<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_17_0610219</id>
	<title>Avataritis &mdash; On the Abundance of Customizable Game Characters</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1255776660000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.slowdown.vg/" rel="nofollow">Martyn Zachary</a> writes <i>"The Slowdown has posted a new critique, 'Avataritis,' that attempts to portray the utilization of character customization as a pandemic, emotional response on behalf of publishers and developers to finding the easiest, most efficient solution to the very unique dilemma presented by the enlarging, widening player base of video games. 'No mechanisms are in place stopping developers from writing and designing heterogeneous yet fully structured, narrative-based computer games with <a href="http://www.slowdown.vg/2009/10/16/avataritis/">carefully constructed and immutable, unchangeable characters</a>.' The article discusses the emergence and role of gender criticism and research in relation to the recent proliferation of the customizable avatar. The story also dissects the very act of character creation, subsequently aiming to clarify several semantic distortions related to the terminology utilized in character creation, and in turn breaking apart the concepts of relatability and understandability, wholly differentiating the two. The overarching analysis is finally related to examples from the gaming marketplace, where many continue to corroborate apparent falsehoods and misunderstandings in relation to the utilization of the avatar. Ultimately, the writer hopes to dissuade readers, developers and players from believing that written narratives are going away as customization and emergent content are entering video games with full force."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Martyn Zachary writes " The Slowdown has posted a new critique , 'Avataritis, ' that attempts to portray the utilization of character customization as a pandemic , emotional response on behalf of publishers and developers to finding the easiest , most efficient solution to the very unique dilemma presented by the enlarging , widening player base of video games .
'No mechanisms are in place stopping developers from writing and designing heterogeneous yet fully structured , narrative-based computer games with carefully constructed and immutable , unchangeable characters .
' The article discusses the emergence and role of gender criticism and research in relation to the recent proliferation of the customizable avatar .
The story also dissects the very act of character creation , subsequently aiming to clarify several semantic distortions related to the terminology utilized in character creation , and in turn breaking apart the concepts of relatability and understandability , wholly differentiating the two .
The overarching analysis is finally related to examples from the gaming marketplace , where many continue to corroborate apparent falsehoods and misunderstandings in relation to the utilization of the avatar .
Ultimately , the writer hopes to dissuade readers , developers and players from believing that written narratives are going away as customization and emergent content are entering video games with full force .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Martyn Zachary writes "The Slowdown has posted a new critique, 'Avataritis,' that attempts to portray the utilization of character customization as a pandemic, emotional response on behalf of publishers and developers to finding the easiest, most efficient solution to the very unique dilemma presented by the enlarging, widening player base of video games.
'No mechanisms are in place stopping developers from writing and designing heterogeneous yet fully structured, narrative-based computer games with carefully constructed and immutable, unchangeable characters.
' The article discusses the emergence and role of gender criticism and research in relation to the recent proliferation of the customizable avatar.
The story also dissects the very act of character creation, subsequently aiming to clarify several semantic distortions related to the terminology utilized in character creation, and in turn breaking apart the concepts of relatability and understandability, wholly differentiating the two.
The overarching analysis is finally related to examples from the gaming marketplace, where many continue to corroborate apparent falsehoods and misunderstandings in relation to the utilization of the avatar.
Ultimately, the writer hopes to dissuade readers, developers and players from believing that written narratives are going away as customization and emergent content are entering video games with full force.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29779575</id>
	<title>Re:Standardize Avatars? ART</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255770600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some of us play games pretty much for the art and visuals. The avatar is a huge part of these; standardizing it for anything but the most banal games would be counter-productive and jarring.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of us play games pretty much for the art and visuals .
The avatar is a huge part of these ; standardizing it for anything but the most banal games would be counter-productive and jarring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of us play games pretty much for the art and visuals.
The avatar is a huge part of these; standardizing it for anything but the most banal games would be counter-productive and jarring.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777481</id>
	<title>Re:I've read physics papers by business majors...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255793520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with your points but I don't think that's what the article is about. The article is questioning character 'creation' making players feel God like. It also asks if the unique characters take away from a good story because you can't write a "one size fits all." I think these ideas are simply wrong. I don't think I'm giving birth or creating a new life form. I'm playing myself in the game much as an actor is playing a role in a movie.</p><p>As far as storyline goes, look at Guild Wars and Aion. They render their cut scenes with your character so you are a part of the developing story rather than just watching a character from the story. And both World of Warcraft and Aion have moments where you play in an instance (solo or just your party) where you participate with a few NPCs as key elements of the story unfolds. Your character speaks to the prince, your character is cheered for saving the town and it's your character that fights side by side with Thral.  The story is just as deep and you get to play a part in it through your character.</p><p>Rather than think storyline is dead because of unique character creation, the author should consider how these interactive stories improve on standard story telling.  I've played enough "you are Dr. Freedman" games. I like what is being done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with your points but I do n't think that 's what the article is about .
The article is questioning character 'creation ' making players feel God like .
It also asks if the unique characters take away from a good story because you ca n't write a " one size fits all .
" I think these ideas are simply wrong .
I do n't think I 'm giving birth or creating a new life form .
I 'm playing myself in the game much as an actor is playing a role in a movie.As far as storyline goes , look at Guild Wars and Aion .
They render their cut scenes with your character so you are a part of the developing story rather than just watching a character from the story .
And both World of Warcraft and Aion have moments where you play in an instance ( solo or just your party ) where you participate with a few NPCs as key elements of the story unfolds .
Your character speaks to the prince , your character is cheered for saving the town and it 's your character that fights side by side with Thral .
The story is just as deep and you get to play a part in it through your character.Rather than think storyline is dead because of unique character creation , the author should consider how these interactive stories improve on standard story telling .
I 've played enough " you are Dr. Freedman " games .
I like what is being done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with your points but I don't think that's what the article is about.
The article is questioning character 'creation' making players feel God like.
It also asks if the unique characters take away from a good story because you can't write a "one size fits all.
" I think these ideas are simply wrong.
I don't think I'm giving birth or creating a new life form.
I'm playing myself in the game much as an actor is playing a role in a movie.As far as storyline goes, look at Guild Wars and Aion.
They render their cut scenes with your character so you are a part of the developing story rather than just watching a character from the story.
And both World of Warcraft and Aion have moments where you play in an instance (solo or just your party) where you participate with a few NPCs as key elements of the story unfolds.
Your character speaks to the prince, your character is cheered for saving the town and it's your character that fights side by side with Thral.
The story is just as deep and you get to play a part in it through your character.Rather than think storyline is dead because of unique character creation, the author should consider how these interactive stories improve on standard story telling.
I've played enough "you are Dr. Freedman" games.
I like what is being done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29778115</id>
	<title>Re:I've read physics papers by business majors...</title>
	<author>Nekomusume</author>
	<datestamp>1255800120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4: Making the character up to be a hot guy/girl of "your type", so that you can stare at eye candy that actually suits your own tastes. ("If I'm going to be staring at this character for the next 50+ hours, it might as well look good")<br>5: Making the character up to be a fashion doll. ("screw the stats, I want the awesome looking armor")<br>6: Making the character up to look like anything other than a standard video-game hero(ine), who tend to be carbon copies of each other.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4 : Making the character up to be a hot guy/girl of " your type " , so that you can stare at eye candy that actually suits your own tastes .
( " If I 'm going to be staring at this character for the next 50 + hours , it might as well look good " ) 5 : Making the character up to be a fashion doll .
( " screw the stats , I want the awesome looking armor " ) 6 : Making the character up to look like anything other than a standard video-game hero ( ine ) , who tend to be carbon copies of each other .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4: Making the character up to be a hot guy/girl of "your type", so that you can stare at eye candy that actually suits your own tastes.
("If I'm going to be staring at this character for the next 50+ hours, it might as well look good")5: Making the character up to be a fashion doll.
("screw the stats, I want the awesome looking armor")6: Making the character up to look like anything other than a standard video-game hero(ine), who tend to be carbon copies of each other.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29780029</id>
	<title>Re:I've read physics papers by business majors...</title>
	<author>Keill</author>
	<datestamp>1255775220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was tempted to write another really long post about this in relation to the paper I'm working on, (Story Writing in Computer-based Role-Playing Games), but I'm afraid I really can't be bothered.</p><p>So instead I've been trying to think of a good analogy instead...</p><p>This is like someone complaining about the instruments used in a variety of movie soundtracks, saying it badly affects the story the film tells if the viewer has a choice about what type of soundtrack they wish to hear.</p><p>(Not sure if that is the best analogy tbh?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was tempted to write another really long post about this in relation to the paper I 'm working on , ( Story Writing in Computer-based Role-Playing Games ) , but I 'm afraid I really ca n't be bothered.So instead I 've been trying to think of a good analogy instead...This is like someone complaining about the instruments used in a variety of movie soundtracks , saying it badly affects the story the film tells if the viewer has a choice about what type of soundtrack they wish to hear .
( Not sure if that is the best analogy tbh ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was tempted to write another really long post about this in relation to the paper I'm working on, (Story Writing in Computer-based Role-Playing Games), but I'm afraid I really can't be bothered.So instead I've been trying to think of a good analogy instead...This is like someone complaining about the instruments used in a variety of movie soundtracks, saying it badly affects the story the film tells if the viewer has a choice about what type of soundtrack they wish to hear.
(Not sure if that is the best analogy tbh?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29780073</id>
	<title>Re:Standardize Avatars?</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1255775520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You'd have to define some sort of "base set" of attributes and props, and game makers wouldn't be able to add their own-- otherwise they'd ruin the portability. For example, say Xbox adds a Halo logo shirt, and you put one on your avatar. Now you buy a PS3, and try to port that avatar into Home... what happens to the shirt? Most likely it'd just turn into a generic one, meaning your avatar isn't portable after-all.</p><p>You could *potentially* standardize the format that clothing/props/expressions/facial features/etc takes, so that the PS3 could download the Halo shirt from a server somewhere, but that would be a nightmare to implement with and provide very little benefit. And even if you did pull it off, Sony would still ban the Halo logo because they're Sony.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd have to define some sort of " base set " of attributes and props , and game makers would n't be able to add their own-- otherwise they 'd ruin the portability .
For example , say Xbox adds a Halo logo shirt , and you put one on your avatar .
Now you buy a PS3 , and try to port that avatar into Home... what happens to the shirt ?
Most likely it 'd just turn into a generic one , meaning your avatar is n't portable after-all.You could * potentially * standardize the format that clothing/props/expressions/facial features/etc takes , so that the PS3 could download the Halo shirt from a server somewhere , but that would be a nightmare to implement with and provide very little benefit .
And even if you did pull it off , Sony would still ban the Halo logo because they 're Sony .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd have to define some sort of "base set" of attributes and props, and game makers wouldn't be able to add their own-- otherwise they'd ruin the portability.
For example, say Xbox adds a Halo logo shirt, and you put one on your avatar.
Now you buy a PS3, and try to port that avatar into Home... what happens to the shirt?
Most likely it'd just turn into a generic one, meaning your avatar isn't portable after-all.You could *potentially* standardize the format that clothing/props/expressions/facial features/etc takes, so that the PS3 could download the Halo shirt from a server somewhere, but that would be a nightmare to implement with and provide very little benefit.
And even if you did pull it off, Sony would still ban the Halo logo because they're Sony.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776839</id>
	<title>Re:I've read physics papers by business majors...</title>
	<author>Ihmhi</author>
	<datestamp>1255787280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WoW has this superficially, in that NPCs treat you different depending on your reputation, race, and faction. Some of it is just "Glad to see you here, noble $RACE $CLASS", and some of it is NPC X won't give quests to RACE Y or characters who have a standing with FACTION Z.</p><p>Maybe MMOs need to D&amp;D it up a bit, have a CHA(risma) score or something like that... the prettier you are, the more likely some people are going to help you and the less likely some others would (i.e. a girl might be lovestruck with your elf, but the thug in the tavern doesn't wanna work with no pretty boy). It would bring up interesting opportunities for variance in game design...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WoW has this superficially , in that NPCs treat you different depending on your reputation , race , and faction .
Some of it is just " Glad to see you here , noble $ RACE $ CLASS " , and some of it is NPC X wo n't give quests to RACE Y or characters who have a standing with FACTION Z.Maybe MMOs need to D&amp;D it up a bit , have a CHA ( risma ) score or something like that... the prettier you are , the more likely some people are going to help you and the less likely some others would ( i.e .
a girl might be lovestruck with your elf , but the thug in the tavern does n't wan na work with no pretty boy ) .
It would bring up interesting opportunities for variance in game design.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WoW has this superficially, in that NPCs treat you different depending on your reputation, race, and faction.
Some of it is just "Glad to see you here, noble $RACE $CLASS", and some of it is NPC X won't give quests to RACE Y or characters who have a standing with FACTION Z.Maybe MMOs need to D&amp;D it up a bit, have a CHA(risma) score or something like that... the prettier you are, the more likely some people are going to help you and the less likely some others would (i.e.
a girl might be lovestruck with your elf, but the thug in the tavern doesn't wanna work with no pretty boy).
It would bring up interesting opportunities for variance in game design...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776797</id>
	<title>Obligatory Penny Arcade</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255786500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/10/14/" title="penny-arcade.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/10/14/</a> [penny-arcade.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/10/14/ [ penny-arcade.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/10/14/ [penny-arcade.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29779295</id>
	<title>I'm going to have to disagree</title>
	<author>strech</author>
	<datestamp>1255811040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The short version of the argument is that allowing a lot of character customization<br>a) Can't fully achieve the goal of having the player "become" the character, as the gameplay and narrative of the game provide their own limits;<br>b) Doesn't really solve the problem of the interaction of race and video games; and<br>c) Limits the games, because it prevents them from using meaningful character details as driving the narrative, gutting it.<br>This misses the point to a great deal;</p><p>For (a) All creation has limits but that doesn't make it valueless or not an act of creation; even if the limits are that born within a game system.</p><p>For (b) it's true but character customization was never really aimed at solving the interaction fully.</p><p>For (c) not all details of a character limit the story of a game (would it really matter if Gordon Freeman was black?) and if a game is anything other than a railroad it needs to branch at some point anyway, so the branching of a game in response to character creation (see Dragon Age's multiple origin stories) is not a meaningful limit of narrative.</p><p>In longer form, his argument is full of holes in general; he starts off by begging the question, complete with passive-agressive "I'm going to get modded down for this, but" bullshit:</p><blockquote><div><p>Now, to offend half the blogosphere offhand: For the purpose of this article, we will consider avatar customization a convenient narrative cop-out. We shall also assume that no mechanisms are in place stopping developers from writing and designing heterogeneous yet fully structured, narrative-based computer games with carefully constructed and immutable, unchangeable characters.</p></div></blockquote><p>So he assumes the practice he's complaining about is the only thing stopping him from getting the games he wants (it isn't, but I can see the assumption as useful for purposes of argument) and then assumes the practice he disagrees with is valueless (it isn't).  He even admits that in terms of narrative etc he's dismissing the value with nothing more than the word "seems":</p><blockquote><div><p>(Obviously, there are occasions wherein the &ldquo;tabula rasa&rdquo; scenario is a fully motivated one, either by its ludic or narrative function, but assuming this to be a default state to be aspired to seems ultimately misguided beyond the MMO.)</p></div></blockquote><p>As he asserts this without evidence, I'll dismiss it with little more (At very least, games in the line of Fallout or (from what I know about it) Dragon Age are clear examples in opposition to this).</p><p>He goes on for a while about minorities and gaming, nothing that minorities are underrepresented in gaming, and that the common approach of reading \% of characters as a measure of this is a bit of tokenism and misses the point &ndash; that the experience of growing up white and growing up, say, Latino are different and this affects a lot of things in subtle ways, and just changing a character's skin isn't going to reflect these ways.  And that making this irrelevant works against both the white and Latino's experience.  This is true as far as it goes, but it really doesn't have much to do with character creation:</p><p>a) I've always thought the \% studies as a quick and dirty measure of how much of the creators are working to take those experiences into account.  If the numbers are heavily lopsided, then it's a sign the probably aren't; if the numbers are more even there's at least a chance they are.<br>b) More importantly, the ability of a trait to help someone connect with a character isn't necessarily connected with the importance in the game world.  To paraphrase from a shadowrun sourcebook, &ldquo;Who cares about the color of someone's skin when the guy over there is a rock with hands as big as your head?&rdquo;  This is even true for characters set initially in our on world (c.f. Gordon Freeman).  So the race of the character could end up being meaningful for the player and not meaningful for the game world.<br>c) Even where it is relevant, it can be branched; this can help the narrative in a way that it doesn't work with books.  Flipping back to Dragon Age &ndash; the plan for the game is you select one of several &ldquo;origin stories&rdquo;, which set the first few hours of the game and have impacts through the rest of the game.   This allows them to examine more of the game world &ndash; improving the narrative/story of the game as a whole rather than weakening it - while giving freedom in character creation.   While it does it in context of class and species rather than (say) race and gender, which are rendered irrelevant, there's no reason it couldn't be used for the latter.</p><p>Then he gets tripped up on language for a bit:</p><blockquote><div><p>Yes, the act does resemble that of &ldquo;creation&rdquo; in that players apply their imagination to a restricted set of tools, much in the same way one would other forms of art, but a process of &ldquo;birthing&rdquo;, like Alexander calls it, it is not.<br>After all, the word &ldquo;birth&rdquo; is far removed from the tangible actuality of the interfaces to which our creativity is ultimately tied to</p></div></blockquote><p>I dunno, people get pretty creative with the interfaces used in birth.  (Well, people that aren't slashdot readers.)  But I'm really not sure what he's getting at here; yes, it is a restricted set of tools for creation.  And?  It seems like he's trying to confuse himself with terminology while knowing what people actually mean by it:</p><blockquote><div><p>In video games, then, we do become one with our character &ndash; at least as much as acting out a role in a play allows us to vicariously experience being an another being.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Well, yes, but this doesn't actually lead to the rest of his point:</p><blockquote><div><blockquote><div><p>audiences often demand protagonists to whom they can relate, whom they admire, to motivate gameplay and enhance immersion &ndash; so isn&rsquo;t the best way to &ldquo;get it right&rdquo; to allow players to build their own.</p></div></blockquote><p>For designers, writers and ultimately companies to seek to &ldquo;get it right&rdquo; in this manner, from my narrative-obsessed standpoint, is what I mean by avataritis.<br>.<br>This is the dualistic fallacy of the avatar: Customization may seem to offer developers and players alike a chance to mask, to separate an avatar from its perfunctory position and move it closer to the player, bridging the gap between various players of different origins, but due to the avatar&rsquo;s function as a literary element, a character never does become perfectly liberated from its original environs and place of creation.</p></div></blockquote><p>The idea that an idea (character creation) allowing a character to move towards the player rather than the creator is fallacious because it's not perfect is absurd.  That something isn't imperfect doesn't mean it's valueless; customization does not always weaken the narrative (as I noted above) and even when it does the tradeoff may be worth it.</p><p>He goes on to say we can connect with people that aren't like us, which no-one has ever disagreed with.  Skipping past the first 2 summary points, a note on the third:</p><blockquote><div><p>Third, I sought to explain how offering players avatar-based customization can lead to beautification, stereotyping, archetyping and the ongoing perpetration of an established discourse of the avatar that allows companies to purport and rely on the assumption that players (or viewers) only want to relate, desire, admire or be themselves.</p></div> </blockquote><p>So I'm an elf, robot, alien, human, and talking cow-person of various genders?  Alternately, avatar customization can also be used to put yourself in someone else's shoes and experience them, or just mess around with different characters in general; while avatars allow us to make characters like ourselves they don't require it.  And often they lead away from it; if customization and the game are sufficiently robust, they can even encourage it, by playing as multiple characters.  If you're replaying a game on a different path, you may as well make a different character as well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The short version of the argument is that allowing a lot of character customizationa ) Ca n't fully achieve the goal of having the player " become " the character , as the gameplay and narrative of the game provide their own limits ; b ) Does n't really solve the problem of the interaction of race and video games ; andc ) Limits the games , because it prevents them from using meaningful character details as driving the narrative , gutting it.This misses the point to a great deal ; For ( a ) All creation has limits but that does n't make it valueless or not an act of creation ; even if the limits are that born within a game system.For ( b ) it 's true but character customization was never really aimed at solving the interaction fully.For ( c ) not all details of a character limit the story of a game ( would it really matter if Gordon Freeman was black ?
) and if a game is anything other than a railroad it needs to branch at some point anyway , so the branching of a game in response to character creation ( see Dragon Age 's multiple origin stories ) is not a meaningful limit of narrative.In longer form , his argument is full of holes in general ; he starts off by begging the question , complete with passive-agressive " I 'm going to get modded down for this , but " bullshit : Now , to offend half the blogosphere offhand : For the purpose of this article , we will consider avatar customization a convenient narrative cop-out .
We shall also assume that no mechanisms are in place stopping developers from writing and designing heterogeneous yet fully structured , narrative-based computer games with carefully constructed and immutable , unchangeable characters.So he assumes the practice he 's complaining about is the only thing stopping him from getting the games he wants ( it is n't , but I can see the assumption as useful for purposes of argument ) and then assumes the practice he disagrees with is valueless ( it is n't ) .
He even admits that in terms of narrative etc he 's dismissing the value with nothing more than the word " seems " : ( Obviously , there are occasions wherein the    tabula rasa    scenario is a fully motivated one , either by its ludic or narrative function , but assuming this to be a default state to be aspired to seems ultimately misguided beyond the MMO .
) As he asserts this without evidence , I 'll dismiss it with little more ( At very least , games in the line of Fallout or ( from what I know about it ) Dragon Age are clear examples in opposition to this ) .He goes on for a while about minorities and gaming , nothing that minorities are underrepresented in gaming , and that the common approach of reading \ % of characters as a measure of this is a bit of tokenism and misses the point    that the experience of growing up white and growing up , say , Latino are different and this affects a lot of things in subtle ways , and just changing a character 's skin is n't going to reflect these ways .
And that making this irrelevant works against both the white and Latino 's experience .
This is true as far as it goes , but it really does n't have much to do with character creation : a ) I 've always thought the \ % studies as a quick and dirty measure of how much of the creators are working to take those experiences into account .
If the numbers are heavily lopsided , then it 's a sign the probably are n't ; if the numbers are more even there 's at least a chance they are.b ) More importantly , the ability of a trait to help someone connect with a character is n't necessarily connected with the importance in the game world .
To paraphrase from a shadowrun sourcebook ,    Who cares about the color of someone 's skin when the guy over there is a rock with hands as big as your head ?    This is even true for characters set initially in our on world ( c.f .
Gordon Freeman ) .
So the race of the character could end up being meaningful for the player and not meaningful for the game world.c ) Even where it is relevant , it can be branched ; this can help the narrative in a way that it does n't work with books .
Flipping back to Dragon Age    the plan for the game is you select one of several    origin stories    , which set the first few hours of the game and have impacts through the rest of the game .
This allows them to examine more of the game world    improving the narrative/story of the game as a whole rather than weakening it - while giving freedom in character creation .
While it does it in context of class and species rather than ( say ) race and gender , which are rendered irrelevant , there 's no reason it could n't be used for the latter.Then he gets tripped up on language for a bit : Yes , the act does resemble that of    creation    in that players apply their imagination to a restricted set of tools , much in the same way one would other forms of art , but a process of    birthing    , like Alexander calls it , it is not.After all , the word    birth    is far removed from the tangible actuality of the interfaces to which our creativity is ultimately tied toI dunno , people get pretty creative with the interfaces used in birth .
( Well , people that are n't slashdot readers .
) But I 'm really not sure what he 's getting at here ; yes , it is a restricted set of tools for creation .
And ? It seems like he 's trying to confuse himself with terminology while knowing what people actually mean by it : In video games , then , we do become one with our character    at least as much as acting out a role in a play allows us to vicariously experience being an another being .
Well , yes , but this does n't actually lead to the rest of his point : audiences often demand protagonists to whom they can relate , whom they admire , to motivate gameplay and enhance immersion    so isn    t the best way to    get it right    to allow players to build their own.For designers , writers and ultimately companies to seek to    get it right    in this manner , from my narrative-obsessed standpoint , is what I mean by avataritis..This is the dualistic fallacy of the avatar : Customization may seem to offer developers and players alike a chance to mask , to separate an avatar from its perfunctory position and move it closer to the player , bridging the gap between various players of different origins , but due to the avatar    s function as a literary element , a character never does become perfectly liberated from its original environs and place of creation.The idea that an idea ( character creation ) allowing a character to move towards the player rather than the creator is fallacious because it 's not perfect is absurd .
That something is n't imperfect does n't mean it 's valueless ; customization does not always weaken the narrative ( as I noted above ) and even when it does the tradeoff may be worth it.He goes on to say we can connect with people that are n't like us , which no-one has ever disagreed with .
Skipping past the first 2 summary points , a note on the third : Third , I sought to explain how offering players avatar-based customization can lead to beautification , stereotyping , archetyping and the ongoing perpetration of an established discourse of the avatar that allows companies to purport and rely on the assumption that players ( or viewers ) only want to relate , desire , admire or be themselves .
So I 'm an elf , robot , alien , human , and talking cow-person of various genders ?
Alternately , avatar customization can also be used to put yourself in someone else 's shoes and experience them , or just mess around with different characters in general ; while avatars allow us to make characters like ourselves they do n't require it .
And often they lead away from it ; if customization and the game are sufficiently robust , they can even encourage it , by playing as multiple characters .
If you 're replaying a game on a different path , you may as well make a different character as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The short version of the argument is that allowing a lot of character customizationa) Can't fully achieve the goal of having the player "become" the character, as the gameplay and narrative of the game provide their own limits;b) Doesn't really solve the problem of the interaction of race and video games; andc) Limits the games, because it prevents them from using meaningful character details as driving the narrative, gutting it.This misses the point to a great deal;For (a) All creation has limits but that doesn't make it valueless or not an act of creation; even if the limits are that born within a game system.For (b) it's true but character customization was never really aimed at solving the interaction fully.For (c) not all details of a character limit the story of a game (would it really matter if Gordon Freeman was black?
) and if a game is anything other than a railroad it needs to branch at some point anyway, so the branching of a game in response to character creation (see Dragon Age's multiple origin stories) is not a meaningful limit of narrative.In longer form, his argument is full of holes in general; he starts off by begging the question, complete with passive-agressive "I'm going to get modded down for this, but" bullshit:Now, to offend half the blogosphere offhand: For the purpose of this article, we will consider avatar customization a convenient narrative cop-out.
We shall also assume that no mechanisms are in place stopping developers from writing and designing heterogeneous yet fully structured, narrative-based computer games with carefully constructed and immutable, unchangeable characters.So he assumes the practice he's complaining about is the only thing stopping him from getting the games he wants (it isn't, but I can see the assumption as useful for purposes of argument) and then assumes the practice he disagrees with is valueless (it isn't).
He even admits that in terms of narrative etc he's dismissing the value with nothing more than the word "seems":(Obviously, there are occasions wherein the “tabula rasa” scenario is a fully motivated one, either by its ludic or narrative function, but assuming this to be a default state to be aspired to seems ultimately misguided beyond the MMO.
)As he asserts this without evidence, I'll dismiss it with little more (At very least, games in the line of Fallout or (from what I know about it) Dragon Age are clear examples in opposition to this).He goes on for a while about minorities and gaming, nothing that minorities are underrepresented in gaming, and that the common approach of reading \% of characters as a measure of this is a bit of tokenism and misses the point – that the experience of growing up white and growing up, say, Latino are different and this affects a lot of things in subtle ways, and just changing a character's skin isn't going to reflect these ways.
And that making this irrelevant works against both the white and Latino's experience.
This is true as far as it goes, but it really doesn't have much to do with character creation:a) I've always thought the \% studies as a quick and dirty measure of how much of the creators are working to take those experiences into account.
If the numbers are heavily lopsided, then it's a sign the probably aren't; if the numbers are more even there's at least a chance they are.b) More importantly, the ability of a trait to help someone connect with a character isn't necessarily connected with the importance in the game world.
To paraphrase from a shadowrun sourcebook, “Who cares about the color of someone's skin when the guy over there is a rock with hands as big as your head?”  This is even true for characters set initially in our on world (c.f.
Gordon Freeman).
So the race of the character could end up being meaningful for the player and not meaningful for the game world.c) Even where it is relevant, it can be branched; this can help the narrative in a way that it doesn't work with books.
Flipping back to Dragon Age – the plan for the game is you select one of several “origin stories”, which set the first few hours of the game and have impacts through the rest of the game.
This allows them to examine more of the game world – improving the narrative/story of the game as a whole rather than weakening it - while giving freedom in character creation.
While it does it in context of class and species rather than (say) race and gender, which are rendered irrelevant, there's no reason it couldn't be used for the latter.Then he gets tripped up on language for a bit:Yes, the act does resemble that of “creation” in that players apply their imagination to a restricted set of tools, much in the same way one would other forms of art, but a process of “birthing”, like Alexander calls it, it is not.After all, the word “birth” is far removed from the tangible actuality of the interfaces to which our creativity is ultimately tied toI dunno, people get pretty creative with the interfaces used in birth.
(Well, people that aren't slashdot readers.
)  But I'm really not sure what he's getting at here; yes, it is a restricted set of tools for creation.
And?  It seems like he's trying to confuse himself with terminology while knowing what people actually mean by it:In video games, then, we do become one with our character – at least as much as acting out a role in a play allows us to vicariously experience being an another being.
Well, yes, but this doesn't actually lead to the rest of his point:audiences often demand protagonists to whom they can relate, whom they admire, to motivate gameplay and enhance immersion – so isn’t the best way to “get it right” to allow players to build their own.For designers, writers and ultimately companies to seek to “get it right” in this manner, from my narrative-obsessed standpoint, is what I mean by avataritis..This is the dualistic fallacy of the avatar: Customization may seem to offer developers and players alike a chance to mask, to separate an avatar from its perfunctory position and move it closer to the player, bridging the gap between various players of different origins, but due to the avatar’s function as a literary element, a character never does become perfectly liberated from its original environs and place of creation.The idea that an idea (character creation) allowing a character to move towards the player rather than the creator is fallacious because it's not perfect is absurd.
That something isn't imperfect doesn't mean it's valueless; customization does not always weaken the narrative (as I noted above) and even when it does the tradeoff may be worth it.He goes on to say we can connect with people that aren't like us, which no-one has ever disagreed with.
Skipping past the first 2 summary points, a note on the third:Third, I sought to explain how offering players avatar-based customization can lead to beautification, stereotyping, archetyping and the ongoing perpetration of an established discourse of the avatar that allows companies to purport and rely on the assumption that players (or viewers) only want to relate, desire, admire or be themselves.
So I'm an elf, robot, alien, human, and talking cow-person of various genders?
Alternately, avatar customization can also be used to put yourself in someone else's shoes and experience them, or just mess around with different characters in general; while avatars allow us to make characters like ourselves they don't require it.
And often they lead away from it; if customization and the game are sufficiently robust, they can even encourage it, by playing as multiple characters.
If you're replaying a game on a different path, you may as well make a different character as well.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29778141</id>
	<title>Re:Summary of article</title>
	<author>Dr. Impossible</author>
	<datestamp>1255800300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Despite this, I'm not sure allowing character customization is a good idea. First, there is the familiar tradeoff of depth vs breadth, so customization leads to shallower stories</p></div></blockquote><p>This makes even less sense than the article's summary.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Despite this , I 'm not sure allowing character customization is a good idea .
First , there is the familiar tradeoff of depth vs breadth , so customization leads to shallower storiesThis makes even less sense than the article 's summary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Despite this, I'm not sure allowing character customization is a good idea.
First, there is the familiar tradeoff of depth vs breadth, so customization leads to shallower storiesThis makes even less sense than the article's summary.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777253</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777553</id>
	<title>Re:Standardize Avatars?</title>
	<author>Sporkinum</author>
	<datestamp>1255794180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't want a damned avatar for Xbox360, but the bastards ground me down with the annoying pop-ups everytime you'd turn the damn thing on. I ended up making the most non-descript avatar I could.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't want a damned avatar for Xbox360 , but the bastards ground me down with the annoying pop-ups everytime you 'd turn the damn thing on .
I ended up making the most non-descript avatar I could .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't want a damned avatar for Xbox360, but the bastards ground me down with the annoying pop-ups everytime you'd turn the damn thing on.
I ended up making the most non-descript avatar I could.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776715</id>
	<title>"The Slowdown" IS Martyn Zachary</title>
	<author>RobotRunAmok</author>
	<datestamp>1255784580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and after reading that summary -- a good chunk of it anyway, the coherent, least pretentious parts -- I'll be happy never to see anything about the site or him posted here again.  This is the stuff which gives geeks and nerds a bad name, even among geeks and nerds.  Christ Almighty, makes me want to go outside and toss around a football while tivo'ing American Idol.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and after reading that summary -- a good chunk of it anyway , the coherent , least pretentious parts -- I 'll be happy never to see anything about the site or him posted here again .
This is the stuff which gives geeks and nerds a bad name , even among geeks and nerds .
Christ Almighty , makes me want to go outside and toss around a football while tivo'ing American Idol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and after reading that summary -- a good chunk of it anyway, the coherent, least pretentious parts -- I'll be happy never to see anything about the site or him posted here again.
This is the stuff which gives geeks and nerds a bad name, even among geeks and nerds.
Christ Almighty, makes me want to go outside and toss around a football while tivo'ing American Idol.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219</id>
	<title>Is it me or was the summary a pain to read?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255791300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got the feeling this guy is in marketing. There was something being said, but it was lost in all the frills.
</p><p>The english language is not a wedding gown, it doesn't get better the more lace you add. It is instead a thong. Less is more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got the feeling this guy is in marketing .
There was something being said , but it was lost in all the frills .
The english language is not a wedding gown , it does n't get better the more lace you add .
It is instead a thong .
Less is more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got the feeling this guy is in marketing.
There was something being said, but it was lost in all the frills.
The english language is not a wedding gown, it doesn't get better the more lace you add.
It is instead a thong.
Less is more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29779101</id>
	<title>Re:Is it me or was the summary a pain to read?</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1255809240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's more in the tradition of literary criticism or comparative literature. For whatever reason, those people feel the harder to  understand that writing is, the better it is. Simple writing is just for when you want to communicate with the masses. Seriously, I've had that conversation with them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's more in the tradition of literary criticism or comparative literature .
For whatever reason , those people feel the harder to understand that writing is , the better it is .
Simple writing is just for when you want to communicate with the masses .
Seriously , I 've had that conversation with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's more in the tradition of literary criticism or comparative literature.
For whatever reason, those people feel the harder to  understand that writing is, the better it is.
Simple writing is just for when you want to communicate with the masses.
Seriously, I've had that conversation with them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781639</id>
	<title>Re:Is it me or was the summary a pain to read?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255795440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The asininity of your argument is glaring in your metaphor:</p><p>Does your wife wear nothing but a thong in front of your family and friends in the wedding of your dreams?</p><p>Plus, given the number of thongs with lace on them these days, I'd say you're full of shit and you shouldn't make snappy catch-all phrases just because you're too fucking embarrassed that something didn't come as easy to you as it might normally.</p><p>Just as an aside, have a Terry Pratchett quote:</p><p>"As for The Mapp... I suspect it'll never get a US publication. It seemed to frighten US publishers. They don't seem to understand it.<br>That seems to point up a significant difference between Europeans and Americans:<br>A European says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with me? An American says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with him?<br>I make no suggestion that one side or other is right, but observation over many years leads me to believe it is true."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The asininity of your argument is glaring in your metaphor : Does your wife wear nothing but a thong in front of your family and friends in the wedding of your dreams ? Plus , given the number of thongs with lace on them these days , I 'd say you 're full of shit and you should n't make snappy catch-all phrases just because you 're too fucking embarrassed that something did n't come as easy to you as it might normally.Just as an aside , have a Terry Pratchett quote : " As for The Mapp... I suspect it 'll never get a US publication .
It seemed to frighten US publishers .
They do n't seem to understand it.That seems to point up a significant difference between Europeans and Americans : A European says : I ca n't understand this , what 's wrong with me ?
An American says : I ca n't understand this , what 's wrong with him ? I make no suggestion that one side or other is right , but observation over many years leads me to believe it is true .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The asininity of your argument is glaring in your metaphor:Does your wife wear nothing but a thong in front of your family and friends in the wedding of your dreams?Plus, given the number of thongs with lace on them these days, I'd say you're full of shit and you shouldn't make snappy catch-all phrases just because you're too fucking embarrassed that something didn't come as easy to you as it might normally.Just as an aside, have a Terry Pratchett quote:"As for The Mapp... I suspect it'll never get a US publication.
It seemed to frighten US publishers.
They don't seem to understand it.That seems to point up a significant difference between Europeans and Americans:A European says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with me?
An American says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with him?I make no suggestion that one side or other is right, but observation over many years leads me to believe it is true.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29780129</id>
	<title>Re:Skinning</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1255776060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>JWZ is a software engineer writing about usability. He's not writing about video game characters.</p><p>Do you seriously think those two things are equivalent?</p><p><i>As far as I'm concerned, any time spent customizing a character and not playing the game is wasted.</i></p><p>And I think crafting in MMOs is boring, and thus wasted effort on the part of the developer. But guess what? I'm not the *only* person who plays the game. Ditto with the alchemy system in Oblivion, but I'm sure there are thousands of gamers who really appreciated it.</p><p>This is going to blow your brain, but Champions Online released their character creator as a demo, and I spent ages doing nothing but customizing characters, and enjoying it.</p><p>So in short, you're wrong and also an ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>JWZ is a software engineer writing about usability .
He 's not writing about video game characters.Do you seriously think those two things are equivalent ? As far as I 'm concerned , any time spent customizing a character and not playing the game is wasted.And I think crafting in MMOs is boring , and thus wasted effort on the part of the developer .
But guess what ?
I 'm not the * only * person who plays the game .
Ditto with the alchemy system in Oblivion , but I 'm sure there are thousands of gamers who really appreciated it.This is going to blow your brain , but Champions Online released their character creator as a demo , and I spent ages doing nothing but customizing characters , and enjoying it.So in short , you 're wrong and also an ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>JWZ is a software engineer writing about usability.
He's not writing about video game characters.Do you seriously think those two things are equivalent?As far as I'm concerned, any time spent customizing a character and not playing the game is wasted.And I think crafting in MMOs is boring, and thus wasted effort on the part of the developer.
But guess what?
I'm not the *only* person who plays the game.
Ditto with the alchemy system in Oblivion, but I'm sure there are thousands of gamers who really appreciated it.This is going to blow your brain, but Champions Online released their character creator as a demo, and I spent ages doing nothing but customizing characters, and enjoying it.So in short, you're wrong and also an ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776713</id>
	<title>Best customization I've found is Champions Online</title>
	<author>CrazyJim1</author>
	<datestamp>1255784340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>One reason I purchased CO was to see what people make with the Avatar customization.  It breaks what we think is standard for MMOS.  You think if you find armor, your avatar should change, but they don't do it this way.  They let you pick what your avatar looks like and you stick with it.  It makes sense anyway considering most games have an OP Armor set that everyone wears and looks the same end game.  I give them points for thinking outside the box.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One reason I purchased CO was to see what people make with the Avatar customization .
It breaks what we think is standard for MMOS .
You think if you find armor , your avatar should change , but they do n't do it this way .
They let you pick what your avatar looks like and you stick with it .
It makes sense anyway considering most games have an OP Armor set that everyone wears and looks the same end game .
I give them points for thinking outside the box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One reason I purchased CO was to see what people make with the Avatar customization.
It breaks what we think is standard for MMOS.
You think if you find armor, your avatar should change, but they don't do it this way.
They let you pick what your avatar looks like and you stick with it.
It makes sense anyway considering most games have an OP Armor set that everyone wears and looks the same end game.
I give them points for thinking outside the box.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781157</id>
	<title>Re:Is it me or was the summary a pain to read?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255787760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clearly if ever he read Strunk and White, it didn't take. "Omit needless words!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearly if ever he read Strunk and White , it did n't take .
" Omit needless words !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearly if ever he read Strunk and White, it didn't take.
"Omit needless words!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776577</id>
	<title>OP can't get a date.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255781040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good Grid! Somebody has WAAAAAY too much time on their hands.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good Grid !
Somebody has WAAAAAY too much time on their hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good Grid!
Somebody has WAAAAAY too much time on their hands.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777253</id>
	<title>Summary of article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255791600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a comp lit major so I'm wordy and like to argue about other people's words mean and even my own.  I'm concerned about racial/gender stereotyping like all comp lit majors.</p><p>Despite this, I'm not sure allowing character customization is a good idea.  First, there is the familiar tradeoff of depth vs breadth, so customization leads to shallower stories.  Second, customization is a cop-out in the war against stereotyping.  It feels like I can't call a game racist if I can choose my race, but this isn't very satisfying for me---I wish there were more games like Resident Evil 5.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a comp lit major so I 'm wordy and like to argue about other people 's words mean and even my own .
I 'm concerned about racial/gender stereotyping like all comp lit majors.Despite this , I 'm not sure allowing character customization is a good idea .
First , there is the familiar tradeoff of depth vs breadth , so customization leads to shallower stories .
Second , customization is a cop-out in the war against stereotyping .
It feels like I ca n't call a game racist if I can choose my race , but this is n't very satisfying for me---I wish there were more games like Resident Evil 5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a comp lit major so I'm wordy and like to argue about other people's words mean and even my own.
I'm concerned about racial/gender stereotyping like all comp lit majors.Despite this, I'm not sure allowing character customization is a good idea.
First, there is the familiar tradeoff of depth vs breadth, so customization leads to shallower stories.
Second, customization is a cop-out in the war against stereotyping.
It feels like I can't call a game racist if I can choose my race, but this isn't very satisfying for me---I wish there were more games like Resident Evil 5.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777659</id>
	<title>Cost</title>
	<author>Spazmania</author>
	<datestamp>1255795260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>No mechanisms are in place stopping developers from writing and designing heterogeneous yet fully structured, narrative-based computer games with carefully constructed and immutable, unchangeable characters</em></p><p>The mechanism in place is called a "cash register." Stories with immutable characters are worth $7 to $20 whether it's a movie in the theater or a book at the store.</p><p>For me to cough up $50, the story must adapt to me. Starting with the characters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No mechanisms are in place stopping developers from writing and designing heterogeneous yet fully structured , narrative-based computer games with carefully constructed and immutable , unchangeable charactersThe mechanism in place is called a " cash register .
" Stories with immutable characters are worth $ 7 to $ 20 whether it 's a movie in the theater or a book at the store.For me to cough up $ 50 , the story must adapt to me .
Starting with the characters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No mechanisms are in place stopping developers from writing and designing heterogeneous yet fully structured, narrative-based computer games with carefully constructed and immutable, unchangeable charactersThe mechanism in place is called a "cash register.
" Stories with immutable characters are worth $7 to $20 whether it's a movie in the theater or a book at the store.For me to cough up $50, the story must adapt to me.
Starting with the characters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776607</id>
	<title>ok..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255781820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same fellow that write EULAs?</p><p>It's a bad article due to linguistic elephantiasis. Too much words, too little content.</p><p>Or like Monthy Python says: "Get on with it!".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same fellow that write EULAs ? It 's a bad article due to linguistic elephantiasis .
Too much words , too little content.Or like Monthy Python says : " Get on with it !
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same fellow that write EULAs?It's a bad article due to linguistic elephantiasis.
Too much words, too little content.Or like Monthy Python says: "Get on with it!
".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777195</id>
	<title>"Very unique"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255791180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, this is not a very unique dilemma.  It's only a little bit unique.  I've seen many dilemmas which were much more unique than this one.</p><p>In fact, on a scale of 1 to 1, where 1 is only a little bit unique, and 1 is completely unique, I would say this particular dilemma rates only a 1.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , this is not a very unique dilemma .
It 's only a little bit unique .
I 've seen many dilemmas which were much more unique than this one.In fact , on a scale of 1 to 1 , where 1 is only a little bit unique , and 1 is completely unique , I would say this particular dilemma rates only a 1 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, this is not a very unique dilemma.
It's only a little bit unique.
I've seen many dilemmas which were much more unique than this one.In fact, on a scale of 1 to 1, where 1 is only a little bit unique, and 1 is completely unique, I would say this particular dilemma rates only a 1.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777925</id>
	<title>No, it's not just you.</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1255798020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was reminded of Richard Feynman's story about how he couldn't make head nor tail of what his literature and philosophy professors were writing about, so he wrote about what he wanted to, dressed it up with some of the jargon, and got A and B+ on his papers anyway. There's no content there, it's all about making the psychobabble sound right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was reminded of Richard Feynman 's story about how he could n't make head nor tail of what his literature and philosophy professors were writing about , so he wrote about what he wanted to , dressed it up with some of the jargon , and got A and B + on his papers anyway .
There 's no content there , it 's all about making the psychobabble sound right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was reminded of Richard Feynman's story about how he couldn't make head nor tail of what his literature and philosophy professors were writing about, so he wrote about what he wanted to, dressed it up with some of the jargon, and got A and B+ on his papers anyway.
There's no content there, it's all about making the psychobabble sound right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777415</id>
	<title>It is written in academition... let me translate:</title>
	<author>Saysys</author>
	<datestamp>1255792980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Some people you don't care about are saying that character customization is used to keep from having to write story, we don't HAVE to have customization. Some gender studies people are looking at video games. Relate-ability and understandability are two different words! Game markets sell you the LIE. Stories can't and won't be replaced with customizable avatars and content."<br> <br>
Even from an academic paper standpoint this is a bad abstract/introduction. An abstract should say what the objective of the paper is, why that objective is important, to whom the objective is important, when the research does and does not apply and what the findings are... this paper = fail <br> <br>
from a human stand point.. The re-defining of words to mean something that no one else understands is the stupidity of academia. The more I read about this the more I believe this guy <a href="http://timecube.com/" title="timecube.com" rel="nofollow">time cube</a> [timecube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Some people you do n't care about are saying that character customization is used to keep from having to write story , we do n't HAVE to have customization .
Some gender studies people are looking at video games .
Relate-ability and understandability are two different words !
Game markets sell you the LIE .
Stories ca n't and wo n't be replaced with customizable avatars and content .
" Even from an academic paper standpoint this is a bad abstract/introduction .
An abstract should say what the objective of the paper is , why that objective is important , to whom the objective is important , when the research does and does not apply and what the findings are... this paper = fail from a human stand point.. The re-defining of words to mean something that no one else understands is the stupidity of academia .
The more I read about this the more I believe this guy time cube [ timecube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Some people you don't care about are saying that character customization is used to keep from having to write story, we don't HAVE to have customization.
Some gender studies people are looking at video games.
Relate-ability and understandability are two different words!
Game markets sell you the LIE.
Stories can't and won't be replaced with customizable avatars and content.
" 
Even from an academic paper standpoint this is a bad abstract/introduction.
An abstract should say what the objective of the paper is, why that objective is important, to whom the objective is important, when the research does and does not apply and what the findings are... this paper = fail  
from a human stand point.. The re-defining of words to mean something that no one else understands is the stupidity of academia.
The more I read about this the more I believe this guy time cube [timecube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776969</id>
	<title>Re:I've read physics papers by business majors...</title>
	<author>Chemisor</author>
	<datestamp>1255789380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4. You make a naked hot girl to wander the wasteland and fight supermutants with her bare hands. Because it's no fun to spend hours upon hours staring at some guys ugly butt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4 .
You make a naked hot girl to wander the wasteland and fight supermutants with her bare hands .
Because it 's no fun to spend hours upon hours staring at some guys ugly butt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4.
You make a naked hot girl to wander the wasteland and fight supermutants with her bare hands.
Because it's no fun to spend hours upon hours staring at some guys ugly butt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777527</id>
	<title>Re:Summary reads like a mess.</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1255793880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please. Call me Larry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please .
Call me Larry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please.
Call me Larry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776685</id>
	<title>Tsss...</title>
	<author>Jerry Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1255783920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>And all that time I thought people were going for a funny picture, silly me!</htmltext>
<tokenext>And all that time I thought people were going for a funny picture , silly me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And all that time I thought people were going for a funny picture, silly me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781001</id>
	<title>Re:Best customization I've found is Champions Onli</title>
	<author>Swanktastic</author>
	<datestamp>1255785300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Although the applications are somewhat limited, I really had fun with the concept in some EA Sports games (Tiger Woods in my case) where you could upload a picture of yourself and skin the character.  It was pretty easy and looked mostly like me.  It was a heck of lot easier than spending 3 hours trying to tune an avatar with sliders.  I suppose there's too much opportunity for mischief however for this to make it into MMORPGs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Although the applications are somewhat limited , I really had fun with the concept in some EA Sports games ( Tiger Woods in my case ) where you could upload a picture of yourself and skin the character .
It was pretty easy and looked mostly like me .
It was a heck of lot easier than spending 3 hours trying to tune an avatar with sliders .
I suppose there 's too much opportunity for mischief however for this to make it into MMORPGs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although the applications are somewhat limited, I really had fun with the concept in some EA Sports games (Tiger Woods in my case) where you could upload a picture of yourself and skin the character.
It was pretty easy and looked mostly like me.
It was a heck of lot easier than spending 3 hours trying to tune an avatar with sliders.
I suppose there's too much opportunity for mischief however for this to make it into MMORPGs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29778631</id>
	<title>Re:Standardize Avatars?</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1255804740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can see the advantage of importing a custom avatar. There are certain things, names, and characteristics that I often import into a game anyway. Bundling them together would be an interesting feature. But at the same time, I just don't see a good way to do that without crippling the freedom of the game designers. After all, if they come up with a far better avatar creation system, I might rather just start fresh than import my stuff.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see the advantage of importing a custom avatar .
There are certain things , names , and characteristics that I often import into a game anyway .
Bundling them together would be an interesting feature .
But at the same time , I just do n't see a good way to do that without crippling the freedom of the game designers .
After all , if they come up with a far better avatar creation system , I might rather just start fresh than import my stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see the advantage of importing a custom avatar.
There are certain things, names, and characteristics that I often import into a game anyway.
Bundling them together would be an interesting feature.
But at the same time, I just don't see a good way to do that without crippling the freedom of the game designers.
After all, if they come up with a far better avatar creation system, I might rather just start fresh than import my stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753</id>
	<title>Standardize Avatars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255785420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reading his writing (but ignoring his conclusion), I got wondering why we don't have some sort of standardization for avatars.  All three major consoles now have some sort of system avatar, customizable to various degrees.  These don't always make it into the games you play on them, but even when they do they tend to be very basic avatars, whereas many games have a huge number of options (and combinations thereof.)  Considering how many games are giving us customizable avatars, and the rate with which they are coming to represent us online and in-game, it would seem the next logical step to create a method whereby someone can import a custom set into a game, and then tweak it from that base template, ensuring a mostly heterogeneous style over all the games they play.</p><p>This doesn't mean that developers would be limited by options, nor that they can't do micro-customization.  For instance, a game that offers your character a Fu Man Chu would mark such a beard style as part of the "Small Beard" class/group.  If a game does not offer that style, it chooses the default "Small Beard" style.  Along with this standard, which would incorporate as many customizations as possible (and likely keep updating its database), there could be a set of open-source models based on the standards, which developers could then import into their game, customizing as desired.  This would increase the potential of having a similar character from game to game.</p><p>There are some sequels that read on older games, and thus would likely incorporate customization, but I'm surprised this doesn't seem to be on even on a developer/publisher level--standardizing such a thing would seem, at least to me, to save a lot of time developing, as well as be supportive of return business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading his writing ( but ignoring his conclusion ) , I got wondering why we do n't have some sort of standardization for avatars .
All three major consoles now have some sort of system avatar , customizable to various degrees .
These do n't always make it into the games you play on them , but even when they do they tend to be very basic avatars , whereas many games have a huge number of options ( and combinations thereof .
) Considering how many games are giving us customizable avatars , and the rate with which they are coming to represent us online and in-game , it would seem the next logical step to create a method whereby someone can import a custom set into a game , and then tweak it from that base template , ensuring a mostly heterogeneous style over all the games they play.This does n't mean that developers would be limited by options , nor that they ca n't do micro-customization .
For instance , a game that offers your character a Fu Man Chu would mark such a beard style as part of the " Small Beard " class/group .
If a game does not offer that style , it chooses the default " Small Beard " style .
Along with this standard , which would incorporate as many customizations as possible ( and likely keep updating its database ) , there could be a set of open-source models based on the standards , which developers could then import into their game , customizing as desired .
This would increase the potential of having a similar character from game to game.There are some sequels that read on older games , and thus would likely incorporate customization , but I 'm surprised this does n't seem to be on even on a developer/publisher level--standardizing such a thing would seem , at least to me , to save a lot of time developing , as well as be supportive of return business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading his writing (but ignoring his conclusion), I got wondering why we don't have some sort of standardization for avatars.
All three major consoles now have some sort of system avatar, customizable to various degrees.
These don't always make it into the games you play on them, but even when they do they tend to be very basic avatars, whereas many games have a huge number of options (and combinations thereof.
)  Considering how many games are giving us customizable avatars, and the rate with which they are coming to represent us online and in-game, it would seem the next logical step to create a method whereby someone can import a custom set into a game, and then tweak it from that base template, ensuring a mostly heterogeneous style over all the games they play.This doesn't mean that developers would be limited by options, nor that they can't do micro-customization.
For instance, a game that offers your character a Fu Man Chu would mark such a beard style as part of the "Small Beard" class/group.
If a game does not offer that style, it chooses the default "Small Beard" style.
Along with this standard, which would incorporate as many customizations as possible (and likely keep updating its database), there could be a set of open-source models based on the standards, which developers could then import into their game, customizing as desired.
This would increase the potential of having a similar character from game to game.There are some sequels that read on older games, and thus would likely incorporate customization, but I'm surprised this doesn't seem to be on even on a developer/publisher level--standardizing such a thing would seem, at least to me, to save a lot of time developing, as well as be supportive of return business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683</id>
	<title>I've read physics papers by business majors...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255783920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that made more sense.</p><p>1. You make a character look like you, so you can feel like 'YOU' are part of the story.<br>2. You make a character like you wish you were, to make 'YOU' feel like some sort of hero (or anti-hero)<br>3. You make a character unlike yourself and not like you wish you were to give yourself a different perspective and to act out a roll.</p><p>If the characters look (color, shape, accent, etc) has no direct bearing on the story then it's just window dressing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that made more sense.1 .
You make a character look like you , so you can feel like 'YOU ' are part of the story.2 .
You make a character like you wish you were , to make 'YOU ' feel like some sort of hero ( or anti-hero ) 3 .
You make a character unlike yourself and not like you wish you were to give yourself a different perspective and to act out a roll.If the characters look ( color , shape , accent , etc ) has no direct bearing on the story then it 's just window dressing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that made more sense.1.
You make a character look like you, so you can feel like 'YOU' are part of the story.2.
You make a character like you wish you were, to make 'YOU' feel like some sort of hero (or anti-hero)3.
You make a character unlike yourself and not like you wish you were to give yourself a different perspective and to act out a roll.If the characters look (color, shape, accent, etc) has no direct bearing on the story then it's just window dressing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781037</id>
	<title>Re:"The Slowdown" IS Martyn Zachary</title>
	<author>GradiusCVK</author>
	<datestamp>1255785900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously.<br>
Gayest. Article. Evar.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
Gayest. Article .
Evar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
Gayest. Article.
Evar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29794521</id>
	<title>OK...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255968720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I enjoy character customization.  It's actually a selling point to me, and I've bought games I otherwise would have passed over because they've had a really robust character creation feature.</p><p>Dissect it all you want.  I enjoy it.  That's good enough for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I enjoy character customization .
It 's actually a selling point to me , and I 've bought games I otherwise would have passed over because they 've had a really robust character creation feature.Dissect it all you want .
I enjoy it .
That 's good enough for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I enjoy character customization.
It's actually a selling point to me, and I've bought games I otherwise would have passed over because they've had a really robust character creation feature.Dissect it all you want.
I enjoy it.
That's good enough for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776723</id>
	<title>What language is this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255784700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can someone please translate the summary into English?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can someone please translate the summary into English ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can someone please translate the summary into English?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776627</id>
	<title>Summary reads like a mess.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255782300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The story also dissects the very act of character creation, subsequently aiming to clarify several semantic distortions related to the terminology utilized in character creation, and in turn breaking apart the concepts of relatability and understandability, wholly differentiating the two"</p><p>Who wrote this? The Architect?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The story also dissects the very act of character creation , subsequently aiming to clarify several semantic distortions related to the terminology utilized in character creation , and in turn breaking apart the concepts of relatability and understandability , wholly differentiating the two " Who wrote this ?
The Architect ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The story also dissects the very act of character creation, subsequently aiming to clarify several semantic distortions related to the terminology utilized in character creation, and in turn breaking apart the concepts of relatability and understandability, wholly differentiating the two"Who wrote this?
The Architect?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776799</id>
	<title>Re:I've read physics papers by business majors...</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1255786500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4. You make a character that fits the role you want to play. Unless you really look like an ogre, that is.</p><p>Also, uncustomizable characters really only go with an uncustomizable story. If you can be anyone from Conan the Barbarian to Conan the Librarian it makes no sense. Most MMORPGs or even RPGs are rather open-ended, you choose your skils and classes and party members and whatnot, even in games like Neverwinter Nights or Oblivion. Having an uncustomizable character is really only good for a linear game like Tales of Monkey Island - you're always Guybrush Threepwood, but it's a comical character in a comical game, it's not supposed to be you. There it works well, but most other places I'd like an avatar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4 .
You make a character that fits the role you want to play .
Unless you really look like an ogre , that is.Also , uncustomizable characters really only go with an uncustomizable story .
If you can be anyone from Conan the Barbarian to Conan the Librarian it makes no sense .
Most MMORPGs or even RPGs are rather open-ended , you choose your skils and classes and party members and whatnot , even in games like Neverwinter Nights or Oblivion .
Having an uncustomizable character is really only good for a linear game like Tales of Monkey Island - you 're always Guybrush Threepwood , but it 's a comical character in a comical game , it 's not supposed to be you .
There it works well , but most other places I 'd like an avatar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4.
You make a character that fits the role you want to play.
Unless you really look like an ogre, that is.Also, uncustomizable characters really only go with an uncustomizable story.
If you can be anyone from Conan the Barbarian to Conan the Librarian it makes no sense.
Most MMORPGs or even RPGs are rather open-ended, you choose your skils and classes and party members and whatnot, even in games like Neverwinter Nights or Oblivion.
Having an uncustomizable character is really only good for a linear game like Tales of Monkey Island - you're always Guybrush Threepwood, but it's a comical character in a comical game, it's not supposed to be you.
There it works well, but most other places I'd like an avatar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777645</id>
	<title>Skinning</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1255795080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Customizable characters are essentially a form of skins.  I wholeheartedly agree with this thought on the subject from <a href="http://www.jwz.org/doc/linuxvideo.html" title="jwz.org">jwz.org</a> [jwz.org]:</p><blockquote><div><p>Makali wrote:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Whenever a programmer thinks, "Hey, skins, what a cool idea", their computer's speakers should create some sort of cock-shaped soundwave and plunge it repeatedly through their skulls.</p><p>I am fully in support of this proposed audio-cock technology.</p></div></blockquote><p>As far as I'm concerned, any time spent customizing a character and not playing the game is wasted.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Customizable characters are essentially a form of skins .
I wholeheartedly agree with this thought on the subject from jwz.org [ jwz.org ] : Makali wrote :             Whenever a programmer thinks , " Hey , skins , what a cool idea " , their computer 's speakers should create some sort of cock-shaped soundwave and plunge it repeatedly through their skulls.I am fully in support of this proposed audio-cock technology.As far as I 'm concerned , any time spent customizing a character and not playing the game is wasted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Customizable characters are essentially a form of skins.
I wholeheartedly agree with this thought on the subject from jwz.org [jwz.org]:Makali wrote:
            Whenever a programmer thinks, "Hey, skins, what a cool idea", their computer's speakers should create some sort of cock-shaped soundwave and plunge it repeatedly through their skulls.I am fully in support of this proposed audio-cock technology.As far as I'm concerned, any time spent customizing a character and not playing the game is wasted.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29780129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777925
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29780073
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29779575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29779101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29778115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29780029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29778631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29778141
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777253
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776627
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776969
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_0610219_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777195
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781037
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776627
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777527
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777415
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777253
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29778141
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781001
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777645
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29780129
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29779295
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776683
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776839
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29780029
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29778115
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776969
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776577
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29776753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29779575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29778631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29780073
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_0610219.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29779101
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29781639
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_0610219.29777925
</commentlist>
</conversation>
