing has dramatically changed, except for your character's abilities, which let you kill in new and interesting ways. You're still killing in the same "right-click then press 1-2-3 until it dies" fashion, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see richness and depth in online games .
Most of the worlds are ridiculously large , but they take a regular game 's worth of content and stretch it for hundreds of hours .
For instance , you might fight a wolf at level 1 , but you 'll fight that same wolf at level 50 , but now he 's reskinned and slightly larger .
You 'll still be collecting wolf pelts the whole way through .
Nothing has dramatically changed , except for your character 's abilities , which let you kill in new and interesting ways .
You 're still killing in the same " right-click then press 1-2-3 until it dies " fashion , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see richness and depth in online games.
Most of the worlds are ridiculously large, but they take a regular game's worth of content and stretch it for hundreds of hours.
For instance, you might fight a wolf at level 1, but you'll fight that same wolf at level 50, but now he's reskinned and slightly larger.
You'll still be collecting wolf pelts the whole way through.
Nothing has dramatically changed, except for your character's abilities, which let you kill in new and interesting ways.
You're still killing in the same "right-click then press 1-2-3 until it dies" fashion, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742689</id>
	<title>Re:It's the D-Bags...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247947920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cool. That sounds like an engineering problem.<br>.<br>Perhaps one can implement a rating system that lets you rate characters you've grouped with, and displays the overall rating as a percentile. I think most of the little kinks could be worked out.<br>.<br>But of course, even good people/characters sometimes have to quit before the dungeon has been cleared, or the quest finished. That's where scaled content could come in. If you're in a 5-man dungeon and one character leaves, let's say for instance a mage character, then the remaining enemies could have their HP lowered to 80\% and lose any abilities that may be showstoppers without a mage character in the group. Another guy leaves? HP goes down to 60\% and more abilities are possibly removed. The drop rate of rewards would have to be lowered as well, otherwise everyone would solo. Sure, people would find ways to exploit the system. But that could probably be fine-tuned for every dungeon and every combination of characters, with surprisingly few problems. Probably.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cool .
That sounds like an engineering problem..Perhaps one can implement a rating system that lets you rate characters you 've grouped with , and displays the overall rating as a percentile .
I think most of the little kinks could be worked out..But of course , even good people/characters sometimes have to quit before the dungeon has been cleared , or the quest finished .
That 's where scaled content could come in .
If you 're in a 5-man dungeon and one character leaves , let 's say for instance a mage character , then the remaining enemies could have their HP lowered to 80 \ % and lose any abilities that may be showstoppers without a mage character in the group .
Another guy leaves ?
HP goes down to 60 \ % and more abilities are possibly removed .
The drop rate of rewards would have to be lowered as well , otherwise everyone would solo .
Sure , people would find ways to exploit the system .
But that could probably be fine-tuned for every dungeon and every combination of characters , with surprisingly few problems .
Probably .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cool.
That sounds like an engineering problem..Perhaps one can implement a rating system that lets you rate characters you've grouped with, and displays the overall rating as a percentile.
I think most of the little kinks could be worked out..But of course, even good people/characters sometimes have to quit before the dungeon has been cleared, or the quest finished.
That's where scaled content could come in.
If you're in a 5-man dungeon and one character leaves, let's say for instance a mage character, then the remaining enemies could have their HP lowered to 80\% and lose any abilities that may be showstoppers without a mage character in the group.
Another guy leaves?
HP goes down to 60\% and more abilities are possibly removed.
The drop rate of rewards would have to be lowered as well, otherwise everyone would solo.
Sure, people would find ways to exploit the system.
But that could probably be fine-tuned for every dungeon and every combination of characters, with surprisingly few problems.
Probably.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739711</id>
	<title>This is why I quit WoW</title>
	<author>maudface</author>
	<datestamp>1247919900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I started to realise that I actively hated having to group with other people to the point that I'd obnoxiously subject prospective party members to simple logic tests to find out whether they were functionally mentally disabled or not. I'd just avoid any sort of quest that would require me to interact with other people, at the time realms were closed off so the actual real live friends of mine were invariably on other realms or completely inappropriate levels to quest with me.

Where does it get sane to pay a monthly fee for the ability to avoid playing with others online? If I wanted that I'd actually bother to pay for an xbox live gold subscription, at least with that I can still play the damn games instead of having their content entirely withdrawn from me despite having paid for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I started to realise that I actively hated having to group with other people to the point that I 'd obnoxiously subject prospective party members to simple logic tests to find out whether they were functionally mentally disabled or not .
I 'd just avoid any sort of quest that would require me to interact with other people , at the time realms were closed off so the actual real live friends of mine were invariably on other realms or completely inappropriate levels to quest with me .
Where does it get sane to pay a monthly fee for the ability to avoid playing with others online ?
If I wanted that I 'd actually bother to pay for an xbox live gold subscription , at least with that I can still play the damn games instead of having their content entirely withdrawn from me despite having paid for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I started to realise that I actively hated having to group with other people to the point that I'd obnoxiously subject prospective party members to simple logic tests to find out whether they were functionally mentally disabled or not.
I'd just avoid any sort of quest that would require me to interact with other people, at the time realms were closed off so the actual real live friends of mine were invariably on other realms or completely inappropriate levels to quest with me.
Where does it get sane to pay a monthly fee for the ability to avoid playing with others online?
If I wanted that I'd actually bother to pay for an xbox live gold subscription, at least with that I can still play the damn games instead of having their content entirely withdrawn from me despite having paid for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741447</id>
	<title>Re:And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247937900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In contrast, I'm not a MMO fan. I love WoW because of the world and the complicated skill trees and diversity of character types and the non-linear story lines.</p><p>The worst thing for me about WoW (and the reason I don't spend $15/mo on it anymore) is the MMO aspect. I hate the fact that you can't solo dungeons at the level where the loot is beneficial. When you get to level 80, there are a ton of dungeons you still can't solo. You have to advertise for a group and wait for them to organize and wait for the tank and the dps and the healer. You have to roll for loot, which means you have to run a dungeon 5 times to get the drops you want (which ruins any concept of a storyline). Not to mention the lack of enforcement of role-playing on role-playing servers.</p><p>If they made a massively single player version of WoW, I'd never stop playing. Even better, let me control several characters at once so I can solo dungeons with a group (like Sword of the New World).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In contrast , I 'm not a MMO fan .
I love WoW because of the world and the complicated skill trees and diversity of character types and the non-linear story lines.The worst thing for me about WoW ( and the reason I do n't spend $ 15/mo on it anymore ) is the MMO aspect .
I hate the fact that you ca n't solo dungeons at the level where the loot is beneficial .
When you get to level 80 , there are a ton of dungeons you still ca n't solo .
You have to advertise for a group and wait for them to organize and wait for the tank and the dps and the healer .
You have to roll for loot , which means you have to run a dungeon 5 times to get the drops you want ( which ruins any concept of a storyline ) .
Not to mention the lack of enforcement of role-playing on role-playing servers.If they made a massively single player version of WoW , I 'd never stop playing .
Even better , let me control several characters at once so I can solo dungeons with a group ( like Sword of the New World ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In contrast, I'm not a MMO fan.
I love WoW because of the world and the complicated skill trees and diversity of character types and the non-linear story lines.The worst thing for me about WoW (and the reason I don't spend $15/mo on it anymore) is the MMO aspect.
I hate the fact that you can't solo dungeons at the level where the loot is beneficial.
When you get to level 80, there are a ton of dungeons you still can't solo.
You have to advertise for a group and wait for them to organize and wait for the tank and the dps and the healer.
You have to roll for loot, which means you have to run a dungeon 5 times to get the drops you want (which ruins any concept of a storyline).
Not to mention the lack of enforcement of role-playing on role-playing servers.If they made a massively single player version of WoW, I'd never stop playing.
Even better, let me control several characters at once so I can solo dungeons with a group (like Sword of the New World).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742447</id>
	<title>Re:And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247945820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- Vocal chat. 6 years on, we still have to use very un-ergonomic 3rd party programs. Blizzard could at least buy &amp; re-design those, or help their developpers interface with WoW... WoW's own voice chat make the idiotic assumption that we want to disconnect whenever you're not in the game, or switch toons<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>If they allowed you to use it when not in-game people would be using it for chatting all the time. Sounds like a nice idea, but you'd have to be prepared to have a few bucks a month added onto your subscription to cover the extra servers purely for voice chat.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- Vocal chat .
6 years on , we still have to use very un-ergonomic 3rd party programs .
Blizzard could at least buy &amp; re-design those , or help their developpers interface with WoW... WoW 's own voice chat make the idiotic assumption that we want to disconnect whenever you 're not in the game , or switch toons ...If they allowed you to use it when not in-game people would be using it for chatting all the time .
Sounds like a nice idea , but you 'd have to be prepared to have a few bucks a month added onto your subscription to cover the extra servers purely for voice chat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- Vocal chat.
6 years on, we still have to use very un-ergonomic 3rd party programs.
Blizzard could at least buy &amp; re-design those, or help their developpers interface with WoW... WoW's own voice chat make the idiotic assumption that we want to disconnect whenever you're not in the game, or switch toons ...If they allowed you to use it when not in-game people would be using it for chatting all the time.
Sounds like a nice idea, but you'd have to be prepared to have a few bucks a month added onto your subscription to cover the extra servers purely for voice chat.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743499</id>
	<title>Re:And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1247912220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Multi-player combo moves.</i></p><p>EQ2 has exactly that. Classes are divided into 4 groups (tanks, rogues, clerics, mages), each spell/style belongs to some group, and the combos are done by executing a style/spell of the relevant group when it's your turn. Depending on what kinds of players you have in your group, you can do different combos (i.e. if you have no mage in your group, just do combos that require only tank/cleric or something like that).</p><p>Unfortunately it's been nerfed into oblivion, the bonus or damage such a group combo deals is so minimal by now that nobody bothers doing them anymore. It cuts into your style/spell routine because you have to go out of your way to execute the appropriate style/spell in time when it's your turn (group combos have a timer that ticks out if you don't finish it within, IIRC, 10 seconds), and generally you're better off just pulling off your routine than paying attention to the group combos.</p><p>Really a pity, it was one of the most interesting features that set EQ2 apart.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Multi-player combo moves.EQ2 has exactly that .
Classes are divided into 4 groups ( tanks , rogues , clerics , mages ) , each spell/style belongs to some group , and the combos are done by executing a style/spell of the relevant group when it 's your turn .
Depending on what kinds of players you have in your group , you can do different combos ( i.e .
if you have no mage in your group , just do combos that require only tank/cleric or something like that ) .Unfortunately it 's been nerfed into oblivion , the bonus or damage such a group combo deals is so minimal by now that nobody bothers doing them anymore .
It cuts into your style/spell routine because you have to go out of your way to execute the appropriate style/spell in time when it 's your turn ( group combos have a timer that ticks out if you do n't finish it within , IIRC , 10 seconds ) , and generally you 're better off just pulling off your routine than paying attention to the group combos.Really a pity , it was one of the most interesting features that set EQ2 apart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multi-player combo moves.EQ2 has exactly that.
Classes are divided into 4 groups (tanks, rogues, clerics, mages), each spell/style belongs to some group, and the combos are done by executing a style/spell of the relevant group when it's your turn.
Depending on what kinds of players you have in your group, you can do different combos (i.e.
if you have no mage in your group, just do combos that require only tank/cleric or something like that).Unfortunately it's been nerfed into oblivion, the bonus or damage such a group combo deals is so minimal by now that nobody bothers doing them anymore.
It cuts into your style/spell routine because you have to go out of your way to execute the appropriate style/spell in time when it's your turn (group combos have a timer that ticks out if you don't finish it within, IIRC, 10 seconds), and generally you're better off just pulling off your routine than paying attention to the group combos.Really a pity, it was one of the most interesting features that set EQ2 apart.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742769</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>alfs boner</author>
	<datestamp>1247948520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You should have gone to a better college.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You should have gone to a better college .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should have gone to a better college.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745215</id>
	<title>So... a Bethesda game?</title>
	<author>Rambling Paladin</author>
	<datestamp>1247934000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Elder Scrolls games (and now Fallout, I suppose) basically are single-player MMO games.  Massive open worlds with a billion things to do (most of them kinda shallow, but still fun), except you'll never have to worry about xxxDeFKnyGHTxxx stealing the rare mob you were waiting to kill so you'd get a 1\% chance to get a Sword of Awesome +100.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Elder Scrolls games ( and now Fallout , I suppose ) basically are single-player MMO games .
Massive open worlds with a billion things to do ( most of them kinda shallow , but still fun ) , except you 'll never have to worry about xxxDeFKnyGHTxxx stealing the rare mob you were waiting to kill so you 'd get a 1 \ % chance to get a Sword of Awesome + 100 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Elder Scrolls games (and now Fallout, I suppose) basically are single-player MMO games.
Massive open worlds with a billion things to do (most of them kinda shallow, but still fun), except you'll never have to worry about xxxDeFKnyGHTxxx stealing the rare mob you were waiting to kill so you'd get a 1\% chance to get a Sword of Awesome +100.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745911</id>
	<title>Technology issues and short-sightedness</title>
	<author>Rocketship Underpant</author>
	<datestamp>1247943180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that's a problem with game architecture. Any given Wow server has dozens of dungeon instances that require a group or raid of 5-40 players of the right levels and classes to experience properly. However, Blizzard's hardware infrastructure cannot handle the number of simultaneous players you need on one server to make forming groups at any time for all this content viable, and there is a queue system limiting the number of players allowed to log in at any time. This problem gets worse with every expansion, as the amount of group content available increases but the number of simultaneous players permitted remains constant.

On top of this, lack of coordination between game world design and game client software results in concentrations of players in specific areas that exceed the ability of the client to render those zones at a playable framerate.

In summary (for the case of WoW):

1. A smooth multiplayer experience requires a higher population than current MMO hardware can handle.
2. Smooth software operation on the client side requires yet a lower population than the (insufficient for multiplayer) populations currently allowed.

Some of this can be fixed with better server-side infrastructure and better game design, but I don't know if it all can be fixed at present.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that 's a problem with game architecture .
Any given Wow server has dozens of dungeon instances that require a group or raid of 5-40 players of the right levels and classes to experience properly .
However , Blizzard 's hardware infrastructure can not handle the number of simultaneous players you need on one server to make forming groups at any time for all this content viable , and there is a queue system limiting the number of players allowed to log in at any time .
This problem gets worse with every expansion , as the amount of group content available increases but the number of simultaneous players permitted remains constant .
On top of this , lack of coordination between game world design and game client software results in concentrations of players in specific areas that exceed the ability of the client to render those zones at a playable framerate .
In summary ( for the case of WoW ) : 1 .
A smooth multiplayer experience requires a higher population than current MMO hardware can handle .
2. Smooth software operation on the client side requires yet a lower population than the ( insufficient for multiplayer ) populations currently allowed .
Some of this can be fixed with better server-side infrastructure and better game design , but I do n't know if it all can be fixed at present .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that's a problem with game architecture.
Any given Wow server has dozens of dungeon instances that require a group or raid of 5-40 players of the right levels and classes to experience properly.
However, Blizzard's hardware infrastructure cannot handle the number of simultaneous players you need on one server to make forming groups at any time for all this content viable, and there is a queue system limiting the number of players allowed to log in at any time.
This problem gets worse with every expansion, as the amount of group content available increases but the number of simultaneous players permitted remains constant.
On top of this, lack of coordination between game world design and game client software results in concentrations of players in specific areas that exceed the ability of the client to render those zones at a playable framerate.
In summary (for the case of WoW):

1.
A smooth multiplayer experience requires a higher population than current MMO hardware can handle.
2. Smooth software operation on the client side requires yet a lower population than the (insufficient for multiplayer) populations currently allowed.
Some of this can be fixed with better server-side infrastructure and better game design, but I don't know if it all can be fixed at present.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740135</id>
	<title>What's all this QQ about?</title>
	<author>Kreigaffe</author>
	<datestamp>1247926260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simply put, people are a waste of time.</p><p>Let's go back to two games I played and HATED because of the forced-grouping.  EQ and DAOC.  EQ was *terrible* about requiring a group to do...  anything.  Except for certain classes.  DAOC was the same way.  In both cases, the intention was always to force people to group up to do pretty much anything at all.  Hell, even just getting from Point A to Point B was often dangerous alone.</p><p>It's just not fun.  Period, end of story.</p><p>To build an MMO like that, you're assuming there will be an equal distribution of the classes required to do anything.  You're assuming there will be as much tanks and dps as healers.  That's..  not true, at all.  Never happens.  And nobody wants to spend their limited time in-game sitting around waiting for people to show up so MAYBE they can go push a single button over and over and gain a half a level.  Spend 2 hours looking for a group, and 1 hour actually grouping?  It's just not fun any way you slice it.</p><p>Forced grouping works GREAT in certain games, and certain aspects of games.  Look at D&amp;D.  You KNOW when you're playing D&amp;D that you'll have a group with you, because if you don't..  you're not playing.  You don't decide to play and then sit around your table waiting for random people to walk by and ask them if they happen to be the class you need in your group.  That happened in EQ and DAOC constantly.  It's dumb.  In WoW, end-game raids are generally scheduled, and even those that aren't?  They're at least end-game, where the majority of your player base will wind up, so at least there's a wide pool of people to draw on.  Even that wasn't enough, though, so WoW has added tons of tools to help people find other people to group with for end-game content, and of the 3 archtypes -- tank, dps, heal -- most classes can handle at least two of those jobs, and with dual specs it's really, really simple.  And honestly, it still kinda sucks.  A few people don't show up to a scheduled raid, you have to spend time looking for fill-ins.  PUGs don't always even get off the ground.</p><p>Basically, forced-grouping in MMOs fails because people don't like sitting on their ass typing "LFG" over and over and over when they're *supposed* to be playing a game and having fun.  Once you add all the retards into the equation, you wind up spending too much time typing "LFG" and once you're done with that, it's probably 50/50 odds that you'll have to start doing it again shortly because whoever you find will be too stupid to group with.</p><p>Honestly WAR handled it pretty well, at least up until level 30 or so (when I quit..).  Solo you'd be fine 99\% of the time, but each time you added to your group you became more and more effective.  WoW group play compared to solo I often found to actually slow me down, even with guildies on vent, but WAR it really always payed off but never was necessary.  Really a shame they got so much wrong with that game, because they did get a lot right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simply put , people are a waste of time.Let 's go back to two games I played and HATED because of the forced-grouping .
EQ and DAOC .
EQ was * terrible * about requiring a group to do... anything. Except for certain classes .
DAOC was the same way .
In both cases , the intention was always to force people to group up to do pretty much anything at all .
Hell , even just getting from Point A to Point B was often dangerous alone.It 's just not fun .
Period , end of story.To build an MMO like that , you 're assuming there will be an equal distribution of the classes required to do anything .
You 're assuming there will be as much tanks and dps as healers .
That 's.. not true , at all .
Never happens .
And nobody wants to spend their limited time in-game sitting around waiting for people to show up so MAYBE they can go push a single button over and over and gain a half a level .
Spend 2 hours looking for a group , and 1 hour actually grouping ?
It 's just not fun any way you slice it.Forced grouping works GREAT in certain games , and certain aspects of games .
Look at D&amp;D .
You KNOW when you 're playing D&amp;D that you 'll have a group with you , because if you do n't.. you 're not playing .
You do n't decide to play and then sit around your table waiting for random people to walk by and ask them if they happen to be the class you need in your group .
That happened in EQ and DAOC constantly .
It 's dumb .
In WoW , end-game raids are generally scheduled , and even those that are n't ?
They 're at least end-game , where the majority of your player base will wind up , so at least there 's a wide pool of people to draw on .
Even that was n't enough , though , so WoW has added tons of tools to help people find other people to group with for end-game content , and of the 3 archtypes -- tank , dps , heal -- most classes can handle at least two of those jobs , and with dual specs it 's really , really simple .
And honestly , it still kinda sucks .
A few people do n't show up to a scheduled raid , you have to spend time looking for fill-ins .
PUGs do n't always even get off the ground.Basically , forced-grouping in MMOs fails because people do n't like sitting on their ass typing " LFG " over and over and over when they 're * supposed * to be playing a game and having fun .
Once you add all the retards into the equation , you wind up spending too much time typing " LFG " and once you 're done with that , it 's probably 50/50 odds that you 'll have to start doing it again shortly because whoever you find will be too stupid to group with.Honestly WAR handled it pretty well , at least up until level 30 or so ( when I quit.. ) .
Solo you 'd be fine 99 \ % of the time , but each time you added to your group you became more and more effective .
WoW group play compared to solo I often found to actually slow me down , even with guildies on vent , but WAR it really always payed off but never was necessary .
Really a shame they got so much wrong with that game , because they did get a lot right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simply put, people are a waste of time.Let's go back to two games I played and HATED because of the forced-grouping.
EQ and DAOC.
EQ was *terrible* about requiring a group to do...  anything.  Except for certain classes.
DAOC was the same way.
In both cases, the intention was always to force people to group up to do pretty much anything at all.
Hell, even just getting from Point A to Point B was often dangerous alone.It's just not fun.
Period, end of story.To build an MMO like that, you're assuming there will be an equal distribution of the classes required to do anything.
You're assuming there will be as much tanks and dps as healers.
That's..  not true, at all.
Never happens.
And nobody wants to spend their limited time in-game sitting around waiting for people to show up so MAYBE they can go push a single button over and over and gain a half a level.
Spend 2 hours looking for a group, and 1 hour actually grouping?
It's just not fun any way you slice it.Forced grouping works GREAT in certain games, and certain aspects of games.
Look at D&amp;D.
You KNOW when you're playing D&amp;D that you'll have a group with you, because if you don't..  you're not playing.
You don't decide to play and then sit around your table waiting for random people to walk by and ask them if they happen to be the class you need in your group.
That happened in EQ and DAOC constantly.
It's dumb.
In WoW, end-game raids are generally scheduled, and even those that aren't?
They're at least end-game, where the majority of your player base will wind up, so at least there's a wide pool of people to draw on.
Even that wasn't enough, though, so WoW has added tons of tools to help people find other people to group with for end-game content, and of the 3 archtypes -- tank, dps, heal -- most classes can handle at least two of those jobs, and with dual specs it's really, really simple.
And honestly, it still kinda sucks.
A few people don't show up to a scheduled raid, you have to spend time looking for fill-ins.
PUGs don't always even get off the ground.Basically, forced-grouping in MMOs fails because people don't like sitting on their ass typing "LFG" over and over and over when they're *supposed* to be playing a game and having fun.
Once you add all the retards into the equation, you wind up spending too much time typing "LFG" and once you're done with that, it's probably 50/50 odds that you'll have to start doing it again shortly because whoever you find will be too stupid to group with.Honestly WAR handled it pretty well, at least up until level 30 or so (when I quit..).
Solo you'd be fine 99\% of the time, but each time you added to your group you became more and more effective.
WoW group play compared to solo I often found to actually slow me down, even with guildies on vent, but WAR it really always payed off but never was necessary.
Really a shame they got so much wrong with that game, because they did get a lot right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740013</id>
	<title>Re:That's not why</title>
	<author>Meton5</author>
	<datestamp>1247924940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is compounded when the forced grouping is integrated into the competitive end, where you need not only the right class, but the right partners.

At least in fighters, FPS, and RTS you aren't forced to use whatever the balance team decides is good enough for your class this patch.  You can actually pick what is worth picking.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is compounded when the forced grouping is integrated into the competitive end , where you need not only the right class , but the right partners .
At least in fighters , FPS , and RTS you are n't forced to use whatever the balance team decides is good enough for your class this patch .
You can actually pick what is worth picking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is compounded when the forced grouping is integrated into the competitive end, where you need not only the right class, but the right partners.
At least in fighters, FPS, and RTS you aren't forced to use whatever the balance team decides is good enough for your class this patch.
You can actually pick what is worth picking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867</id>
	<title>Re:And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1247933100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Very true. I'm amazed at how much effort is poured into adding solo content, and how little is put into making the group experience better. Possible areas of improved, in WoW, would be:</p><p>- a Karma system, actually 2, one for skill and one for social intelligence. Assholes and retards spoil the game for whomever groups with them, and it's amazing how many of those there are. Blizzard must have the intellectual and financial means to build a karma system that works ?</p><p>- Multi-player combo moves. Buffs are fine, but having combat combo moves that require several players to collaborate would be oodles of fun.</p><p>- Vocal chat. 6 years on, we still have to use very un-ergonomic 3rd party programs. Blizzard could at least buy &amp; re-design those, or help their developpers interface with WoW... WoW's own voice chat make the idiotic assumption that we want to disconnect whenever you're not in the game, or switch toons<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>They did at last get the grouping interface mostly right (should take alts into account, though).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very true .
I 'm amazed at how much effort is poured into adding solo content , and how little is put into making the group experience better .
Possible areas of improved , in WoW , would be : - a Karma system , actually 2 , one for skill and one for social intelligence .
Assholes and retards spoil the game for whomever groups with them , and it 's amazing how many of those there are .
Blizzard must have the intellectual and financial means to build a karma system that works ? - Multi-player combo moves .
Buffs are fine , but having combat combo moves that require several players to collaborate would be oodles of fun.- Vocal chat .
6 years on , we still have to use very un-ergonomic 3rd party programs .
Blizzard could at least buy &amp; re-design those , or help their developpers interface with WoW... WoW 's own voice chat make the idiotic assumption that we want to disconnect whenever you 're not in the game , or switch toons ...They did at last get the grouping interface mostly right ( should take alts into account , though ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very true.
I'm amazed at how much effort is poured into adding solo content, and how little is put into making the group experience better.
Possible areas of improved, in WoW, would be:- a Karma system, actually 2, one for skill and one for social intelligence.
Assholes and retards spoil the game for whomever groups with them, and it's amazing how many of those there are.
Blizzard must have the intellectual and financial means to build a karma system that works ?- Multi-player combo moves.
Buffs are fine, but having combat combo moves that require several players to collaborate would be oodles of fun.- Vocal chat.
6 years on, we still have to use very un-ergonomic 3rd party programs.
Blizzard could at least buy &amp; re-design those, or help their developpers interface with WoW... WoW's own voice chat make the idiotic assumption that we want to disconnect whenever you're not in the game, or switch toons ...They did at last get the grouping interface mostly right (should take alts into account, though).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740111</id>
	<title>Article misses the mark</title>
	<author>Synn</author>
	<datestamp>1247926140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Players didn't get sick of group play, they got tired of having to wait 30 mins to an hour for the proper group to form just so they could play the game. Then you'd get an hour into a dungeon only to have the cleric leave and you'd have to exit and sit around waiting for another cleric to show up, because you couldn't play the game without one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Players did n't get sick of group play , they got tired of having to wait 30 mins to an hour for the proper group to form just so they could play the game .
Then you 'd get an hour into a dungeon only to have the cleric leave and you 'd have to exit and sit around waiting for another cleric to show up , because you could n't play the game without one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Players didn't get sick of group play, they got tired of having to wait 30 mins to an hour for the proper group to form just so they could play the game.
Then you'd get an hour into a dungeon only to have the cleric leave and you'd have to exit and sit around waiting for another cleric to show up, because you couldn't play the game without one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740653</id>
	<title>Re:That's not why</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1247930940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Takes a while to get a collection of good players, but it's worth it.</p><p>In "old school" games where you had to group to get anywhere, it meant that you spent your 20s and 30s (provided it's a 50 level game, generally about the first 3/5th of your leveling) with groups that sucked. Mostly. My standards are pretty high, so I'd say about 4 out of 5 people I played with sucked and they didn't meet my requirements. I took a note of the other fifth of the players I played with, though. And so did they. Over time, you got a healthy collection of people you knew you could play with.</p><p>Today, this is done after leveling, when it goes into raids, when you hack 4 hours into the dungeon before you find out you have someone with you that "has to go now, it's my bedtime". IMO that's worse than being in a simple leveling dungeon/area where you could simply pick up a new guy or just continue with the rest of the group.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Takes a while to get a collection of good players , but it 's worth it.In " old school " games where you had to group to get anywhere , it meant that you spent your 20s and 30s ( provided it 's a 50 level game , generally about the first 3/5th of your leveling ) with groups that sucked .
Mostly. My standards are pretty high , so I 'd say about 4 out of 5 people I played with sucked and they did n't meet my requirements .
I took a note of the other fifth of the players I played with , though .
And so did they .
Over time , you got a healthy collection of people you knew you could play with.Today , this is done after leveling , when it goes into raids , when you hack 4 hours into the dungeon before you find out you have someone with you that " has to go now , it 's my bedtime " .
IMO that 's worse than being in a simple leveling dungeon/area where you could simply pick up a new guy or just continue with the rest of the group .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Takes a while to get a collection of good players, but it's worth it.In "old school" games where you had to group to get anywhere, it meant that you spent your 20s and 30s (provided it's a 50 level game, generally about the first 3/5th of your leveling) with groups that sucked.
Mostly. My standards are pretty high, so I'd say about 4 out of 5 people I played with sucked and they didn't meet my requirements.
I took a note of the other fifth of the players I played with, though.
And so did they.
Over time, you got a healthy collection of people you knew you could play with.Today, this is done after leveling, when it goes into raids, when you hack 4 hours into the dungeon before you find out you have someone with you that "has to go now, it's my bedtime".
IMO that's worse than being in a simple leveling dungeon/area where you could simply pick up a new guy or just continue with the rest of the group.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543</id>
	<title>I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247916600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Time sinks do not make me want to stick around, they make me want to go elsewhere.  I already have a time sink in my life, it's called work.  It regularly consumes 13 hours of my day, factor in an average 8 hours of sleep and that leaves me with 3 hours in which to do things like play games, eat food, etc.  If the game wants me to spend time essentially doing nothing, then I'm not playing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Time sinks do not make me want to stick around , they make me want to go elsewhere .
I already have a time sink in my life , it 's called work .
It regularly consumes 13 hours of my day , factor in an average 8 hours of sleep and that leaves me with 3 hours in which to do things like play games , eat food , etc .
If the game wants me to spend time essentially doing nothing , then I 'm not playing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time sinks do not make me want to stick around, they make me want to go elsewhere.
I already have a time sink in my life, it's called work.
It regularly consumes 13 hours of my day, factor in an average 8 hours of sleep and that leaves me with 3 hours in which to do things like play games, eat food, etc.
If the game wants me to spend time essentially doing nothing, then I'm not playing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645</id>
	<title>And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>AlmondMan</author>
	<datestamp>1247918700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Killing it through making everything into solo-content, losing out on all the things that the genre would've allowed for. All the many possibilities of player vs player conflict are swept under the rug and turned into endless killing grounds, like the instanced battle arenas in Anarchy Online, WAR and WoW. WAR is a bit on the right track again, with the world being sort of dynamic between the two sides, but things are just going way too fast back and forth. And the world is too stiff.<br> <br>

The idea of players working together, cooperating and prospering in these digital worlds has been lost and we're back in the ego race for the most epeen. Which is sad, because the fun of these games lies in the multiplayer cooperative part. Which was their great attraction piece in times past. Now, it's just a really bad singleplayer game. Consider, if you will, playing any of the many MMOs in an offline game. Everything works exactly the same as the MMO, only you're quite alone. Nothing you do will ever have an impact on the world as it does in proper singleplayer games. The story progresses and things change around your character. In MMOs the best thing you can do is fake this, like they've started doing in WoW, which I find to be just cheap, with the only purpose of it being to greater satisfy the solo player. Leaving nothing in the way of multiplayer ways to see change going on in the world.
Sad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Killing it through making everything into solo-content , losing out on all the things that the genre would 've allowed for .
All the many possibilities of player vs player conflict are swept under the rug and turned into endless killing grounds , like the instanced battle arenas in Anarchy Online , WAR and WoW .
WAR is a bit on the right track again , with the world being sort of dynamic between the two sides , but things are just going way too fast back and forth .
And the world is too stiff .
The idea of players working together , cooperating and prospering in these digital worlds has been lost and we 're back in the ego race for the most epeen .
Which is sad , because the fun of these games lies in the multiplayer cooperative part .
Which was their great attraction piece in times past .
Now , it 's just a really bad singleplayer game .
Consider , if you will , playing any of the many MMOs in an offline game .
Everything works exactly the same as the MMO , only you 're quite alone .
Nothing you do will ever have an impact on the world as it does in proper singleplayer games .
The story progresses and things change around your character .
In MMOs the best thing you can do is fake this , like they 've started doing in WoW , which I find to be just cheap , with the only purpose of it being to greater satisfy the solo player .
Leaving nothing in the way of multiplayer ways to see change going on in the world .
Sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Killing it through making everything into solo-content, losing out on all the things that the genre would've allowed for.
All the many possibilities of player vs player conflict are swept under the rug and turned into endless killing grounds, like the instanced battle arenas in Anarchy Online, WAR and WoW.
WAR is a bit on the right track again, with the world being sort of dynamic between the two sides, but things are just going way too fast back and forth.
And the world is too stiff.
The idea of players working together, cooperating and prospering in these digital worlds has been lost and we're back in the ego race for the most epeen.
Which is sad, because the fun of these games lies in the multiplayer cooperative part.
Which was their great attraction piece in times past.
Now, it's just a really bad singleplayer game.
Consider, if you will, playing any of the many MMOs in an offline game.
Everything works exactly the same as the MMO, only you're quite alone.
Nothing you do will ever have an impact on the world as it does in proper singleplayer games.
The story progresses and things change around your character.
In MMOs the best thing you can do is fake this, like they've started doing in WoW, which I find to be just cheap, with the only purpose of it being to greater satisfy the solo player.
Leaving nothing in the way of multiplayer ways to see change going on in the world.
Sad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741567</id>
	<title>Asheron's Call Had (Has?) Great Solo Play</title>
	<author>fyrie</author>
	<datestamp>1247938860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't speak for its current state since I don't play anymore, but AC was very solo friendly. There were tons of quests and dungeons that were doable without a party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't speak for its current state since I do n't play anymore , but AC was very solo friendly .
There were tons of quests and dungeons that were doable without a party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't speak for its current state since I don't play anymore, but AC was very solo friendly.
There were tons of quests and dungeons that were doable without a party.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740731</id>
	<title>Re:The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1247931660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Casual vs serious is all about how much you care.  We all know film buffs for instance who take films very seriously who watch a lot of movies, but also read about them, talk about them, think about them. Then there are people who just like to see a movie from time to time.  Games are the same way, it's not a hard and fast line either, there are many shades in between.</p><p>I guess there are some observations that can be made though.  If you've never seen a foreign movie, you're probably not a film buff.  If you've never played an imported game, you're probably not a serious gamer. If you've never seen a movie that came out before you were born, you're probably not a film buff.  If you've never played a game that came out before you were born, you're probably not a serious gamer. Or you're in your late 30s. If you can't name a few directors off the top of your head, you're probably not a film buff.  If you can't name a few game designers off the top of your head, you're probably not a serious gamer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Casual vs serious is all about how much you care .
We all know film buffs for instance who take films very seriously who watch a lot of movies , but also read about them , talk about them , think about them .
Then there are people who just like to see a movie from time to time .
Games are the same way , it 's not a hard and fast line either , there are many shades in between.I guess there are some observations that can be made though .
If you 've never seen a foreign movie , you 're probably not a film buff .
If you 've never played an imported game , you 're probably not a serious gamer .
If you 've never seen a movie that came out before you were born , you 're probably not a film buff .
If you 've never played a game that came out before you were born , you 're probably not a serious gamer .
Or you 're in your late 30s .
If you ca n't name a few directors off the top of your head , you 're probably not a film buff .
If you ca n't name a few game designers off the top of your head , you 're probably not a serious gamer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Casual vs serious is all about how much you care.
We all know film buffs for instance who take films very seriously who watch a lot of movies, but also read about them, talk about them, think about them.
Then there are people who just like to see a movie from time to time.
Games are the same way, it's not a hard and fast line either, there are many shades in between.I guess there are some observations that can be made though.
If you've never seen a foreign movie, you're probably not a film buff.
If you've never played an imported game, you're probably not a serious gamer.
If you've never seen a movie that came out before you were born, you're probably not a film buff.
If you've never played a game that came out before you were born, you're probably not a serious gamer.
Or you're in your late 30s.
If you can't name a few directors off the top of your head, you're probably not a film buff.
If you can't name a few game designers off the top of your head, you're probably not a serious gamer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28755355</id>
	<title>3 solutions</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1248099780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A: Score players by referral. Search for players using a threshold based on referrals. Just like filtering slashdot posts, filter players. Assholes quickly dissapear then</p><p>B: Scale content. Go into Molten Core solo, in a group, or a raid of 40. Just scale the content, number of drops, etc accordingly.</p><p>C: Provide players the tools needed to police their own. Griefers are the result of the player population (the masses) having no ability to deal with griefers on their own. Bounties as an in-game mechanism can go along way with dealing with griefers. Especially when there is a real penalty for dying when you have a bounty on your head.</p><p>Feature:<br>Bounty - A player, once per day, can place a bounty of X gold on another player. For evey Y gold placed on the target upon death the target will lose 5\% of their exp and will have to wait 1 hour for every Y gold before logging back in. Each time they die Y gold is removed from the bounty pool.</p><p>Y=1000 Gold</p><p>A player has a 5,000 bounty. Upon dying the player will be booted for 5 hours and lose 25\% of their exp. The next time they log in the bounty pool is now at 4,000 bounty. Upon dying the player will be booted for 4 hours and lose 20\% of their current exp. An so on and so on.</p><p>This assumes 1000 gold is a decent amount of cash in your game. This mechanism would go a long way to disciplining griefers. Can be used as a tool to grief? Yep, but pretty damn expensive tool to abuse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A : Score players by referral .
Search for players using a threshold based on referrals .
Just like filtering slashdot posts , filter players .
Assholes quickly dissapear thenB : Scale content .
Go into Molten Core solo , in a group , or a raid of 40 .
Just scale the content , number of drops , etc accordingly.C : Provide players the tools needed to police their own .
Griefers are the result of the player population ( the masses ) having no ability to deal with griefers on their own .
Bounties as an in-game mechanism can go along way with dealing with griefers .
Especially when there is a real penalty for dying when you have a bounty on your head.Feature : Bounty - A player , once per day , can place a bounty of X gold on another player .
For evey Y gold placed on the target upon death the target will lose 5 \ % of their exp and will have to wait 1 hour for every Y gold before logging back in .
Each time they die Y gold is removed from the bounty pool.Y = 1000 GoldA player has a 5,000 bounty .
Upon dying the player will be booted for 5 hours and lose 25 \ % of their exp .
The next time they log in the bounty pool is now at 4,000 bounty .
Upon dying the player will be booted for 4 hours and lose 20 \ % of their current exp .
An so on and so on.This assumes 1000 gold is a decent amount of cash in your game .
This mechanism would go a long way to disciplining griefers .
Can be used as a tool to grief ?
Yep , but pretty damn expensive tool to abuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A: Score players by referral.
Search for players using a threshold based on referrals.
Just like filtering slashdot posts, filter players.
Assholes quickly dissapear thenB: Scale content.
Go into Molten Core solo, in a group, or a raid of 40.
Just scale the content, number of drops, etc accordingly.C: Provide players the tools needed to police their own.
Griefers are the result of the player population (the masses) having no ability to deal with griefers on their own.
Bounties as an in-game mechanism can go along way with dealing with griefers.
Especially when there is a real penalty for dying when you have a bounty on your head.Feature:Bounty - A player, once per day, can place a bounty of X gold on another player.
For evey Y gold placed on the target upon death the target will lose 5\% of their exp and will have to wait 1 hour for every Y gold before logging back in.
Each time they die Y gold is removed from the bounty pool.Y=1000 GoldA player has a 5,000 bounty.
Upon dying the player will be booted for 5 hours and lose 25\% of their exp.
The next time they log in the bounty pool is now at 4,000 bounty.
Upon dying the player will be booted for 4 hours and lose 20\% of their current exp.
An so on and so on.This assumes 1000 gold is a decent amount of cash in your game.
This mechanism would go a long way to disciplining griefers.
Can be used as a tool to grief?
Yep, but pretty damn expensive tool to abuse.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740807</id>
	<title>Player matching</title>
	<author>AlpineR</author>
	<datestamp>1247932380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I sense a demand for a service like eHarmony, Match.com, or Chemistry.com geared toward finding compatible gamers rather than sexual mates. Put all the immersive RPGers on one shard, all the 1/2 hr a night casual grownups on another, the emo teens on a third, etc. Maybe include a function to vote misbehavers off the shard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I sense a demand for a service like eHarmony , Match.com , or Chemistry.com geared toward finding compatible gamers rather than sexual mates .
Put all the immersive RPGers on one shard , all the 1/2 hr a night casual grownups on another , the emo teens on a third , etc .
Maybe include a function to vote misbehavers off the shard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sense a demand for a service like eHarmony, Match.com, or Chemistry.com geared toward finding compatible gamers rather than sexual mates.
Put all the immersive RPGers on one shard, all the 1/2 hr a night casual grownups on another, the emo teens on a third, etc.
Maybe include a function to vote misbehavers off the shard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743085</id>
	<title>Re:The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247908560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>During the school year I tended to buy 2-3 games, and for the summer I'd buy another 4-5 and down them during the summer. This added up to over $300 a year in games (8games tops per year isn't what I'd call hardcore gamer). Recently I started to play world of warcraft, and since then have seen no need to buy a new game. I've paid $45 in subscriptions plus $60 for the game+expansion packs, for a total of $105. Seeing as how I've bought zero games this summer, I've saved ~$75 so far by playing wow.<br>
&nbsp; <br>Paying a monthly subscription makes great sense if the game has enough content/replay value in it compared to the average game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>During the school year I tended to buy 2-3 games , and for the summer I 'd buy another 4-5 and down them during the summer .
This added up to over $ 300 a year in games ( 8games tops per year is n't what I 'd call hardcore gamer ) .
Recently I started to play world of warcraft , and since then have seen no need to buy a new game .
I 've paid $ 45 in subscriptions plus $ 60 for the game + expansion packs , for a total of $ 105 .
Seeing as how I 've bought zero games this summer , I 've saved ~ $ 75 so far by playing wow .
  Paying a monthly subscription makes great sense if the game has enough content/replay value in it compared to the average game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>During the school year I tended to buy 2-3 games, and for the summer I'd buy another 4-5 and down them during the summer.
This added up to over $300 a year in games (8games tops per year isn't what I'd call hardcore gamer).
Recently I started to play world of warcraft, and since then have seen no need to buy a new game.
I've paid $45 in subscriptions plus $60 for the game+expansion packs, for a total of $105.
Seeing as how I've bought zero games this summer, I've saved ~$75 so far by playing wow.
  Paying a monthly subscription makes great sense if the game has enough content/replay value in it compared to the average game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740183</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739953</id>
	<title>Re:The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247924040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have this theory that <i>if</i> there was an Asian-American Republican, he'd have a soul. Double negative, you know.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have this theory that if there was an Asian-American Republican , he 'd have a soul .
Double negative , you know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have this theory that if there was an Asian-American Republican, he'd have a soul.
Double negative, you know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743737</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>drsquare</author>
	<datestamp>1247914200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do realise that if people didn't do any jobs unless they really loved doing them, then the entire economy collapse and most people would starve to death?</p><p>We can't all be astronauts and rock stars, someone has to clean the toilets and empty the bins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do realise that if people did n't do any jobs unless they really loved doing them , then the entire economy collapse and most people would starve to death ? We ca n't all be astronauts and rock stars , someone has to clean the toilets and empty the bins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do realise that if people didn't do any jobs unless they really loved doing them, then the entire economy collapse and most people would starve to death?We can't all be astronauts and rock stars, someone has to clean the toilets and empty the bins.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719</id>
	<title>Online worlds FTW; online players suck.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247919960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want the colossal richness and depth available only through online worlds, without the horny adolescents, griefers, and other social incompetents that MMOGs seem to attract.</p><p>Give with WoW with just me and the NPCs, and I'll pay for it. Not otherwise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want the colossal richness and depth available only through online worlds , without the horny adolescents , griefers , and other social incompetents that MMOGs seem to attract.Give with WoW with just me and the NPCs , and I 'll pay for it .
Not otherwise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want the colossal richness and depth available only through online worlds, without the horny adolescents, griefers, and other social incompetents that MMOGs seem to attract.Give with WoW with just me and the NPCs, and I'll pay for it.
Not otherwise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741089</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>nedlohs</author>
	<datestamp>1247934780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are plenty of jobs that nobody could possibly want to do.</p><p>Sure there are less now that we have car building robots and so on.</p><p>I worked a couple of months between semesters once on a production line that was taking shrink wrapped cartoons of cigarettes, opening them and putting them into smaller promotional packages that were then shrink wrapped. No one could have possibly enjoyed that work, and it certainly wasn't benefiting humanity.</p><p>Harvesting a field isn't fun either, at least that one is essential to humanity though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are plenty of jobs that nobody could possibly want to do.Sure there are less now that we have car building robots and so on.I worked a couple of months between semesters once on a production line that was taking shrink wrapped cartoons of cigarettes , opening them and putting them into smaller promotional packages that were then shrink wrapped .
No one could have possibly enjoyed that work , and it certainly was n't benefiting humanity.Harvesting a field is n't fun either , at least that one is essential to humanity though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are plenty of jobs that nobody could possibly want to do.Sure there are less now that we have car building robots and so on.I worked a couple of months between semesters once on a production line that was taking shrink wrapped cartoons of cigarettes, opening them and putting them into smaller promotional packages that were then shrink wrapped.
No one could have possibly enjoyed that work, and it certainly wasn't benefiting humanity.Harvesting a field isn't fun either, at least that one is essential to humanity though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740959</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>Rich0</author>
	<datestamp>1247933700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you given thought to joining a commune?  They work really well.  At least they do until they realize that nobody is taking out the trash since everybody wants to be an artist...</p><p>The only people I know who would be doing what they're doing for work if they were independantly wealthy, are independantly wealthy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you given thought to joining a commune ?
They work really well .
At least they do until they realize that nobody is taking out the trash since everybody wants to be an artist...The only people I know who would be doing what they 're doing for work if they were independantly wealthy , are independantly wealthy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you given thought to joining a commune?
They work really well.
At least they do until they realize that nobody is taking out the trash since everybody wants to be an artist...The only people I know who would be doing what they're doing for work if they were independantly wealthy, are independantly wealthy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740587</id>
	<title>Re:That's not why</title>
	<author>Endo13</author>
	<datestamp>1247930580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When I play games like Guild Wars solo, it's not because "I want to be the hero" or because "I want all the lewts". It's because pick-up groups suck. You spend half an hour trying to round up people to fill out the group, and it only takes one of them being a moron to ruin the entire experience.</p></div><p>Real MMOs have less of a problem with that than GW though, because in a real MMO you actually have to care about your reputation as a player at least a little bit. In GW it doesn't matter because you'll never see anyone from the same group again anyway. You can be a shit player having good players carry you through the game the whole way and never group with the same person twice, without trying. In an MMO, you can get away with that for a while, but if you do it too much it eventually catches up with you, unless you keep paying for name and/or server changes.</p><p>And you're right - pugs in GW absolutely suck. In fact, as a general rule all of the game is easier to play with one friend than with a pug.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>For those few of you who don't know, that's the guy who doesn't know how to get where you're going, can't properly follow your directions to get there, tries to boss around the party when he finally does get there even though he clearly doesn't know what he's doing, and then fifteen minutes into the group says, "o man i have 2 go.. mom wants me 2 clean my room".</p></div><p>He's also the guy drawing the cock &amp; balls on the compass minimap, or just otherwise cluttering it up so no one can use it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I play games like Guild Wars solo , it 's not because " I want to be the hero " or because " I want all the lewts " .
It 's because pick-up groups suck .
You spend half an hour trying to round up people to fill out the group , and it only takes one of them being a moron to ruin the entire experience.Real MMOs have less of a problem with that than GW though , because in a real MMO you actually have to care about your reputation as a player at least a little bit .
In GW it does n't matter because you 'll never see anyone from the same group again anyway .
You can be a shit player having good players carry you through the game the whole way and never group with the same person twice , without trying .
In an MMO , you can get away with that for a while , but if you do it too much it eventually catches up with you , unless you keep paying for name and/or server changes.And you 're right - pugs in GW absolutely suck .
In fact , as a general rule all of the game is easier to play with one friend than with a pug.For those few of you who do n't know , that 's the guy who does n't know how to get where you 're going , ca n't properly follow your directions to get there , tries to boss around the party when he finally does get there even though he clearly does n't know what he 's doing , and then fifteen minutes into the group says , " o man i have 2 go.. mom wants me 2 clean my room " .He 's also the guy drawing the cock &amp; balls on the compass minimap , or just otherwise cluttering it up so no one can use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I play games like Guild Wars solo, it's not because "I want to be the hero" or because "I want all the lewts".
It's because pick-up groups suck.
You spend half an hour trying to round up people to fill out the group, and it only takes one of them being a moron to ruin the entire experience.Real MMOs have less of a problem with that than GW though, because in a real MMO you actually have to care about your reputation as a player at least a little bit.
In GW it doesn't matter because you'll never see anyone from the same group again anyway.
You can be a shit player having good players carry you through the game the whole way and never group with the same person twice, without trying.
In an MMO, you can get away with that for a while, but if you do it too much it eventually catches up with you, unless you keep paying for name and/or server changes.And you're right - pugs in GW absolutely suck.
In fact, as a general rule all of the game is easier to play with one friend than with a pug.For those few of you who don't know, that's the guy who doesn't know how to get where you're going, can't properly follow your directions to get there, tries to boss around the party when he finally does get there even though he clearly doesn't know what he's doing, and then fifteen minutes into the group says, "o man i have 2 go.. mom wants me 2 clean my room".He's also the guy drawing the cock &amp; balls on the compass minimap, or just otherwise cluttering it up so no one can use it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740473</id>
	<title>Animal Crossing</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1247929680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Consider, if you will, playing any of the many MMOs in an offline game. Everything works exactly the same as the MMO, only you're quite alone. Nothing you do will ever have an impact on the world as it does in proper singleplayer games. The story progresses and things change around your character.</p></div><p>In other words, the <i>Animal Crossing</i> series. Or what am I missing?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Consider , if you will , playing any of the many MMOs in an offline game .
Everything works exactly the same as the MMO , only you 're quite alone .
Nothing you do will ever have an impact on the world as it does in proper singleplayer games .
The story progresses and things change around your character.In other words , the Animal Crossing series .
Or what am I missing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Consider, if you will, playing any of the many MMOs in an offline game.
Everything works exactly the same as the MMO, only you're quite alone.
Nothing you do will ever have an impact on the world as it does in proper singleplayer games.
The story progresses and things change around your character.In other words, the Animal Crossing series.
Or what am I missing?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740253</id>
	<title>I just tried WOW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247927400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had just 2 weeks of vacation, and I tried WOW for some fun. I found out that the main game concept is pretty appealing, the graphics are awesome and I really loved the mood of the game (especially thanks to the magnificent background music). However I also cancelled my account already, citing the amount of time sinks as the main reason. Everyone knows that WOW basically starts when you reach level 80 (when you can access the really high-end content). Just grinding for a year to reach the point where you get the maximum amount of enjoyment out of the game was not really appealing to me.</p><p>In fact, I doubt that the time sinks in fact benefit the game makers after all. Although they might make some people stick around for longer time paying their monthly fees the time sinks also make some people quit very fast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had just 2 weeks of vacation , and I tried WOW for some fun .
I found out that the main game concept is pretty appealing , the graphics are awesome and I really loved the mood of the game ( especially thanks to the magnificent background music ) .
However I also cancelled my account already , citing the amount of time sinks as the main reason .
Everyone knows that WOW basically starts when you reach level 80 ( when you can access the really high-end content ) .
Just grinding for a year to reach the point where you get the maximum amount of enjoyment out of the game was not really appealing to me.In fact , I doubt that the time sinks in fact benefit the game makers after all .
Although they might make some people stick around for longer time paying their monthly fees the time sinks also make some people quit very fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had just 2 weeks of vacation, and I tried WOW for some fun.
I found out that the main game concept is pretty appealing, the graphics are awesome and I really loved the mood of the game (especially thanks to the magnificent background music).
However I also cancelled my account already, citing the amount of time sinks as the main reason.
Everyone knows that WOW basically starts when you reach level 80 (when you can access the really high-end content).
Just grinding for a year to reach the point where you get the maximum amount of enjoyment out of the game was not really appealing to me.In fact, I doubt that the time sinks in fact benefit the game makers after all.
Although they might make some people stick around for longer time paying their monthly fees the time sinks also make some people quit very fast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740509</id>
	<title>Re:Solo Play Should be Offline Play</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1247929980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For every sword-and-sorcery or sci-fi themed MMO, there is an offline game, designed from the ground up for solo players.</p></div><p>That's not likely to continue for very long, as publishers move components of single-player games online for revenue stream protection.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For every sword-and-sorcery or sci-fi themed MMO , there is an offline game , designed from the ground up for solo players.That 's not likely to continue for very long , as publishers move components of single-player games online for revenue stream protection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For every sword-and-sorcery or sci-fi themed MMO, there is an offline game, designed from the ground up for solo players.That's not likely to continue for very long, as publishers move components of single-player games online for revenue stream protection.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739821</id>
	<title>Re:The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247921760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's easy to define casual:</p><p>It's a socially awkward player who is afraid that people in a guild would find out on teamspeak or vent that the hotavnger21 female night elf warrior with HUGE boobs is in fact John Conner, male, aged 43 living in a trailer and has only the huge boobs in common with his character.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's easy to define casual : It 's a socially awkward player who is afraid that people in a guild would find out on teamspeak or vent that the hotavnger21 female night elf warrior with HUGE boobs is in fact John Conner , male , aged 43 living in a trailer and has only the huge boobs in common with his character .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's easy to define casual:It's a socially awkward player who is afraid that people in a guild would find out on teamspeak or vent that the hotavnger21 female night elf warrior with HUGE boobs is in fact John Conner, male, aged 43 living in a trailer and has only the huge boobs in common with his character.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740805</id>
	<title>Re:The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1247932380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow's subscription costs about the same as<br>- 2 movie tickets<br>- half a nice restaurant meal<br>- 1/4th of a new game<br>- a very cheap/bad theater/opera ticket<br>- a new CD<br>- a new DVD<br>-<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>you can play very little WoW (6-8 hours/month), and still get more "entertainment time" for your money than you would with more traditional entertainment.</p><p>of course, you won't get the same benefits out of it.. it's pretty much a-cultural... but then again, given how bad most recent movies have been<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow 's subscription costs about the same as- 2 movie tickets- half a nice restaurant meal- 1/4th of a new game- a very cheap/bad theater/opera ticket- a new CD- a new DVD- ...you can play very little WoW ( 6-8 hours/month ) , and still get more " entertainment time " for your money than you would with more traditional entertainment.of course , you wo n't get the same benefits out of it.. it 's pretty much a-cultural... but then again , given how bad most recent movies have been .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow's subscription costs about the same as- 2 movie tickets- half a nice restaurant meal- 1/4th of a new game- a very cheap/bad theater/opera ticket- a new CD- a new DVD- ...you can play very little WoW (6-8 hours/month), and still get more "entertainment time" for your money than you would with more traditional entertainment.of course, you won't get the same benefits out of it.. it's pretty much a-cultural... but then again, given how bad most recent movies have been ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740183</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740183</id>
	<title>Re:The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>williamhb</author>
	<datestamp>1247926920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There are many levels of time people put into games. How exactly do you definite 'casual'? If you look at it from the MMO perspective (wow for example) do you count a casual gamer as someone who doesnt raid? how about someone who only spends time in the game for raiding and not much else? What about if the non-raider spends more time in game than the raider, which one is casual?</p></div><p>In my personal opinion, if the idea of paying a monthly subscription for a game appealed to you in the first place, then you are probably not a casual gamer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are many levels of time people put into games .
How exactly do you definite 'casual ' ?
If you look at it from the MMO perspective ( wow for example ) do you count a casual gamer as someone who doesnt raid ?
how about someone who only spends time in the game for raiding and not much else ?
What about if the non-raider spends more time in game than the raider , which one is casual ? In my personal opinion , if the idea of paying a monthly subscription for a game appealed to you in the first place , then you are probably not a casual gamer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are many levels of time people put into games.
How exactly do you definite 'casual'?
If you look at it from the MMO perspective (wow for example) do you count a casual gamer as someone who doesnt raid?
how about someone who only spends time in the game for raiding and not much else?
What about if the non-raider spends more time in game than the raider, which one is casual?In my personal opinion, if the idea of paying a monthly subscription for a game appealed to you in the first place, then you are probably not a casual gamer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744371</id>
	<title>And that is exactly the problem</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1247922000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is both in the players and the game design. Since my most recent MMO is Lotro, I will use that as an example. The game does several things right. It typically lists quests properly as being either solo or group play. It also, later on, tends to make areas that are group only while there is plenty to do were you can go solo.
</p><p>It also gives enough healing to the non-healing classes to reduce the waiting for main-healer symptom. For instance, humans have a skill to do a near full heal once every hour, not fantastic but enough to buy you a second chance in a wtf situation. While the main healing class is the minstrel (similar to cleric/priest) other classes like captains and lore-masters can if played properly do a decent amount of healing. Have a party that plays together and a burglar led group can also pull of masive healing. An all burglar group is unstoppable. We did a Helegrod raid with all lore-masters and the rift with just burglars. It means the game does allow players to mix and match at will.
</p><p>Yet many players fail at this. They insist on the tank, healer, dps because they can't get their heads around the fact that other mixes can also work and even be a lot more effective. The sad fact is that most players just don't have what it takes to think outside the box. Why should you come up with intresting hybrid classes or let people select their own skills if everyone is just going to go for tank, healer, dps?
</p><p>But Lotro also does things worng. Its world is rather spread out and fast travel is a mess with lots of routes taking ages if you even got enough reputation. Most people never bother with the reputation since when you are done with all the quests in an area, you still have nowhere near enough. This means that for some quests, you have a hard time finding help, simply because most people do NOT come online just to spend half an hour travelling.  The one clas with summoning skills is a LOT easier to group with. "Hi can you help me with this book quest in Forochel" "Ooops sorry mate, I am in Moria, it would take me ages to get there." "I can summon you, and later my hunter can port you right back to Moria" "Ah no problem, invite me".
</p><p>Other errors in Lotro are that group quests are all over the place, often seperated by lengthy time wasting solo quests. So you just got a group and voila, half leaf because the next group part takes an hour to get to and they got other obligations. It is annoying. it wouldn't be all that hard to write the story line in such a way that you first spend sometime solo building the story and save the epic battle for the end.
</p><p>It is not that people don't want to play in a group, but that the game developers put so many obstacles in the way that all the fun is beaten out of it.
</p><p>Group loot: Do we REALLY need more greed into the world by dropping only 1 item for the entire group? It might SEEM like a way to force the group to play the quest a number of times, but all it really does is create greed and resentment.
</p><p>Fast travel: Put something like a summoning horn outside every group quest area, so that people can join whereever they are. The costs for this should be trivial. People want to play, not spend ages in slow-fast travel.
</p><p>Chat channels: Is it REALLY that hard to allow people to quick link to quests and restrict posts to say once per minute?
</p><p>Less loot: Nothing kills a group faster then constantly having to sort out loot. Not every critter has to drop something. Just give everyone some cash at the end and a copy of the special item at the end. if the game is fun, people will come back for more and if it isn't, they will just quit playing faster if you bore them.
</p><p>The funny thing is that companies that beat the fun out of group play then claim that people only want solo play and kill group play even more. But in the end you then end up with a game that is a very poor excuse for a single player game, with a monthly fee and 12yr olds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is both in the players and the game design .
Since my most recent MMO is Lotro , I will use that as an example .
The game does several things right .
It typically lists quests properly as being either solo or group play .
It also , later on , tends to make areas that are group only while there is plenty to do were you can go solo .
It also gives enough healing to the non-healing classes to reduce the waiting for main-healer symptom .
For instance , humans have a skill to do a near full heal once every hour , not fantastic but enough to buy you a second chance in a wtf situation .
While the main healing class is the minstrel ( similar to cleric/priest ) other classes like captains and lore-masters can if played properly do a decent amount of healing .
Have a party that plays together and a burglar led group can also pull of masive healing .
An all burglar group is unstoppable .
We did a Helegrod raid with all lore-masters and the rift with just burglars .
It means the game does allow players to mix and match at will .
Yet many players fail at this .
They insist on the tank , healer , dps because they ca n't get their heads around the fact that other mixes can also work and even be a lot more effective .
The sad fact is that most players just do n't have what it takes to think outside the box .
Why should you come up with intresting hybrid classes or let people select their own skills if everyone is just going to go for tank , healer , dps ?
But Lotro also does things worng .
Its world is rather spread out and fast travel is a mess with lots of routes taking ages if you even got enough reputation .
Most people never bother with the reputation since when you are done with all the quests in an area , you still have nowhere near enough .
This means that for some quests , you have a hard time finding help , simply because most people do NOT come online just to spend half an hour travelling .
The one clas with summoning skills is a LOT easier to group with .
" Hi can you help me with this book quest in Forochel " " Ooops sorry mate , I am in Moria , it would take me ages to get there .
" " I can summon you , and later my hunter can port you right back to Moria " " Ah no problem , invite me " .
Other errors in Lotro are that group quests are all over the place , often seperated by lengthy time wasting solo quests .
So you just got a group and voila , half leaf because the next group part takes an hour to get to and they got other obligations .
It is annoying .
it would n't be all that hard to write the story line in such a way that you first spend sometime solo building the story and save the epic battle for the end .
It is not that people do n't want to play in a group , but that the game developers put so many obstacles in the way that all the fun is beaten out of it .
Group loot : Do we REALLY need more greed into the world by dropping only 1 item for the entire group ?
It might SEEM like a way to force the group to play the quest a number of times , but all it really does is create greed and resentment .
Fast travel : Put something like a summoning horn outside every group quest area , so that people can join whereever they are .
The costs for this should be trivial .
People want to play , not spend ages in slow-fast travel .
Chat channels : Is it REALLY that hard to allow people to quick link to quests and restrict posts to say once per minute ?
Less loot : Nothing kills a group faster then constantly having to sort out loot .
Not every critter has to drop something .
Just give everyone some cash at the end and a copy of the special item at the end .
if the game is fun , people will come back for more and if it is n't , they will just quit playing faster if you bore them .
The funny thing is that companies that beat the fun out of group play then claim that people only want solo play and kill group play even more .
But in the end you then end up with a game that is a very poor excuse for a single player game , with a monthly fee and 12yr olds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is both in the players and the game design.
Since my most recent MMO is Lotro, I will use that as an example.
The game does several things right.
It typically lists quests properly as being either solo or group play.
It also, later on, tends to make areas that are group only while there is plenty to do were you can go solo.
It also gives enough healing to the non-healing classes to reduce the waiting for main-healer symptom.
For instance, humans have a skill to do a near full heal once every hour, not fantastic but enough to buy you a second chance in a wtf situation.
While the main healing class is the minstrel (similar to cleric/priest) other classes like captains and lore-masters can if played properly do a decent amount of healing.
Have a party that plays together and a burglar led group can also pull of masive healing.
An all burglar group is unstoppable.
We did a Helegrod raid with all lore-masters and the rift with just burglars.
It means the game does allow players to mix and match at will.
Yet many players fail at this.
They insist on the tank, healer, dps because they can't get their heads around the fact that other mixes can also work and even be a lot more effective.
The sad fact is that most players just don't have what it takes to think outside the box.
Why should you come up with intresting hybrid classes or let people select their own skills if everyone is just going to go for tank, healer, dps?
But Lotro also does things worng.
Its world is rather spread out and fast travel is a mess with lots of routes taking ages if you even got enough reputation.
Most people never bother with the reputation since when you are done with all the quests in an area, you still have nowhere near enough.
This means that for some quests, you have a hard time finding help, simply because most people do NOT come online just to spend half an hour travelling.
The one clas with summoning skills is a LOT easier to group with.
"Hi can you help me with this book quest in Forochel" "Ooops sorry mate, I am in Moria, it would take me ages to get there.
" "I can summon you, and later my hunter can port you right back to Moria" "Ah no problem, invite me".
Other errors in Lotro are that group quests are all over the place, often seperated by lengthy time wasting solo quests.
So you just got a group and voila, half leaf because the next group part takes an hour to get to and they got other obligations.
It is annoying.
it wouldn't be all that hard to write the story line in such a way that you first spend sometime solo building the story and save the epic battle for the end.
It is not that people don't want to play in a group, but that the game developers put so many obstacles in the way that all the fun is beaten out of it.
Group loot: Do we REALLY need more greed into the world by dropping only 1 item for the entire group?
It might SEEM like a way to force the group to play the quest a number of times, but all it really does is create greed and resentment.
Fast travel: Put something like a summoning horn outside every group quest area, so that people can join whereever they are.
The costs for this should be trivial.
People want to play, not spend ages in slow-fast travel.
Chat channels: Is it REALLY that hard to allow people to quick link to quests and restrict posts to say once per minute?
Less loot: Nothing kills a group faster then constantly having to sort out loot.
Not every critter has to drop something.
Just give everyone some cash at the end and a copy of the special item at the end.
if the game is fun, people will come back for more and if it isn't, they will just quit playing faster if you bore them.
The funny thing is that companies that beat the fun out of group play then claim that people only want solo play and kill group play even more.
But in the end you then end up with a game that is a very poor excuse for a single player game, with a monthly fee and 12yr olds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741733</id>
	<title>Re:The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>UnknownSoldier</author>
	<datestamp>1247940240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's real easy to define on a sliding scale...</p><p>* &lt; 1 hr/week of gaming: casual gamer<br>* &lt; 2 hrs/week of gaming: The addiction is starting...<br>* &gt; 4 hrs/week of gaming: average gamer<br>* &gt; 8 hrs/week of gaming: hard-core gamer<br>* &gt; 32 hrs/week of gaming: I can stop any time...</p><p>--<br><b>WoW</b> (<i>TM</i>) is the <b>McDonalds</b> (<i>TM</i>) of MMOs</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's real easy to define on a sliding scale... * * * &gt; 4 hrs/week of gaming : average gamer * &gt; 8 hrs/week of gaming : hard-core gamer * &gt; 32 hrs/week of gaming : I can stop any time...--WoW ( TM ) is the McDonalds ( TM ) of MMOs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's real easy to define on a sliding scale...* * * &gt; 4 hrs/week of gaming: average gamer* &gt; 8 hrs/week of gaming: hard-core gamer* &gt; 32 hrs/week of gaming: I can stop any time...--WoW (TM) is the McDonalds (TM) of MMOs</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744339</id>
	<title>Funny to mention UO there...</title>
	<author>tengeta</author>
	<datestamp>1247921700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I still have a RunUO server on my system that I start up every now and then to screw around in old style Ultima Online. You usually needed people, but a good hour of fun can be provided with GM commands at hand.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still have a RunUO server on my system that I start up every now and then to screw around in old style Ultima Online .
You usually needed people , but a good hour of fun can be provided with GM commands at hand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still have a RunUO server on my system that I start up every now and then to screw around in old style Ultima Online.
You usually needed people, but a good hour of fun can be provided with GM commands at hand.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744197</id>
	<title>Re:And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247919480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- Multi-player combo moves. Buffs are fine, but having combat combo moves that require several players to collaborate would be oodles of fun.</p></div><p>Lord of the Rings Online has this.  They are called Fellowship Maneuvers (or conjunctions by those of us from beta).  Yes, they are oodles of fun<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>- Vocal chat. 6 years on, we still have to use very un-ergonomic 3rd party programs. Blizzard could at least buy &amp; re-design those, or help their developpers interface with WoW... WoW's own voice chat make the idiotic assumption that we want to disconnect whenever you're not in the game, or switch toons<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>They did at last get the grouping interface mostly right (should take alts into account, though).</p></div><p>I kind of like having a separate voice chat for the guild.  LotRO has a voice chat function built in, and it is nice for pick-up groups because it works just for the group or raid.  My kinship has a Ventrillo server that we can use to communicate privately and independently from the fellowship.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- Multi-player combo moves .
Buffs are fine , but having combat combo moves that require several players to collaborate would be oodles of fun.Lord of the Rings Online has this .
They are called Fellowship Maneuvers ( or conjunctions by those of us from beta ) .
Yes , they are oodles of fun : ) - Vocal chat .
6 years on , we still have to use very un-ergonomic 3rd party programs .
Blizzard could at least buy &amp; re-design those , or help their developpers interface with WoW... WoW 's own voice chat make the idiotic assumption that we want to disconnect whenever you 're not in the game , or switch toons ...They did at last get the grouping interface mostly right ( should take alts into account , though ) .I kind of like having a separate voice chat for the guild .
LotRO has a voice chat function built in , and it is nice for pick-up groups because it works just for the group or raid .
My kinship has a Ventrillo server that we can use to communicate privately and independently from the fellowship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- Multi-player combo moves.
Buffs are fine, but having combat combo moves that require several players to collaborate would be oodles of fun.Lord of the Rings Online has this.
They are called Fellowship Maneuvers (or conjunctions by those of us from beta).
Yes, they are oodles of fun :)- Vocal chat.
6 years on, we still have to use very un-ergonomic 3rd party programs.
Blizzard could at least buy &amp; re-design those, or help their developpers interface with WoW... WoW's own voice chat make the idiotic assumption that we want to disconnect whenever you're not in the game, or switch toons ...They did at last get the grouping interface mostly right (should take alts into account, though).I kind of like having a separate voice chat for the guild.
LotRO has a voice chat function built in, and it is nice for pick-up groups because it works just for the group or raid.
My kinship has a Ventrillo server that we can use to communicate privately and independently from the fellowship.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28781575</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1248276900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who voted this as insightful? It's about as misinformed as a creationist convention.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who voted this as insightful ?
It 's about as misinformed as a creationist convention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who voted this as insightful?
It's about as misinformed as a creationist convention.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742071</id>
	<title>Re:Online worlds FTW; online players suck.</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1247943000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, like Fallout 3 or Oblivion? or just like playing Guild Wars on an European server?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , like Fallout 3 or Oblivion ?
or just like playing Guild Wars on an European server ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, like Fallout 3 or Oblivion?
or just like playing Guild Wars on an European server?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739885</id>
	<title>Ultima Online</title>
	<author>Kethinov</author>
	<datestamp>1247923020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ultima Online (at least on the free shard UOGamers) doesn't require any kind of interaction with other players on any meaningful level. I quite commonly solo my way through PVM as well as PVP in the dueling system without having to talk to anybody or organize people like other more guild-centric MMORPGs require. The most I ever typically interact with people is the occasional chat with someone I encounter or buying/selling stuff.</p><p>Try it out. <a href="http://uogamers.com/" title="uogamers.com">http://uogamers.com/</a> [uogamers.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ultima Online ( at least on the free shard UOGamers ) does n't require any kind of interaction with other players on any meaningful level .
I quite commonly solo my way through PVM as well as PVP in the dueling system without having to talk to anybody or organize people like other more guild-centric MMORPGs require .
The most I ever typically interact with people is the occasional chat with someone I encounter or buying/selling stuff.Try it out .
http : //uogamers.com/ [ uogamers.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ultima Online (at least on the free shard UOGamers) doesn't require any kind of interaction with other players on any meaningful level.
I quite commonly solo my way through PVM as well as PVP in the dueling system without having to talk to anybody or organize people like other more guild-centric MMORPGs require.
The most I ever typically interact with people is the occasional chat with someone I encounter or buying/selling stuff.Try it out.
http://uogamers.com/ [uogamers.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742983</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>subsonic</author>
	<datestamp>1247907660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Excellent point.  Doing a job is something that you find rewarding, and is something that someone else can't (or doesn't want to) do as well as you- which is why you get paid.  Hopefully you find it stimulating and challenging, I know my current job sure isn't.  But I'm also taking classes and trying to get to a better job.</p><p>I love photography, but I know I would HATE to have someone tell me where/when/what to shoot and to stake a paycheck on it.</p><p>Also, just to go further down this tangent.  Chris Rock once mentioned that the difference between a job and a career is the concept of time.  In a job, there is too much time.  You just want to get out and get on with something else.  With a career, there's never enough time in the day to do everything you need/want to do.  I really want a career.  But until then, a job will do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Excellent point .
Doing a job is something that you find rewarding , and is something that someone else ca n't ( or does n't want to ) do as well as you- which is why you get paid .
Hopefully you find it stimulating and challenging , I know my current job sure is n't .
But I 'm also taking classes and trying to get to a better job.I love photography , but I know I would HATE to have someone tell me where/when/what to shoot and to stake a paycheck on it.Also , just to go further down this tangent .
Chris Rock once mentioned that the difference between a job and a career is the concept of time .
In a job , there is too much time .
You just want to get out and get on with something else .
With a career , there 's never enough time in the day to do everything you need/want to do .
I really want a career .
But until then , a job will do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Excellent point.
Doing a job is something that you find rewarding, and is something that someone else can't (or doesn't want to) do as well as you- which is why you get paid.
Hopefully you find it stimulating and challenging, I know my current job sure isn't.
But I'm also taking classes and trying to get to a better job.I love photography, but I know I would HATE to have someone tell me where/when/what to shoot and to stake a paycheck on it.Also, just to go further down this tangent.
Chris Rock once mentioned that the difference between a job and a career is the concept of time.
In a job, there is too much time.
You just want to get out and get on with something else.
With a career, there's never enough time in the day to do everything you need/want to do.
I really want a career.
But until then, a job will do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744781</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1247927460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The main problem is this. There is nothing that I enjoy doing 40+ hours per week</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Really? How about this list:
</p><ul>
<li>breathing - 167 hours/week;</li>
<li>sleeping - 56 hours/week;</li>
<li>digesting food - 167 hours/week;</li>
</ul><p>
Shit - I'm already up to 56 hours a DAY! No wonder I don't have any free time!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The main problem is this .
There is nothing that I enjoy doing 40 + hours per week Really ?
How about this list : breathing - 167 hours/week ; sleeping - 56 hours/week ; digesting food - 167 hours/week ; Shit - I 'm already up to 56 hours a DAY !
No wonder I do n't have any free time !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main problem is this.
There is nothing that I enjoy doing 40+ hours per week

Really?
How about this list:

breathing - 167 hours/week;
sleeping - 56 hours/week;
digesting food - 167 hours/week;

Shit - I'm already up to 56 hours a DAY!
No wonder I don't have any free time!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741153</id>
	<title>Re:What's all this QQ about?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247935320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Couldn't agree more - I don't really care for MMOs that force reliance on groups to generally have fun.  I'm willing to sacrifice some levelling for being a little more of a loner.  When I do take part in group activities I try to do ones that don't really leave the group depending on me too much - so that I can cut and run at any time.</p><p>I live in the real world.  If something comes up that I need to take care of, well, I'm going to be taking care of it.  If that means I send a message to my group to say "gotta run" and then disconnect - we'll, that's fine by me.</p><p>So, I avoid games that do forced grouping, and when I am in a group setting it is usually a social thing (people doing the same thing together - maybe dividing chores a little but where if everybody stopped working together everybody could still get the job done alone).  I'm always up-front about real-life.  As a result, I generally have fun, and people are happy to see me, and don't mind seeing me go.</p><p>Too many MMOs are designed for people how have hours on end to dedicate to the game, and who can get away without having any interruptions at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could n't agree more - I do n't really care for MMOs that force reliance on groups to generally have fun .
I 'm willing to sacrifice some levelling for being a little more of a loner .
When I do take part in group activities I try to do ones that do n't really leave the group depending on me too much - so that I can cut and run at any time.I live in the real world .
If something comes up that I need to take care of , well , I 'm going to be taking care of it .
If that means I send a message to my group to say " got ta run " and then disconnect - we 'll , that 's fine by me.So , I avoid games that do forced grouping , and when I am in a group setting it is usually a social thing ( people doing the same thing together - maybe dividing chores a little but where if everybody stopped working together everybody could still get the job done alone ) .
I 'm always up-front about real-life .
As a result , I generally have fun , and people are happy to see me , and do n't mind seeing me go.Too many MMOs are designed for people how have hours on end to dedicate to the game , and who can get away without having any interruptions at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Couldn't agree more - I don't really care for MMOs that force reliance on groups to generally have fun.
I'm willing to sacrifice some levelling for being a little more of a loner.
When I do take part in group activities I try to do ones that don't really leave the group depending on me too much - so that I can cut and run at any time.I live in the real world.
If something comes up that I need to take care of, well, I'm going to be taking care of it.
If that means I send a message to my group to say "gotta run" and then disconnect - we'll, that's fine by me.So, I avoid games that do forced grouping, and when I am in a group setting it is usually a social thing (people doing the same thing together - maybe dividing chores a little but where if everybody stopped working together everybody could still get the job done alone).
I'm always up-front about real-life.
As a result, I generally have fun, and people are happy to see me, and don't mind seeing me go.Too many MMOs are designed for people how have hours on end to dedicate to the game, and who can get away without having any interruptions at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740135</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739707</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247919900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, it sounds like your life sucks.</p><p>I used to work 12-16 hours a day until I just got sick of it. Now I work 4 hours every other day and make almost as much money. Remember, work smarter, not harder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , it sounds like your life sucks.I used to work 12-16 hours a day until I just got sick of it .
Now I work 4 hours every other day and make almost as much money .
Remember , work smarter , not harder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, it sounds like your life sucks.I used to work 12-16 hours a day until I just got sick of it.
Now I work 4 hours every other day and make almost as much money.
Remember, work smarter, not harder.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28753747</id>
	<title>Follow the money..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1248123300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Game companies would rather have 500,000 brain-dead paying idiots for subscribers than 10,000 intelligent thinking ones. Yeah of course this is why MMOs and games in general are mostly horrible. Unless you actually enjoy playing spreadsheet simulators with pretty graphics, competing with thousands of other people for the highest numbers.  Which I know many gamers do enjoy but I'll pass and I do not want to play text RPGs either.  Are there any MMOs out there that are not anti-social competitive nightmares, but still have a populated world and decent graphics?  Yes, I actually want to play with the other players! I don't see them as THOSE players who ought to be avoided at all costs.  If the game's other players are so bad that they need to be avoided, I don't want to play at all.  Give me a game that actually encourages socializing with all those other people but still has deep gameplay and I'd be on it in a minute.  EQ actually fit the bill pretty well for years, though it was highly competitive it was also highly social, but it's completely dead to me now. I am a homeless ex-gamer, I want to come back but I have nowhere to go.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Game companies would rather have 500,000 brain-dead paying idiots for subscribers than 10,000 intelligent thinking ones .
Yeah of course this is why MMOs and games in general are mostly horrible .
Unless you actually enjoy playing spreadsheet simulators with pretty graphics , competing with thousands of other people for the highest numbers .
Which I know many gamers do enjoy but I 'll pass and I do not want to play text RPGs either .
Are there any MMOs out there that are not anti-social competitive nightmares , but still have a populated world and decent graphics ?
Yes , I actually want to play with the other players !
I do n't see them as THOSE players who ought to be avoided at all costs .
If the game 's other players are so bad that they need to be avoided , I do n't want to play at all .
Give me a game that actually encourages socializing with all those other people but still has deep gameplay and I 'd be on it in a minute .
EQ actually fit the bill pretty well for years , though it was highly competitive it was also highly social , but it 's completely dead to me now .
I am a homeless ex-gamer , I want to come back but I have nowhere to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Game companies would rather have 500,000 brain-dead paying idiots for subscribers than 10,000 intelligent thinking ones.
Yeah of course this is why MMOs and games in general are mostly horrible.
Unless you actually enjoy playing spreadsheet simulators with pretty graphics, competing with thousands of other people for the highest numbers.
Which I know many gamers do enjoy but I'll pass and I do not want to play text RPGs either.
Are there any MMOs out there that are not anti-social competitive nightmares, but still have a populated world and decent graphics?
Yes, I actually want to play with the other players!
I don't see them as THOSE players who ought to be avoided at all costs.
If the game's other players are so bad that they need to be avoided, I don't want to play at all.
Give me a game that actually encourages socializing with all those other people but still has deep gameplay and I'd be on it in a minute.
EQ actually fit the bill pretty well for years, though it was highly competitive it was also highly social, but it's completely dead to me now.
I am a homeless ex-gamer, I want to come back but I have nowhere to go.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742537</id>
	<title>Re:Online worlds FTW; online players suck.</title>
	<author>centuren</author>
	<datestamp>1247946600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I want the colossal richness and depth available only through online worlds, without the horny adolescents, griefers, and other social incompetents that MMOGs seem to attract.</p><p>Give with WoW with just me and the NPCs, and I'll pay for it. Not otherwise.</p></div><p>I'd expand this to say, make a boss drop his loot, and rely less of repetitive play for content. He either has something or he hasn't. Killing the same boss 20 times for rep, badges, and the hope of a drop hardly helps maintain immersed in that richness and depth.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want the colossal richness and depth available only through online worlds , without the horny adolescents , griefers , and other social incompetents that MMOGs seem to attract.Give with WoW with just me and the NPCs , and I 'll pay for it .
Not otherwise.I 'd expand this to say , make a boss drop his loot , and rely less of repetitive play for content .
He either has something or he has n't .
Killing the same boss 20 times for rep , badges , and the hope of a drop hardly helps maintain immersed in that richness and depth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want the colossal richness and depth available only through online worlds, without the horny adolescents, griefers, and other social incompetents that MMOGs seem to attract.Give with WoW with just me and the NPCs, and I'll pay for it.
Not otherwise.I'd expand this to say, make a boss drop his loot, and rely less of repetitive play for content.
He either has something or he hasn't.
Killing the same boss 20 times for rep, badges, and the hope of a drop hardly helps maintain immersed in that richness and depth.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609</id>
	<title>The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>acehole</author>
	<datestamp>1247917980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its a myth like unicorns or a republican with a soul.</p><p>There are many levels of time people put into games. How exactly do you definite 'casual'? If you look at it from the MMO perspective (wow for example) do you count a casual gamer as someone who doesnt raid? how about someone who only spends time in the game for raiding and not much else? What about if the non-raider spends more time in game than the raider, which one is casual?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its a myth like unicorns or a republican with a soul.There are many levels of time people put into games .
How exactly do you definite 'casual ' ?
If you look at it from the MMO perspective ( wow for example ) do you count a casual gamer as someone who doesnt raid ?
how about someone who only spends time in the game for raiding and not much else ?
What about if the non-raider spends more time in game than the raider , which one is casual ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its a myth like unicorns or a republican with a soul.There are many levels of time people put into games.
How exactly do you definite 'casual'?
If you look at it from the MMO perspective (wow for example) do you count a casual gamer as someone who doesnt raid?
how about someone who only spends time in the game for raiding and not much else?
What about if the non-raider spends more time in game than the raider, which one is casual?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742673</id>
	<title>Not Ultima..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247947620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The very reason I liked Ultima Online was that it did NOT require groups of people to play. You gathered with groups not because you were forced to, but because you wanted to.</p><p>Newer games like EQ and WOW Force you group, which frankly sucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The very reason I liked Ultima Online was that it did NOT require groups of people to play .
You gathered with groups not because you were forced to , but because you wanted to.Newer games like EQ and WOW Force you group , which frankly sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The very reason I liked Ultima Online was that it did NOT require groups of people to play.
You gathered with groups not because you were forced to, but because you wanted to.Newer games like EQ and WOW Force you group, which frankly sucks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739991</id>
	<title>"Your Multiplayer Experience May Vary"</title>
	<author>pwilli</author>
	<datestamp>1247924460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Therefore, I chose to do all "challenges" in WoW by myself, wherever possible. The moment I couldn't do stuff on my own/finding a (working) group to do it would always take more than 1 hour, I quit. I am definetly not the "I need to be THE hero" type of player, therefore the timesinks in WoW ("Hey everybody, look at my super-duper 1000 hours worth of playtime pet, I'm awesome!") and other MMOs don't work for me either.
<br> <br>
A single player WoW with bots would've been awesome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Therefore , I chose to do all " challenges " in WoW by myself , wherever possible .
The moment I could n't do stuff on my own/finding a ( working ) group to do it would always take more than 1 hour , I quit .
I am definetly not the " I need to be THE hero " type of player , therefore the timesinks in WoW ( " Hey everybody , look at my super-duper 1000 hours worth of playtime pet , I 'm awesome !
" ) and other MMOs do n't work for me either .
A single player WoW with bots would 've been awesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Therefore, I chose to do all "challenges" in WoW by myself, wherever possible.
The moment I couldn't do stuff on my own/finding a (working) group to do it would always take more than 1 hour, I quit.
I am definetly not the "I need to be THE hero" type of player, therefore the timesinks in WoW ("Hey everybody, look at my super-duper 1000 hours worth of playtime pet, I'm awesome!
") and other MMOs don't work for me either.
A single player WoW with bots would've been awesome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741931</id>
	<title>Re:What's all this QQ about?</title>
	<author>Minwee</author>
	<datestamp>1247941800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Forced grouping works GREAT in certain games, and certain aspects of games. Look at D&amp;D. You KNOW when you're playing D&amp;D that you'll have a group with you, because if you don't.. you're not playing. You don't decide to play and then sit around your table waiting for random people to walk by and ask them if they happen to be the class you need in your group. That happened in EQ and DAOC constantly. It's dumb.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's because when you wanted to play D&amp;D you usually wouldn't just wander up to your kitchen table, sit down and then wait for random people to join you.  Not being a complete moron you would usually contact your friends who also played and invite them to join you first.
</p><p>But for some reason that seems to be how you were playing EQ and DAOC.  Why did you think that would work?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Forced grouping works GREAT in certain games , and certain aspects of games .
Look at D&amp;D .
You KNOW when you 're playing D&amp;D that you 'll have a group with you , because if you do n't.. you 're not playing .
You do n't decide to play and then sit around your table waiting for random people to walk by and ask them if they happen to be the class you need in your group .
That happened in EQ and DAOC constantly .
It 's dumb.That 's because when you wanted to play D&amp;D you usually would n't just wander up to your kitchen table , sit down and then wait for random people to join you .
Not being a complete moron you would usually contact your friends who also played and invite them to join you first .
But for some reason that seems to be how you were playing EQ and DAOC .
Why did you think that would work ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forced grouping works GREAT in certain games, and certain aspects of games.
Look at D&amp;D.
You KNOW when you're playing D&amp;D that you'll have a group with you, because if you don't.. you're not playing.
You don't decide to play and then sit around your table waiting for random people to walk by and ask them if they happen to be the class you need in your group.
That happened in EQ and DAOC constantly.
It's dumb.That's because when you wanted to play D&amp;D you usually wouldn't just wander up to your kitchen table, sit down and then wait for random people to join you.
Not being a complete moron you would usually contact your friends who also played and invite them to join you first.
But for some reason that seems to be how you were playing EQ and DAOC.
Why did you think that would work?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740135</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28761039</id>
	<title>multibox</title>
	<author>space\_jake</author>
	<datestamp>1248080760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>see subject</htmltext>
<tokenext>see subject</tokentext>
<sentencetext>see subject</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743157</id>
	<title>Re:The 'casual' gamer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247909100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About your comment about a-cultural, it really depends on who you know. If none of your friends like music, listening to music could be a very lonely activity (then again, you should question who you pick as friends if no one enjoys what you do) For me nearly every close friend I have plays WoW, some more than others. It makes a great conversation topic and has helped me get closer to people I used to barely talk to mainly due to lack of common interests. So saying you won't get the same benefits is purely a case-by-case thing. I know spending all night playing wow on vent with people I've known for years counts as a benefit, people that in the past I never called, or never called me suddenly spend more time "online". This also leads into hanging out in the mall, having lunch, and watching movies together too, so it's not just being sucked into a computer world.<br>
&nbsp; <br>One side note is, I do know there are extreme cases where say two people can only talk about the game, and nothing else, that to me can be unhealthy (one quits the game, then friendship ends basically) All things should be done in moderation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About your comment about a-cultural , it really depends on who you know .
If none of your friends like music , listening to music could be a very lonely activity ( then again , you should question who you pick as friends if no one enjoys what you do ) For me nearly every close friend I have plays WoW , some more than others .
It makes a great conversation topic and has helped me get closer to people I used to barely talk to mainly due to lack of common interests .
So saying you wo n't get the same benefits is purely a case-by-case thing .
I know spending all night playing wow on vent with people I 've known for years counts as a benefit , people that in the past I never called , or never called me suddenly spend more time " online " .
This also leads into hanging out in the mall , having lunch , and watching movies together too , so it 's not just being sucked into a computer world .
  One side note is , I do know there are extreme cases where say two people can only talk about the game , and nothing else , that to me can be unhealthy ( one quits the game , then friendship ends basically ) All things should be done in moderation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About your comment about a-cultural, it really depends on who you know.
If none of your friends like music, listening to music could be a very lonely activity (then again, you should question who you pick as friends if no one enjoys what you do) For me nearly every close friend I have plays WoW, some more than others.
It makes a great conversation topic and has helped me get closer to people I used to barely talk to mainly due to lack of common interests.
So saying you won't get the same benefits is purely a case-by-case thing.
I know spending all night playing wow on vent with people I've known for years counts as a benefit, people that in the past I never called, or never called me suddenly spend more time "online".
This also leads into hanging out in the mall, having lunch, and watching movies together too, so it's not just being sucked into a computer world.
  One side note is, I do know there are extreme cases where say two people can only talk about the game, and nothing else, that to me can be unhealthy (one quits the game, then friendship ends basically) All things should be done in moderation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740493</id>
	<title>Re:It's the D-Bags...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247929920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You mean like the goonies in Eve Online<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean like the goonies in Eve Online ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean like the goonies in Eve Online ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741183</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>GarryFre</author>
	<datestamp>1247935500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah there are many time sinks and risks associated with having to group.

1. Time spent waiting for groups to get together.
2. Time sinks when someone is taking care of a baby or some other thing they should not be trying to do while raiding.
3. Time sink and risk of loss due to group members being disconnected. The chances of this seem to go up exponentially the more players there are in the group especially during key events of a raid.
4. Playing with strangers who are poor players or suddenly abandon the group in a fit of rage or ninja loot.
5. The parent trap<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... one or more group members who have parents who walk in suddenly and demand they quit playing at once and go to bed.
6. Ending up playing longer than I wish to. Games aren't the only thing in my life, and sometimes I am not feeling well and I don't wish to spend that much time playing.

I could go on and on, but one of the reasons I quit games is when I reach a level that there is no more meaningful solo content left.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah there are many time sinks and risks associated with having to group .
1. Time spent waiting for groups to get together .
2. Time sinks when someone is taking care of a baby or some other thing they should not be trying to do while raiding .
3. Time sink and risk of loss due to group members being disconnected .
The chances of this seem to go up exponentially the more players there are in the group especially during key events of a raid .
4. Playing with strangers who are poor players or suddenly abandon the group in a fit of rage or ninja loot .
5. The parent trap ... one or more group members who have parents who walk in suddenly and demand they quit playing at once and go to bed .
6. Ending up playing longer than I wish to .
Games are n't the only thing in my life , and sometimes I am not feeling well and I do n't wish to spend that much time playing .
I could go on and on , but one of the reasons I quit games is when I reach a level that there is no more meaningful solo content left .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah there are many time sinks and risks associated with having to group.
1. Time spent waiting for groups to get together.
2. Time sinks when someone is taking care of a baby or some other thing they should not be trying to do while raiding.
3. Time sink and risk of loss due to group members being disconnected.
The chances of this seem to go up exponentially the more players there are in the group especially during key events of a raid.
4. Playing with strangers who are poor players or suddenly abandon the group in a fit of rage or ninja loot.
5. The parent trap ... one or more group members who have parents who walk in suddenly and demand they quit playing at once and go to bed.
6. Ending up playing longer than I wish to.
Games aren't the only thing in my life, and sometimes I am not feeling well and I don't wish to spend that much time playing.
I could go on and on, but one of the reasons I quit games is when I reach a level that there is no more meaningful solo content left.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745861</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>Rocketship Underpant</author>
	<datestamp>1247942460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So he argued against specialization and comparative advantage, the pillars that make an economy work in the first place?  No wonder his ideas failed so badly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So he argued against specialization and comparative advantage , the pillars that make an economy work in the first place ?
No wonder his ideas failed so badly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So he argued against specialization and comparative advantage, the pillars that make an economy work in the first place?
No wonder his ideas failed so badly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743179</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743217</id>
	<title>World of Warcraft solo play</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247909700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good luck finding anyone to group with unless your level 80, and geared for 25 man Naxx or Ulduar. I'm currently trying to get a quest done in RFK for 5 days now and I'm leveled out of LFG limit, the one where you choose what dungeon to LFG for.</p><p>Its heroic this or Ulduar that. There is a reason Blizzard set up the 'mentor' a newbie/recruit a friend program. Its the only way they can attract people to play a game that has already left the station.</p><p>WoW is now newbie unfriendly. Hell they made new Death Knight start at lvl 55 but you had to have a existing character at that level. I'm betting it gets patched out so the only requirement id the WoTLK expansions and the hell with levels 1-54.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck finding anyone to group with unless your level 80 , and geared for 25 man Naxx or Ulduar .
I 'm currently trying to get a quest done in RFK for 5 days now and I 'm leveled out of LFG limit , the one where you choose what dungeon to LFG for.Its heroic this or Ulduar that .
There is a reason Blizzard set up the 'mentor ' a newbie/recruit a friend program .
Its the only way they can attract people to play a game that has already left the station.WoW is now newbie unfriendly .
Hell they made new Death Knight start at lvl 55 but you had to have a existing character at that level .
I 'm betting it gets patched out so the only requirement id the WoTLK expansions and the hell with levels 1-54 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck finding anyone to group with unless your level 80, and geared for 25 man Naxx or Ulduar.
I'm currently trying to get a quest done in RFK for 5 days now and I'm leveled out of LFG limit, the one where you choose what dungeon to LFG for.Its heroic this or Ulduar that.
There is a reason Blizzard set up the 'mentor' a newbie/recruit a friend program.
Its the only way they can attract people to play a game that has already left the station.WoW is now newbie unfriendly.
Hell they made new Death Knight start at lvl 55 but you had to have a existing character at that level.
I'm betting it gets patched out so the only requirement id the WoTLK expansions and the hell with levels 1-54.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28757169</id>
	<title>Re:And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>Reapy</author>
	<datestamp>1248109620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I kind of have the opposite view. I hate the trend in multiplayer lately that EVERY game is co op in some way shape or form. WoW is actually well balanced between solo content and group content. Beating dungeons and tough bosses as a group is fun. Most of the new content being developed is for groups and cooperative play.</p><p>I want some more solo - multiplayer games. I miss quake FFA style servers, where you shoot everything that moves. Now a days there are 2 teams and half the player on a server you cant shoot at. I miss subspace with 80 people to lob bombs at rather then 1. Some days I just want to zone into a mindless killfest after work. You can't really do that as much online now a days.</p><p>There seem to be certain formats you see now a days for multiplayer. I kind of agree though with the shaping of the formats.</p><p>*FFA - Very rare now a days. A shame, this mode is fun to relax in.<br>*2 teams vs each other. - Common as hell. But some varation now a days like left for dead with 4 players vs AI and players, or at least both teams being very different play experiences (splinter cell).<br>*Human vs AI co op ---Finally starting to see light of day. This way of playing is great esp when you have weaker players, when you are ALL on the same team everyone can have fun. I like this one a lot and hope to see a lot more of this play.</p><p>So let me talk a second about MMO PVP. I love PVP, I enjoyed shadowbane, and look forward to trying DFO when it gets us servers and has had a lil bit of patch time. But man, let me say, PVP in an MMO sucks.</p><p>For it to be even a reasonably interesting game, it needs to have either no levels (ala quake or even just small like cod4), or a skill system. And by skill system I mean that as you level up you increase versatility, not lethality. What I mean is that at level 1 I can hit you as hard with a sword as anybody else, but that is all I can do. At level 50 you have 100 other ways to kill me. This makes for an interesting game for all players.</p><p>Second, in the MMO format, without doing these instanced or set up 'arcade' battlegrounds, you never get an even fight. "World pvp" is fun because it is random and silly, but as a day and day again format it doesnt hold up. First, you have a huge world, where is everybody? You could walk all day back and forth and keep missing each other. Next, group balance. Pretty next to impossible to maintain balance between 1v1, 2v2, 1v15 combat. Which leads into...world style pvp is often a  gank fest. Most fights are always hugely unbalanced, 15 players run up and gank 5. While that playstyle is fun, its not as fun as an even set up game.</p><p>It is sort of like why we play games. We have fun with them because we are all constrained by the same ruleset, and one team manages to work the rules better with their strategy and end up winning. In the 'world pvp' style it can be very much like the end of wargame. You know that point you hit in your strat game where you made all the right moves, now it is just a matter of time before you win. Except in an MMO it was usually someone else playing the overall strat game, and you are on either landslide winning or losing side, and are just along for the ride.</p><p>If a dev puts a way to spring back, often it then takes away the fun of having played the strat game correctly. Great, I can make all the right moves and overwhelm them, but as soon as I do that they push the I win button and heave back.</p><p>Honestly, the design implications for making a 'fun' mmo pvp game is hard as hell. And the sad part is there is not a big audience for it.</p><p>Cause you know why? The majority of gamers do not want to play another human. Humans are HARD. When you play people unless you are VERY GOOD, your win \% is slightly above 50\%. When you play AI you usually ride 75\% up winning (made up stats but is an in general), and guess like, people like to win.</p><p>Maybe that's my jaded psychology, but when I find a game I like, I play, get a little better then average, then either buddy up with the other good players or steer clear of the, cause you know what, at the end of the day, I just want to relax, not get owned in the face and teabagged in my limited spare time. Dev's know this, and the mulitplayer games that have come out this past decade reflect it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I kind of have the opposite view .
I hate the trend in multiplayer lately that EVERY game is co op in some way shape or form .
WoW is actually well balanced between solo content and group content .
Beating dungeons and tough bosses as a group is fun .
Most of the new content being developed is for groups and cooperative play.I want some more solo - multiplayer games .
I miss quake FFA style servers , where you shoot everything that moves .
Now a days there are 2 teams and half the player on a server you cant shoot at .
I miss subspace with 80 people to lob bombs at rather then 1 .
Some days I just want to zone into a mindless killfest after work .
You ca n't really do that as much online now a days.There seem to be certain formats you see now a days for multiplayer .
I kind of agree though with the shaping of the formats .
* FFA - Very rare now a days .
A shame , this mode is fun to relax in .
* 2 teams vs each other .
- Common as hell .
But some varation now a days like left for dead with 4 players vs AI and players , or at least both teams being very different play experiences ( splinter cell ) .
* Human vs AI co op ---Finally starting to see light of day .
This way of playing is great esp when you have weaker players , when you are ALL on the same team everyone can have fun .
I like this one a lot and hope to see a lot more of this play.So let me talk a second about MMO PVP .
I love PVP , I enjoyed shadowbane , and look forward to trying DFO when it gets us servers and has had a lil bit of patch time .
But man , let me say , PVP in an MMO sucks.For it to be even a reasonably interesting game , it needs to have either no levels ( ala quake or even just small like cod4 ) , or a skill system .
And by skill system I mean that as you level up you increase versatility , not lethality .
What I mean is that at level 1 I can hit you as hard with a sword as anybody else , but that is all I can do .
At level 50 you have 100 other ways to kill me .
This makes for an interesting game for all players.Second , in the MMO format , without doing these instanced or set up 'arcade ' battlegrounds , you never get an even fight .
" World pvp " is fun because it is random and silly , but as a day and day again format it doesnt hold up .
First , you have a huge world , where is everybody ?
You could walk all day back and forth and keep missing each other .
Next , group balance .
Pretty next to impossible to maintain balance between 1v1 , 2v2 , 1v15 combat .
Which leads into...world style pvp is often a gank fest .
Most fights are always hugely unbalanced , 15 players run up and gank 5 .
While that playstyle is fun , its not as fun as an even set up game.It is sort of like why we play games .
We have fun with them because we are all constrained by the same ruleset , and one team manages to work the rules better with their strategy and end up winning .
In the 'world pvp ' style it can be very much like the end of wargame .
You know that point you hit in your strat game where you made all the right moves , now it is just a matter of time before you win .
Except in an MMO it was usually someone else playing the overall strat game , and you are on either landslide winning or losing side , and are just along for the ride.If a dev puts a way to spring back , often it then takes away the fun of having played the strat game correctly .
Great , I can make all the right moves and overwhelm them , but as soon as I do that they push the I win button and heave back.Honestly , the design implications for making a 'fun ' mmo pvp game is hard as hell .
And the sad part is there is not a big audience for it.Cause you know why ?
The majority of gamers do not want to play another human .
Humans are HARD .
When you play people unless you are VERY GOOD , your win \ % is slightly above 50 \ % .
When you play AI you usually ride 75 \ % up winning ( made up stats but is an in general ) , and guess like , people like to win.Maybe that 's my jaded psychology , but when I find a game I like , I play , get a little better then average , then either buddy up with the other good players or steer clear of the , cause you know what , at the end of the day , I just want to relax , not get owned in the face and teabagged in my limited spare time .
Dev 's know this , and the mulitplayer games that have come out this past decade reflect it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I kind of have the opposite view.
I hate the trend in multiplayer lately that EVERY game is co op in some way shape or form.
WoW is actually well balanced between solo content and group content.
Beating dungeons and tough bosses as a group is fun.
Most of the new content being developed is for groups and cooperative play.I want some more solo - multiplayer games.
I miss quake FFA style servers, where you shoot everything that moves.
Now a days there are 2 teams and half the player on a server you cant shoot at.
I miss subspace with 80 people to lob bombs at rather then 1.
Some days I just want to zone into a mindless killfest after work.
You can't really do that as much online now a days.There seem to be certain formats you see now a days for multiplayer.
I kind of agree though with the shaping of the formats.
*FFA - Very rare now a days.
A shame, this mode is fun to relax in.
*2 teams vs each other.
- Common as hell.
But some varation now a days like left for dead with 4 players vs AI and players, or at least both teams being very different play experiences (splinter cell).
*Human vs AI co op ---Finally starting to see light of day.
This way of playing is great esp when you have weaker players, when you are ALL on the same team everyone can have fun.
I like this one a lot and hope to see a lot more of this play.So let me talk a second about MMO PVP.
I love PVP, I enjoyed shadowbane, and look forward to trying DFO when it gets us servers and has had a lil bit of patch time.
But man, let me say, PVP in an MMO sucks.For it to be even a reasonably interesting game, it needs to have either no levels (ala quake or even just small like cod4), or a skill system.
And by skill system I mean that as you level up you increase versatility, not lethality.
What I mean is that at level 1 I can hit you as hard with a sword as anybody else, but that is all I can do.
At level 50 you have 100 other ways to kill me.
This makes for an interesting game for all players.Second, in the MMO format, without doing these instanced or set up 'arcade' battlegrounds, you never get an even fight.
"World pvp" is fun because it is random and silly, but as a day and day again format it doesnt hold up.
First, you have a huge world, where is everybody?
You could walk all day back and forth and keep missing each other.
Next, group balance.
Pretty next to impossible to maintain balance between 1v1, 2v2, 1v15 combat.
Which leads into...world style pvp is often a  gank fest.
Most fights are always hugely unbalanced, 15 players run up and gank 5.
While that playstyle is fun, its not as fun as an even set up game.It is sort of like why we play games.
We have fun with them because we are all constrained by the same ruleset, and one team manages to work the rules better with their strategy and end up winning.
In the 'world pvp' style it can be very much like the end of wargame.
You know that point you hit in your strat game where you made all the right moves, now it is just a matter of time before you win.
Except in an MMO it was usually someone else playing the overall strat game, and you are on either landslide winning or losing side, and are just along for the ride.If a dev puts a way to spring back, often it then takes away the fun of having played the strat game correctly.
Great, I can make all the right moves and overwhelm them, but as soon as I do that they push the I win button and heave back.Honestly, the design implications for making a 'fun' mmo pvp game is hard as hell.
And the sad part is there is not a big audience for it.Cause you know why?
The majority of gamers do not want to play another human.
Humans are HARD.
When you play people unless you are VERY GOOD, your win \% is slightly above 50\%.
When you play AI you usually ride 75\% up winning (made up stats but is an in general), and guess like, people like to win.Maybe that's my jaded psychology, but when I find a game I like, I play, get a little better then average, then either buddy up with the other good players or steer clear of the, cause you know what, at the end of the day, I just want to relax, not get owned in the face and teabagged in my limited spare time.
Dev's know this, and the mulitplayer games that have come out this past decade reflect it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742425</id>
	<title>Re:That's not why</title>
	<author>centuren</author>
	<datestamp>1247945700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For those few of you who don't know, that's the guy who doesn't know how to get where you're going, can't properly follow your directions to get there, tries to boss around the party when he finally does get there even though he clearly doesn't know what he's doing, and then fifteen minutes into the group says, "o man i have 2 go.. mom wants me 2 clean my room".</p></div><p>As a tank in WoW, the type of player I hated the most was the one who believed there was only one way to run a dungeon. They weren't usually horrible players in terms of basic mechanics, but were definitely more prone to let their rigidity hurt their performance. My main frustration was they will have read gone online and read through a complete guide on how to do each corner, each pull (I'm not even counting bosses in this, just mobs). Chances are, the way detailed in the guide is a good way, quite possibly the best.</p><p>However, as a tank I'd run those heroics over and over and over to get badges, and to help my guildies get badges. I played with other good players, such that we could easily handle not doing every single pull "by the book" exactly. I liked mixing things up a bit, and even pushing some players that I knew could handle themselves (the rogues always LOVED being asked to evasion tank an elite mob solo).</p><p>The rigid, by the book players, would throw a complete FIT. One guy in particular (not a teenager), would have a complete tantrum, and refuse to continue any further at all if we didn't do things exactly as he said we should. That guy was the most extreme, because once he threw his hissy fit, it was no simple matter to calm him down and just get it over with, even if we all said okay, okay. The mere suggestion he was wrong was cause for lengthy arguments.</p><p>Less extreme, but still rigid players also objected to changing plans as circumstances changed. Maybe the sheep accidentally got a dot, maybe a wandering mob came in, but I've had players complain bitterly after I'd calmly and quickly swapped the markings and everyone in the party had adapted perfectly.</p><p>After the first complaint, I started doing this as a sort of test for players new to the guild, especially healers. A lot can go wrong in a raid or a simple pull, and adaptability is part of player competence. An accidental double pull is a much worse situation than a single pull with a planned (by me anyway), change of markings. I just mean something as simple as updating the kill order symbols as the mobs are killed. If a healer complains about symbols changing, I don't really trust that they are really up to taking in the whole situation and reacting if things don't end up going as planned.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For those few of you who do n't know , that 's the guy who does n't know how to get where you 're going , ca n't properly follow your directions to get there , tries to boss around the party when he finally does get there even though he clearly does n't know what he 's doing , and then fifteen minutes into the group says , " o man i have 2 go.. mom wants me 2 clean my room " .As a tank in WoW , the type of player I hated the most was the one who believed there was only one way to run a dungeon .
They were n't usually horrible players in terms of basic mechanics , but were definitely more prone to let their rigidity hurt their performance .
My main frustration was they will have read gone online and read through a complete guide on how to do each corner , each pull ( I 'm not even counting bosses in this , just mobs ) .
Chances are , the way detailed in the guide is a good way , quite possibly the best.However , as a tank I 'd run those heroics over and over and over to get badges , and to help my guildies get badges .
I played with other good players , such that we could easily handle not doing every single pull " by the book " exactly .
I liked mixing things up a bit , and even pushing some players that I knew could handle themselves ( the rogues always LOVED being asked to evasion tank an elite mob solo ) .The rigid , by the book players , would throw a complete FIT .
One guy in particular ( not a teenager ) , would have a complete tantrum , and refuse to continue any further at all if we did n't do things exactly as he said we should .
That guy was the most extreme , because once he threw his hissy fit , it was no simple matter to calm him down and just get it over with , even if we all said okay , okay .
The mere suggestion he was wrong was cause for lengthy arguments.Less extreme , but still rigid players also objected to changing plans as circumstances changed .
Maybe the sheep accidentally got a dot , maybe a wandering mob came in , but I 've had players complain bitterly after I 'd calmly and quickly swapped the markings and everyone in the party had adapted perfectly.After the first complaint , I started doing this as a sort of test for players new to the guild , especially healers .
A lot can go wrong in a raid or a simple pull , and adaptability is part of player competence .
An accidental double pull is a much worse situation than a single pull with a planned ( by me anyway ) , change of markings .
I just mean something as simple as updating the kill order symbols as the mobs are killed .
If a healer complains about symbols changing , I do n't really trust that they are really up to taking in the whole situation and reacting if things do n't end up going as planned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those few of you who don't know, that's the guy who doesn't know how to get where you're going, can't properly follow your directions to get there, tries to boss around the party when he finally does get there even though he clearly doesn't know what he's doing, and then fifteen minutes into the group says, "o man i have 2 go.. mom wants me 2 clean my room".As a tank in WoW, the type of player I hated the most was the one who believed there was only one way to run a dungeon.
They weren't usually horrible players in terms of basic mechanics, but were definitely more prone to let their rigidity hurt their performance.
My main frustration was they will have read gone online and read through a complete guide on how to do each corner, each pull (I'm not even counting bosses in this, just mobs).
Chances are, the way detailed in the guide is a good way, quite possibly the best.However, as a tank I'd run those heroics over and over and over to get badges, and to help my guildies get badges.
I played with other good players, such that we could easily handle not doing every single pull "by the book" exactly.
I liked mixing things up a bit, and even pushing some players that I knew could handle themselves (the rogues always LOVED being asked to evasion tank an elite mob solo).The rigid, by the book players, would throw a complete FIT.
One guy in particular (not a teenager), would have a complete tantrum, and refuse to continue any further at all if we didn't do things exactly as he said we should.
That guy was the most extreme, because once he threw his hissy fit, it was no simple matter to calm him down and just get it over with, even if we all said okay, okay.
The mere suggestion he was wrong was cause for lengthy arguments.Less extreme, but still rigid players also objected to changing plans as circumstances changed.
Maybe the sheep accidentally got a dot, maybe a wandering mob came in, but I've had players complain bitterly after I'd calmly and quickly swapped the markings and everyone in the party had adapted perfectly.After the first complaint, I started doing this as a sort of test for players new to the guild, especially healers.
A lot can go wrong in a raid or a simple pull, and adaptability is part of player competence.
An accidental double pull is a much worse situation than a single pull with a planned (by me anyway), change of markings.
I just mean something as simple as updating the kill order symbols as the mobs are killed.
If a healer complains about symbols changing, I don't really trust that they are really up to taking in the whole situation and reacting if things don't end up going as planned.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744753</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1247927160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I worked a couple of months between semesters once on a production line that was taking shrink wrapped cartoons of cigarettes, opening them and putting them into smaller promotional packages that were then shrink wrapped. No one could have possibly enjoyed that work, and it certainly wasn't benefiting humanity.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
That's because you were doing it WRONG!  You should have been inserting small "chicken-fart" firecrackers at random (actually chemically-treated slivers of wood) into them at random.  People who claim that "smoking calms their nerves" would quickly develop a different attitude if they were to have one blow up in their face at random times.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked a couple of months between semesters once on a production line that was taking shrink wrapped cartoons of cigarettes , opening them and putting them into smaller promotional packages that were then shrink wrapped .
No one could have possibly enjoyed that work , and it certainly was n't benefiting humanity .
That 's because you were doing it WRONG !
You should have been inserting small " chicken-fart " firecrackers at random ( actually chemically-treated slivers of wood ) into them at random .
People who claim that " smoking calms their nerves " would quickly develop a different attitude if they were to have one blow up in their face at random times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked a couple of months between semesters once on a production line that was taking shrink wrapped cartoons of cigarettes, opening them and putting them into smaller promotional packages that were then shrink wrapped.
No one could have possibly enjoyed that work, and it certainly wasn't benefiting humanity.
That's because you were doing it WRONG!
You should have been inserting small "chicken-fart" firecrackers at random (actually chemically-treated slivers of wood) into them at random.
People who claim that "smoking calms their nerves" would quickly develop a different attitude if they were to have one blow up in their face at random times.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741089</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740489</id>
	<title>Re:That's not why</title>
	<author>stereoroid</author>
	<datestamp>1247929860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was going to mention Guild Wars too, as an example of a game that is highly playable as a single player. You can be offline for a month, and it's not costing you anything, since they don't have monthly fees. The quality of the graphics is such that you can just wander around in your own time admiring the scenery, especially with the Eye Of The North expansion.</p><p>On one of the few occasions I joining a pickup mission, I ran in to an "expectation" problem. The character I used was a Monk, and what I learned is that there seems to an expectation that a Monk will sit back and cast healing spells, while the other characters can go blundering in to battle without a care. Um... not this Monk. This Monk walks softly, carries a big stick, and is usually too busy Smiting to heal anyone else. 8)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to mention Guild Wars too , as an example of a game that is highly playable as a single player .
You can be offline for a month , and it 's not costing you anything , since they do n't have monthly fees .
The quality of the graphics is such that you can just wander around in your own time admiring the scenery , especially with the Eye Of The North expansion.On one of the few occasions I joining a pickup mission , I ran in to an " expectation " problem .
The character I used was a Monk , and what I learned is that there seems to an expectation that a Monk will sit back and cast healing spells , while the other characters can go blundering in to battle without a care .
Um... not this Monk .
This Monk walks softly , carries a big stick , and is usually too busy Smiting to heal anyone else .
8 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to mention Guild Wars too, as an example of a game that is highly playable as a single player.
You can be offline for a month, and it's not costing you anything, since they don't have monthly fees.
The quality of the graphics is such that you can just wander around in your own time admiring the scenery, especially with the Eye Of The North expansion.On one of the few occasions I joining a pickup mission, I ran in to an "expectation" problem.
The character I used was a Monk, and what I learned is that there seems to an expectation that a Monk will sit back and cast healing spells, while the other characters can go blundering in to battle without a care.
Um... not this Monk.
This Monk walks softly, carries a big stick, and is usually too busy Smiting to heal anyone else.
8)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28753629</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1248121200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WTF?  There are that many of you who love your job, or you're just drinking the Kool-Aid?  Welcome to my world, where no one will pay me to do what I like.  Which planet are you from?  I guess that would explain my suicidal ideation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF ?
There are that many of you who love your job , or you 're just drinking the Kool-Aid ?
Welcome to my world , where no one will pay me to do what I like .
Which planet are you from ?
I guess that would explain my suicidal ideation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF?
There are that many of you who love your job, or you're just drinking the Kool-Aid?
Welcome to my world, where no one will pay me to do what I like.
Which planet are you from?
I guess that would explain my suicidal ideation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743179</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>Homburg</author>
	<datestamp>1247909280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do think that's a very good point. <a href="http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01a.htm#2" title="marxists.org">Marx put it well 150 years ago</a> [marxists.org]:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The division of labour offers us the first example of how, as long as man remains in natural society, that is, as long as a cleavage exists between the particular and the common interest, as long, therefore, as activity is not voluntarily, but naturally, divided, man&#226;(TM)s own deed becomes an alien power opposed to him, which enslaves him instead of being controlled by him. For as soon as the distribution of labour comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape. He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic. This fixation of social activity, this consolidation of what we ourselves produce into an objective power above us, growing out of our control, thwarting our expectations, bringing to naught our calculations, is one of the chief factors in historical development up till now.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do think that 's a very good point .
Marx put it well 150 years ago [ marxists.org ] : The division of labour offers us the first example of how , as long as man remains in natural society , that is , as long as a cleavage exists between the particular and the common interest , as long , therefore , as activity is not voluntarily , but naturally , divided , man   ( TM ) s own deed becomes an alien power opposed to him , which enslaves him instead of being controlled by him .
For as soon as the distribution of labour comes into being , each man has a particular , exclusive sphere of activity , which is forced upon him and from which he can not escape .
He is a hunter , a fisherman , a herdsman , or a critical critic , and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood ; while in communist society , where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes , society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow , to hunt in the morning , fish in the afternoon , rear cattle in the evening , criticise after dinner , just as I have a mind , without ever becoming hunter , fisherman , herdsman or critic .
This fixation of social activity , this consolidation of what we ourselves produce into an objective power above us , growing out of our control , thwarting our expectations , bringing to naught our calculations , is one of the chief factors in historical development up till now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do think that's a very good point.
Marx put it well 150 years ago [marxists.org]:The division of labour offers us the first example of how, as long as man remains in natural society, that is, as long as a cleavage exists between the particular and the common interest, as long, therefore, as activity is not voluntarily, but naturally, divided, manâ(TM)s own deed becomes an alien power opposed to him, which enslaves him instead of being controlled by him.
For as soon as the distribution of labour comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape.
He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.
This fixation of social activity, this consolidation of what we ourselves produce into an objective power above us, growing out of our control, thwarting our expectations, bringing to naught our calculations, is one of the chief factors in historical development up till now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>MorePower</author>
	<datestamp>1247937600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The main problem is this. There is <b>nothing</b> that I enjoy doing 40+ hours per week. And the really big problem is that even things I do enjoy doing, I hate doing to someone else's schedule. I really like building things with LEGO, for example, so should I go apply for a job at LEGOLAND (as if I would really get such a coveted job)? I bet I would hate it just as much as my current job, because I'm not always in the mood to build things with LEGO, starting at 8:00am and ending at 5:00pm (or whatever hours LEGOLAND builders work).</p><p>And that's the thing about jobs, someone else is relying on your output. So you need to adjust to their wants and needs. And that's the part that sucks.</p><p>Also, there is no way to "quit your job, live off social security..." Social Security only pays out when you reach retirement age (and you notice, most people <b>do</b> quit as soon as they are eligible for retirement benefits). Welfare is what you would get as a working age person, and unless you have dependent kids they cut you off after 5 years (cumulative for your lifetime) and leave you to starve to death.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The main problem is this .
There is nothing that I enjoy doing 40 + hours per week .
And the really big problem is that even things I do enjoy doing , I hate doing to someone else 's schedule .
I really like building things with LEGO , for example , so should I go apply for a job at LEGOLAND ( as if I would really get such a coveted job ) ?
I bet I would hate it just as much as my current job , because I 'm not always in the mood to build things with LEGO , starting at 8 : 00am and ending at 5 : 00pm ( or whatever hours LEGOLAND builders work ) .And that 's the thing about jobs , someone else is relying on your output .
So you need to adjust to their wants and needs .
And that 's the part that sucks.Also , there is no way to " quit your job , live off social security... " Social Security only pays out when you reach retirement age ( and you notice , most people do quit as soon as they are eligible for retirement benefits ) .
Welfare is what you would get as a working age person , and unless you have dependent kids they cut you off after 5 years ( cumulative for your lifetime ) and leave you to starve to death .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main problem is this.
There is nothing that I enjoy doing 40+ hours per week.
And the really big problem is that even things I do enjoy doing, I hate doing to someone else's schedule.
I really like building things with LEGO, for example, so should I go apply for a job at LEGOLAND (as if I would really get such a coveted job)?
I bet I would hate it just as much as my current job, because I'm not always in the mood to build things with LEGO, starting at 8:00am and ending at 5:00pm (or whatever hours LEGOLAND builders work).And that's the thing about jobs, someone else is relying on your output.
So you need to adjust to their wants and needs.
And that's the part that sucks.Also, there is no way to "quit your job, live off social security..." Social Security only pays out when you reach retirement age (and you notice, most people do quit as soon as they are eligible for retirement benefits).
Welfare is what you would get as a working age person, and unless you have dependent kids they cut you off after 5 years (cumulative for your lifetime) and leave you to starve to death.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743301</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247910360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My excrement should smell like roses too, but that's not likely to happen either.  "Fun" is a different word from "work" for a reason.  All that "whoring" people do usually lets people do things like "eat" and "have shelter".  If you're making $100,000 a year, then yeah - maybe you're whoring.  If you're making $15,000 then you're probably just surviving.</p><p>People should try to find jobs that they like doing, but it's not an overnight event and most people have to grind through a lot of tedious things before they get what they want.</p><p>If it were easy to have the ultimate dream job then everyone would have it already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My excrement should smell like roses too , but that 's not likely to happen either .
" Fun " is a different word from " work " for a reason .
All that " whoring " people do usually lets people do things like " eat " and " have shelter " .
If you 're making $ 100,000 a year , then yeah - maybe you 're whoring .
If you 're making $ 15,000 then you 're probably just surviving.People should try to find jobs that they like doing , but it 's not an overnight event and most people have to grind through a lot of tedious things before they get what they want.If it were easy to have the ultimate dream job then everyone would have it already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My excrement should smell like roses too, but that's not likely to happen either.
"Fun" is a different word from "work" for a reason.
All that "whoring" people do usually lets people do things like "eat" and "have shelter".
If you're making $100,000 a year, then yeah - maybe you're whoring.
If you're making $15,000 then you're probably just surviving.People should try to find jobs that they like doing, but it's not an overnight event and most people have to grind through a lot of tedious things before they get what they want.If it were easy to have the ultimate dream job then everyone would have it already.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713</id>
	<title>That's not why</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247919900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I play games like Guild Wars solo, it's not because "I want to be the hero" or because "I want all the lewts".  It's because pick-up groups suck.  You spend half an hour trying to round up people to fill out the group, and it only takes one of them being a moron to ruin the entire experience.</p><p>For those few of you who don't know, that's the guy who doesn't know how to get where you're going, can't properly follow your directions to get there, tries to boss around the party when he finally does get there even though he clearly doesn't know what he's doing, and then fifteen minutes into the group says, "o man i have 2 go.. mom wants me 2 clean my room".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I play games like Guild Wars solo , it 's not because " I want to be the hero " or because " I want all the lewts " .
It 's because pick-up groups suck .
You spend half an hour trying to round up people to fill out the group , and it only takes one of them being a moron to ruin the entire experience.For those few of you who do n't know , that 's the guy who does n't know how to get where you 're going , ca n't properly follow your directions to get there , tries to boss around the party when he finally does get there even though he clearly does n't know what he 's doing , and then fifteen minutes into the group says , " o man i have 2 go.. mom wants me 2 clean my room " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I play games like Guild Wars solo, it's not because "I want to be the hero" or because "I want all the lewts".
It's because pick-up groups suck.
You spend half an hour trying to round up people to fill out the group, and it only takes one of them being a moron to ruin the entire experience.For those few of you who don't know, that's the guy who doesn't know how to get where you're going, can't properly follow your directions to get there, tries to boss around the party when he finally does get there even though he clearly doesn't know what he's doing, and then fifteen minutes into the group says, "o man i have 2 go.. mom wants me 2 clean my room".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742603</id>
	<title>Re:It's the D-Bags...</title>
	<author>centuren</author>
	<datestamp>1247947080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's because of the d-bags. We love the idea of all the new content, ever-changing worlds, new quests, new gear, or trading for awesome gear you can't normally get at your level. Then we play with people and remember that it's still the same thing as playing with online as it ever was--awful. D-bags, cheaters, impatient people, and all the other awful people online. Just think, the same trolls and flamebaiters and morons who post random comments on forums/articles (excluding<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.; those people make<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./ trolls look like saints) are the same people you'll be playing with on an MMO.</p><p>Hence the single-player MMO--providing all the benefits with none of the drawbacks.</p></div><p>I agree with your thoughts on the d-bags, but not that a single player MMO will provide all the benefits. The single biggest benefit to my MMO experience, and the only reason I started playing one at all, was that I could play with friends. My friends are scattered around the country now, and in high school we used to have gaming nights all the time. Playing WoW, we got to play together again, socialising every night and having a lot of fun. When people started quitting or moving servers (for good reasons, all), WoW suddenly lost it's primary appeal. Even though I still had plenty of decent guildmates to play with, it just wasn't the same.</p><p>There's just something fun about getting a text message on a Sunday evening from one of my oldest friends saying only: "arena arena arena arena arena arena ", and then spending the next 3 hours yelling and swearing over vent. It was like being back in the high school computer lab playing Quake death match over a LAN, complete with someone throwing a mouse in to the garbage from time to time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's because of the d-bags .
We love the idea of all the new content , ever-changing worlds , new quests , new gear , or trading for awesome gear you ca n't normally get at your level .
Then we play with people and remember that it 's still the same thing as playing with online as it ever was--awful .
D-bags , cheaters , impatient people , and all the other awful people online .
Just think , the same trolls and flamebaiters and morons who post random comments on forums/articles ( excluding / .
; those people make ./ trolls look like saints ) are the same people you 'll be playing with on an MMO.Hence the single-player MMO--providing all the benefits with none of the drawbacks.I agree with your thoughts on the d-bags , but not that a single player MMO will provide all the benefits .
The single biggest benefit to my MMO experience , and the only reason I started playing one at all , was that I could play with friends .
My friends are scattered around the country now , and in high school we used to have gaming nights all the time .
Playing WoW , we got to play together again , socialising every night and having a lot of fun .
When people started quitting or moving servers ( for good reasons , all ) , WoW suddenly lost it 's primary appeal .
Even though I still had plenty of decent guildmates to play with , it just was n't the same.There 's just something fun about getting a text message on a Sunday evening from one of my oldest friends saying only : " arena arena arena arena arena arena " , and then spending the next 3 hours yelling and swearing over vent .
It was like being back in the high school computer lab playing Quake death match over a LAN , complete with someone throwing a mouse in to the garbage from time to time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's because of the d-bags.
We love the idea of all the new content, ever-changing worlds, new quests, new gear, or trading for awesome gear you can't normally get at your level.
Then we play with people and remember that it's still the same thing as playing with online as it ever was--awful.
D-bags, cheaters, impatient people, and all the other awful people online.
Just think, the same trolls and flamebaiters and morons who post random comments on forums/articles (excluding /.
; those people make ./ trolls look like saints) are the same people you'll be playing with on an MMO.Hence the single-player MMO--providing all the benefits with none of the drawbacks.I agree with your thoughts on the d-bags, but not that a single player MMO will provide all the benefits.
The single biggest benefit to my MMO experience, and the only reason I started playing one at all, was that I could play with friends.
My friends are scattered around the country now, and in high school we used to have gaming nights all the time.
Playing WoW, we got to play together again, socialising every night and having a lot of fun.
When people started quitting or moving servers (for good reasons, all), WoW suddenly lost it's primary appeal.
Even though I still had plenty of decent guildmates to play with, it just wasn't the same.There's just something fun about getting a text message on a Sunday evening from one of my oldest friends saying only: "arena arena arena arena arena arena ", and then spending the next 3 hours yelling and swearing over vent.
It was like being back in the high school computer lab playing Quake death match over a LAN, complete with someone throwing a mouse in to the garbage from time to time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739881</id>
	<title>Gaming as a service?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247922900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a natural progression to where one gets a metered amount of content/rewards/joy per month.  The cost of the next month will always sound cheap compared to what one gets, just like those multi-issue cooking books that appear disturbingly often, but it adds up over time to a raw deal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a natural progression to where one gets a metered amount of content/rewards/joy per month .
The cost of the next month will always sound cheap compared to what one gets , just like those multi-issue cooking books that appear disturbingly often , but it adds up over time to a raw deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a natural progression to where one gets a metered amount of content/rewards/joy per month.
The cost of the next month will always sound cheap compared to what one gets, just like those multi-issue cooking books that appear disturbingly often, but it adds up over time to a raw deal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740685</id>
	<title>Re:Online worlds FTW; online players suck.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247931240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>agreed within reason.</p><p>I wish they would do like Diablo 2 and scale the difficulty to group size.  If people come and go, it doesn't matter.  But a group of 5 actual friends (like my situation) can experience all of the content in the game.</p><p>There are so many areas I've never seen because I don't want to group up with 20 strangers.</p><p>It's like paying for premium cable channels you never watch... oh wait. we do that too don't we?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>agreed within reason.I wish they would do like Diablo 2 and scale the difficulty to group size .
If people come and go , it does n't matter .
But a group of 5 actual friends ( like my situation ) can experience all of the content in the game.There are so many areas I 've never seen because I do n't want to group up with 20 strangers.It 's like paying for premium cable channels you never watch... oh wait .
we do that too do n't we ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>agreed within reason.I wish they would do like Diablo 2 and scale the difficulty to group size.
If people come and go, it doesn't matter.
But a group of 5 actual friends (like my situation) can experience all of the content in the game.There are so many areas I've never seen because I don't want to group up with 20 strangers.It's like paying for premium cable channels you never watch... oh wait.
we do that too don't we?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740053</id>
	<title>Personally,   Hell yeah!</title>
	<author>lindseyp</author>
	<datestamp>1247925420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't spend so much time gaming.  But having wasted a good many hundreds of hours on MUD's back in the day.  I can say the one thing I found inherently unattractive about the recent flavour of MMORPGs was the fact that you had to go find friends, become part of a guild or team, and work through all those stupid politics and social chores just to be able to play.</p><p>I don't necessarily want to make friends.  I just want to play.  What I *Love* about multi-player games is the fact that you meet real people along the way, and have the *opportunity* to befriend or interact if you so choose.  What I don't want in my escapism is some social obligation to go through the same bulsh*t with people to "get my game done" as I have to at work to "get my job done".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't spend so much time gaming .
But having wasted a good many hundreds of hours on MUD 's back in the day .
I can say the one thing I found inherently unattractive about the recent flavour of MMORPGs was the fact that you had to go find friends , become part of a guild or team , and work through all those stupid politics and social chores just to be able to play.I do n't necessarily want to make friends .
I just want to play .
What I * Love * about multi-player games is the fact that you meet real people along the way , and have the * opportunity * to befriend or interact if you so choose .
What I do n't want in my escapism is some social obligation to go through the same bulsh * t with people to " get my game done " as I have to at work to " get my job done " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't spend so much time gaming.
But having wasted a good many hundreds of hours on MUD's back in the day.
I can say the one thing I found inherently unattractive about the recent flavour of MMORPGs was the fact that you had to go find friends, become part of a guild or team, and work through all those stupid politics and social chores just to be able to play.I don't necessarily want to make friends.
I just want to play.
What I *Love* about multi-player games is the fact that you meet real people along the way, and have the *opportunity* to befriend or interact if you so choose.
What I don't want in my escapism is some social obligation to go through the same bulsh*t with people to "get my game done" as I have to at work to "get my job done".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740327</id>
	<title>Re:That's not why</title>
	<author>Artifakt</author>
	<datestamp>1247928180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could have just said "Google Leeroy Jenkins"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could have just said " Google Leeroy Jenkins "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could have just said "Google Leeroy Jenkins"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28752029</id>
	<title>Re:And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>PaganRitual</author>
	<datestamp>1248016020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a really good point. One of the first things I've noticed about my waning desire to play WoW is that solo the game is absolutely terrible, and it always has been, it's just that at the start the addiction was heavy and I didn't notice as much. Last weekend I spent most of my time in Morrowind instead, and the difference in the two games is just amazing (duh). I've complained in the past (to no one in particular, I've just complained) about the lack of a solid single player experience in an MMO but, quite frankly, I'd probably be happier if for them to purely focus on making everything as multiplayer as possible, if this is the best single player they can muster. Single player and MMO simply don't work together, any attempt appears transparent and lame, and the old MMO requirements come back to haunt the experience every time. The new phasing crap in WoW just means that helping out friends that haven't done specific quests just mean that they are attacked by things you simply can't see, and quests involving NPCs are such a waste of time because, just in case you didn't think it possible, the lack of risk and challenge was lowered even further than before by completely overpowered helpers that did all the work while you just stood around and waited for it to finish.</p><p>On the other hand, in my new game of Morrowind, I joined the mages guild, joined the thieves guild, which are full of different people and varied quests. I was tasked to collect mushrooms initially (sigh), but then I was told to was to slip a fake soul gem into someones desk, then travel to a distant area and either convince a man to join the guild, or kill him. I was also asked to steal a diamond from someone, and procure a house key via whatever means available to me from a particular person, be it stealth, violence or my smooth tongue. During this I was attacked by Dark Brotherhood agents, and in the process of tracing them to their source, found a man who had stolen some magical armor from the local Duke. I lured the man underwater, where I paralysed him until he drowned, taking his magical armor and the other magical weapons he had stashed. That diamond is now permanently gone from that vendor. That man is now permanently floating near the underwater entrance to his cave. The key is no longer with the servant. If I loiter around long enough to guy won't disappear from the water and reappear at the back of the cave for the next loser. The key won't magically come back to the guys pocket, the diamond is forever in the hands of the thieves guild leader. The guy I locked in a downstairs room before testing my paralyse/bash-him-over-the-head-with-my-summonded-sword strategy is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... well, he is gone for good too. But the game world has changed. Permanently.</p><p>And I've realised that the trade off between being able to permanently change the game world, or help a friend find a dirt mount behind a farm once owner by a guy now camping by a river, only to have the dirt mound never disappear, the man never move on from his camp, and the bad guys that were loitering around the farm to magically reappear a few minutes after us killing them, is a trade off I'm happy to make. And thats before we even consider the fact that I don't have the option to just murder the man himself for whatever he was intending to give me instead of running his errands.</p><p>I'm not really making a point, but seriously, 2 player co-op Morrowind would be completely fucking amazing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a really good point .
One of the first things I 've noticed about my waning desire to play WoW is that solo the game is absolutely terrible , and it always has been , it 's just that at the start the addiction was heavy and I did n't notice as much .
Last weekend I spent most of my time in Morrowind instead , and the difference in the two games is just amazing ( duh ) .
I 've complained in the past ( to no one in particular , I 've just complained ) about the lack of a solid single player experience in an MMO but , quite frankly , I 'd probably be happier if for them to purely focus on making everything as multiplayer as possible , if this is the best single player they can muster .
Single player and MMO simply do n't work together , any attempt appears transparent and lame , and the old MMO requirements come back to haunt the experience every time .
The new phasing crap in WoW just means that helping out friends that have n't done specific quests just mean that they are attacked by things you simply ca n't see , and quests involving NPCs are such a waste of time because , just in case you did n't think it possible , the lack of risk and challenge was lowered even further than before by completely overpowered helpers that did all the work while you just stood around and waited for it to finish.On the other hand , in my new game of Morrowind , I joined the mages guild , joined the thieves guild , which are full of different people and varied quests .
I was tasked to collect mushrooms initially ( sigh ) , but then I was told to was to slip a fake soul gem into someones desk , then travel to a distant area and either convince a man to join the guild , or kill him .
I was also asked to steal a diamond from someone , and procure a house key via whatever means available to me from a particular person , be it stealth , violence or my smooth tongue .
During this I was attacked by Dark Brotherhood agents , and in the process of tracing them to their source , found a man who had stolen some magical armor from the local Duke .
I lured the man underwater , where I paralysed him until he drowned , taking his magical armor and the other magical weapons he had stashed .
That diamond is now permanently gone from that vendor .
That man is now permanently floating near the underwater entrance to his cave .
The key is no longer with the servant .
If I loiter around long enough to guy wo n't disappear from the water and reappear at the back of the cave for the next loser .
The key wo n't magically come back to the guys pocket , the diamond is forever in the hands of the thieves guild leader .
The guy I locked in a downstairs room before testing my paralyse/bash-him-over-the-head-with-my-summonded-sword strategy is ... well , he is gone for good too .
But the game world has changed .
Permanently.And I 've realised that the trade off between being able to permanently change the game world , or help a friend find a dirt mount behind a farm once owner by a guy now camping by a river , only to have the dirt mound never disappear , the man never move on from his camp , and the bad guys that were loitering around the farm to magically reappear a few minutes after us killing them , is a trade off I 'm happy to make .
And thats before we even consider the fact that I do n't have the option to just murder the man himself for whatever he was intending to give me instead of running his errands.I 'm not really making a point , but seriously , 2 player co-op Morrowind would be completely fucking amazing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a really good point.
One of the first things I've noticed about my waning desire to play WoW is that solo the game is absolutely terrible, and it always has been, it's just that at the start the addiction was heavy and I didn't notice as much.
Last weekend I spent most of my time in Morrowind instead, and the difference in the two games is just amazing (duh).
I've complained in the past (to no one in particular, I've just complained) about the lack of a solid single player experience in an MMO but, quite frankly, I'd probably be happier if for them to purely focus on making everything as multiplayer as possible, if this is the best single player they can muster.
Single player and MMO simply don't work together, any attempt appears transparent and lame, and the old MMO requirements come back to haunt the experience every time.
The new phasing crap in WoW just means that helping out friends that haven't done specific quests just mean that they are attacked by things you simply can't see, and quests involving NPCs are such a waste of time because, just in case you didn't think it possible, the lack of risk and challenge was lowered even further than before by completely overpowered helpers that did all the work while you just stood around and waited for it to finish.On the other hand, in my new game of Morrowind, I joined the mages guild, joined the thieves guild, which are full of different people and varied quests.
I was tasked to collect mushrooms initially (sigh), but then I was told to was to slip a fake soul gem into someones desk, then travel to a distant area and either convince a man to join the guild, or kill him.
I was also asked to steal a diamond from someone, and procure a house key via whatever means available to me from a particular person, be it stealth, violence or my smooth tongue.
During this I was attacked by Dark Brotherhood agents, and in the process of tracing them to their source, found a man who had stolen some magical armor from the local Duke.
I lured the man underwater, where I paralysed him until he drowned, taking his magical armor and the other magical weapons he had stashed.
That diamond is now permanently gone from that vendor.
That man is now permanently floating near the underwater entrance to his cave.
The key is no longer with the servant.
If I loiter around long enough to guy won't disappear from the water and reappear at the back of the cave for the next loser.
The key won't magically come back to the guys pocket, the diamond is forever in the hands of the thieves guild leader.
The guy I locked in a downstairs room before testing my paralyse/bash-him-over-the-head-with-my-summonded-sword strategy is ... well, he is gone for good too.
But the game world has changed.
Permanently.And I've realised that the trade off between being able to permanently change the game world, or help a friend find a dirt mount behind a farm once owner by a guy now camping by a river, only to have the dirt mound never disappear, the man never move on from his camp, and the bad guys that were loitering around the farm to magically reappear a few minutes after us killing them, is a trade off I'm happy to make.
And thats before we even consider the fact that I don't have the option to just murder the man himself for whatever he was intending to give me instead of running his errands.I'm not really making a point, but seriously, 2 player co-op Morrowind would be completely fucking amazing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165</id>
	<title>Re:I hate time sinks</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1247926680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I already have a time sink in my life, it's called work. It regularly consumes 13 hours of my day, factor in an average 8 hours of sleep and that leaves me with 3 hours in which to do things like play games, eat food, etc.</p></div></blockquote><p>It seems common lately, but this is a pretty weird notion; that life is all about having fun after work, and work is just a waste of time. Work IS the majority of your time.  It's what YOU do --- YOUR job; YOUR career; YOUR chosen way to exist.  It should be something that's meaningful to you -- something you care about and believe in.  Either find a way to enjoy it (by enjoying the technical challenge of a high-end IT job, or the service to others that waiting tables involves, for instance) or get/invent a new job that you DO give a shit about. Otherwise, you're a) doomed to a hateful existence; and b) essentially whoring your life away for the sake of money from someone you don't like.</p><p>Hell, if you want to spend your time playing games, just quit the job, live off social security, and play games.  Why lie about who you are?  But if you want your time to be meaningful and your job to be rewarding, then pick a meaningful job that you're capable of feeling the rewards from.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I already have a time sink in my life , it 's called work .
It regularly consumes 13 hours of my day , factor in an average 8 hours of sleep and that leaves me with 3 hours in which to do things like play games , eat food , etc.It seems common lately , but this is a pretty weird notion ; that life is all about having fun after work , and work is just a waste of time .
Work IS the majority of your time .
It 's what YOU do --- YOUR job ; YOUR career ; YOUR chosen way to exist .
It should be something that 's meaningful to you -- something you care about and believe in .
Either find a way to enjoy it ( by enjoying the technical challenge of a high-end IT job , or the service to others that waiting tables involves , for instance ) or get/invent a new job that you DO give a shit about .
Otherwise , you 're a ) doomed to a hateful existence ; and b ) essentially whoring your life away for the sake of money from someone you do n't like.Hell , if you want to spend your time playing games , just quit the job , live off social security , and play games .
Why lie about who you are ?
But if you want your time to be meaningful and your job to be rewarding , then pick a meaningful job that you 're capable of feeling the rewards from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I already have a time sink in my life, it's called work.
It regularly consumes 13 hours of my day, factor in an average 8 hours of sleep and that leaves me with 3 hours in which to do things like play games, eat food, etc.It seems common lately, but this is a pretty weird notion; that life is all about having fun after work, and work is just a waste of time.
Work IS the majority of your time.
It's what YOU do --- YOUR job; YOUR career; YOUR chosen way to exist.
It should be something that's meaningful to you -- something you care about and believe in.
Either find a way to enjoy it (by enjoying the technical challenge of a high-end IT job, or the service to others that waiting tables involves, for instance) or get/invent a new job that you DO give a shit about.
Otherwise, you're a) doomed to a hateful existence; and b) essentially whoring your life away for the sake of money from someone you don't like.Hell, if you want to spend your time playing games, just quit the job, live off social security, and play games.
Why lie about who you are?
But if you want your time to be meaningful and your job to be rewarding, then pick a meaningful job that you're capable of feeling the rewards from.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743097</id>
	<title>Re:And this is what is slowly killing the genre</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247908620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On Karma: Absolutely no technological measures can improve any community when the majority of the community itself would prefer to conduct itself that way.  One solution can be to have more communities, like "moderated servers" where griefers find themselves forcibly migrated to another server.  Unfortunately, even with the maintenance cost and difficulties of policing aside, any degree of control engenders politics and all the drama that swirls around it.</p><p>As for combos and combat, indeed... WoW is ultimately a numbers game based on very simple primitives.  Attacks usually only have up to three animations if that many, and everyone clips through each other.  Other MMOs address this technology, but in the end it doesn't seem to matter that much when the player base prefers to focus on other mechanics -- like grouping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On Karma : Absolutely no technological measures can improve any community when the majority of the community itself would prefer to conduct itself that way .
One solution can be to have more communities , like " moderated servers " where griefers find themselves forcibly migrated to another server .
Unfortunately , even with the maintenance cost and difficulties of policing aside , any degree of control engenders politics and all the drama that swirls around it.As for combos and combat , indeed... WoW is ultimately a numbers game based on very simple primitives .
Attacks usually only have up to three animations if that many , and everyone clips through each other .
Other MMOs address this technology , but in the end it does n't seem to matter that much when the player base prefers to focus on other mechanics -- like grouping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On Karma: Absolutely no technological measures can improve any community when the majority of the community itself would prefer to conduct itself that way.
One solution can be to have more communities, like "moderated servers" where griefers find themselves forcibly migrated to another server.
Unfortunately, even with the maintenance cost and difficulties of policing aside, any degree of control engenders politics and all the drama that swirls around it.As for combos and combat, indeed... WoW is ultimately a numbers game based on very simple primitives.
Attacks usually only have up to three animations if that many, and everyone clips through each other.
Other MMOs address this technology, but in the end it doesn't seem to matter that much when the player base prefers to focus on other mechanics -- like grouping.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744353</id>
	<title>Re:Player matching</title>
	<author>k8to</author>
	<datestamp>1247921820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a nice theory, but there's a lot of antisocials who get their entertainment by harassing those who aren't interested.  Where do they go?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a nice theory , but there 's a lot of antisocials who get their entertainment by harassing those who are n't interested .
Where do they go ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a nice theory, but there's a lot of antisocials who get their entertainment by harassing those who aren't interested.
Where do they go?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740807</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28781575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743097
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28753629
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740253
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740135
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742071
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743179
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743737
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28747455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28757169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28753803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740959
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740135
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28752029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740587
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_18_0413257_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740509
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739645
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740867
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742447
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744197
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743097
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28757169
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740473
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741447
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28753803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28752029
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742071
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745019
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740807
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740685
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739711
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739609
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739821
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740183
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740805
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743157
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741733
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739953
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741183
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740253
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740165
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743301
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743737
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741419
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28747455
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28743179
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745861
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744781
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28781575
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742983
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28753629
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740959
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741089
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742769
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739707
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740111
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28745911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28744371
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742689
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740493
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739991
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740135
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741931
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28739713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740013
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740327
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740587
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740653
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28742425
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28740489
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_18_0413257.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_18_0413257.28741567
</commentlist>
</conversation>
