<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_23_0548247</id>
	<title>Are Game Publishers a Necessary Evil, Or Just Necessary?</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1256292480000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An editorial at GameSetWatch examines whether game publishers <a href="http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2009/10/editorial\_are\_publishers\_a\_nec.php">really deserve all the flak they get</a> from gamers and developers alike. While some questionable decisions can certainly be laid at their feet, they're also responsible for making a lot of good game projects happen. Quoting:
<i>"The trouble comes when the money and the creativity appear to be at odds. ... Developers and publishers often have a curious relationship. The best analogy I can think of is that of parent and child. The publisher or parent thinks it knows best, because it's been there before (shipped more games), and because 'it's my money, so you'll live by my rules.' The developer &mdash; or child &mdash; is rebellious, and thinks it has all the answers. In many ways, it does know more than the parent, and is closer to what's innovative, but maybe hasn't figured out how to hone that energy yet."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An editorial at GameSetWatch examines whether game publishers really deserve all the flak they get from gamers and developers alike .
While some questionable decisions can certainly be laid at their feet , they 're also responsible for making a lot of good game projects happen .
Quoting : " The trouble comes when the money and the creativity appear to be at odds .
... Developers and publishers often have a curious relationship .
The best analogy I can think of is that of parent and child .
The publisher or parent thinks it knows best , because it 's been there before ( shipped more games ) , and because 'it 's my money , so you 'll live by my rules .
' The developer    or child    is rebellious , and thinks it has all the answers .
In many ways , it does know more than the parent , and is closer to what 's innovative , but maybe has n't figured out how to hone that energy yet .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An editorial at GameSetWatch examines whether game publishers really deserve all the flak they get from gamers and developers alike.
While some questionable decisions can certainly be laid at their feet, they're also responsible for making a lot of good game projects happen.
Quoting:
"The trouble comes when the money and the creativity appear to be at odds.
... Developers and publishers often have a curious relationship.
The best analogy I can think of is that of parent and child.
The publisher or parent thinks it knows best, because it's been there before (shipped more games), and because 'it's my money, so you'll live by my rules.
' The developer — or child — is rebellious, and thinks it has all the answers.
In many ways, it does know more than the parent, and is closer to what's innovative, but maybe hasn't figured out how to hone that energy yet.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849713</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>yurtinus</author>
	<datestamp>1256328000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>-1 WhatRealityDoYouLiveIn
<br> <br>
People only have so much time to spend playing games, and your game would have to be *ridiculously* good for any broad number folks to pick it up (let alone buy it) on word of mouth alone. Can you think of many games that have gone big without a publisher backing them? They are out there, but they are few and far between, and don't reach near the success of publisher backed releases.
<br> <br>
Word of mouth works for small productions, once any large investment has been made during development, you *have* to advertise. Be that on your own or through a publisher, you still can't rely on people telling their buddies "hey, try this game, bro."</htmltext>
<tokenext>-1 WhatRealityDoYouLiveIn People only have so much time to spend playing games , and your game would have to be * ridiculously * good for any broad number folks to pick it up ( let alone buy it ) on word of mouth alone .
Can you think of many games that have gone big without a publisher backing them ?
They are out there , but they are few and far between , and do n't reach near the success of publisher backed releases .
Word of mouth works for small productions , once any large investment has been made during development , you * have * to advertise .
Be that on your own or through a publisher , you still ca n't rely on people telling their buddies " hey , try this game , bro .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>-1 WhatRealityDoYouLiveIn
 
People only have so much time to spend playing games, and your game would have to be *ridiculously* good for any broad number folks to pick it up (let alone buy it) on word of mouth alone.
Can you think of many games that have gone big without a publisher backing them?
They are out there, but they are few and far between, and don't reach near the success of publisher backed releases.
Word of mouth works for small productions, once any large investment has been made during development, you *have* to advertise.
Be that on your own or through a publisher, you still can't rely on people telling their buddies "hey, try this game, bro.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846033</id>
	<title>Re:Third option</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1256312580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I guess I am showing my bias... but why WOULDN'T the developers know more than the publishers?</p></div></blockquote><p>About developing?  They probably do.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess I am showing my bias... but why WOULD N'T the developers know more than the publishers ? About developing ?
They probably do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess I am showing my bias... but why WOULDN'T the developers know more than the publishers?About developing?
They probably do.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844321</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844793</id>
	<title>Both</title>
	<author>cirby</author>
	<datestamp>1256305200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is now room for both the small, single-person game shop (as long as that person is a programmer, game designer, artist, editor, and publicist) and the major, high-dollar, high-end company (yes, it costs money to create really big games).  That small-game person becomes... the publisher.  On a smaller scale, but the same thing a "game publisher" does.</p><p>If you're good, you can create a one-author game, put it online, and let people download it for some amount of money.  If you want to make money with it, or get more than a few dozen people to buy/play it, you're going to need some sort of promotion.  Which means you either need to hire a promotion group, or farm the game out to someone who will promote it (take out ads, convince reviewers to play it, etc).  You know - a publisher.</p><p>If you put together a team (ten or twelve people), create a hugely successful "big" game, market it, and make a lot of money at it, bad news - YOU'RE the publisher...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is now room for both the small , single-person game shop ( as long as that person is a programmer , game designer , artist , editor , and publicist ) and the major , high-dollar , high-end company ( yes , it costs money to create really big games ) .
That small-game person becomes... the publisher .
On a smaller scale , but the same thing a " game publisher " does.If you 're good , you can create a one-author game , put it online , and let people download it for some amount of money .
If you want to make money with it , or get more than a few dozen people to buy/play it , you 're going to need some sort of promotion .
Which means you either need to hire a promotion group , or farm the game out to someone who will promote it ( take out ads , convince reviewers to play it , etc ) .
You know - a publisher.If you put together a team ( ten or twelve people ) , create a hugely successful " big " game , market it , and make a lot of money at it , bad news - YOU 'RE the publisher.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is now room for both the small, single-person game shop (as long as that person is a programmer, game designer, artist, editor, and publicist) and the major, high-dollar, high-end company (yes, it costs money to create really big games).
That small-game person becomes... the publisher.
On a smaller scale, but the same thing a "game publisher" does.If you're good, you can create a one-author game, put it online, and let people download it for some amount of money.
If you want to make money with it, or get more than a few dozen people to buy/play it, you're going to need some sort of promotion.
Which means you either need to hire a promotion group, or farm the game out to someone who will promote it (take out ads, convince reviewers to play it, etc).
You know - a publisher.If you put together a team (ten or twelve people), create a hugely successful "big" game, market it, and make a lot of money at it, bad news - YOU'RE the publisher...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845433</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1256309520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems like you are doing a lot of work that is not designing games.<br>So Lets say it took you 6 months to make the game.<br>So with PayPal how much do you get dinged for every sale.  How much is the marketing company going to charge you? How much time are you planning to put in making YouTube, developing a nice game site, all the viral marketing.  Sometimes Marketing fails, so that is even more risk on your end.</p><p>For the most part you may get better margins however you may end up better with a publisher, in terms of better living (not having to do everything) and the fact that you may get say $1.00 from a $60.00 box copy. vs. $30.00 per $60.00 box copy. But it could be the difference between millions of sails (A million dollars to you) vs. 10000 sales ($300,000).</p><p>Now the trick it to find the right publisher for you one and make a deal that you feel is fair, and make sure the publisher can do better then you could alone.</p><p>But like all business sometimes it is better to do it yourself (say that $300,000 my be the best your game could do due to a niche status your are filling) or sometimes it is better to get a publisher because a lot of people would like your game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems like you are doing a lot of work that is not designing games.So Lets say it took you 6 months to make the game.So with PayPal how much do you get dinged for every sale .
How much is the marketing company going to charge you ?
How much time are you planning to put in making YouTube , developing a nice game site , all the viral marketing .
Sometimes Marketing fails , so that is even more risk on your end.For the most part you may get better margins however you may end up better with a publisher , in terms of better living ( not having to do everything ) and the fact that you may get say $ 1.00 from a $ 60.00 box copy .
vs. $ 30.00 per $ 60.00 box copy .
But it could be the difference between millions of sails ( A million dollars to you ) vs. 10000 sales ( $ 300,000 ) .Now the trick it to find the right publisher for you one and make a deal that you feel is fair , and make sure the publisher can do better then you could alone.But like all business sometimes it is better to do it yourself ( say that $ 300,000 my be the best your game could do due to a niche status your are filling ) or sometimes it is better to get a publisher because a lot of people would like your game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems like you are doing a lot of work that is not designing games.So Lets say it took you 6 months to make the game.So with PayPal how much do you get dinged for every sale.
How much is the marketing company going to charge you?
How much time are you planning to put in making YouTube, developing a nice game site, all the viral marketing.
Sometimes Marketing fails, so that is even more risk on your end.For the most part you may get better margins however you may end up better with a publisher, in terms of better living (not having to do everything) and the fact that you may get say $1.00 from a $60.00 box copy.
vs. $30.00 per $60.00 box copy.
But it could be the difference between millions of sails (A million dollars to you) vs. 10000 sales ($300,000).Now the trick it to find the right publisher for you one and make a deal that you feel is fair, and make sure the publisher can do better then you could alone.But like all business sometimes it is better to do it yourself (say that $300,000 my be the best your game could do due to a niche status your are filling) or sometimes it is better to get a publisher because a lot of people would like your game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29868875</id>
	<title>Resource providers that is all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256488500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Large game publisher simply provides one thing. Resources as in money for development and marketing. Other then that they dont really contribute anything to the game itself or the quality. I would much rather see an environment where you have independent game developers who have avenues to distribute their games like Steam as an example, and network to connect good developer projects with investment for capital.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Large game publisher simply provides one thing .
Resources as in money for development and marketing .
Other then that they dont really contribute anything to the game itself or the quality .
I would much rather see an environment where you have independent game developers who have avenues to distribute their games like Steam as an example , and network to connect good developer projects with investment for capital .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Large game publisher simply provides one thing.
Resources as in money for development and marketing.
Other then that they dont really contribute anything to the game itself or the quality.
I would much rather see an environment where you have independent game developers who have avenues to distribute their games like Steam as an example, and network to connect good developer projects with investment for capital.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997</id>
	<title>Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>In a way, you may or may not need a publisher depending on what you're developing.

A lot of the generic titles that the "industry" keeps pumping out require a publisher for marketing such a mediocre game. But then you get the unconventional games whose development is actually hampered by having a publisher breathe down your neck and make games easier for the general public.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a way , you may or may not need a publisher depending on what you 're developing .
A lot of the generic titles that the " industry " keeps pumping out require a publisher for marketing such a mediocre game .
But then you get the unconventional games whose development is actually hampered by having a publisher breathe down your neck and make games easier for the general public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a way, you may or may not need a publisher depending on what you're developing.
A lot of the generic titles that the "industry" keeps pumping out require a publisher for marketing such a mediocre game.
But then you get the unconventional games whose development is actually hampered by having a publisher breathe down your neck and make games easier for the general public.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844829</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers</title>
	<author>Targon</author>
	<datestamp>1256305500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A big issue is the costs involved with game development, and the advertising side of it.   You also have to expect that when it comes to books, there ARE pressures placed on authors to release the next book in a series.   Do you REALLY think that the seventh Harry Potter book didn't have the publisher asking for updates and pushing for it to be done so they could print and sell it?</p><p>Now, in the development of computer games, you really have two types of development models.</p><p>The first is when you have an independent developer with its own money that can get the job done from start to finish.   In that case, the publishers only need to do some very basic work when it comes to the product development, like putting in the normal copyright stuff, publisher logos, etc.   In these cases, the publisher only has to do advertising for the product to generate enough hype to properly sell the product.   It should be noted that this CAN cost a lot of money.   TV advertising is VERY VERY VERY expensive, and advertising in movie theaters and such also can be expensive.   The production costs for the advertisements for TV ads as well can not be discounted.   So, how many millions of dollars can they REALLY spend to hype a game before the advertising costs exceed expected revenue?</p><p>Then you have the case where a publisher has to INVEST in the development of a title.   This becomes more essential as the development cost of an all original game with engine takes four to five years, and all the programming, sound, and other development work, plus voice actors(every game has voice acting in it now for the most part), licenses for the software used for in-game cut scenes, etc.   How many millions of dollars does it really take to make a game these days?   How many start-ups can afford the risk of spending $10 million or more for a game that may not sell more than 10000 copies in a worst-case scenario?   With this situation, the publisher DOES have to invest a bit to help the developer get the title out, in the same way that book publishers will give an advance on royalties to an author to help the author make it a full-time investment(rather than writing while working a regular day-job to pay the bills).</p><p>The big thing is when a publisher really tries to hype a given book or product vs. these books that come out that are very good, but that no one has heard of.   You will notice that you don't see books advertised very often, considering how many books are published each year.   That shows the level of investment from the publisher.    And, books have what, 1-4 people who do the writing, vs. how many people are needed for game development.</p><p>So, a better comparison would be the film industry, where you have hundreds, if not thousands of people who contribute to getting a movie out the door.    The thing is, film is a mature industry, so it is easier to see up front and early when a movie will be well done, or if it will be horrible.   You hear from the film industry about movies that get started in production, but then die as well(if you look into it).   You hear about budgets and costs in movie development.   And you hear about the studios running into money issues when they release too many bad or mediocre moves in a year, and they lose money in a given year.    The difference is that movie studios DO have systems in place for how things are done, and people with experience that can be called in to help fix problems with projects that are having problems.</p><p>Now, do you see how generally independent game developers have it a lot harder?    Who do you go to when you run into problems and don't have the expertise in-house to deal with them?   Even companies like EA, which have a lot of expertise don't seem to have management understand how to make use of the talent they have available to them to help the smaller developers gain the experience and expertise needed to stand on their own.</p><p>And of course, game technology is still advancing at an insane rate.   Due to how much better(faster, better quality graphi</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A big issue is the costs involved with game development , and the advertising side of it .
You also have to expect that when it comes to books , there ARE pressures placed on authors to release the next book in a series .
Do you REALLY think that the seventh Harry Potter book did n't have the publisher asking for updates and pushing for it to be done so they could print and sell it ? Now , in the development of computer games , you really have two types of development models.The first is when you have an independent developer with its own money that can get the job done from start to finish .
In that case , the publishers only need to do some very basic work when it comes to the product development , like putting in the normal copyright stuff , publisher logos , etc .
In these cases , the publisher only has to do advertising for the product to generate enough hype to properly sell the product .
It should be noted that this CAN cost a lot of money .
TV advertising is VERY VERY VERY expensive , and advertising in movie theaters and such also can be expensive .
The production costs for the advertisements for TV ads as well can not be discounted .
So , how many millions of dollars can they REALLY spend to hype a game before the advertising costs exceed expected revenue ? Then you have the case where a publisher has to INVEST in the development of a title .
This becomes more essential as the development cost of an all original game with engine takes four to five years , and all the programming , sound , and other development work , plus voice actors ( every game has voice acting in it now for the most part ) , licenses for the software used for in-game cut scenes , etc .
How many millions of dollars does it really take to make a game these days ?
How many start-ups can afford the risk of spending $ 10 million or more for a game that may not sell more than 10000 copies in a worst-case scenario ?
With this situation , the publisher DOES have to invest a bit to help the developer get the title out , in the same way that book publishers will give an advance on royalties to an author to help the author make it a full-time investment ( rather than writing while working a regular day-job to pay the bills ) .The big thing is when a publisher really tries to hype a given book or product vs. these books that come out that are very good , but that no one has heard of .
You will notice that you do n't see books advertised very often , considering how many books are published each year .
That shows the level of investment from the publisher .
And , books have what , 1-4 people who do the writing , vs. how many people are needed for game development.So , a better comparison would be the film industry , where you have hundreds , if not thousands of people who contribute to getting a movie out the door .
The thing is , film is a mature industry , so it is easier to see up front and early when a movie will be well done , or if it will be horrible .
You hear from the film industry about movies that get started in production , but then die as well ( if you look into it ) .
You hear about budgets and costs in movie development .
And you hear about the studios running into money issues when they release too many bad or mediocre moves in a year , and they lose money in a given year .
The difference is that movie studios DO have systems in place for how things are done , and people with experience that can be called in to help fix problems with projects that are having problems.Now , do you see how generally independent game developers have it a lot harder ?
Who do you go to when you run into problems and do n't have the expertise in-house to deal with them ?
Even companies like EA , which have a lot of expertise do n't seem to have management understand how to make use of the talent they have available to them to help the smaller developers gain the experience and expertise needed to stand on their own.And of course , game technology is still advancing at an insane rate .
Due to how much better ( faster , better quality graphi</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A big issue is the costs involved with game development, and the advertising side of it.
You also have to expect that when it comes to books, there ARE pressures placed on authors to release the next book in a series.
Do you REALLY think that the seventh Harry Potter book didn't have the publisher asking for updates and pushing for it to be done so they could print and sell it?Now, in the development of computer games, you really have two types of development models.The first is when you have an independent developer with its own money that can get the job done from start to finish.
In that case, the publishers only need to do some very basic work when it comes to the product development, like putting in the normal copyright stuff, publisher logos, etc.
In these cases, the publisher only has to do advertising for the product to generate enough hype to properly sell the product.
It should be noted that this CAN cost a lot of money.
TV advertising is VERY VERY VERY expensive, and advertising in movie theaters and such also can be expensive.
The production costs for the advertisements for TV ads as well can not be discounted.
So, how many millions of dollars can they REALLY spend to hype a game before the advertising costs exceed expected revenue?Then you have the case where a publisher has to INVEST in the development of a title.
This becomes more essential as the development cost of an all original game with engine takes four to five years, and all the programming, sound, and other development work, plus voice actors(every game has voice acting in it now for the most part), licenses for the software used for in-game cut scenes, etc.
How many millions of dollars does it really take to make a game these days?
How many start-ups can afford the risk of spending $10 million or more for a game that may not sell more than 10000 copies in a worst-case scenario?
With this situation, the publisher DOES have to invest a bit to help the developer get the title out, in the same way that book publishers will give an advance on royalties to an author to help the author make it a full-time investment(rather than writing while working a regular day-job to pay the bills).The big thing is when a publisher really tries to hype a given book or product vs. these books that come out that are very good, but that no one has heard of.
You will notice that you don't see books advertised very often, considering how many books are published each year.
That shows the level of investment from the publisher.
And, books have what, 1-4 people who do the writing, vs. how many people are needed for game development.So, a better comparison would be the film industry, where you have hundreds, if not thousands of people who contribute to getting a movie out the door.
The thing is, film is a mature industry, so it is easier to see up front and early when a movie will be well done, or if it will be horrible.
You hear from the film industry about movies that get started in production, but then die as well(if you look into it).
You hear about budgets and costs in movie development.
And you hear about the studios running into money issues when they release too many bad or mediocre moves in a year, and they lose money in a given year.
The difference is that movie studios DO have systems in place for how things are done, and people with experience that can be called in to help fix problems with projects that are having problems.Now, do you see how generally independent game developers have it a lot harder?
Who do you go to when you run into problems and don't have the expertise in-house to deal with them?
Even companies like EA, which have a lot of expertise don't seem to have management understand how to make use of the talent they have available to them to help the smaller developers gain the experience and expertise needed to stand on their own.And of course, game technology is still advancing at an insane rate.
Due to how much better(faster, better quality graphi</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846267</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers are not the problem</title>
	<author>Talgrath</author>
	<datestamp>1256314020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wrong.  It's not that publishers don't (generally) want new things, it's that the public doesn't.  How many idiots rushed out to buy Halo ODST?  It's the same shit as all the other Halos except now you play cannon fodder, woohoo I'm weaker!  How many people went out and bought the latest Madden?  The new Guitar Hero?  Rock Band?  The only game players that care about new, exciting and different IPs are people that play a lot of games, sometimes called "hardcore" gamers.  The thing is, they also go out and buy the latest Halo, Madden and Guitar Hero; why would the publisher risk money on creative/cool series when the same old shit gives them millions?  How many here have heard of Majesty 2?  Folklore?  Beyond Good and Evil?  How many bought them?  Not many, the publisher is just giving people what they're asking for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrong .
It 's not that publishers do n't ( generally ) want new things , it 's that the public does n't .
How many idiots rushed out to buy Halo ODST ?
It 's the same shit as all the other Halos except now you play cannon fodder , woohoo I 'm weaker !
How many people went out and bought the latest Madden ?
The new Guitar Hero ?
Rock Band ?
The only game players that care about new , exciting and different IPs are people that play a lot of games , sometimes called " hardcore " gamers .
The thing is , they also go out and buy the latest Halo , Madden and Guitar Hero ; why would the publisher risk money on creative/cool series when the same old shit gives them millions ?
How many here have heard of Majesty 2 ?
Folklore ? Beyond Good and Evil ?
How many bought them ?
Not many , the publisher is just giving people what they 're asking for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrong.
It's not that publishers don't (generally) want new things, it's that the public doesn't.
How many idiots rushed out to buy Halo ODST?
It's the same shit as all the other Halos except now you play cannon fodder, woohoo I'm weaker!
How many people went out and bought the latest Madden?
The new Guitar Hero?
Rock Band?
The only game players that care about new, exciting and different IPs are people that play a lot of games, sometimes called "hardcore" gamers.
The thing is, they also go out and buy the latest Halo, Madden and Guitar Hero; why would the publisher risk money on creative/cool series when the same old shit gives them millions?
How many here have heard of Majesty 2?
Folklore?  Beyond Good and Evil?
How many bought them?
Not many, the publisher is just giving people what they're asking for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845699</id>
	<title>Re:Kinda depends</title>
	<author>Aklyon</author>
	<datestamp>1256310960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You can't work on a game forever.</p></div><p> Nethack is 20 years old. there is STILL a Dev Team. think about that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't work on a game forever .
Nethack is 20 years old .
there is STILL a Dev Team .
think about that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't work on a game forever.
Nethack is 20 years old.
there is STILL a Dev Team.
think about that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844805</id>
	<title>Re:Third option</title>
	<author>RKThoadan</author>
	<datestamp>1256305320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most publishers are evil, but there are a few exceptions.  Stardock is probably the most notable, but Valve is pretty good with Steam.  Oddly enough, they run the 2 largest digital distribution platforms.  Blizzard used to be in the generally good category, but I doubt they will stay in that category since they sold out.</p><p>On a side note, if you want unparralleled input on the development of a new game pre-order Elemental from Stardock and jump in on the beta.  It's a multi-phase beta and they are just barely beyond the point where they make sure it doesn't fry your PC.  You can actually join the forums even if you aren't in the beta and contribute that way as well.  There is currently a spirited discussion on how resources will be accounted for.  Right now it ranges from "If you have Iron you can build stuff that requires Iron anywhere" to "Iron from your mines is stored in the city the mine is built in and must be transported to other cities using caravans.  Individual equipment can require specific amounts of Iron."  It's really interesting seeing these decisions be made.</p><p>Link: <a href="http://forums.elementalgame.com/" title="elementalgame.com">http://forums.elementalgame.com/</a> [elementalgame.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most publishers are evil , but there are a few exceptions .
Stardock is probably the most notable , but Valve is pretty good with Steam .
Oddly enough , they run the 2 largest digital distribution platforms .
Blizzard used to be in the generally good category , but I doubt they will stay in that category since they sold out.On a side note , if you want unparralleled input on the development of a new game pre-order Elemental from Stardock and jump in on the beta .
It 's a multi-phase beta and they are just barely beyond the point where they make sure it does n't fry your PC .
You can actually join the forums even if you are n't in the beta and contribute that way as well .
There is currently a spirited discussion on how resources will be accounted for .
Right now it ranges from " If you have Iron you can build stuff that requires Iron anywhere " to " Iron from your mines is stored in the city the mine is built in and must be transported to other cities using caravans .
Individual equipment can require specific amounts of Iron .
" It 's really interesting seeing these decisions be made.Link : http : //forums.elementalgame.com/ [ elementalgame.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most publishers are evil, but there are a few exceptions.
Stardock is probably the most notable, but Valve is pretty good with Steam.
Oddly enough, they run the 2 largest digital distribution platforms.
Blizzard used to be in the generally good category, but I doubt they will stay in that category since they sold out.On a side note, if you want unparralleled input on the development of a new game pre-order Elemental from Stardock and jump in on the beta.
It's a multi-phase beta and they are just barely beyond the point where they make sure it doesn't fry your PC.
You can actually join the forums even if you aren't in the beta and contribute that way as well.
There is currently a spirited discussion on how resources will be accounted for.
Right now it ranges from "If you have Iron you can build stuff that requires Iron anywhere" to "Iron from your mines is stored in the city the mine is built in and must be transported to other cities using caravans.
Individual equipment can require specific amounts of Iron.
"  It's really interesting seeing these decisions be made.Link: http://forums.elementalgame.com/ [elementalgame.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847493</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>TheVelvetFlamebait</author>
	<datestamp>1256320080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, how many games have you produced with publishers, and how many without, and what was the difference in profits? Did you self-publish only later works, perhaps when you were a bit more confident/competent/respected and known? Were all your projects small (i.e. 1-3 person team)? Did you ever have to organise a team of developers? Did you ever pay them for their time up front? Did you do many large-scope games; i.e. ones that you could charge 20-30 dollars or more for?</p><p>It seems to me that for small projects, you can get away with organising everything yourself, if you have a bit of loose money and time to blow around. When the project grows that next step in size, when you and a friend or two isn't enough to finish the game in a reasonable time-frame, and you have to look for paid outside help, publishers start to become very valuable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , how many games have you produced with publishers , and how many without , and what was the difference in profits ?
Did you self-publish only later works , perhaps when you were a bit more confident/competent/respected and known ?
Were all your projects small ( i.e .
1-3 person team ) ?
Did you ever have to organise a team of developers ?
Did you ever pay them for their time up front ?
Did you do many large-scope games ; i.e .
ones that you could charge 20-30 dollars or more for ? It seems to me that for small projects , you can get away with organising everything yourself , if you have a bit of loose money and time to blow around .
When the project grows that next step in size , when you and a friend or two is n't enough to finish the game in a reasonable time-frame , and you have to look for paid outside help , publishers start to become very valuable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, how many games have you produced with publishers, and how many without, and what was the difference in profits?
Did you self-publish only later works, perhaps when you were a bit more confident/competent/respected and known?
Were all your projects small (i.e.
1-3 person team)?
Did you ever have to organise a team of developers?
Did you ever pay them for their time up front?
Did you do many large-scope games; i.e.
ones that you could charge 20-30 dollars or more for?It seems to me that for small projects, you can get away with organising everything yourself, if you have a bit of loose money and time to blow around.
When the project grows that next step in size, when you and a friend or two isn't enough to finish the game in a reasonable time-frame, and you have to look for paid outside help, publishers start to become very valuable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844619</id>
	<title>New Style Air max 90boot man Shoes,CA Bag</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256304060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; www.tntshoes.com</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; We offer kinds of Newest Style Handbag,Brand Handbag,Fashion Handbags,<br>Ladies' Leather Handbag,Replica Handbag--AmmonOnline<br>We ship to worldwide by EMS,TNT,DHL,UPS.<br>We supply you with smooth and fast services, and do dorp shipping.<br>Welcome to visit our factory.<br>Please visit our Website:Http://www.tntshoes.com    or products Album,</p><p>Contact us now, We can send you more details.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; OUR WEBSITE:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; YAHOO:shoppertrade@yahoo.com.cn</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; MSN:shoppertrade@hotmail.com</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; HTTP://www.tntshoes.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  www.tntshoes.com     We offer kinds of Newest Style Handbag,Brand Handbag,Fashion Handbags,Ladies ' Leather Handbag,Replica Handbag--AmmonOnlineWe ship to worldwide by EMS,TNT,DHL,UPS.We supply you with smooth and fast services , and do dorp shipping.Welcome to visit our factory.Please visit our Website : Http : //www.tntshoes.com or products Album,Contact us now , We can send you more details .
      OUR WEBSITE :                                                               YAHOO : shoppertrade @ yahoo.com.cn                                                                 MSN : shoppertrade @ hotmail.com                                                                           HTTP : //www.tntshoes.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  www.tntshoes.com
    We offer kinds of Newest Style Handbag,Brand Handbag,Fashion Handbags,Ladies' Leather Handbag,Replica Handbag--AmmonOnlineWe ship to worldwide by EMS,TNT,DHL,UPS.We supply you with smooth and fast services, and do dorp shipping.Welcome to visit our factory.Please visit our Website:Http://www.tntshoes.com    or products Album,Contact us now, We can send you more details.
      OUR WEBSITE:
                                                              YAHOO:shoppertrade@yahoo.com.cn
                                                                MSN:shoppertrade@hotmail.com
                                                                          HTTP://www.tntshoes.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844023</id>
	<title>Innovative?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ahahaha.</p><p>I'll have whatever the writer is smoking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ahahaha.I 'll have whatever the writer is smoking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ahahaha.I'll have whatever the writer is smoking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844485</id>
	<title>oh my god</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256302740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For christ's sake, game developpers are not f***ing children.<br>Who is the retard who writes stuff like this ?<br>It is insulting for me as a software developper to read stuff like this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For christ 's sake , game developpers are not f * * * ing children.Who is the retard who writes stuff like this ? It is insulting for me as a software developper to read stuff like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For christ's sake, game developpers are not f***ing children.Who is the retard who writes stuff like this ?It is insulting for me as a software developper to read stuff like this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845543</id>
	<title>Re:Kinda depends</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256310120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Stardock decided that since they'd been screwed over by a publisher on GC1, they'd just self publish.</p></div><p>That worked because Stardock develops in a PC-centric genre. But because there isn't a gaming PC in most living rooms yet, developers of games in genres more suited to the living room than the computer desk (e.g. anything multiplayer that isn't an FPS, RTS, or online RPG) need an established publisher to represent the developer to the console makers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stardock decided that since they 'd been screwed over by a publisher on GC1 , they 'd just self publish.That worked because Stardock develops in a PC-centric genre .
But because there is n't a gaming PC in most living rooms yet , developers of games in genres more suited to the living room than the computer desk ( e.g .
anything multiplayer that is n't an FPS , RTS , or online RPG ) need an established publisher to represent the developer to the console makers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stardock decided that since they'd been screwed over by a publisher on GC1, they'd just self publish.That worked because Stardock develops in a PC-centric genre.
But because there isn't a gaming PC in most living rooms yet, developers of games in genres more suited to the living room than the computer desk (e.g.
anything multiplayer that isn't an FPS, RTS, or online RPG) need an established publisher to represent the developer to the console makers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844045</id>
	<title>Publishers a parent?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256297160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If EA was a parent, I think I'd rather be an orphan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If EA was a parent , I think I 'd rather be an orphan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If EA was a parent, I think I'd rather be an orphan.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849013</id>
	<title>Re:Kinda depends</title>
	<author>Backward Z</author>
	<datestamp>1256325300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I worked briefly as in-house game development staff in an entry level position at EA Redwood Shores.  I, for one, using the example of EA, am of the opinion that the publisher would be willing to amputate a game's legs if it meant shipping on time.</p><p>And that's not good for the developer.</p><p>The studio I worked in, formerly just called "EARS - EA Redwood Shores" has been renamed "Visceral Games," but don't let that fool you into thinking it's anything like an independent studio.  It is <i>very</i> EA there.  It is seeped in EA there.  The. Game. Must. Ship.  It really amazed me how late in development they were still tooling with basic mechanics, making drastic changes to the jumping and fighting systems and then finding out it broke the level design...</p><p>I mean, there are a lot of other problems at EA other than "it's the publisher," but the environment that pressure creates IMHO causes the game to suffer terribly.  Everybody there thinks in "features."  They get so compartmentalized in their thinking, the sound guy is ONLY worried about sound, the art guy is ONLY worried about art.  We'd sit around talking about problems with the game design in such a way you'd think the designers were in a different office on the other side of the planet--not just down the hall.  "Maybe they'll get to that, but we're not going to bring it up."</p><p>Also, the publisher brings a lot of other baggage like dependence on focus groups.  We ran focus groups for <i>months</i> and the feedback was taken very seriously.  As a result of the focus groups, every objective point in the game had a blue glowy marker, making the only difference between our game and a Disney ride that in our game, you actually have to push a stick in the direction you want to go.</p><p>But fuck, man!  We're too busy to question it!  They say, "Do this," and we're fucking ON it because it's the difference between four and six hours of sleep tonight.  It amazes me the mental gymnastics that people do to justify the hours demanded of the position, for the sake of what's increasingly becoming more and more of a mediocre game the more time we spend overworking on it...  "It's what you gotta do."  There's this complete tunnel vision of get to the end and everything will be okay.</p><p>I know I'm getting onto a slanderous tangent, but I gotta relate this: when I was in college, the studio head of the department I worked in and ultimately the guy who ended up hiring me came and spoke at an event at my school.  The most palpable, salient statement I remember him saying was: "Once you accept that it really is all about the shareholder, it gets a lot easier."</p><p>It still makes my skin crawl.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The development subsidiaries are just "developers" and just worry about making the game. EA itself then worries about funding, marketing, and so on.</p></div><p>I love this.  I'm picturing a Dr. Strangelove-esque war room where instead of a world map, it's a huge EA logo and there's all these different people sitting around.  Seated in the middle is "The Decider," who hands down deadlines from above.  Around him sits all the different departments, or advisors.  There's marketing, there's funding, there's HR, there's development, there's acquisitions, there's property management, and on and on and on.  The point here is that development is only one seat at this table.  Apt image.  I like.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked briefly as in-house game development staff in an entry level position at EA Redwood Shores .
I , for one , using the example of EA , am of the opinion that the publisher would be willing to amputate a game 's legs if it meant shipping on time.And that 's not good for the developer.The studio I worked in , formerly just called " EARS - EA Redwood Shores " has been renamed " Visceral Games , " but do n't let that fool you into thinking it 's anything like an independent studio .
It is very EA there .
It is seeped in EA there .
The. Game .
Must. Ship .
It really amazed me how late in development they were still tooling with basic mechanics , making drastic changes to the jumping and fighting systems and then finding out it broke the level design...I mean , there are a lot of other problems at EA other than " it 's the publisher , " but the environment that pressure creates IMHO causes the game to suffer terribly .
Everybody there thinks in " features .
" They get so compartmentalized in their thinking , the sound guy is ONLY worried about sound , the art guy is ONLY worried about art .
We 'd sit around talking about problems with the game design in such a way you 'd think the designers were in a different office on the other side of the planet--not just down the hall .
" Maybe they 'll get to that , but we 're not going to bring it up .
" Also , the publisher brings a lot of other baggage like dependence on focus groups .
We ran focus groups for months and the feedback was taken very seriously .
As a result of the focus groups , every objective point in the game had a blue glowy marker , making the only difference between our game and a Disney ride that in our game , you actually have to push a stick in the direction you want to go.But fuck , man !
We 're too busy to question it !
They say , " Do this , " and we 're fucking ON it because it 's the difference between four and six hours of sleep tonight .
It amazes me the mental gymnastics that people do to justify the hours demanded of the position , for the sake of what 's increasingly becoming more and more of a mediocre game the more time we spend overworking on it... " It 's what you got ta do .
" There 's this complete tunnel vision of get to the end and everything will be okay.I know I 'm getting onto a slanderous tangent , but I got ta relate this : when I was in college , the studio head of the department I worked in and ultimately the guy who ended up hiring me came and spoke at an event at my school .
The most palpable , salient statement I remember him saying was : " Once you accept that it really is all about the shareholder , it gets a lot easier .
" It still makes my skin crawl.The development subsidiaries are just " developers " and just worry about making the game .
EA itself then worries about funding , marketing , and so on.I love this .
I 'm picturing a Dr. Strangelove-esque war room where instead of a world map , it 's a huge EA logo and there 's all these different people sitting around .
Seated in the middle is " The Decider , " who hands down deadlines from above .
Around him sits all the different departments , or advisors .
There 's marketing , there 's funding , there 's HR , there 's development , there 's acquisitions , there 's property management , and on and on and on .
The point here is that development is only one seat at this table .
Apt image .
I like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked briefly as in-house game development staff in an entry level position at EA Redwood Shores.
I, for one, using the example of EA, am of the opinion that the publisher would be willing to amputate a game's legs if it meant shipping on time.And that's not good for the developer.The studio I worked in, formerly just called "EARS - EA Redwood Shores" has been renamed "Visceral Games," but don't let that fool you into thinking it's anything like an independent studio.
It is very EA there.
It is seeped in EA there.
The. Game.
Must. Ship.
It really amazed me how late in development they were still tooling with basic mechanics, making drastic changes to the jumping and fighting systems and then finding out it broke the level design...I mean, there are a lot of other problems at EA other than "it's the publisher," but the environment that pressure creates IMHO causes the game to suffer terribly.
Everybody there thinks in "features.
"  They get so compartmentalized in their thinking, the sound guy is ONLY worried about sound, the art guy is ONLY worried about art.
We'd sit around talking about problems with the game design in such a way you'd think the designers were in a different office on the other side of the planet--not just down the hall.
"Maybe they'll get to that, but we're not going to bring it up.
"Also, the publisher brings a lot of other baggage like dependence on focus groups.
We ran focus groups for months and the feedback was taken very seriously.
As a result of the focus groups, every objective point in the game had a blue glowy marker, making the only difference between our game and a Disney ride that in our game, you actually have to push a stick in the direction you want to go.But fuck, man!
We're too busy to question it!
They say, "Do this," and we're fucking ON it because it's the difference between four and six hours of sleep tonight.
It amazes me the mental gymnastics that people do to justify the hours demanded of the position, for the sake of what's increasingly becoming more and more of a mediocre game the more time we spend overworking on it...  "It's what you gotta do.
"  There's this complete tunnel vision of get to the end and everything will be okay.I know I'm getting onto a slanderous tangent, but I gotta relate this: when I was in college, the studio head of the department I worked in and ultimately the guy who ended up hiring me came and spoke at an event at my school.
The most palpable, salient statement I remember him saying was: "Once you accept that it really is all about the shareholder, it gets a lot easier.
"It still makes my skin crawl.The development subsidiaries are just "developers" and just worry about making the game.
EA itself then worries about funding, marketing, and so on.I love this.
I'm picturing a Dr. Strangelove-esque war room where instead of a world map, it's a huge EA logo and there's all these different people sitting around.
Seated in the middle is "The Decider," who hands down deadlines from above.
Around him sits all the different departments, or advisors.
There's marketing, there's funding, there's HR, there's development, there's acquisitions, there's property management, and on and on and on.
The point here is that development is only one seat at this table.
Apt image.
I like.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>poetmatt</author>
	<datestamp>1256308140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are relying on a publisher to get the name out, either a:your game sucks, or b: your game sucks.</p><p>Plenty of people can get their name out without, a good game will get coverage anyway by worth of mouth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are relying on a publisher to get the name out , either a : your game sucks , or b : your game sucks.Plenty of people can get their name out without , a good game will get coverage anyway by worth of mouth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are relying on a publisher to get the name out, either a:your game sucks, or b: your game sucks.Plenty of people can get their name out without, a good game will get coverage anyway by worth of mouth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29848709</id>
	<title>Terrible analogy.  Game publishers = RIAA/MPAA</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1256324340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems like we have a lot of industries are split into creators, publishers, and distributors.  Publishers are a middle-man, and they sometimes help, but sometimes get in the way.  The biggest problems arise when the publisher is completely unnecessary, so they try to block creators and distributors from meeting.  This is the RIAA situation today: Anyone can put their music onto iTunes if they want to, and RIAA companies are becoming marginalized.  So they respond by trying to strangle the industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems like we have a lot of industries are split into creators , publishers , and distributors .
Publishers are a middle-man , and they sometimes help , but sometimes get in the way .
The biggest problems arise when the publisher is completely unnecessary , so they try to block creators and distributors from meeting .
This is the RIAA situation today : Anyone can put their music onto iTunes if they want to , and RIAA companies are becoming marginalized .
So they respond by trying to strangle the industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems like we have a lot of industries are split into creators, publishers, and distributors.
Publishers are a middle-man, and they sometimes help, but sometimes get in the way.
The biggest problems arise when the publisher is completely unnecessary, so they try to block creators and distributors from meeting.
This is the RIAA situation today: Anyone can put their music onto iTunes if they want to, and RIAA companies are becoming marginalized.
So they respond by trying to strangle the industry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844693</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1256304480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>are you naive? Do you really think the Catholic Church went to Michaelangelo and said here is a bunch of money, take all the time you need and just send a message when you're done? and if you never finish it then just keep the money?</p><p>No, they said we need a sculpture for so and so church to be done by this deadline for some event where it will be prensented.</p><p>I work in a part of NYC with a bunch of art galleries. there are bills to pay to keep the business going and that means you always have to have a supply of art to sell. Just like in the old days when Michaelangelo or Da Vinci had to pay their students who worked for them, buy the materials, pay the mortgage, pay the living expenses, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are you naive ?
Do you really think the Catholic Church went to Michaelangelo and said here is a bunch of money , take all the time you need and just send a message when you 're done ?
and if you never finish it then just keep the money ? No , they said we need a sculpture for so and so church to be done by this deadline for some event where it will be prensented.I work in a part of NYC with a bunch of art galleries .
there are bills to pay to keep the business going and that means you always have to have a supply of art to sell .
Just like in the old days when Michaelangelo or Da Vinci had to pay their students who worked for them , buy the materials , pay the mortgage , pay the living expenses , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are you naive?
Do you really think the Catholic Church went to Michaelangelo and said here is a bunch of money, take all the time you need and just send a message when you're done?
and if you never finish it then just keep the money?No, they said we need a sculpture for so and so church to be done by this deadline for some event where it will be prensented.I work in a part of NYC with a bunch of art galleries.
there are bills to pay to keep the business going and that means you always have to have a supply of art to sell.
Just like in the old days when Michaelangelo or Da Vinci had to pay their students who worked for them, buy the materials, pay the mortgage, pay the living expenses, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844513</id>
	<title>Re:They are not necessary, but convenient.</title>
	<author>arth1</author>
	<datestamp>1256302980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since you mentioned trademarks of Dungeons &amp; Dragons(tm)(r)(c)(sm).<br>Judging by the releases over the last few years, as well as the reaction of the actual developers, Wizards of the Coast in bed with "New Atari" isn't any better as games publishers than others.<br>Personally, I think they'd sell tickets to Gary Gygax' grave if they thought it could make them money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since you mentioned trademarks of Dungeons &amp; Dragons ( tm ) ( r ) ( c ) ( sm ) .Judging by the releases over the last few years , as well as the reaction of the actual developers , Wizards of the Coast in bed with " New Atari " is n't any better as games publishers than others.Personally , I think they 'd sell tickets to Gary Gygax ' grave if they thought it could make them money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since you mentioned trademarks of Dungeons &amp; Dragons(tm)(r)(c)(sm).Judging by the releases over the last few years, as well as the reaction of the actual developers, Wizards of the Coast in bed with "New Atari" isn't any better as games publishers than others.Personally, I think they'd sell tickets to Gary Gygax' grave if they thought it could make them money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844241</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256299980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it is because most works of art don't require massive up-front investment and most artists get paid based on what their works actually raised, rather than receiving a fixed sum regardless of the commercial performance of the result (unless they are on a grant, which is not a commercial arrangement). They don't have "publishers" so much as "agents".</p><p>Also, most artists probably earn and cost a lot less than the average game developer. A $40k recoverable advance would allow a novelist to complete a novel at home, but the same amount of money would probably pay for about three months of a single developer once office space, equipment and overheads are factored in - and it wouldn't be recoverable.</p><p>If you could hire a group of developers who were happy to not be paid at all for two years, and who would then receive an amount that could vary from $0 to $riches, and who would supply all the equipment and pay for any technology licensing required themselves, then yes, you can do without publishers. Otherwise you have to realize that the very high risk involved in developing games means the targeted returns (and control) of the publisher will have to be high.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it is because most works of art do n't require massive up-front investment and most artists get paid based on what their works actually raised , rather than receiving a fixed sum regardless of the commercial performance of the result ( unless they are on a grant , which is not a commercial arrangement ) .
They do n't have " publishers " so much as " agents " .Also , most artists probably earn and cost a lot less than the average game developer .
A $ 40k recoverable advance would allow a novelist to complete a novel at home , but the same amount of money would probably pay for about three months of a single developer once office space , equipment and overheads are factored in - and it would n't be recoverable.If you could hire a group of developers who were happy to not be paid at all for two years , and who would then receive an amount that could vary from $ 0 to $ riches , and who would supply all the equipment and pay for any technology licensing required themselves , then yes , you can do without publishers .
Otherwise you have to realize that the very high risk involved in developing games means the targeted returns ( and control ) of the publisher will have to be high .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it is because most works of art don't require massive up-front investment and most artists get paid based on what their works actually raised, rather than receiving a fixed sum regardless of the commercial performance of the result (unless they are on a grant, which is not a commercial arrangement).
They don't have "publishers" so much as "agents".Also, most artists probably earn and cost a lot less than the average game developer.
A $40k recoverable advance would allow a novelist to complete a novel at home, but the same amount of money would probably pay for about three months of a single developer once office space, equipment and overheads are factored in - and it wouldn't be recoverable.If you could hire a group of developers who were happy to not be paid at all for two years, and who would then receive an amount that could vary from $0 to $riches, and who would supply all the equipment and pay for any technology licensing required themselves, then yes, you can do without publishers.
Otherwise you have to realize that the very high risk involved in developing games means the targeted returns (and control) of the publisher will have to be high.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844535</id>
	<title>In short, not really</title>
	<author>Niubi</author>
	<datestamp>1256303220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But I confess that I like shiny games with nice graphics and an interesting storyline. That's not to say there's no indie games out there like that, but on the whole... (I liked Prey, for e.g.).

Perhaps minor gamemakers could form some sort of coalition and flog their wares on a site like DubLi or eBay which both have some kind of global reach?</htmltext>
<tokenext>But I confess that I like shiny games with nice graphics and an interesting storyline .
That 's not to say there 's no indie games out there like that , but on the whole... ( I liked Prey , for e.g. ) .
Perhaps minor gamemakers could form some sort of coalition and flog their wares on a site like DubLi or eBay which both have some kind of global reach ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But I confess that I like shiny games with nice graphics and an interesting storyline.
That's not to say there's no indie games out there like that, but on the whole... (I liked Prey, for e.g.).
Perhaps minor gamemakers could form some sort of coalition and flog their wares on a site like DubLi or eBay which both have some kind of global reach?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845445</id>
	<title>Re:Father and Child?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256309580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>For starters, where's the car?</i></p><p>In the garage, it won't start. Are you going to replace the starter?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For starters , where 's the car ? In the garage , it wo n't start .
Are you going to replace the starter ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For starters, where's the car?In the garage, it won't start.
Are you going to replace the starter?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846933</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1256317440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Plenty of people can get their name out without, a good game will get coverage anyway by worth of mouth.</p></div><p>After a while.  Eventually.  Most people don't want to wait 5 years and don't have the money to self-promote, though.  Look how many open source programs are great and <i>not</i> popular.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Plenty of people can get their name out without , a good game will get coverage anyway by worth of mouth.After a while .
Eventually. Most people do n't want to wait 5 years and do n't have the money to self-promote , though .
Look how many open source programs are great and not popular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plenty of people can get their name out without, a good game will get coverage anyway by worth of mouth.After a while.
Eventually.  Most people don't want to wait 5 years and don't have the money to self-promote, though.
Look how many open source programs are great and not popular.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845593</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256310360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's because the good artists already have the marketing done in the form of important gallery showings. And if the artist sells something at that show, you better believe the gallery takes a LARGE cut of that money as payment for the marketing. Look up Lori Early and when she did her art showing in Manhattan 2 years ago. lots of money she got for working herself sick for several years...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's because the good artists already have the marketing done in the form of important gallery showings .
And if the artist sells something at that show , you better believe the gallery takes a LARGE cut of that money as payment for the marketing .
Look up Lori Early and when she did her art showing in Manhattan 2 years ago .
lots of money she got for working herself sick for several years.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's because the good artists already have the marketing done in the form of important gallery showings.
And if the artist sells something at that show, you better believe the gallery takes a LARGE cut of that money as payment for the marketing.
Look up Lori Early and when she did her art showing in Manhattan 2 years ago.
lots of money she got for working herself sick for several years...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846153</id>
	<title>Typical Corporation</title>
	<author>Orion Blastar</author>
	<datestamp>1256313360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>game Publishers are typical corporations. They only think about one thing, money. They don't think about customer satisfaction, quality, enjoyability of the game, or even giving customers what they want. Instead they tell customers what they want.</p><p>Many customers want classic games like Bard's Tale and Master of Magic to be remade for modern systems. But when they tried to make a console version of Bard's Tale it was nothing like the C64/Amiga/Atari ST/Mac/Apple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>//GS etc version and became stupid and they tried to make it a parody of the original game and it failed badly. Master of Magic 2.0 couldn't be made because Atari bought the rights to Simtech who made the game and Microprose owns the Civilization type engine it was based on. So if they do make a game it will be nothing like the original Master of Magic.</p><p>If Game Publishers cannot come up with original games, they ought to look at past hits from the 1980's and 1990's and remake them for modern systems. But sometimes that means buying the IP from the original company that made the game and not all original companies are willing to give up their IP much less sell it.</p><p>IP often gets in the way of making a good game, and game Publishers suing each other does not make the gamers happy.</p><p>Most modern games I am not happy with, and I play old games via DOSBOX or my Amiga emulator and they are more enjoyable than modern games for modern systems. I own the old games, and wouldn't mind buying the new modern versions if they sold for a reasonable price and didn't need a lot of resources and RAM to run.</p><p>That is another thing, some modern games need 3G of RAM and a 3.0 Ghz processor or higher to work, why? How bloated can a game be to require that much RAM and that fast a processor?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>game Publishers are typical corporations .
They only think about one thing , money .
They do n't think about customer satisfaction , quality , enjoyability of the game , or even giving customers what they want .
Instead they tell customers what they want.Many customers want classic games like Bard 's Tale and Master of Magic to be remade for modern systems .
But when they tried to make a console version of Bard 's Tale it was nothing like the C64/Amiga/Atari ST/Mac/Apple //GS etc version and became stupid and they tried to make it a parody of the original game and it failed badly .
Master of Magic 2.0 could n't be made because Atari bought the rights to Simtech who made the game and Microprose owns the Civilization type engine it was based on .
So if they do make a game it will be nothing like the original Master of Magic.If Game Publishers can not come up with original games , they ought to look at past hits from the 1980 's and 1990 's and remake them for modern systems .
But sometimes that means buying the IP from the original company that made the game and not all original companies are willing to give up their IP much less sell it.IP often gets in the way of making a good game , and game Publishers suing each other does not make the gamers happy.Most modern games I am not happy with , and I play old games via DOSBOX or my Amiga emulator and they are more enjoyable than modern games for modern systems .
I own the old games , and would n't mind buying the new modern versions if they sold for a reasonable price and did n't need a lot of resources and RAM to run.That is another thing , some modern games need 3G of RAM and a 3.0 Ghz processor or higher to work , why ?
How bloated can a game be to require that much RAM and that fast a processor ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>game Publishers are typical corporations.
They only think about one thing, money.
They don't think about customer satisfaction, quality, enjoyability of the game, or even giving customers what they want.
Instead they tell customers what they want.Many customers want classic games like Bard's Tale and Master of Magic to be remade for modern systems.
But when they tried to make a console version of Bard's Tale it was nothing like the C64/Amiga/Atari ST/Mac/Apple //GS etc version and became stupid and they tried to make it a parody of the original game and it failed badly.
Master of Magic 2.0 couldn't be made because Atari bought the rights to Simtech who made the game and Microprose owns the Civilization type engine it was based on.
So if they do make a game it will be nothing like the original Master of Magic.If Game Publishers cannot come up with original games, they ought to look at past hits from the 1980's and 1990's and remake them for modern systems.
But sometimes that means buying the IP from the original company that made the game and not all original companies are willing to give up their IP much less sell it.IP often gets in the way of making a good game, and game Publishers suing each other does not make the gamers happy.Most modern games I am not happy with, and I play old games via DOSBOX or my Amiga emulator and they are more enjoyable than modern games for modern systems.
I own the old games, and wouldn't mind buying the new modern versions if they sold for a reasonable price and didn't need a lot of resources and RAM to run.That is another thing, some modern games need 3G of RAM and a 3.0 Ghz processor or higher to work, why?
How bloated can a game be to require that much RAM and that fast a processor?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844329</id>
	<title>Re:Third option</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1256301060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I was wondering myself why this option in answer to the question posted in the title was missing.</p><p>A better analogy is that publishers are like RIAA members, and developers are like artists.</p><p>I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide from that analogy what level of relevance publishers have in this day and age.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I was wondering myself why this option in answer to the question posted in the title was missing.A better analogy is that publishers are like RIAA members , and developers are like artists.I 'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide from that analogy what level of relevance publishers have in this day and age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I was wondering myself why this option in answer to the question posted in the title was missing.A better analogy is that publishers are like RIAA members, and developers are like artists.I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide from that analogy what level of relevance publishers have in this day and age.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844043</id>
	<title>like movie studio or book publisher...</title>
	<author>lapsed</author>
	<datestamp>1256297100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Book publishers edit, ship, manage the printing of, and distribute books. They also balance the riskiness of publishing each individual book across their portfolio of books. In the same way, movie studios are good at financing and distribution, but a big part of what they do is invest in multiple pictures, so that even if one movie bombs there are always others.<br>
Something -- regardless of what it's called -- has to be able to hold a portfolio of games. To make informed investments, that entity is probably going to have to understand the industry. That knowledge is likely to be valuable and applicable high-level marketing and strategy decisions, and *rightly or wrongly* the investment will only be made if that knowledge can be applied, or if the investor has some power of the developers. <br>
Workers in other very capital-intensive creative industries -- film and television, for example -- tend to be stratified into two economic classes. People in the upper classes eventually get money and are then able to call the shots. There's no reason why the same thing can't happen in gaming. But money will, for the most part, determine who has the power.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Book publishers edit , ship , manage the printing of , and distribute books .
They also balance the riskiness of publishing each individual book across their portfolio of books .
In the same way , movie studios are good at financing and distribution , but a big part of what they do is invest in multiple pictures , so that even if one movie bombs there are always others .
Something -- regardless of what it 's called -- has to be able to hold a portfolio of games .
To make informed investments , that entity is probably going to have to understand the industry .
That knowledge is likely to be valuable and applicable high-level marketing and strategy decisions , and * rightly or wrongly * the investment will only be made if that knowledge can be applied , or if the investor has some power of the developers .
Workers in other very capital-intensive creative industries -- film and television , for example -- tend to be stratified into two economic classes .
People in the upper classes eventually get money and are then able to call the shots .
There 's no reason why the same thing ca n't happen in gaming .
But money will , for the most part , determine who has the power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Book publishers edit, ship, manage the printing of, and distribute books.
They also balance the riskiness of publishing each individual book across their portfolio of books.
In the same way, movie studios are good at financing and distribution, but a big part of what they do is invest in multiple pictures, so that even if one movie bombs there are always others.
Something -- regardless of what it's called -- has to be able to hold a portfolio of games.
To make informed investments, that entity is probably going to have to understand the industry.
That knowledge is likely to be valuable and applicable high-level marketing and strategy decisions, and *rightly or wrongly* the investment will only be made if that knowledge can be applied, or if the investor has some power of the developers.
Workers in other very capital-intensive creative industries -- film and television, for example -- tend to be stratified into two economic classes.
People in the upper classes eventually get money and are then able to call the shots.
There's no reason why the same thing can't happen in gaming.
But money will, for the most part, determine who has the power.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844469</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256302680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well the primary reason developers go to publishers is to secure funding to develop the product. Unless you have access to vast amounts of capital or are making a small indie game how do you plan to fund development? Venture capital? It's just as cut throat as a publisher. Even indie games can cost a huge amout of money to produce. Also don't underestimate the value of a propperly organised traditional marketing campaign. Viral is great when it works, but I suspect we never hear about a great many viral campaigns because they simply fail badly.</p><p>That said the deals publishers offer are stacked in their favour and they retain huge control of a product. The hold the purse strings and almost all of the control.</p><p>The core problem is huge team sizes, very limited sales windows and generally limited shelf life of a product (there are exceptions) in brick and mortar retail outlets which drives up the risk and cost of producing games. Lets leave out the whole debate on weather or how much used games sales hurt developers.</p><p>Publishers aren't evil, they are just a business that is extracting maximum profit from market conditions. Some of them can be a developers greatest allie and some of them can ruin a developer. I don't think you can tar them all with the one brush.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well the primary reason developers go to publishers is to secure funding to develop the product .
Unless you have access to vast amounts of capital or are making a small indie game how do you plan to fund development ?
Venture capital ?
It 's just as cut throat as a publisher .
Even indie games can cost a huge amout of money to produce .
Also do n't underestimate the value of a propperly organised traditional marketing campaign .
Viral is great when it works , but I suspect we never hear about a great many viral campaigns because they simply fail badly.That said the deals publishers offer are stacked in their favour and they retain huge control of a product .
The hold the purse strings and almost all of the control.The core problem is huge team sizes , very limited sales windows and generally limited shelf life of a product ( there are exceptions ) in brick and mortar retail outlets which drives up the risk and cost of producing games .
Lets leave out the whole debate on weather or how much used games sales hurt developers.Publishers are n't evil , they are just a business that is extracting maximum profit from market conditions .
Some of them can be a developers greatest allie and some of them can ruin a developer .
I do n't think you can tar them all with the one brush .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well the primary reason developers go to publishers is to secure funding to develop the product.
Unless you have access to vast amounts of capital or are making a small indie game how do you plan to fund development?
Venture capital?
It's just as cut throat as a publisher.
Even indie games can cost a huge amout of money to produce.
Also don't underestimate the value of a propperly organised traditional marketing campaign.
Viral is great when it works, but I suspect we never hear about a great many viral campaigns because they simply fail badly.That said the deals publishers offer are stacked in their favour and they retain huge control of a product.
The hold the purse strings and almost all of the control.The core problem is huge team sizes, very limited sales windows and generally limited shelf life of a product (there are exceptions) in brick and mortar retail outlets which drives up the risk and cost of producing games.
Lets leave out the whole debate on weather or how much used games sales hurt developers.Publishers aren't evil, they are just a business that is extracting maximum profit from market conditions.
Some of them can be a developers greatest allie and some of them can ruin a developer.
I don't think you can tar them all with the one brush.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29848511</id>
	<title>Localization</title>
	<author>g4pengts</author>
	<datestamp>1256323800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Didn't see any comment mentioning this, but without publishers willing to localize games, small time game companies would not be able to afford to localize games for different regions.  I'm thinking publishers like Atlus and NISA here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't see any comment mentioning this , but without publishers willing to localize games , small time game companies would not be able to afford to localize games for different regions .
I 'm thinking publishers like Atlus and NISA here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't see any comment mentioning this, but without publishers willing to localize games, small time game companies would not be able to afford to localize games for different regions.
I'm thinking publishers like Atlus and NISA here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844011</id>
	<title>R music publishers a necessary evil or just evil?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A bit easier to answer that question eh?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>But seriously, it's clear that publishers lend a degree of expertise to any business, but at some point their contributions may start to be outweighed by their negative influences and or their inability to adapt to a changing industry.</p><p>In the games business this balance may be still be in the favour of the publishers since it's a much more technical business than say music publishing... but in the future the balance may tip the other way...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A bit easier to answer that question eh ?
: - ) But seriously , it 's clear that publishers lend a degree of expertise to any business , but at some point their contributions may start to be outweighed by their negative influences and or their inability to adapt to a changing industry.In the games business this balance may be still be in the favour of the publishers since it 's a much more technical business than say music publishing... but in the future the balance may tip the other way.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A bit easier to answer that question eh?
:-)But seriously, it's clear that publishers lend a degree of expertise to any business, but at some point their contributions may start to be outweighed by their negative influences and or their inability to adapt to a changing industry.In the games business this balance may be still be in the favour of the publishers since it's a much more technical business than say music publishing... but in the future the balance may tip the other way...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844057</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256297340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps a car analogy would be better?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps a car analogy would be better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps a car analogy would be better?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844633</id>
	<title>Re:Father and Child?</title>
	<author>Dachannien</author>
	<datestamp>1256304120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dunno - it seems pretty apt to me.  It does facilitate the whole "eating your own babies" concept, after all....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dunno - it seems pretty apt to me .
It does facilitate the whole " eating your own babies " concept , after all... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dunno - it seems pretty apt to me.
It does facilitate the whole "eating your own babies" concept, after all....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844227</id>
	<title>They are just greedy Jews</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256299740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Greedy Jews force money to be chosen above and beyond any progress and life.</p><p>Let there finally and really be a holocaust to get rid of Jews and have the creativity flow!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Greedy Jews force money to be chosen above and beyond any progress and life.Let there finally and really be a holocaust to get rid of Jews and have the creativity flow !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Greedy Jews force money to be chosen above and beyond any progress and life.Let there finally and really be a holocaust to get rid of Jews and have the creativity flow!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29853577</id>
	<title>DG Sunglass,Male BBC Jean &amp; CA Skirt</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256308440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Http://www.tntshoes.com</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; The shoes We can supply all kinds of shoes with different styles, You will find what your like.<br>Features:<br>1) Size for men US8-12 UK7-11(some US13/UK12)<br>Size for women US5-8/10<br>2) Packing: 1pr/box, 12prs/carton, 12prs/style/color(original box and retro card)<br>3) Many designs and colors available<br>4) Delivery can be prompt shipping<br>5) We accept paypal +++aaa quality .</p><p>OUR WEBSITE:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; YAHOO:shoppertrade@yahoo.com.cn</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; MSN:shoppertrade@hotmail.com</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Http://www.tntshoes.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>    Http : //www.tntshoes.com     The shoes We can supply all kinds of shoes with different styles , You will find what your like.Features : 1 ) Size for men US8-12 UK7-11 ( some US13/UK12 ) Size for women US5-8/102 ) Packing : 1pr/box , 12prs/carton , 12prs/style/color ( original box and retro card ) 3 ) Many designs and colors available4 ) Delivery can be prompt shipping5 ) We accept paypal + + + aaa quality .OUR WEBSITE :                                                         YAHOO : shoppertrade @ yahoo.com.cn                                                                 MSN : shoppertrade @ hotmail.com                                                                     Http : //www.tntshoes.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
    Http://www.tntshoes.com
    The shoes We can supply all kinds of shoes with different styles, You will find what your like.Features:1) Size for men US8-12 UK7-11(some US13/UK12)Size for women US5-8/102) Packing: 1pr/box, 12prs/carton, 12prs/style/color(original box and retro card)3) Many designs and colors available4) Delivery can be prompt shipping5) We accept paypal +++aaa quality .OUR WEBSITE:
                                                        YAHOO:shoppertrade@yahoo.com.cn
                                                                MSN:shoppertrade@hotmail.com
                                                                    Http://www.tntshoes.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844745</id>
	<title>Re:Kinda depends</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256304900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Sycraft-fuI I was writing something very similar to what you just wrote. Unfortunately I deleted it all as to not be redundant. This leaves me with instead of writing several pages breaking down cost profit structure or to just give people the urge to think it through. It's very dependent on the type of contract.</p><p>What that means is that it is very dependent on exactly who is responsible for what. Everything from funding structure if there is a need for one, down to how many photo shoots and interviews the game company CEO is responsible to go too and who arranges the limo to get that person there. It all costs money. So this brings us to money. Yes it could be a 50\% take if the developer needs hand holding and funding. Hand holding down to the level of arranging the limo to get to an interview somewhere. Only the already famous have the interviewer pick them up.</p><p>Then the delicate subject on how much is risk worth in the return expectations. Goto any industry and try to get risk capital money to expand your product. You would be very lucky to keep 50\% of your company. Remember the publisher might be risking millions. Most PC games don't make $20million.</p><p>The answer is. Unless you have very deep pockets and want to branch your game development business out into being a publishing business and risk more money than your game will make. Then by all means be my guest, because this whole viral thing only works if your game does in fact become contagious to a very wide audience, or hugely successful to a small niche'. Either way, the developer needs to be a genius business mind, or in fact does have a better mouse trap where people are beating down your door. But if they do in fact beat it down, then you screwed up!! Because you should have marketed better to sell your game to those that are not beating down your door. You missed the 'what's all the fuss about market segment and that is also huge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sycraft-fuI I was writing something very similar to what you just wrote .
Unfortunately I deleted it all as to not be redundant .
This leaves me with instead of writing several pages breaking down cost profit structure or to just give people the urge to think it through .
It 's very dependent on the type of contract.What that means is that it is very dependent on exactly who is responsible for what .
Everything from funding structure if there is a need for one , down to how many photo shoots and interviews the game company CEO is responsible to go too and who arranges the limo to get that person there .
It all costs money .
So this brings us to money .
Yes it could be a 50 \ % take if the developer needs hand holding and funding .
Hand holding down to the level of arranging the limo to get to an interview somewhere .
Only the already famous have the interviewer pick them up.Then the delicate subject on how much is risk worth in the return expectations .
Goto any industry and try to get risk capital money to expand your product .
You would be very lucky to keep 50 \ % of your company .
Remember the publisher might be risking millions .
Most PC games do n't make $ 20million.The answer is .
Unless you have very deep pockets and want to branch your game development business out into being a publishing business and risk more money than your game will make .
Then by all means be my guest , because this whole viral thing only works if your game does in fact become contagious to a very wide audience , or hugely successful to a small niche' .
Either way , the developer needs to be a genius business mind , or in fact does have a better mouse trap where people are beating down your door .
But if they do in fact beat it down , then you screwed up ! !
Because you should have marketed better to sell your game to those that are not beating down your door .
You missed the 'what 's all the fuss about market segment and that is also huge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Sycraft-fuI I was writing something very similar to what you just wrote.
Unfortunately I deleted it all as to not be redundant.
This leaves me with instead of writing several pages breaking down cost profit structure or to just give people the urge to think it through.
It's very dependent on the type of contract.What that means is that it is very dependent on exactly who is responsible for what.
Everything from funding structure if there is a need for one, down to how many photo shoots and interviews the game company CEO is responsible to go too and who arranges the limo to get that person there.
It all costs money.
So this brings us to money.
Yes it could be a 50\% take if the developer needs hand holding and funding.
Hand holding down to the level of arranging the limo to get to an interview somewhere.
Only the already famous have the interviewer pick them up.Then the delicate subject on how much is risk worth in the return expectations.
Goto any industry and try to get risk capital money to expand your product.
You would be very lucky to keep 50\% of your company.
Remember the publisher might be risking millions.
Most PC games don't make $20million.The answer is.
Unless you have very deep pockets and want to branch your game development business out into being a publishing business and risk more money than your game will make.
Then by all means be my guest, because this whole viral thing only works if your game does in fact become contagious to a very wide audience, or hugely successful to a small niche'.
Either way, the developer needs to be a genius business mind, or in fact does have a better mouse trap where people are beating down your door.
But if they do in fact beat it down, then you screwed up!!
Because you should have marketed better to sell your game to those that are not beating down your door.
You missed the 'what's all the fuss about market segment and that is also huge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845589</id>
	<title>Console makers hold the keys</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1256310360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have an Internet connection. I can rent bandwidth and rent or buy space on a web server. I can broadcast news of my game via social networking, message boards and other free medium. If I can work out how to write games, managing a web server isn't going to be brain surgery.What the fuck do I need a publisher for?</p></div><p>A publisher represents you to the console makers, which hold the digital signing keys to the console bootloaders. If you decide to make a multiplayer game PC-exclusive, you have to make it good enough that people will spend either $1,800 for three additional PCs and monitors for players two through four, or $450 for a gaming PC to connect to the TV.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an Internet connection .
I can rent bandwidth and rent or buy space on a web server .
I can broadcast news of my game via social networking , message boards and other free medium .
If I can work out how to write games , managing a web server is n't going to be brain surgery.What the fuck do I need a publisher for ? A publisher represents you to the console makers , which hold the digital signing keys to the console bootloaders .
If you decide to make a multiplayer game PC-exclusive , you have to make it good enough that people will spend either $ 1,800 for three additional PCs and monitors for players two through four , or $ 450 for a gaming PC to connect to the TV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an Internet connection.
I can rent bandwidth and rent or buy space on a web server.
I can broadcast news of my game via social networking, message boards and other free medium.
If I can work out how to write games, managing a web server isn't going to be brain surgery.What the fuck do I need a publisher for?A publisher represents you to the console makers, which hold the digital signing keys to the console bootloaders.
If you decide to make a multiplayer game PC-exclusive, you have to make it good enough that people will spend either $1,800 for three additional PCs and monitors for players two through four, or $450 for a gaming PC to connect to the TV.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844251</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29856261</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256395860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"do you honestly think people are buying these games out of charity to the companies?"</p><p>No people buy things because 1) they are bored 2) there's nothing better available 3) The game is tolerably interesting enough to waste money on. 4) I'm sure many people have a stack of unplayed games they purchased</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" do you honestly think people are buying these games out of charity to the companies ?
" No people buy things because 1 ) they are bored 2 ) there 's nothing better available 3 ) The game is tolerably interesting enough to waste money on .
4 ) I 'm sure many people have a stack of unplayed games they purchased</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"do you honestly think people are buying these games out of charity to the companies?
"No people buy things because 1) they are bored 2) there's nothing better available 3) The game is tolerably interesting enough to waste money on.
4) I'm sure many people have a stack of unplayed games they purchased</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844547</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>BananaPeel</author>
	<datestamp>1256303400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have to take into account there is a huge difference between small indi companies and larger game developers. If you have invested a lot of money up front to make your game. You need to recoup that as quickly as possible (time value of money). You also need to be certain that you have made enough noise compared to all the competing products out there. Your investors will not be happy if you left this very important area to chance. Advertising, PR etc are all hugely expensive, you have to be sure your product will make the biggest splash.</p><p>This process costs money. Sure you can do without it but lets face it many games are a bit lame, If there games are launched they will probably only make a fraction of what it would have made with a publisher pushing it for you simply becuse the whole viral thing would not work for you</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to take into account there is a huge difference between small indi companies and larger game developers .
If you have invested a lot of money up front to make your game .
You need to recoup that as quickly as possible ( time value of money ) .
You also need to be certain that you have made enough noise compared to all the competing products out there .
Your investors will not be happy if you left this very important area to chance .
Advertising , PR etc are all hugely expensive , you have to be sure your product will make the biggest splash.This process costs money .
Sure you can do without it but lets face it many games are a bit lame , If there games are launched they will probably only make a fraction of what it would have made with a publisher pushing it for you simply becuse the whole viral thing would not work for you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to take into account there is a huge difference between small indi companies and larger game developers.
If you have invested a lot of money up front to make your game.
You need to recoup that as quickly as possible (time value of money).
You also need to be certain that you have made enough noise compared to all the competing products out there.
Your investors will not be happy if you left this very important area to chance.
Advertising, PR etc are all hugely expensive, you have to be sure your product will make the biggest splash.This process costs money.
Sure you can do without it but lets face it many games are a bit lame, If there games are launched they will probably only make a fraction of what it would have made with a publisher pushing it for you simply becuse the whole viral thing would not work for you</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846131</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256313180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Original DOOM and Wolfenstein had only a handful of guys making them. Seeing as how software development tools are far less primitive than they were twenty years ago when these games came out, I don't understand how they can spend millions developing today's games. Except for the graphics I don't see any difference in today's games, except that they just aren't as fun.</p></div><p>If you don't like today's games, then why did you just write about a page on it?  While I will admit that badly run publishers can kill great games by under budgeting or pushing the game out the door too soon, well-run publishers produce a lot of great games that people find to be fun.  If you're not having fun anymore then I'm terribly sorry to hear that, but video games today have a larger audience than ever; do you honestly think people are buying these games out of charity to the companies?  They're buying them because they are having fun with them; this isn't just due to the developers but also due to the publishers.</p><p>In a way the publisher being a parent is a fairly decent analogy, just not quite right; the publisher wants you to do well so that they can benefit.  I'd say it's more equivalent to the relationship between a manager and another employee; good managers want you to do well so they can benefit as well to make them look good and get the work done.  Much like a manager, a publisher that doesn't put any restraint on a developer and just lets them do whatever they please they put out crap like Too Human, if they put too much restraint on a developer they get an underfunded wreck of a game.  Some developers already have the proper focus to create something great others don't just like human beings; good managers are there to help their employees just like good publishers.  When publishers just let developers create in a "free" environment we've generally gotten shitty games; Too Human, that X-Box game series that died after the first game came out (can't remember the name of it off the top of my head), Daikatana and others are examples of what happens when developers don't have proper focus and are basically just given money.</p><p>As to what all the money goes to in development, an awful lot of it goes to paying employees; anyone who hasn't been sleeping under a rock for the past two decades or so knows that most development teams now encompass teams of dozens of highly talented people.  The increase of personnel has largely been due to the fact that computer programming has grown even more complex (note that computer software has seen a similar increase) and that most games today have more content in them. More people creating means you need more office space and generally have more overhead etc etc.  Finally, marketing has also become more necessary (though the costs have mostly stayed the same compared to inflation) and those fancy new tools for development cost money to make too.</p><p>If you really don't like publishers just put your money where your mouth is (and maybe you already have, given that you claim you don't play new games because they aren't as fun) and don't buy any games put out by a publisher.  Or if (as you may have just realized) most games you can play today have a publisher, then don't buy from Activision, EA, Ubisoft, Sega, Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft as those are the biggest publishers in America right now.  But those of you reading this aren't going to do that, are you?  You'll bitch about publishers whenever they nix a game you think you may have liked or drop a series you like, but ultimately you'll still go out and buy the best games out there.  For all the supposed evil of publishers, they're funding, shipping and advertising most (if not all of) your favorite games and game series; bitch whine and moan as much as you like but in capitalism your vote is your money and an awful lot of people are voting "yes" for publishers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Original DOOM and Wolfenstein had only a handful of guys making them .
Seeing as how software development tools are far less primitive than they were twenty years ago when these games came out , I do n't understand how they can spend millions developing today 's games .
Except for the graphics I do n't see any difference in today 's games , except that they just are n't as fun.If you do n't like today 's games , then why did you just write about a page on it ?
While I will admit that badly run publishers can kill great games by under budgeting or pushing the game out the door too soon , well-run publishers produce a lot of great games that people find to be fun .
If you 're not having fun anymore then I 'm terribly sorry to hear that , but video games today have a larger audience than ever ; do you honestly think people are buying these games out of charity to the companies ?
They 're buying them because they are having fun with them ; this is n't just due to the developers but also due to the publishers.In a way the publisher being a parent is a fairly decent analogy , just not quite right ; the publisher wants you to do well so that they can benefit .
I 'd say it 's more equivalent to the relationship between a manager and another employee ; good managers want you to do well so they can benefit as well to make them look good and get the work done .
Much like a manager , a publisher that does n't put any restraint on a developer and just lets them do whatever they please they put out crap like Too Human , if they put too much restraint on a developer they get an underfunded wreck of a game .
Some developers already have the proper focus to create something great others do n't just like human beings ; good managers are there to help their employees just like good publishers .
When publishers just let developers create in a " free " environment we 've generally gotten shitty games ; Too Human , that X-Box game series that died after the first game came out ( ca n't remember the name of it off the top of my head ) , Daikatana and others are examples of what happens when developers do n't have proper focus and are basically just given money.As to what all the money goes to in development , an awful lot of it goes to paying employees ; anyone who has n't been sleeping under a rock for the past two decades or so knows that most development teams now encompass teams of dozens of highly talented people .
The increase of personnel has largely been due to the fact that computer programming has grown even more complex ( note that computer software has seen a similar increase ) and that most games today have more content in them .
More people creating means you need more office space and generally have more overhead etc etc .
Finally , marketing has also become more necessary ( though the costs have mostly stayed the same compared to inflation ) and those fancy new tools for development cost money to make too.If you really do n't like publishers just put your money where your mouth is ( and maybe you already have , given that you claim you do n't play new games because they are n't as fun ) and do n't buy any games put out by a publisher .
Or if ( as you may have just realized ) most games you can play today have a publisher , then do n't buy from Activision , EA , Ubisoft , Sega , Nintendo , Sony or Microsoft as those are the biggest publishers in America right now .
But those of you reading this are n't going to do that , are you ?
You 'll bitch about publishers whenever they nix a game you think you may have liked or drop a series you like , but ultimately you 'll still go out and buy the best games out there .
For all the supposed evil of publishers , they 're funding , shipping and advertising most ( if not all of ) your favorite games and game series ; bitch whine and moan as much as you like but in capitalism your vote is your money and an awful lot of people are voting " yes " for publishers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Original DOOM and Wolfenstein had only a handful of guys making them.
Seeing as how software development tools are far less primitive than they were twenty years ago when these games came out, I don't understand how they can spend millions developing today's games.
Except for the graphics I don't see any difference in today's games, except that they just aren't as fun.If you don't like today's games, then why did you just write about a page on it?
While I will admit that badly run publishers can kill great games by under budgeting or pushing the game out the door too soon, well-run publishers produce a lot of great games that people find to be fun.
If you're not having fun anymore then I'm terribly sorry to hear that, but video games today have a larger audience than ever; do you honestly think people are buying these games out of charity to the companies?
They're buying them because they are having fun with them; this isn't just due to the developers but also due to the publishers.In a way the publisher being a parent is a fairly decent analogy, just not quite right; the publisher wants you to do well so that they can benefit.
I'd say it's more equivalent to the relationship between a manager and another employee; good managers want you to do well so they can benefit as well to make them look good and get the work done.
Much like a manager, a publisher that doesn't put any restraint on a developer and just lets them do whatever they please they put out crap like Too Human, if they put too much restraint on a developer they get an underfunded wreck of a game.
Some developers already have the proper focus to create something great others don't just like human beings; good managers are there to help their employees just like good publishers.
When publishers just let developers create in a "free" environment we've generally gotten shitty games; Too Human, that X-Box game series that died after the first game came out (can't remember the name of it off the top of my head), Daikatana and others are examples of what happens when developers don't have proper focus and are basically just given money.As to what all the money goes to in development, an awful lot of it goes to paying employees; anyone who hasn't been sleeping under a rock for the past two decades or so knows that most development teams now encompass teams of dozens of highly talented people.
The increase of personnel has largely been due to the fact that computer programming has grown even more complex (note that computer software has seen a similar increase) and that most games today have more content in them.
More people creating means you need more office space and generally have more overhead etc etc.
Finally, marketing has also become more necessary (though the costs have mostly stayed the same compared to inflation) and those fancy new tools for development cost money to make too.If you really don't like publishers just put your money where your mouth is (and maybe you already have, given that you claim you don't play new games because they aren't as fun) and don't buy any games put out by a publisher.
Or if (as you may have just realized) most games you can play today have a publisher, then don't buy from Activision, EA, Ubisoft, Sega, Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft as those are the biggest publishers in America right now.
But those of you reading this aren't going to do that, are you?
You'll bitch about publishers whenever they nix a game you think you may have liked or drop a series you like, but ultimately you'll still go out and buy the best games out there.
For all the supposed evil of publishers, they're funding, shipping and advertising most (if not all of) your favorite games and game series; bitch whine and moan as much as you like but in capitalism your vote is your money and an awful lot of people are voting "yes" for publishers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844337</id>
	<title>Re:Totally unnecessary</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1256301180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah.  The only other things a publisher can do is get shelf space in high street stores, advertising space in computer magazines, mentions in the mainstream press, show at E3 and fund development for a year, as well as hire professional web designers who know about promotion and page layout to sort out the website.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah .
The only other things a publisher can do is get shelf space in high street stores , advertising space in computer magazines , mentions in the mainstream press , show at E3 and fund development for a year , as well as hire professional web designers who know about promotion and page layout to sort out the website .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.
The only other things a publisher can do is get shelf space in high street stores, advertising space in computer magazines, mentions in the mainstream press, show at E3 and fund development for a year, as well as hire professional web designers who know about promotion and page layout to sort out the website.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844251</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844365</id>
	<title>No.</title>
	<author>imakemusic</author>
	<datestamp>1256301480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No.<br> <br>
Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
Ask a stupid question , get a stupid answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844715</id>
	<title>Learning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256304600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been developing an indie game in my spare time for a very long time (I don't want to quit my day job). I should have a demo out by the end of the year if all works out; and the full version done some time next Summer. I currently don't have a publisher, or any real ironclad marketing-distribution plan...though the trailer is almost done.</p><p>I'd like to delegate the work of marketing and distribution to a publisher so that I can focus on development. I've had no luck in exciting any publisher (big or small) with my game. None of them actually told me *why*, but my guess is it's for one or more of these reasons: I'm an unknown and therefore undesirably high-risk, they prefer the game be 99.999\% done before I pitch it, I simply haven't looked hard enough, or the game is just bad and undeserving to be published.</p><p>Having said that, I'd like to hear other indie teams share their experiences with publishers (or lack thereof), marketing and distribution. Viral marketing and listening to your player base is a no-brainer; but the rest, to me, is still a mystery that will only be solved through experience and asking many questions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been developing an indie game in my spare time for a very long time ( I do n't want to quit my day job ) .
I should have a demo out by the end of the year if all works out ; and the full version done some time next Summer .
I currently do n't have a publisher , or any real ironclad marketing-distribution plan...though the trailer is almost done.I 'd like to delegate the work of marketing and distribution to a publisher so that I can focus on development .
I 've had no luck in exciting any publisher ( big or small ) with my game .
None of them actually told me * why * , but my guess is it 's for one or more of these reasons : I 'm an unknown and therefore undesirably high-risk , they prefer the game be 99.999 \ % done before I pitch it , I simply have n't looked hard enough , or the game is just bad and undeserving to be published.Having said that , I 'd like to hear other indie teams share their experiences with publishers ( or lack thereof ) , marketing and distribution .
Viral marketing and listening to your player base is a no-brainer ; but the rest , to me , is still a mystery that will only be solved through experience and asking many questions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been developing an indie game in my spare time for a very long time (I don't want to quit my day job).
I should have a demo out by the end of the year if all works out; and the full version done some time next Summer.
I currently don't have a publisher, or any real ironclad marketing-distribution plan...though the trailer is almost done.I'd like to delegate the work of marketing and distribution to a publisher so that I can focus on development.
I've had no luck in exciting any publisher (big or small) with my game.
None of them actually told me *why*, but my guess is it's for one or more of these reasons: I'm an unknown and therefore undesirably high-risk, they prefer the game be 99.999\% done before I pitch it, I simply haven't looked hard enough, or the game is just bad and undeserving to be published.Having said that, I'd like to hear other indie teams share their experiences with publishers (or lack thereof), marketing and distribution.
Viral marketing and listening to your player base is a no-brainer; but the rest, to me, is still a mystery that will only be solved through experience and asking many questions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849253</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1256326260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It all depends on the genre of game really.</p><p>Big 3D games (particularly HD ones) are much like blockbuster moves. They take huge teams of people to make (most of which aren't coders BTW) and those people have to be paid.</p><p>This means you to develop such a game requires a backer with two things<br>1: the money to advance the development costs<br>2: the marketing clout to get sufficient customers to recover those development costs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It all depends on the genre of game really.Big 3D games ( particularly HD ones ) are much like blockbuster moves .
They take huge teams of people to make ( most of which are n't coders BTW ) and those people have to be paid.This means you to develop such a game requires a backer with two things1 : the money to advance the development costs2 : the marketing clout to get sufficient customers to recover those development costs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It all depends on the genre of game really.Big 3D games (particularly HD ones) are much like blockbuster moves.
They take huge teams of people to make (most of which aren't coders BTW) and those people have to be paid.This means you to develop such a game requires a backer with two things1: the money to advance the development costs2: the marketing clout to get sufficient customers to recover those development costs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845657</id>
	<title>The Child is Usually Right?</title>
	<author>Stormy Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1256310720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In many ways, it does know more than the parent, and is closer to what's innovative, but maybe hasn't figured out how to hone that energy yet</p></div></blockquote><p>
Without commenting on the validity of the analogy, I for one found that as I get older I increasingly realize my parents were usually right.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In many ways , it does know more than the parent , and is closer to what 's innovative , but maybe has n't figured out how to hone that energy yet Without commenting on the validity of the analogy , I for one found that as I get older I increasingly realize my parents were usually right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In many ways, it does know more than the parent, and is closer to what's innovative, but maybe hasn't figured out how to hone that energy yet
Without commenting on the validity of the analogy, I for one found that as I get older I increasingly realize my parents were usually right.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131</id>
	<title>Kinda depends</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256298420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Publishers can do good and bad, and have done both. Likewise developers can do well one their own, or poorly. Overall I'd say publishers are useful.</p><p>One of the biggest things they do is provide resources to get games developed that otherwise might not be able to be made. If you are a small games studio, you probably don't have the money to work on a large scale title for a couple years with no money coming in, and additionally buy other things you may need (like if you need to hire an outside composer, because you don't have one). Well, a publisher can provide that. You sell them your idea, they pony up the money for you to make it a reality.</p><p>Another useful thing they do is setting deadlines. If they are stupid about it sure it can be a problem, but when it gets down to it this needs to be done. You can't work on a game forever. Technology changes, you have to get it out in a reasonable timeline. While developers might get all wrapped up in their project and just want it to go on forever, publishers can be more objective and set goals. A game that isn't everything you want, but it fun and actually on the market is much better than a "perfect" game that never exists.</p><p>Also even if a game studio totally develops a game in house, self funded and everything, they may choose to sell it to a publisher. Reason is that when a game is released there is still stuff to be done. It has to be marketed, it has to be distributed, etc. A game studio doesn't always have the staff/resources for that, so they hand it off to someone else.</p><p>An example of a situation where a publisher was really needed was Duke Nukem Forever. While it technically had a publisher (Take Two), they weren't in the typical arrangement of funding it. As such 3D Realms could basically do what they pleased, they were footing the bill. What happened was a decade of unfocused running around and now a canceled game because they ran out of money.</p><p>Now an example where a game was fine without a publisher would be Galactic Civilizations 2. Stardock decided that since they'd been screwed over by a publisher on GC1, they'd just self publish. The game came out in a reasonable amount of time, with a low budget, and sold well on account of being a rocking title.</p><p>Overall, publishers are probalby useful. In part just because it creates something of a division between the creative and business sides of a game. You'll notice that even large integrated game houses often function in the developer/publisher setting. EA owns a lot of game companies, and if they wanted to they could simply make it all "EA". They would be the developers, publishers, and so on. However they don't seem to do that. They have separate internal game studios, with their own headquarters and so on that develop the game, and the EA publishes it. Even their EA label stuff is that way. EA Sports is a subsidiary in Vancouver (with it's own CEO and so on), whereas EA itself is in Redwood.</p><p>My guess is they do it that way because it works better. The development subsidiaries are just "developers" and just worry about making the game. EA itself then worries about funding, marketing, and so on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Publishers can do good and bad , and have done both .
Likewise developers can do well one their own , or poorly .
Overall I 'd say publishers are useful.One of the biggest things they do is provide resources to get games developed that otherwise might not be able to be made .
If you are a small games studio , you probably do n't have the money to work on a large scale title for a couple years with no money coming in , and additionally buy other things you may need ( like if you need to hire an outside composer , because you do n't have one ) .
Well , a publisher can provide that .
You sell them your idea , they pony up the money for you to make it a reality.Another useful thing they do is setting deadlines .
If they are stupid about it sure it can be a problem , but when it gets down to it this needs to be done .
You ca n't work on a game forever .
Technology changes , you have to get it out in a reasonable timeline .
While developers might get all wrapped up in their project and just want it to go on forever , publishers can be more objective and set goals .
A game that is n't everything you want , but it fun and actually on the market is much better than a " perfect " game that never exists.Also even if a game studio totally develops a game in house , self funded and everything , they may choose to sell it to a publisher .
Reason is that when a game is released there is still stuff to be done .
It has to be marketed , it has to be distributed , etc .
A game studio does n't always have the staff/resources for that , so they hand it off to someone else.An example of a situation where a publisher was really needed was Duke Nukem Forever .
While it technically had a publisher ( Take Two ) , they were n't in the typical arrangement of funding it .
As such 3D Realms could basically do what they pleased , they were footing the bill .
What happened was a decade of unfocused running around and now a canceled game because they ran out of money.Now an example where a game was fine without a publisher would be Galactic Civilizations 2 .
Stardock decided that since they 'd been screwed over by a publisher on GC1 , they 'd just self publish .
The game came out in a reasonable amount of time , with a low budget , and sold well on account of being a rocking title.Overall , publishers are probalby useful .
In part just because it creates something of a division between the creative and business sides of a game .
You 'll notice that even large integrated game houses often function in the developer/publisher setting .
EA owns a lot of game companies , and if they wanted to they could simply make it all " EA " .
They would be the developers , publishers , and so on .
However they do n't seem to do that .
They have separate internal game studios , with their own headquarters and so on that develop the game , and the EA publishes it .
Even their EA label stuff is that way .
EA Sports is a subsidiary in Vancouver ( with it 's own CEO and so on ) , whereas EA itself is in Redwood.My guess is they do it that way because it works better .
The development subsidiaries are just " developers " and just worry about making the game .
EA itself then worries about funding , marketing , and so on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Publishers can do good and bad, and have done both.
Likewise developers can do well one their own, or poorly.
Overall I'd say publishers are useful.One of the biggest things they do is provide resources to get games developed that otherwise might not be able to be made.
If you are a small games studio, you probably don't have the money to work on a large scale title for a couple years with no money coming in, and additionally buy other things you may need (like if you need to hire an outside composer, because you don't have one).
Well, a publisher can provide that.
You sell them your idea, they pony up the money for you to make it a reality.Another useful thing they do is setting deadlines.
If they are stupid about it sure it can be a problem, but when it gets down to it this needs to be done.
You can't work on a game forever.
Technology changes, you have to get it out in a reasonable timeline.
While developers might get all wrapped up in their project and just want it to go on forever, publishers can be more objective and set goals.
A game that isn't everything you want, but it fun and actually on the market is much better than a "perfect" game that never exists.Also even if a game studio totally develops a game in house, self funded and everything, they may choose to sell it to a publisher.
Reason is that when a game is released there is still stuff to be done.
It has to be marketed, it has to be distributed, etc.
A game studio doesn't always have the staff/resources for that, so they hand it off to someone else.An example of a situation where a publisher was really needed was Duke Nukem Forever.
While it technically had a publisher (Take Two), they weren't in the typical arrangement of funding it.
As such 3D Realms could basically do what they pleased, they were footing the bill.
What happened was a decade of unfocused running around and now a canceled game because they ran out of money.Now an example where a game was fine without a publisher would be Galactic Civilizations 2.
Stardock decided that since they'd been screwed over by a publisher on GC1, they'd just self publish.
The game came out in a reasonable amount of time, with a low budget, and sold well on account of being a rocking title.Overall, publishers are probalby useful.
In part just because it creates something of a division between the creative and business sides of a game.
You'll notice that even large integrated game houses often function in the developer/publisher setting.
EA owns a lot of game companies, and if they wanted to they could simply make it all "EA".
They would be the developers, publishers, and so on.
However they don't seem to do that.
They have separate internal game studios, with their own headquarters and so on that develop the game, and the EA publishes it.
Even their EA label stuff is that way.
EA Sports is a subsidiary in Vancouver (with it's own CEO and so on), whereas EA itself is in Redwood.My guess is they do it that way because it works better.
The development subsidiaries are just "developers" and just worry about making the game.
EA itself then worries about funding, marketing, and so on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845769</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>Talgrath</author>
	<datestamp>1256311320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bullshit.  What was the last game you played that you really enjoyed that didn't have a publisher?  What was the last game you played that was well known (by the public at large) that didn't have a publisher?  Making a great game is good, but it doesn't pay the bills unless you can sell it to somebody.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bullshit .
What was the last game you played that you really enjoyed that did n't have a publisher ?
What was the last game you played that was well known ( by the public at large ) that did n't have a publisher ?
Making a great game is good , but it does n't pay the bills unless you can sell it to somebody .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bullshit.
What was the last game you played that you really enjoyed that didn't have a publisher?
What was the last game you played that was well known (by the public at large) that didn't have a publisher?
Making a great game is good, but it doesn't pay the bills unless you can sell it to somebody.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844631</id>
	<title>Publishers are not the problem</title>
	<author>jonwil</author>
	<datestamp>1256304120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is the large publishers like EA and Activision and Atari (many of which also have in-house development shops) and the fact that said large publishers wont publish anything thats in any way new or different.</p><p>What the games industry needs is publishers that are similar to what Fox Searchlight and similar studios are to the movie industry (i.e. someone willing to do smaller indy games).</p><p>And we need publishers (and retailers) that realize that not all games need graphics that push a GeForce 9800GT to its limits, audio that is best heard on a 8.2 channel speaker setup and 5-year development times.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is the large publishers like EA and Activision and Atari ( many of which also have in-house development shops ) and the fact that said large publishers wont publish anything thats in any way new or different.What the games industry needs is publishers that are similar to what Fox Searchlight and similar studios are to the movie industry ( i.e .
someone willing to do smaller indy games ) .And we need publishers ( and retailers ) that realize that not all games need graphics that push a GeForce 9800GT to its limits , audio that is best heard on a 8.2 channel speaker setup and 5-year development times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is the large publishers like EA and Activision and Atari (many of which also have in-house development shops) and the fact that said large publishers wont publish anything thats in any way new or different.What the games industry needs is publishers that are similar to what Fox Searchlight and similar studios are to the movie industry (i.e.
someone willing to do smaller indy games).And we need publishers (and retailers) that realize that not all games need graphics that push a GeForce 9800GT to its limits, audio that is best heard on a 8.2 channel speaker setup and 5-year development times.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847003</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256317860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Old school publishers will probably all either go out of business, or radically change their business methods. Book publishers will probably be the last to go; on-demand printing will be their downfall. RIAA-style music labels will probably be the first, because they think they're selling music. Book publishers know they don't sell novels, they sell books, even if their marketing depts sell novels.</p><p>The trouble with publishers is they're listening to their own marketers, who don't sell the steak, they sell the sizzle. Music publishers should "sell" the music by selling CDs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Old school publishers will probably all either go out of business , or radically change their business methods .
Book publishers will probably be the last to go ; on-demand printing will be their downfall .
RIAA-style music labels will probably be the first , because they think they 're selling music .
Book publishers know they do n't sell novels , they sell books , even if their marketing depts sell novels.The trouble with publishers is they 're listening to their own marketers , who do n't sell the steak , they sell the sizzle .
Music publishers should " sell " the music by selling CDs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Old school publishers will probably all either go out of business, or radically change their business methods.
Book publishers will probably be the last to go; on-demand printing will be their downfall.
RIAA-style music labels will probably be the first, because they think they're selling music.
Book publishers know they don't sell novels, they sell books, even if their marketing depts sell novels.The trouble with publishers is they're listening to their own marketers, who don't sell the steak, they sell the sizzle.
Music publishers should "sell" the music by selling CDs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849849</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>Libertarian001</author>
	<datestamp>1256328600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  It'll sell itself, will it?  And yes, that is what you're claiming.  Shall we starting a talley of how many great products have failed because of this idiotic mentality?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
It 'll sell itself , will it ?
And yes , that is what you 're claiming .
Shall we starting a talley of how many great products have failed because of this idiotic mentality ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
It'll sell itself, will it?
And yes, that is what you're claiming.
Shall we starting a talley of how many great products have failed because of this idiotic mentality?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845587</id>
	<title>I fixed it for you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256310360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Are Game Publishers a Necessary Evil, Or Just Evil?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Are Game Publishers a Necessary Evil , Or Just Evil ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Are Game Publishers a Necessary Evil, Or Just Evil?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845273</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1256308680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You need publishers to take off the burden of marketing from you, so you can concentrate on what you do best: development.</p></div> </blockquote><p>That's a good theory, and not just for games.  But in practice, it's always the developers who get shafted in that arrangement.  The marketing, sales, and business people get the control and the big bucks, and the developers are treated like interchangeable widget-makers.  And in case you think that's a valid distribution of reward given the risks, note that if the product flops, the developers get laid off first.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You need publishers to take off the burden of marketing from you , so you can concentrate on what you do best : development .
That 's a good theory , and not just for games .
But in practice , it 's always the developers who get shafted in that arrangement .
The marketing , sales , and business people get the control and the big bucks , and the developers are treated like interchangeable widget-makers .
And in case you think that 's a valid distribution of reward given the risks , note that if the product flops , the developers get laid off first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need publishers to take off the burden of marketing from you, so you can concentrate on what you do best: development.
That's a good theory, and not just for games.
But in practice, it's always the developers who get shafted in that arrangement.
The marketing, sales, and business people get the control and the big bucks, and the developers are treated like interchangeable widget-makers.
And in case you think that's a valid distribution of reward given the risks, note that if the product flops, the developers get laid off first.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845795</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1256311380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Everybody can rent a server for a couple of dollars, and offer his game there.</p></div><p>A video game console's shop app would never think to look on your server.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody can rent a server for a couple of dollars , and offer his game there.A video game console 's shop app would never think to look on your server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody can rent a server for a couple of dollars, and offer his game there.A video game console's shop app would never think to look on your server.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844933</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256306160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did badanalogyguy write the article? Comparing developers with children and publishers with parents is a worse analogy than anything I've ever seen badanalogy guy ever post. It's not that the publishers "know best"; they don't, but parents in fact DO know best and are looking out for their kids' best interests, even at the cost of giving up their own best interests. Publishers aren't looking out for developers' best interests, they're looking out for the stockholders' best interests. When it comes to game design, how would a PFB be better at knowing what's best in a game? Developers are perfectly right to rebel.</p><p>I suspect the article was written by a teenager, or someone who was recently a teenager who has yet to become a parent.</p><p>You hit the nail on the head. It's more like the relationship between an RIAA record company and their musicians. And there are many, many paralells -- such as the use of DRM, which failed miserably back in the floppy days, when we refused to buy such games and the houses that employed DRM went kaput. A tech company should KNOW that DRM is as big of a fraud as any snake oil. It can't possibly work. Yet they keep trying.</p><p>These corporations should let their creative people (musicians and singers in the case of the RIAA, coders and visual artists in the case of games) create and stay the hell out of it until the work of art (game or album) is finished, then market the damned thing.</p><p>I'm reminded of Die Hard IV, where the suits decided that they'd tone it down to the point where it wouldn't have to be censored for TV, and it sucked. A PG-13 Die Hard? Those MPAA execs need to put that coke spoon down. The theatrical release went over like a lead balloon; the movie wasn't Die Hard. When they released the "unrated" version on DVD, it was as good as (maybe better than) the previous three.</p><p>The games industry should realize that what they are producing is art, and let their artists create in a free environment.</p><p>The Original DOOM and Wolfenstein had only a handful of guys making them. Seeing as how software development tools are far less primitive than they were twenty years ago when these games came out, I don't understand how they can spend millions developing today's games. Except for the graphics I don't see any difference in today's games, except that they just aren't as fun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did badanalogyguy write the article ?
Comparing developers with children and publishers with parents is a worse analogy than anything I 've ever seen badanalogy guy ever post .
It 's not that the publishers " know best " ; they do n't , but parents in fact DO know best and are looking out for their kids ' best interests , even at the cost of giving up their own best interests .
Publishers are n't looking out for developers ' best interests , they 're looking out for the stockholders ' best interests .
When it comes to game design , how would a PFB be better at knowing what 's best in a game ?
Developers are perfectly right to rebel.I suspect the article was written by a teenager , or someone who was recently a teenager who has yet to become a parent.You hit the nail on the head .
It 's more like the relationship between an RIAA record company and their musicians .
And there are many , many paralells -- such as the use of DRM , which failed miserably back in the floppy days , when we refused to buy such games and the houses that employed DRM went kaput .
A tech company should KNOW that DRM is as big of a fraud as any snake oil .
It ca n't possibly work .
Yet they keep trying.These corporations should let their creative people ( musicians and singers in the case of the RIAA , coders and visual artists in the case of games ) create and stay the hell out of it until the work of art ( game or album ) is finished , then market the damned thing.I 'm reminded of Die Hard IV , where the suits decided that they 'd tone it down to the point where it would n't have to be censored for TV , and it sucked .
A PG-13 Die Hard ?
Those MPAA execs need to put that coke spoon down .
The theatrical release went over like a lead balloon ; the movie was n't Die Hard .
When they released the " unrated " version on DVD , it was as good as ( maybe better than ) the previous three.The games industry should realize that what they are producing is art , and let their artists create in a free environment.The Original DOOM and Wolfenstein had only a handful of guys making them .
Seeing as how software development tools are far less primitive than they were twenty years ago when these games came out , I do n't understand how they can spend millions developing today 's games .
Except for the graphics I do n't see any difference in today 's games , except that they just are n't as fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did badanalogyguy write the article?
Comparing developers with children and publishers with parents is a worse analogy than anything I've ever seen badanalogy guy ever post.
It's not that the publishers "know best"; they don't, but parents in fact DO know best and are looking out for their kids' best interests, even at the cost of giving up their own best interests.
Publishers aren't looking out for developers' best interests, they're looking out for the stockholders' best interests.
When it comes to game design, how would a PFB be better at knowing what's best in a game?
Developers are perfectly right to rebel.I suspect the article was written by a teenager, or someone who was recently a teenager who has yet to become a parent.You hit the nail on the head.
It's more like the relationship between an RIAA record company and their musicians.
And there are many, many paralells -- such as the use of DRM, which failed miserably back in the floppy days, when we refused to buy such games and the houses that employed DRM went kaput.
A tech company should KNOW that DRM is as big of a fraud as any snake oil.
It can't possibly work.
Yet they keep trying.These corporations should let their creative people (musicians and singers in the case of the RIAA, coders and visual artists in the case of games) create and stay the hell out of it until the work of art (game or album) is finished, then market the damned thing.I'm reminded of Die Hard IV, where the suits decided that they'd tone it down to the point where it wouldn't have to be censored for TV, and it sucked.
A PG-13 Die Hard?
Those MPAA execs need to put that coke spoon down.
The theatrical release went over like a lead balloon; the movie wasn't Die Hard.
When they released the "unrated" version on DVD, it was as good as (maybe better than) the previous three.The games industry should realize that what they are producing is art, and let their artists create in a free environment.The Original DOOM and Wolfenstein had only a handful of guys making them.
Seeing as how software development tools are far less primitive than they were twenty years ago when these games came out, I don't understand how they can spend millions developing today's games.
Except for the graphics I don't see any difference in today's games, except that they just aren't as fun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844251</id>
	<title>Totally unnecessary</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1256300160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an Internet connection. I can rent bandwidth and rent or buy space on a web server. I can broadcast news of my game via social networking, message boards and other free medium. If I can work out how to write games, managing a web server isn't going to be brain surgery.What the fuck do I need a publisher for? I'm not unique.</p><p>Publishers fuck off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an Internet connection .
I can rent bandwidth and rent or buy space on a web server .
I can broadcast news of my game via social networking , message boards and other free medium .
If I can work out how to write games , managing a web server is n't going to be brain surgery.What the fuck do I need a publisher for ?
I 'm not unique.Publishers fuck off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an Internet connection.
I can rent bandwidth and rent or buy space on a web server.
I can broadcast news of my game via social networking, message boards and other free medium.
If I can work out how to write games, managing a web server isn't going to be brain surgery.What the fuck do I need a publisher for?
I'm not unique.Publishers fuck off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029</id>
	<title>Third option</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just Evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just Evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just Evil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29850949</id>
	<title>When you ask questions like this...</title>
	<author>poofmeisterp</author>
	<datestamp>1256289600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you ask questions like this, you'll get a lot of answers and just spark debate.</p><p>The only answers that contain the true form of "answer" are from the subjects in question.  Ask the developers.  Ask the publishers.  What are their answers?</p><p>Once you have those, there will be another debate to be had, because there will be liars and truth-tellers.  Both will be coming from positive and negative perspectives.</p><p>In the end, there isn't an answer.  Just hypothesis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you ask questions like this , you 'll get a lot of answers and just spark debate.The only answers that contain the true form of " answer " are from the subjects in question .
Ask the developers .
Ask the publishers .
What are their answers ? Once you have those , there will be another debate to be had , because there will be liars and truth-tellers .
Both will be coming from positive and negative perspectives.In the end , there is n't an answer .
Just hypothesis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you ask questions like this, you'll get a lot of answers and just spark debate.The only answers that contain the true form of "answer" are from the subjects in question.
Ask the developers.
Ask the publishers.
What are their answers?Once you have those, there will be another debate to be had, because there will be liars and truth-tellers.
Both will be coming from positive and negative perspectives.In the end, there isn't an answer.
Just hypothesis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005</id>
	<title>Publishers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Films, books, music and games all have publishers that push for them to complete for deadlines, yet I've never heard of an artist (painter, sculpter, whatever) pushed for a deadline due to their sponsors money issues, Certainly for public displays marking an event, but they're generally given generous amounts of time in the first place prior to starting.</p><p>Maybe someone will burst my bubble and reveal that all artists are pushed by publishers, it's just that we never hear about it, but if not, what is so different about a painting or sculpture as a labour of love than a game or film as the same?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Films , books , music and games all have publishers that push for them to complete for deadlines , yet I 've never heard of an artist ( painter , sculpter , whatever ) pushed for a deadline due to their sponsors money issues , Certainly for public displays marking an event , but they 're generally given generous amounts of time in the first place prior to starting.Maybe someone will burst my bubble and reveal that all artists are pushed by publishers , it 's just that we never hear about it , but if not , what is so different about a painting or sculpture as a labour of love than a game or film as the same ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Films, books, music and games all have publishers that push for them to complete for deadlines, yet I've never heard of an artist (painter, sculpter, whatever) pushed for a deadline due to their sponsors money issues, Certainly for public displays marking an event, but they're generally given generous amounts of time in the first place prior to starting.Maybe someone will burst my bubble and reveal that all artists are pushed by publishers, it's just that we never hear about it, but if not, what is so different about a painting or sculpture as a labour of love than a game or film as the same?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29852481</id>
	<title>Can we get a 'stupidanalogy' tag?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256297520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>well?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>well ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844031</id>
	<title>Just evil</title>
	<author>stjobe</author>
	<datestamp>1256297040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just evil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844247</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers</title>
	<author>ivucica</author>
	<datestamp>1256300100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Games, films etc. are made to make money, not to just satisfy artistic desires. Sculptures and paintings can only sell because of some perceived originality or artistic value; they don't have continued entertainment value (and by continued I mean longer than 10min). Sponsor <i>thanks</i> the artist, publisher <i>invests</i> into the creator.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Games , films etc .
are made to make money , not to just satisfy artistic desires .
Sculptures and paintings can only sell because of some perceived originality or artistic value ; they do n't have continued entertainment value ( and by continued I mean longer than 10min ) .
Sponsor thanks the artist , publisher invests into the creator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games, films etc.
are made to make money, not to just satisfy artistic desires.
Sculptures and paintings can only sell because of some perceived originality or artistic value; they don't have continued entertainment value (and by continued I mean longer than 10min).
Sponsor thanks the artist, publisher invests into the creator.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844107</id>
	<title>please land..... somewhere</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256298060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/10/23/airliner.fly.by/index.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/10/23/airliner.fly.by/index.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/10/23/airliner.fly.by/index.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844237</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>ivucica</author>
	<datestamp>1256299920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>By not having a publisher, you don't have a way to reach the audience. In short -- without publisher, you can usually shove your unconventional game up your you-know-what, since it won't have audience and won't sell. Without a publisher, the distributors (online and offline) tend to send you away. Guess how I know what a difference a publisher makes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By not having a publisher , you do n't have a way to reach the audience .
In short -- without publisher , you can usually shove your unconventional game up your you-know-what , since it wo n't have audience and wo n't sell .
Without a publisher , the distributors ( online and offline ) tend to send you away .
Guess how I know what a difference a publisher makes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By not having a publisher, you don't have a way to reach the audience.
In short -- without publisher, you can usually shove your unconventional game up your you-know-what, since it won't have audience and won't sell.
Without a publisher, the distributors (online and offline) tend to send you away.
Guess how I know what a difference a publisher makes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844567</id>
	<title>Maybe there is room for more App Stores?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256303580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People have varying degrees of love or hate for Apple, but most will agree that even as frustrating as it can be for developers, the Apple App Store has been wildly successful at promoting, delivering and managing the marketing and updates of iphone and ipod touch applications.  They take 30\%, but they handle all the mechanics and don't require you to sell your soul.  The beauty is that any regular joe developer is on a level playing field against the big boys - the EAs and the Zynga's of the world.  Any one can build a game and successfully sell it through the App Store.</p><p>Why can't this model be created generically outside of Apple to apply to all other applications, games, books, music, art and anything else that traditionally required a publisher or middleman?  Combine the best features of App Store, Zazzle, Amazon, Ebay, and Deviant into one really cool, state of the art website where the owner takes 25\% or something and lets the developer/artist/writer call the shots?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People have varying degrees of love or hate for Apple , but most will agree that even as frustrating as it can be for developers , the Apple App Store has been wildly successful at promoting , delivering and managing the marketing and updates of iphone and ipod touch applications .
They take 30 \ % , but they handle all the mechanics and do n't require you to sell your soul .
The beauty is that any regular joe developer is on a level playing field against the big boys - the EAs and the Zynga 's of the world .
Any one can build a game and successfully sell it through the App Store.Why ca n't this model be created generically outside of Apple to apply to all other applications , games , books , music , art and anything else that traditionally required a publisher or middleman ?
Combine the best features of App Store , Zazzle , Amazon , Ebay , and Deviant into one really cool , state of the art website where the owner takes 25 \ % or something and lets the developer/artist/writer call the shots ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have varying degrees of love or hate for Apple, but most will agree that even as frustrating as it can be for developers, the Apple App Store has been wildly successful at promoting, delivering and managing the marketing and updates of iphone and ipod touch applications.
They take 30\%, but they handle all the mechanics and don't require you to sell your soul.
The beauty is that any regular joe developer is on a level playing field against the big boys - the EAs and the Zynga's of the world.
Any one can build a game and successfully sell it through the App Store.Why can't this model be created generically outside of Apple to apply to all other applications, games, books, music, art and anything else that traditionally required a publisher or middleman?
Combine the best features of App Store, Zazzle, Amazon, Ebay, and Deviant into one really cool, state of the art website where the owner takes 25\% or something and lets the developer/artist/writer call the shots?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846537</id>
	<title>Welcome to Art</title>
	<author>tthomas48</author>
	<datestamp>1256315400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We have a wide spectrum. Avant-garde. Commercial. Some artists get large grants from the government or private foundations. Some don't. It's like movie production. Or theater production. Or sculpture. Some things can only be done with the large amount of investment that commercial dollars can provide. Some can be done in the artists free time with little up front investment. Getting the commercial dollars involves having more hands in the mix to make sure the end product is commercially viable.</p><p>These complaints go back to ancient Rome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We have a wide spectrum .
Avant-garde. Commercial .
Some artists get large grants from the government or private foundations .
Some do n't .
It 's like movie production .
Or theater production .
Or sculpture .
Some things can only be done with the large amount of investment that commercial dollars can provide .
Some can be done in the artists free time with little up front investment .
Getting the commercial dollars involves having more hands in the mix to make sure the end product is commercially viable.These complaints go back to ancient Rome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have a wide spectrum.
Avant-garde. Commercial.
Some artists get large grants from the government or private foundations.
Some don't.
It's like movie production.
Or theater production.
Or sculpture.
Some things can only be done with the large amount of investment that commercial dollars can provide.
Some can be done in the artists free time with little up front investment.
Getting the commercial dollars involves having more hands in the mix to make sure the end product is commercially viable.These complaints go back to ancient Rome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844385</id>
	<title>A matter of size?</title>
	<author>sten ben</author>
	<datestamp>1256301660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't help but wondering if it is a matter of size. It seems, just from casual observation, that the bigger the publisher gets the less inclined it gets to allow innovation. Actually that seems to be a pattern in most areas, perhaps, as profits and revenues increase, human caution kicks in. More to loose, less to gain so to speak.</p><p>
Taking risks is only natural for those with either nothing to loose or with enough resources that a loss doesn't matter.</p><p>
Of course this is just speculation, and I have enough papers to read to bother looking into this. Anyone else?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't help but wondering if it is a matter of size .
It seems , just from casual observation , that the bigger the publisher gets the less inclined it gets to allow innovation .
Actually that seems to be a pattern in most areas , perhaps , as profits and revenues increase , human caution kicks in .
More to loose , less to gain so to speak .
Taking risks is only natural for those with either nothing to loose or with enough resources that a loss does n't matter .
Of course this is just speculation , and I have enough papers to read to bother looking into this .
Anyone else ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't help but wondering if it is a matter of size.
It seems, just from casual observation, that the bigger the publisher gets the less inclined it gets to allow innovation.
Actually that seems to be a pattern in most areas, perhaps, as profits and revenues increase, human caution kicks in.
More to loose, less to gain so to speak.
Taking risks is only natural for those with either nothing to loose or with enough resources that a loss doesn't matter.
Of course this is just speculation, and I have enough papers to read to bother looking into this.
Anyone else?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849871</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>TrollHammer</author>
	<datestamp>1256328780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In a way, you may or may not need a publisher depending on what you're developing.

A lot of the generic titles that the "industry" keeps pumping out require a publisher for marketing such a mediocre game. But then you get the unconventional games whose development is actually hampered by having a publisher breathe down your neck and make games easier for the general public.</p></div><p>Yes, I agree: It is a terrible analogy. I think there is a perfect one: a director/screenwriter and a producer. The director (or the screenwriter, it depends) knows what film he or she wants to do, but the producer believes that he or she knowns what to do in order to make the movie a economical success. For instance: cast Scarlett Johansson in a semi-nude scene. That is a thing a producer would love to do (lots of tickets sold), but the director may not want Johansson in such a role, because it does not make sense in his or her film, or he or she though about another kind of actress for the role.<br>
<br>
Ok, maybe Johansson is a bad example, who wouldn't want her in such a role?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D But I guess my point about the analogy stands.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a way , you may or may not need a publisher depending on what you 're developing .
A lot of the generic titles that the " industry " keeps pumping out require a publisher for marketing such a mediocre game .
But then you get the unconventional games whose development is actually hampered by having a publisher breathe down your neck and make games easier for the general public.Yes , I agree : It is a terrible analogy .
I think there is a perfect one : a director/screenwriter and a producer .
The director ( or the screenwriter , it depends ) knows what film he or she wants to do , but the producer believes that he or she knowns what to do in order to make the movie a economical success .
For instance : cast Scarlett Johansson in a semi-nude scene .
That is a thing a producer would love to do ( lots of tickets sold ) , but the director may not want Johansson in such a role , because it does not make sense in his or her film , or he or she though about another kind of actress for the role .
Ok , maybe Johansson is a bad example , who would n't want her in such a role ?
: D But I guess my point about the analogy stands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a way, you may or may not need a publisher depending on what you're developing.
A lot of the generic titles that the "industry" keeps pumping out require a publisher for marketing such a mediocre game.
But then you get the unconventional games whose development is actually hampered by having a publisher breathe down your neck and make games easier for the general public.Yes, I agree: It is a terrible analogy.
I think there is a perfect one: a director/screenwriter and a producer.
The director (or the screenwriter, it depends) knows what film he or she wants to do, but the producer believes that he or she knowns what to do in order to make the movie a economical success.
For instance: cast Scarlett Johansson in a semi-nude scene.
That is a thing a producer would love to do (lots of tickets sold), but the director may not want Johansson in such a role, because it does not make sense in his or her film, or he or she though about another kind of actress for the role.
Ok, maybe Johansson is a bad example, who wouldn't want her in such a role?
:D But I guess my point about the analogy stands.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844211</id>
	<title>Follow these steps</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1256299560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Create a bad analogy<br>2. Get lost in your own analogy because it's so bad<br>3. Make sure you submit story title as a question<br>4. YESNOMAYBE</p><p>PS: Publishers suck. Haven't you noticed how hard it's getting to find PC games, even in game stores like Gamestop? THEY have decided to shift everything to consoles, because consoles "can't be pirated". They are middlemen that often add little value to software, and yet expect EVERYONE (devs AND consumers) to dance to their tune.</p><p>It's the 21st century. If Steam/Gamersgate/whoever can sell me a game online as a download and/or as a boxed set, ANY developer can. This model has worked successfully in the past for independent companies that have chosen to implement it. The cost of the bandwidth is nothing compared to what the publisher is going to screw you with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Create a bad analogy2 .
Get lost in your own analogy because it 's so bad3 .
Make sure you submit story title as a question4 .
YESNOMAYBEPS : Publishers suck .
Have n't you noticed how hard it 's getting to find PC games , even in game stores like Gamestop ?
THEY have decided to shift everything to consoles , because consoles " ca n't be pirated " .
They are middlemen that often add little value to software , and yet expect EVERYONE ( devs AND consumers ) to dance to their tune.It 's the 21st century .
If Steam/Gamersgate/whoever can sell me a game online as a download and/or as a boxed set , ANY developer can .
This model has worked successfully in the past for independent companies that have chosen to implement it .
The cost of the bandwidth is nothing compared to what the publisher is going to screw you with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Create a bad analogy2.
Get lost in your own analogy because it's so bad3.
Make sure you submit story title as a question4.
YESNOMAYBEPS: Publishers suck.
Haven't you noticed how hard it's getting to find PC games, even in game stores like Gamestop?
THEY have decided to shift everything to consoles, because consoles "can't be pirated".
They are middlemen that often add little value to software, and yet expect EVERYONE (devs AND consumers) to dance to their tune.It's the 21st century.
If Steam/Gamersgate/whoever can sell me a game online as a download and/or as a boxed set, ANY developer can.
This model has worked successfully in the past for independent companies that have chosen to implement it.
The cost of the bandwidth is nothing compared to what the publisher is going to screw you with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847181</id>
	<title>Re:Third option</title>
	<author>TheVelvetFlamebait</author>
	<datestamp>1256318700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the funny thing about options. "Just Evil" <i>sounds</i> like an option (as does "Neither" for that matter), but for most people, it really isn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the funny thing about options .
" Just Evil " sounds like an option ( as does " Neither " for that matter ) , but for most people , it really is n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the funny thing about options.
"Just Evil" sounds like an option (as does "Neither" for that matter), but for most people, it really isn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844017</id>
	<title>Father and Child?</title>
	<author>Thanshin</author>
	<datestamp>1256296800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The analogy is completely wrong and misused.</p><p>For starters, where's the car?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The analogy is completely wrong and misused.For starters , where 's the car ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The analogy is completely wrong and misused.For starters, where's the car?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846731</id>
	<title>Re:Father and Child?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1256316480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For starters, where's the car?</p></div><p>The car is the game reviewers. And it was hit and run, I'm afraid, which is why you don't see it anymore.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For starters , where 's the car ? The car is the game reviewers .
And it was hit and run , I 'm afraid , which is why you do n't see it anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For starters, where's the car?The car is the game reviewers.
And it was hit and run, I'm afraid, which is why you don't see it anymore.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844463</id>
	<title>how about</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256302500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how about we stop the collective ideological masturbation and come down to the issues that matter:</p><p>where will my next really good meal be<br>when will i get laid<br>what clothes are there for me to wear<br>what car do i drive</p><p>once we sort this out, we can talk about videogames god dammit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how about we stop the collective ideological masturbation and come down to the issues that matter : where will my next really good meal bewhen will i get laidwhat clothes are there for me to wearwhat car do i driveonce we sort this out , we can talk about videogames god dammit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how about we stop the collective ideological masturbation and come down to the issues that matter:where will my next really good meal bewhen will i get laidwhat clothes are there for me to wearwhat car do i driveonce we sort this out, we can talk about videogames god dammit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844245</id>
	<title>Fourth Option</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256300100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29856435</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>metaforest</author>
	<datestamp>1256397420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First rule of self publishing game software:</p><p>DO NOT QUIT YOUR DAY JOB!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First rule of self publishing game software : DO NOT QUIT YOUR DAY JOB !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First rule of self publishing game software:DO NOT QUIT YOUR DAY JOB!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844357</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers</title>
	<author>Benjo</author>
	<datestamp>1256301420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>My sister in law is a sculpter, believe me she knows all about deadlines.  Most of her work is commissioned by either wealthy people or companies like hotels.  It takes a while to make a large sculpture but they definitely want it on time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My sister in law is a sculpter , believe me she knows all about deadlines .
Most of her work is commissioned by either wealthy people or companies like hotels .
It takes a while to make a large sculpture but they definitely want it on time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My sister in law is a sculpter, believe me she knows all about deadlines.
Most of her work is commissioned by either wealthy people or companies like hotels.
It takes a while to make a large sculpture but they definitely want it on time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847069</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe there is room for more App Stores?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256318160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>oh, you mean like <a href="http://steampowered.com/" title="steampowered.com" rel="nofollow">Steam?</a> [steampowered.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>oh , you mean like Steam ?
[ steampowered.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh, you mean like Steam?
[steampowered.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29850657</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers</title>
	<author>poofmeisterp</author>
	<datestamp>1256288520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Films, books, music and games all have publishers that push for them to complete for deadlines, yet I've never heard of an artist (painter, sculpter, whatever) pushed for a deadline due to their sponsors money issues, Certainly for public displays marking an event, but they're generally given generous amounts of time in the first place prior to starting.</p></div><p>Good point.  I won't burst your bubble, but I'll throw another one out to be burst by others...</p><p>Is this story about ALL game development, or is it just about the rush-to-market tendencies of a particular group of companies that certain developers go to work for?</p><p>- A few companies rush and push out crap.<br>- A few rush and push out good stuff, but the developers may or may not have suffered; the price may or may not be reasonable.<br>- A few companies are slow and develop good products, but they may or may not have bugs or "lacking [blah]" stuff.</p><p>What are you basing your point on, oh author?  You having trouble finding work right now?  Is this a school project?</p><p>Not enough variables, too much time.  Wait, strike that, reverse it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Films , books , music and games all have publishers that push for them to complete for deadlines , yet I 've never heard of an artist ( painter , sculpter , whatever ) pushed for a deadline due to their sponsors money issues , Certainly for public displays marking an event , but they 're generally given generous amounts of time in the first place prior to starting.Good point .
I wo n't burst your bubble , but I 'll throw another one out to be burst by others...Is this story about ALL game development , or is it just about the rush-to-market tendencies of a particular group of companies that certain developers go to work for ? - A few companies rush and push out crap.- A few rush and push out good stuff , but the developers may or may not have suffered ; the price may or may not be reasonable.- A few companies are slow and develop good products , but they may or may not have bugs or " lacking [ blah ] " stuff.What are you basing your point on , oh author ?
You having trouble finding work right now ?
Is this a school project ? Not enough variables , too much time .
Wait , strike that , reverse it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Films, books, music and games all have publishers that push for them to complete for deadlines, yet I've never heard of an artist (painter, sculpter, whatever) pushed for a deadline due to their sponsors money issues, Certainly for public displays marking an event, but they're generally given generous amounts of time in the first place prior to starting.Good point.
I won't burst your bubble, but I'll throw another one out to be burst by others...Is this story about ALL game development, or is it just about the rush-to-market tendencies of a particular group of companies that certain developers go to work for?- A few companies rush and push out crap.- A few rush and push out good stuff, but the developers may or may not have suffered; the price may or may not be reasonable.- A few companies are slow and develop good products, but they may or may not have bugs or "lacking [blah]" stuff.What are you basing your point on, oh author?
You having trouble finding work right now?
Is this a school project?Not enough variables, too much time.
Wait, strike that, reverse it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</id>
	<title>NEITHER!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256300460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a game designer, and I don't see any point at all to game "publishers". Everybody can rent a server for a couple of dollars, and offer his game there. People can pay with paypal. It's also really easy to offer other payment options (e.g. with web shops). Then you can pay a marketing company to do advertisements for you. Put videos on YouTube, make a nice game site, maybe some local real-world ads. And a ton of viral marketing.</p><p>What more do you need nowadays?</p><p>Sure, you can always also put it in web shops, like Amazon, eBay, Steam, etc. But only as a second thought, because it has a big price attached to it most of the time, and you have to check its profitability first.<br>That's why I never ever go to actual game "publishers". With them, you are very unlikely to be profitable at all. Because they take giant profit margins of the actual retail price. And on top of that complete insult, they also want and assume all kinds of rights, and may actually damage your business. (e.g. Don't be surprised it they loudly think about suing you for still selling the game yourself on other channels!!)</p><p>So I call the title of TFA "game publisher FUD". Plain and simple.<br>If you so much as think about contacting a game publisher, you already have done your first error. Don't make the second one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a game designer , and I do n't see any point at all to game " publishers " .
Everybody can rent a server for a couple of dollars , and offer his game there .
People can pay with paypal .
It 's also really easy to offer other payment options ( e.g .
with web shops ) .
Then you can pay a marketing company to do advertisements for you .
Put videos on YouTube , make a nice game site , maybe some local real-world ads .
And a ton of viral marketing.What more do you need nowadays ? Sure , you can always also put it in web shops , like Amazon , eBay , Steam , etc .
But only as a second thought , because it has a big price attached to it most of the time , and you have to check its profitability first.That 's why I never ever go to actual game " publishers " .
With them , you are very unlikely to be profitable at all .
Because they take giant profit margins of the actual retail price .
And on top of that complete insult , they also want and assume all kinds of rights , and may actually damage your business .
( e.g. Do n't be surprised it they loudly think about suing you for still selling the game yourself on other channels ! !
) So I call the title of TFA " game publisher FUD " .
Plain and simple.If you so much as think about contacting a game publisher , you already have done your first error .
Do n't make the second one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a game designer, and I don't see any point at all to game "publishers".
Everybody can rent a server for a couple of dollars, and offer his game there.
People can pay with paypal.
It's also really easy to offer other payment options (e.g.
with web shops).
Then you can pay a marketing company to do advertisements for you.
Put videos on YouTube, make a nice game site, maybe some local real-world ads.
And a ton of viral marketing.What more do you need nowadays?Sure, you can always also put it in web shops, like Amazon, eBay, Steam, etc.
But only as a second thought, because it has a big price attached to it most of the time, and you have to check its profitability first.That's why I never ever go to actual game "publishers".
With them, you are very unlikely to be profitable at all.
Because they take giant profit margins of the actual retail price.
And on top of that complete insult, they also want and assume all kinds of rights, and may actually damage your business.
(e.g. Don't be surprised it they loudly think about suing you for still selling the game yourself on other channels!!
)So I call the title of TFA "game publisher FUD".
Plain and simple.If you so much as think about contacting a game publisher, you already have done your first error.
Don't make the second one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29859205</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>Christojojo</author>
	<datestamp>1256375460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes and no to your reply Talgrath. Being pissy doesn't help either. The problem is not publishers. The problem is publishers that force everything their way.

I am a big Call of Duty, Battlefield, Half-life, and Fallout Fan. I voted this last round with my money. I bought and enjoyed the BF series even the console based 1943. I bought and enjoyed Fall OUT 1 and2 but didn't have time for tactical's epic battles so i skipped it. Being a purist I did not like the concept of FO3 so I voted no buy; my money my choice. With CoD 1 &amp; 2 I thought they were and still are fun games to play. Cod4 too many helicopters (freaking cheat like crazy) and points given for non-earned kills but I still play via mods. CoD 5 I voted with a purchase. It came out buggier than day old roadkill. I persevered through 3 updates and have been rewarded with some nice new maps and add-ons. The downside is still a game that crashes way too much.

The Problem With CoD5 is that is was a forced port of a console gaming done on a tight time schedule. It wasn't something that was made sure to be done with the least amount of bugs and tarnished the series rep. I have friends that have literally shredded the disc in irritation (grown men not teenagers either) in pure frustration. The saving point for CoD5 for me has been the mods and dedicated servers.

COD4-2 Modern Warfare 2 by publisher choice is going to get rid of mods and dedicated servers (at least at first.) The series was built and respected in the pc community and modders loved the game. Now due to a publisher- profit/ largest audience make money off  of every single asset and possibility is in serious danger of loosing the community that helped make it great.

Mods show new ways of playing games; give developers ways to see what could be done without much cost if any; breed loyalty; create a robust community that rivals sports. These things seem to be ignored for this mysterious larger audience that seem to want to play the games we have been playing for years.

Publishers lately seem to want to control too much and seem to be going the way of GM and other car makers. If you want windshield wipers you must buy gps. If you want a full size spare it will cost 200 bucks more in unwanted accessories. But I digress in frustration.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes and no to your reply Talgrath .
Being pissy does n't help either .
The problem is not publishers .
The problem is publishers that force everything their way .
I am a big Call of Duty , Battlefield , Half-life , and Fallout Fan .
I voted this last round with my money .
I bought and enjoyed the BF series even the console based 1943 .
I bought and enjoyed Fall OUT 1 and2 but did n't have time for tactical 's epic battles so i skipped it .
Being a purist I did not like the concept of FO3 so I voted no buy ; my money my choice .
With CoD 1 &amp; 2 I thought they were and still are fun games to play .
Cod4 too many helicopters ( freaking cheat like crazy ) and points given for non-earned kills but I still play via mods .
CoD 5 I voted with a purchase .
It came out buggier than day old roadkill .
I persevered through 3 updates and have been rewarded with some nice new maps and add-ons .
The downside is still a game that crashes way too much .
The Problem With CoD5 is that is was a forced port of a console gaming done on a tight time schedule .
It was n't something that was made sure to be done with the least amount of bugs and tarnished the series rep. I have friends that have literally shredded the disc in irritation ( grown men not teenagers either ) in pure frustration .
The saving point for CoD5 for me has been the mods and dedicated servers .
COD4-2 Modern Warfare 2 by publisher choice is going to get rid of mods and dedicated servers ( at least at first .
) The series was built and respected in the pc community and modders loved the game .
Now due to a publisher- profit/ largest audience make money off of every single asset and possibility is in serious danger of loosing the community that helped make it great .
Mods show new ways of playing games ; give developers ways to see what could be done without much cost if any ; breed loyalty ; create a robust community that rivals sports .
These things seem to be ignored for this mysterious larger audience that seem to want to play the games we have been playing for years .
Publishers lately seem to want to control too much and seem to be going the way of GM and other car makers .
If you want windshield wipers you must buy gps .
If you want a full size spare it will cost 200 bucks more in unwanted accessories .
But I digress in frustration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes and no to your reply Talgrath.
Being pissy doesn't help either.
The problem is not publishers.
The problem is publishers that force everything their way.
I am a big Call of Duty, Battlefield, Half-life, and Fallout Fan.
I voted this last round with my money.
I bought and enjoyed the BF series even the console based 1943.
I bought and enjoyed Fall OUT 1 and2 but didn't have time for tactical's epic battles so i skipped it.
Being a purist I did not like the concept of FO3 so I voted no buy; my money my choice.
With CoD 1 &amp; 2 I thought they were and still are fun games to play.
Cod4 too many helicopters (freaking cheat like crazy) and points given for non-earned kills but I still play via mods.
CoD 5 I voted with a purchase.
It came out buggier than day old roadkill.
I persevered through 3 updates and have been rewarded with some nice new maps and add-ons.
The downside is still a game that crashes way too much.
The Problem With CoD5 is that is was a forced port of a console gaming done on a tight time schedule.
It wasn't something that was made sure to be done with the least amount of bugs and tarnished the series rep. I have friends that have literally shredded the disc in irritation (grown men not teenagers either) in pure frustration.
The saving point for CoD5 for me has been the mods and dedicated servers.
COD4-2 Modern Warfare 2 by publisher choice is going to get rid of mods and dedicated servers (at least at first.
) The series was built and respected in the pc community and modders loved the game.
Now due to a publisher- profit/ largest audience make money off  of every single asset and possibility is in serious danger of loosing the community that helped make it great.
Mods show new ways of playing games; give developers ways to see what could be done without much cost if any; breed loyalty; create a robust community that rivals sports.
These things seem to be ignored for this mysterious larger audience that seem to want to play the games we have been playing for years.
Publishers lately seem to want to control too much and seem to be going the way of GM and other car makers.
If you want windshield wipers you must buy gps.
If you want a full size spare it will cost 200 bucks more in unwanted accessories.
But I digress in frustration.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846791</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers are not the problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256316720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And we need publishers (and retailers) that realize that not all games need graphics that push a GeForce 9800GT to its limits, audio that is best heard on a 8.2 channel speaker setup and 5-year development times.</p></div><p>Right. They just need graphics and sounds to the local limit of the Xbox 360 or PS3.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And we need publishers ( and retailers ) that realize that not all games need graphics that push a GeForce 9800GT to its limits , audio that is best heard on a 8.2 channel speaker setup and 5-year development times.Right .
They just need graphics and sounds to the local limit of the Xbox 360 or PS3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And we need publishers (and retailers) that realize that not all games need graphics that push a GeForce 9800GT to its limits, audio that is best heard on a 8.2 channel speaker setup and 5-year development times.Right.
They just need graphics and sounds to the local limit of the Xbox 360 or PS3.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844093</id>
	<title>Like anything else</title>
	<author>phanboy\_iv</author>
	<datestamp>1256297820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...sometimes a good thing and sometimes a bad thing. Publishers can obtain and manage capital, and if they deal fairly and wisely with the devs they fund it's a good thing.
<br> <br>
If, on the other hand, we have something like Activision/Kotick, well, that's pretty indefensible.
<br> <br>
A publishing house that has degenerated to the point where it cares exclusively for ensuring its own well-being is an evil one. There has to be a symbiotic relationship, not a lethal parasitic one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...sometimes a good thing and sometimes a bad thing .
Publishers can obtain and manage capital , and if they deal fairly and wisely with the devs they fund it 's a good thing .
If , on the other hand , we have something like Activision/Kotick , well , that 's pretty indefensible .
A publishing house that has degenerated to the point where it cares exclusively for ensuring its own well-being is an evil one .
There has to be a symbiotic relationship , not a lethal parasitic one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...sometimes a good thing and sometimes a bad thing.
Publishers can obtain and manage capital, and if they deal fairly and wisely with the devs they fund it's a good thing.
If, on the other hand, we have something like Activision/Kotick, well, that's pretty indefensible.
A publishing house that has degenerated to the point where it cares exclusively for ensuring its own well-being is an evil one.
There has to be a symbiotic relationship, not a lethal parasitic one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29851683</id>
	<title>Re:Publishers</title>
	<author>Spykk</author>
	<datestamp>1256292420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Games, films etc. are made to make money, not to just satisfy artistic desires.</p></div><p>
As a developer who writes games in his spare time that rarely see the light of day I have to disagree.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Games , films etc .
are made to make money , not to just satisfy artistic desires .
As a developer who writes games in his spare time that rarely see the light of day I have to disagree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games, films etc.
are made to make money, not to just satisfy artistic desires.
As a developer who writes games in his spare time that rarely see the light of day I have to disagree.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844001</id>
	<title>They are not  necessary, but convenient.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256296560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Useful but not necessary.  Their alignment would appear to be chaotic/neutral.  Rolling aggainst DEX for an FP...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Useful but not necessary .
Their alignment would appear to be chaotic/neutral .
Rolling aggainst DEX for an FP.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Useful but not necessary.
Their alignment would appear to be chaotic/neutral.
Rolling aggainst DEX for an FP...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844669</id>
	<title>EVIL EVIL EVIL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256304300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course not! The FOSS games available are so wonderful in comparison to the crap the publishers push! They don't even support Linux for the most part! These jerks in the suits don't understand me anyways!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course not !
The FOSS games available are so wonderful in comparison to the crap the publishers push !
They do n't even support Linux for the most part !
These jerks in the suits do n't understand me anyways !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course not!
The FOSS games available are so wonderful in comparison to the crap the publishers push!
They don't even support Linux for the most part!
These jerks in the suits don't understand me anyways!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29848137</id>
	<title>Re:Terrible analogy</title>
	<author>jayme0227</author>
	<datestamp>1256322360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is a lot easier to think about this whole concept if you think about the publisher as simply an investor. Investors are going to do everything they can to make sure they make their money back and publishers are the same way. If that means forcing developers to alter games to give them more mass market appeal, so be it. Does this suck? Yeah, sure, but it's nothing that you and I wouldn't do if it was our money on the line. There is a reason a shareholder gets a vote in the company whose stock he owns. The publisher just holds a lot more stock in the games than an ordinary investor holds in any company.</p><p>If a developer doesn't want to compromise on his (or her) game, then he's going to have trouble finding the financial backing needed to make a quality product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is a lot easier to think about this whole concept if you think about the publisher as simply an investor .
Investors are going to do everything they can to make sure they make their money back and publishers are the same way .
If that means forcing developers to alter games to give them more mass market appeal , so be it .
Does this suck ?
Yeah , sure , but it 's nothing that you and I would n't do if it was our money on the line .
There is a reason a shareholder gets a vote in the company whose stock he owns .
The publisher just holds a lot more stock in the games than an ordinary investor holds in any company.If a developer does n't want to compromise on his ( or her ) game , then he 's going to have trouble finding the financial backing needed to make a quality product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is a lot easier to think about this whole concept if you think about the publisher as simply an investor.
Investors are going to do everything they can to make sure they make their money back and publishers are the same way.
If that means forcing developers to alter games to give them more mass market appeal, so be it.
Does this suck?
Yeah, sure, but it's nothing that you and I wouldn't do if it was our money on the line.
There is a reason a shareholder gets a vote in the company whose stock he owns.
The publisher just holds a lot more stock in the games than an ordinary investor holds in any company.If a developer doesn't want to compromise on his (or her) game, then he's going to have trouble finding the financial backing needed to make a quality product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846899</id>
	<title>Re:The Child is Usually Right?</title>
	<author>painandgreed</author>
	<datestamp>1256317260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Without commenting on the validity of the analogy, I for one found that as I get older I increasingly realize my parents were usually right.</i> </p><p>I on the other hand, often find that my parents were very often wrong. They meant well, and their advise was in my best interest, but in many cases, while it would have been the correct advise for them while they were growing up, it simply did not apply my experiences twenty years later because conditions had changed. One case being getting a job. My father was a company man whose advise was for me to get into a company, give them loyalty and work for them for the rest of my life like he did. Needless to say, this did not reflect the job situation I found myself in, especially in the computer industry during the dot-boom and dot-bust. He also found out about the new reality when his company threatened to outsource his department for the last five years he was working there and finally did but luckily close enough to his retirement that he could get a nice package. I won't even go into when he yelled at me for not quitting my cushy summer 9-5 pizza job to instead go work for McDonald's because he thought that was a respectable company.</p><p>Of course, I was the good kid that always did what my parents told me to usually. However, looking back, there are lots of times I think I should have been more rebelious and realize that their advise wasn't the best and should have done what I wanted. Some was stuff like my career, but also, I should have skipped more high school, partied more, and otherwise did more of the things other kids were doing rather than be a good kid. Experienced missed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Without commenting on the validity of the analogy , I for one found that as I get older I increasingly realize my parents were usually right .
I on the other hand , often find that my parents were very often wrong .
They meant well , and their advise was in my best interest , but in many cases , while it would have been the correct advise for them while they were growing up , it simply did not apply my experiences twenty years later because conditions had changed .
One case being getting a job .
My father was a company man whose advise was for me to get into a company , give them loyalty and work for them for the rest of my life like he did .
Needless to say , this did not reflect the job situation I found myself in , especially in the computer industry during the dot-boom and dot-bust .
He also found out about the new reality when his company threatened to outsource his department for the last five years he was working there and finally did but luckily close enough to his retirement that he could get a nice package .
I wo n't even go into when he yelled at me for not quitting my cushy summer 9-5 pizza job to instead go work for McDonald 's because he thought that was a respectable company.Of course , I was the good kid that always did what my parents told me to usually .
However , looking back , there are lots of times I think I should have been more rebelious and realize that their advise was n't the best and should have done what I wanted .
Some was stuff like my career , but also , I should have skipped more high school , partied more , and otherwise did more of the things other kids were doing rather than be a good kid .
Experienced missed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Without commenting on the validity of the analogy, I for one found that as I get older I increasingly realize my parents were usually right.
I on the other hand, often find that my parents were very often wrong.
They meant well, and their advise was in my best interest, but in many cases, while it would have been the correct advise for them while they were growing up, it simply did not apply my experiences twenty years later because conditions had changed.
One case being getting a job.
My father was a company man whose advise was for me to get into a company, give them loyalty and work for them for the rest of my life like he did.
Needless to say, this did not reflect the job situation I found myself in, especially in the computer industry during the dot-boom and dot-bust.
He also found out about the new reality when his company threatened to outsource his department for the last five years he was working there and finally did but luckily close enough to his retirement that he could get a nice package.
I won't even go into when he yelled at me for not quitting my cushy summer 9-5 pizza job to instead go work for McDonald's because he thought that was a respectable company.Of course, I was the good kid that always did what my parents told me to usually.
However, looking back, there are lots of times I think I should have been more rebelious and realize that their advise wasn't the best and should have done what I wanted.
Some was stuff like my career, but also, I should have skipped more high school, partied more, and otherwise did more of the things other kids were doing rather than be a good kid.
Experienced missed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844321</id>
	<title>Re:Third option</title>
	<author>MickyTheIdiot</author>
	<datestamp>1256300880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess I am showing my bias... but why WOULDN'T the developers know more than the publishers?</p><p>I'm sure that they have *some* knowledgeable persons, but aren't they like most overblown corporate organizations that are top heavy with MBA managers that know paperwork more than they know the actual product?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess I am showing my bias... but why WOULD N'T the developers know more than the publishers ? I 'm sure that they have * some * knowledgeable persons , but are n't they like most overblown corporate organizations that are top heavy with MBA managers that know paperwork more than they know the actual product ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess I am showing my bias... but why WOULDN'T the developers know more than the publishers?I'm sure that they have *some* knowledgeable persons, but aren't they like most overblown corporate organizations that are top heavy with MBA managers that know paperwork more than they know the actual product?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844681</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>metrix007</author>
	<datestamp>1256304360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, for small games.</p><p>If you want worldwide distribution and marketing, and the money and manpower needed to make your game as big and detailed as you want it to be, then a publisher comes into it.</p><p>Compare making a game like, say, Batman: Arkham Asylum from scratch, compared to say....Bejewled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , for small games.If you want worldwide distribution and marketing , and the money and manpower needed to make your game as big and detailed as you want it to be , then a publisher comes into it.Compare making a game like , say , Batman : Arkham Asylum from scratch , compared to say....Bejewled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, for small games.If you want worldwide distribution and marketing, and the money and manpower needed to make your game as big and detailed as you want it to be, then a publisher comes into it.Compare making a game like, say, Batman: Arkham Asylum from scratch, compared to say....Bejewled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844425</id>
	<title>Re:NEITHER!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256302080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not everyone has: a) money to rent and maintain the server, b) access to PayPal withdrawal options (I'm from Croatia) \_OR\_ money to pay web shops for maintaining your content, c) money to pay marketing company, d) money to pay local real-world ads.<br>
<br>
Not to mention producing viral advertising isn't trivial. You <b>need</b> publishers to take off the burden of marketing from  you, so you can concentrate on what you do best: development. Or do you want to hire several people just to sell the game, while that one combo of developer+artist you can afford after all the expenses works on the next $5 shareware puzzle game for the next two years?<br>
<br>
Hm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not everyone has : a ) money to rent and maintain the server , b ) access to PayPal withdrawal options ( I 'm from Croatia ) \ _OR \ _ money to pay web shops for maintaining your content , c ) money to pay marketing company , d ) money to pay local real-world ads .
Not to mention producing viral advertising is n't trivial .
You need publishers to take off the burden of marketing from you , so you can concentrate on what you do best : development .
Or do you want to hire several people just to sell the game , while that one combo of developer + artist you can afford after all the expenses works on the next $ 5 shareware puzzle game for the next two years ?
Hm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not everyone has: a) money to rent and maintain the server, b) access to PayPal withdrawal options (I'm from Croatia) \_OR\_ money to pay web shops for maintaining your content, c) money to pay marketing company, d) money to pay local real-world ads.
Not to mention producing viral advertising isn't trivial.
You need publishers to take off the burden of marketing from  you, so you can concentrate on what you do best: development.
Or do you want to hire several people just to sell the game, while that one combo of developer+artist you can afford after all the expenses works on the next $5 shareware puzzle game for the next two years?
Hm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844017
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844631
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29850657
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29848137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844251
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29856261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844337
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844251
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29851683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847181
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844631
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849253
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844017
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29859205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844017
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29856435
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_23_0548247_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844029
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844805
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844245
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844321
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846033
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847181
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844329
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844513
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844131
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844745
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849013
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844005
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844357
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844829
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845593
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844241
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29850657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844247
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29851683
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844619
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847069
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844043
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844093
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844017
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844633
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845445
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844793
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844425
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29856435
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845795
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849253
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29847003
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846791
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844251
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845589
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844337
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29843997
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844057
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844933
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846131
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29859205
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29856261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849871
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29844237
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845197
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849713
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845769
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29849849
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29848137
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846153
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_23_0548247.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29845657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_23_0548247.29846899
</commentlist>
</conversation>
