<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_13_0551220</id>
	<title>Game Endings Going Out of Style?</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1263382740000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An article in the Guardian asks whether the focus of modern games has <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2010/jan/12/game-endings">shifted away from having a clear-cut ending</a> and toward indefinite entertainment instead. With the rise of achievements, frequent content updates and open-ended worlds, it seems like publishers and developers are doing everything they can to help this trend. Quoting:
<i>"Particularly before the advent of 'saving,' the completion of even a simple game could take huge amounts of patience, effort and time. The ending, like those last pages of a book, was a key reason why we started playing in the first place. Sure, multiplayer and arcade style games still had their place, but fond 8, 16 and 32-bit memories consist more of completion and satisfaction than particular levels or tricky moments. Over the past few years, however, the idea of a game as simply something to 'finish' has shifted somewhat. For starters, the availability of downloadable content means no story need ever end, as long as the makers think there's a paying audience. Also, the ubiquity of broadband means multiplayer gaming is now the standard, not the exception it once was. There is no real 'finish' to most MMORPGs."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An article in the Guardian asks whether the focus of modern games has shifted away from having a clear-cut ending and toward indefinite entertainment instead .
With the rise of achievements , frequent content updates and open-ended worlds , it seems like publishers and developers are doing everything they can to help this trend .
Quoting : " Particularly before the advent of 'saving, ' the completion of even a simple game could take huge amounts of patience , effort and time .
The ending , like those last pages of a book , was a key reason why we started playing in the first place .
Sure , multiplayer and arcade style games still had their place , but fond 8 , 16 and 32-bit memories consist more of completion and satisfaction than particular levels or tricky moments .
Over the past few years , however , the idea of a game as simply something to 'finish ' has shifted somewhat .
For starters , the availability of downloadable content means no story need ever end , as long as the makers think there 's a paying audience .
Also , the ubiquity of broadband means multiplayer gaming is now the standard , not the exception it once was .
There is no real 'finish ' to most MMORPGs .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An article in the Guardian asks whether the focus of modern games has shifted away from having a clear-cut ending and toward indefinite entertainment instead.
With the rise of achievements, frequent content updates and open-ended worlds, it seems like publishers and developers are doing everything they can to help this trend.
Quoting:
"Particularly before the advent of 'saving,' the completion of even a simple game could take huge amounts of patience, effort and time.
The ending, like those last pages of a book, was a key reason why we started playing in the first place.
Sure, multiplayer and arcade style games still had their place, but fond 8, 16 and 32-bit memories consist more of completion and satisfaction than particular levels or tricky moments.
Over the past few years, however, the idea of a game as simply something to 'finish' has shifted somewhat.
For starters, the availability of downloadable content means no story need ever end, as long as the makers think there's a paying audience.
Also, the ubiquity of broadband means multiplayer gaming is now the standard, not the exception it once was.
There is no real 'finish' to most MMORPGs.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</id>
	<title>Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263386340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For MMOs, I think this is forgivable. After all, they're supposed to be persistent worlds. That said, a competent MMO developer will set up storylines for players to work through (either at their own pace, or a pace forced by in-game world events). The two MMOs I've played both do this; WoW and Final Fantasy XI. I understand that the real masters in this field are Codemasters, with Lord of the Rings Online, but a variety of other factors have always kept me away from that game. Interestingly, I understand that Blizzard will actually be adding a proper ending cutscene in the next WoW patch, for guilds that manage to take down Arthas. Given this will be the culmination of a major plot arc that kicked off years ago in Warcraft 3, I heartily approve.</p><p>For non-MMO story-based, however, I do want a story with a definite beginning, middle and end. This isn't to say that the game can't continue after the story has ended; I much preferred the way the Broken Steel DLC allowed you to continue exploring the Capital Wastelands in Fallout 3, after you'd beaten the original game and the continuation story. However, if your game has a story, that story needs an ending, even if this ending is open enough to allow for continuation.</p><p>My real bug-bear are the games which eschew a real ending because they're angling for a sequel (or even an entire franchise), but never deliver on this. In my opinion, unless you already have funding in place for a sequel, you should avoid tagging a cliff-hanger ending onto your game. Doesn't mean you can't continue the story later if you want to; look at the first Star Wars movie - it has a perfectly satisfactory ending in itself, but still allowed for sequels. Then with funding secure, Empire was able to have an appropriate cliff-hanger ending. But if your ending is "the real story is just beginning" and then you never do continue it, then I'm definitely not impressed.</p><p>It's not just games that suffer from this. So many TV shows are developed these days with the philosophy that you should continue making series until your audience figures fall low enough to shut you down. If there's an ending at all, only a tiny number of ultra-hardcore viewers ever see it. We're being bombarded with stories that have a beginning and an endless middle, but no ending. Sometimes, ending a show can be the best thing that's ever happened to it. I understand this was the case with the original Mobile Suit Gundam, which flew completely below the radar (probably because it wasn't very good) until the staff were told that they were being terminated, at which point they gave it a proper storyline and ending. The result - the show got noticed and went on to become a genuine cultural phenomenon in Japan (and attracted a good bit of nerdly attention in the wider world), with sequels and reimaginings running for decades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For MMOs , I think this is forgivable .
After all , they 're supposed to be persistent worlds .
That said , a competent MMO developer will set up storylines for players to work through ( either at their own pace , or a pace forced by in-game world events ) .
The two MMOs I 've played both do this ; WoW and Final Fantasy XI .
I understand that the real masters in this field are Codemasters , with Lord of the Rings Online , but a variety of other factors have always kept me away from that game .
Interestingly , I understand that Blizzard will actually be adding a proper ending cutscene in the next WoW patch , for guilds that manage to take down Arthas .
Given this will be the culmination of a major plot arc that kicked off years ago in Warcraft 3 , I heartily approve.For non-MMO story-based , however , I do want a story with a definite beginning , middle and end .
This is n't to say that the game ca n't continue after the story has ended ; I much preferred the way the Broken Steel DLC allowed you to continue exploring the Capital Wastelands in Fallout 3 , after you 'd beaten the original game and the continuation story .
However , if your game has a story , that story needs an ending , even if this ending is open enough to allow for continuation.My real bug-bear are the games which eschew a real ending because they 're angling for a sequel ( or even an entire franchise ) , but never deliver on this .
In my opinion , unless you already have funding in place for a sequel , you should avoid tagging a cliff-hanger ending onto your game .
Does n't mean you ca n't continue the story later if you want to ; look at the first Star Wars movie - it has a perfectly satisfactory ending in itself , but still allowed for sequels .
Then with funding secure , Empire was able to have an appropriate cliff-hanger ending .
But if your ending is " the real story is just beginning " and then you never do continue it , then I 'm definitely not impressed.It 's not just games that suffer from this .
So many TV shows are developed these days with the philosophy that you should continue making series until your audience figures fall low enough to shut you down .
If there 's an ending at all , only a tiny number of ultra-hardcore viewers ever see it .
We 're being bombarded with stories that have a beginning and an endless middle , but no ending .
Sometimes , ending a show can be the best thing that 's ever happened to it .
I understand this was the case with the original Mobile Suit Gundam , which flew completely below the radar ( probably because it was n't very good ) until the staff were told that they were being terminated , at which point they gave it a proper storyline and ending .
The result - the show got noticed and went on to become a genuine cultural phenomenon in Japan ( and attracted a good bit of nerdly attention in the wider world ) , with sequels and reimaginings running for decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For MMOs, I think this is forgivable.
After all, they're supposed to be persistent worlds.
That said, a competent MMO developer will set up storylines for players to work through (either at their own pace, or a pace forced by in-game world events).
The two MMOs I've played both do this; WoW and Final Fantasy XI.
I understand that the real masters in this field are Codemasters, with Lord of the Rings Online, but a variety of other factors have always kept me away from that game.
Interestingly, I understand that Blizzard will actually be adding a proper ending cutscene in the next WoW patch, for guilds that manage to take down Arthas.
Given this will be the culmination of a major plot arc that kicked off years ago in Warcraft 3, I heartily approve.For non-MMO story-based, however, I do want a story with a definite beginning, middle and end.
This isn't to say that the game can't continue after the story has ended; I much preferred the way the Broken Steel DLC allowed you to continue exploring the Capital Wastelands in Fallout 3, after you'd beaten the original game and the continuation story.
However, if your game has a story, that story needs an ending, even if this ending is open enough to allow for continuation.My real bug-bear are the games which eschew a real ending because they're angling for a sequel (or even an entire franchise), but never deliver on this.
In my opinion, unless you already have funding in place for a sequel, you should avoid tagging a cliff-hanger ending onto your game.
Doesn't mean you can't continue the story later if you want to; look at the first Star Wars movie - it has a perfectly satisfactory ending in itself, but still allowed for sequels.
Then with funding secure, Empire was able to have an appropriate cliff-hanger ending.
But if your ending is "the real story is just beginning" and then you never do continue it, then I'm definitely not impressed.It's not just games that suffer from this.
So many TV shows are developed these days with the philosophy that you should continue making series until your audience figures fall low enough to shut you down.
If there's an ending at all, only a tiny number of ultra-hardcore viewers ever see it.
We're being bombarded with stories that have a beginning and an endless middle, but no ending.
Sometimes, ending a show can be the best thing that's ever happened to it.
I understand this was the case with the original Mobile Suit Gundam, which flew completely below the radar (probably because it wasn't very good) until the staff were told that they were being terminated, at which point they gave it a proper storyline and ending.
The result - the show got noticed and went on to become a genuine cultural phenomenon in Japan (and attracted a good bit of nerdly attention in the wider world), with sequels and reimaginings running for decades.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749296</id>
	<title>Credit roll</title>
	<author>DeanLearner</author>
	<datestamp>1263390840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whatever happens, even if they stop doing it right now...

I could be playing and finishing games 50 years from now and I will still wait for the credits to finish rolling on the off chance there is something at the end.

I will no doubt get that awkward, "so.... do I turn the console off  now then or?" feeling as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever happens , even if they stop doing it right now.. . I could be playing and finishing games 50 years from now and I will still wait for the credits to finish rolling on the off chance there is something at the end .
I will no doubt get that awkward , " so.... do I turn the console off now then or ?
" feeling as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever happens, even if they stop doing it right now...

I could be playing and finishing games 50 years from now and I will still wait for the credits to finish rolling on the off chance there is something at the end.
I will no doubt get that awkward, "so.... do I turn the console off  now then or?
" feeling as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30755372</id>
	<title>Deus Ex</title>
	<author>Rexdude</author>
	<datestamp>1263373920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recently dug out my old copy of Deus Ex- this year marks its 10th anniversary. And there's still nothing like it for putting the player in control, infinite replayability (I discovered a few new areas in the Paris level that I'd missed before),philosophical debate, and a plausible world made real by newspaper commentary, public computer bulletins, hackable workstations and emails etc. The 3 separate endings were not influenced by the gameplay however, you get to choose the outcome only in the very last level. Still- it had satisfying cutscenes and superb ending quotes:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; * "It Is Better To Reign In Hell Than To Serve In Heaven" - John Milton, Paradise Lost</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * "Yesterday We Obeyed Kings And Bent Our Necks To Emperors. Today We Kneel Only To Truth." - Kahlil Gibran</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * "If There Were No God, It Would Be Necessary To Invent Him." - Voltaire</p><p>10 years later, nothing, not even its rather poor sequel, matches up to the immersiveness and perhaps also replayability. Go in with guns blazing, or sneak around hacking terminals and disabling security cameras, doing side quests for NPCs who help you out in return etc. etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recently dug out my old copy of Deus Ex- this year marks its 10th anniversary .
And there 's still nothing like it for putting the player in control , infinite replayability ( I discovered a few new areas in the Paris level that I 'd missed before ) ,philosophical debate , and a plausible world made real by newspaper commentary , public computer bulletins , hackable workstations and emails etc .
The 3 separate endings were not influenced by the gameplay however , you get to choose the outcome only in the very last level .
Still- it had satisfying cutscenes and superb ending quotes :     * " It Is Better To Reign In Hell Than To Serve In Heaven " - John Milton , Paradise Lost         * " Yesterday We Obeyed Kings And Bent Our Necks To Emperors .
Today We Kneel Only To Truth .
" - Kahlil Gibran         * " If There Were No God , It Would Be Necessary To Invent Him .
" - Voltaire10 years later , nothing , not even its rather poor sequel , matches up to the immersiveness and perhaps also replayability .
Go in with guns blazing , or sneak around hacking terminals and disabling security cameras , doing side quests for NPCs who help you out in return etc .
etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recently dug out my old copy of Deus Ex- this year marks its 10th anniversary.
And there's still nothing like it for putting the player in control, infinite replayability (I discovered a few new areas in the Paris level that I'd missed before),philosophical debate, and a plausible world made real by newspaper commentary, public computer bulletins, hackable workstations and emails etc.
The 3 separate endings were not influenced by the gameplay however, you get to choose the outcome only in the very last level.
Still- it had satisfying cutscenes and superb ending quotes:
    * "It Is Better To Reign In Hell Than To Serve In Heaven" - John Milton, Paradise Lost
        * "Yesterday We Obeyed Kings And Bent Our Necks To Emperors.
Today We Kneel Only To Truth.
" - Kahlil Gibran
        * "If There Were No God, It Would Be Necessary To Invent Him.
" - Voltaire10 years later, nothing, not even its rather poor sequel, matches up to the immersiveness and perhaps also replayability.
Go in with guns blazing, or sneak around hacking terminals and disabling security cameras, doing side quests for NPCs who help you out in return etc.
etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751642</id>
	<title>Game with a Blake's 7 ending...</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1263402600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One where at the end you gun down your ally from the first half of the game like a punk when you think he has betrayed you, then you get surrounded by soldiers and the credit take over with gunshots being heard behind them....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One where at the end you gun down your ally from the first half of the game like a punk when you think he has betrayed you , then you get surrounded by soldiers and the credit take over with gunshots being heard behind them... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One where at the end you gun down your ally from the first half of the game like a punk when you think he has betrayed you, then you get surrounded by soldiers and the credit take over with gunshots being heard behind them....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749136</id>
	<title>Gaming compared to other entertainment avenues</title>
	<author>ultral0rd</author>
	<datestamp>1263389220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can compare gaming to the movie and TV industry.
Games designed with no end in sight are like TV shows whose life is controlled by the interest of the public, where other games with definite endings could be compared to movies.

Sure TV shows do give you that feeling of really getting to grips with the characters and the story, and lore..
But who turns down a great Movie for that dose of fast paced intense action?

If gaming with set endings ever came to an end, it would truly be a horrible state of affairs for the gaming world.
IMHO that feeling of "clocking" a game should never vanish.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can compare gaming to the movie and TV industry .
Games designed with no end in sight are like TV shows whose life is controlled by the interest of the public , where other games with definite endings could be compared to movies .
Sure TV shows do give you that feeling of really getting to grips with the characters and the story , and lore. . But who turns down a great Movie for that dose of fast paced intense action ?
If gaming with set endings ever came to an end , it would truly be a horrible state of affairs for the gaming world .
IMHO that feeling of " clocking " a game should never vanish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can compare gaming to the movie and TV industry.
Games designed with no end in sight are like TV shows whose life is controlled by the interest of the public, where other games with definite endings could be compared to movies.
Sure TV shows do give you that feeling of really getting to grips with the characters and the story, and lore..
But who turns down a great Movie for that dose of fast paced intense action?
If gaming with set endings ever came to an end, it would truly be a horrible state of affairs for the gaming world.
IMHO that feeling of "clocking" a game should never vanish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749628</id>
	<title>Re:Resale</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263393540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are some games that transcend that limitation, simply because they so enjoyable.</p><p>I kept my copy of 'Grim Fandango' because I would like to play it again in a few years. Like a good movie it should bear re-watching, even if I know what is going to happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some games that transcend that limitation , simply because they so enjoyable.I kept my copy of 'Grim Fandango ' because I would like to play it again in a few years .
Like a good movie it should bear re-watching , even if I know what is going to happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some games that transcend that limitation, simply because they so enjoyable.I kept my copy of 'Grim Fandango' because I would like to play it again in a few years.
Like a good movie it should bear re-watching, even if I know what is going to happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750752</id>
	<title>Re:Misrepresents history</title>
	<author>happy\_place</author>
	<datestamp>1263399120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What games can you remember that Actually had a decent ending?

Most people who buy a single-player game, don't finish them, and when it comes to testing, it's prohibitively more expensive to test the game from beginning to end. In some ways it's better to offer an open-ended sort of game that doesn't end, than a game that ends but hasn't been tested and therefore has some scripting bug that renders the ending unobtanium.

I remember when I first started in games, we had a product that we released, the final level was impossible to win. Another game we offered some hundred levels, and some guy contacts us the day after the game is released, and says, "Are there are any more levels?" We thought it would take months to finish, this guy had it all done in less than a day. When a game ends, there's always someone who thinks you didn't provide enough content (this was a common complaint about Nintendo gamecube games).

So it's something of a rock and a hard place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What games can you remember that Actually had a decent ending ?
Most people who buy a single-player game , do n't finish them , and when it comes to testing , it 's prohibitively more expensive to test the game from beginning to end .
In some ways it 's better to offer an open-ended sort of game that does n't end , than a game that ends but has n't been tested and therefore has some scripting bug that renders the ending unobtanium .
I remember when I first started in games , we had a product that we released , the final level was impossible to win .
Another game we offered some hundred levels , and some guy contacts us the day after the game is released , and says , " Are there are any more levels ?
" We thought it would take months to finish , this guy had it all done in less than a day .
When a game ends , there 's always someone who thinks you did n't provide enough content ( this was a common complaint about Nintendo gamecube games ) .
So it 's something of a rock and a hard place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What games can you remember that Actually had a decent ending?
Most people who buy a single-player game, don't finish them, and when it comes to testing, it's prohibitively more expensive to test the game from beginning to end.
In some ways it's better to offer an open-ended sort of game that doesn't end, than a game that ends but hasn't been tested and therefore has some scripting bug that renders the ending unobtanium.
I remember when I first started in games, we had a product that we released, the final level was impossible to win.
Another game we offered some hundred levels, and some guy contacts us the day after the game is released, and says, "Are there are any more levels?
" We thought it would take months to finish, this guy had it all done in less than a day.
When a game ends, there's always someone who thinks you didn't provide enough content (this was a common complaint about Nintendo gamecube games).
So it's something of a rock and a hard place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749272</id>
	<title>The ending is why we play?</title>
	<author>mmcxii</author>
	<datestamp>1263390540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>The ending, like those last pages of a book, was a key reason why we started playing in the first place.</i> <br> <br>Really? I don't recall this. For me the pleasures in the play. While certain games need to work out to some kind of resolution I do not play just to get to the end. Nor have I ever read a book just to get to the end. A few movies out there are pretty mediocre until the end but I rarely find the ending so good that I'm willing to put up with 1.5-3 hours of crap for a fantastic 5 minutes at the end.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The ending , like those last pages of a book , was a key reason why we started playing in the first place .
Really ? I do n't recall this .
For me the pleasures in the play .
While certain games need to work out to some kind of resolution I do not play just to get to the end .
Nor have I ever read a book just to get to the end .
A few movies out there are pretty mediocre until the end but I rarely find the ending so good that I 'm willing to put up with 1.5-3 hours of crap for a fantastic 5 minutes at the end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ending, like those last pages of a book, was a key reason why we started playing in the first place.
Really? I don't recall this.
For me the pleasures in the play.
While certain games need to work out to some kind of resolution I do not play just to get to the end.
Nor have I ever read a book just to get to the end.
A few movies out there are pretty mediocre until the end but I rarely find the ending so good that I'm willing to put up with 1.5-3 hours of crap for a fantastic 5 minutes at the end.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749336</id>
	<title>But..</title>
	<author>symes</author>
	<datestamp>1263391200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>..my ADHD stops from getting even close to the end of a</htmltext>
<tokenext>..my ADHD stops from getting even close to the end of a</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..my ADHD stops from getting even close to the end of a</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752816</id>
	<title>Bah! This trend is only present in some genres</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263406980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Guardian obviously hasn't been playing any adventure games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Guardian obviously has n't been playing any adventure games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Guardian obviously hasn't been playing any adventure games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749042</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263388020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"My real bug-bear are the games which eschew a real ending because they're angling for a sequel (or even an entire franchise), but never deliver on this."</p><p>Oh, how I hate this. Games, movies and series increasingly often just stop mid-story, on the off chance they might be able to milk the IP for more money. The only thing you can do is not buy from big publishers. Medium/small ones usually know there won't be one or for some magical reason find a way to continue a finished story. Big corporations design the story as part of an IP portfolio that would lose value if they would ever finished it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" My real bug-bear are the games which eschew a real ending because they 're angling for a sequel ( or even an entire franchise ) , but never deliver on this .
" Oh , how I hate this .
Games , movies and series increasingly often just stop mid-story , on the off chance they might be able to milk the IP for more money .
The only thing you can do is not buy from big publishers .
Medium/small ones usually know there wo n't be one or for some magical reason find a way to continue a finished story .
Big corporations design the story as part of an IP portfolio that would lose value if they would ever finished it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"My real bug-bear are the games which eschew a real ending because they're angling for a sequel (or even an entire franchise), but never deliver on this.
"Oh, how I hate this.
Games, movies and series increasingly often just stop mid-story, on the off chance they might be able to milk the IP for more money.
The only thing you can do is not buy from big publishers.
Medium/small ones usually know there won't be one or for some magical reason find a way to continue a finished story.
Big corporations design the story as part of an IP portfolio that would lose value if they would ever finished it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30758866</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Onthax</author>
	<datestamp>1263388920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>kind of like starcraft 2 with it's 3 different stories

oh wait, then you get flamed for making it 3 different games<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:S</htmltext>
<tokenext>kind of like starcraft 2 with it 's 3 different stories oh wait , then you get flamed for making it 3 different games : S</tokentext>
<sentencetext>kind of like starcraft 2 with it's 3 different stories

oh wait, then you get flamed for making it 3 different games :S</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752158</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263404700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well they did say games where the new Hollywood! EA SPORTS  - the same  Game 9 million sequels.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well they did say games where the new Hollywood !
EA SPORTS - the same Game 9 million sequels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well they did say games where the new Hollywood!
EA SPORTS  - the same  Game 9 million sequels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749140</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>krou</author>
	<datestamp>1263389280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Completely agree. Sequels should be about fresh ideas and new stories, maybe reusing some old characters, or allowing you to import save data from the old game. Otherwise, what you end up with is the computer game equivalent of some never-ending TV series. It's incredibly frustrating to play through to the end and have no conclusion, and have no real idea whether the end will be in sight at all. At the very least, if a game company plans on angling for the sequel, then make sure you've got the funding to design the release of your game as a trilogy or similar so that it's clearly marketed as such, like with books.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Completely agree .
Sequels should be about fresh ideas and new stories , maybe reusing some old characters , or allowing you to import save data from the old game .
Otherwise , what you end up with is the computer game equivalent of some never-ending TV series .
It 's incredibly frustrating to play through to the end and have no conclusion , and have no real idea whether the end will be in sight at all .
At the very least , if a game company plans on angling for the sequel , then make sure you 've got the funding to design the release of your game as a trilogy or similar so that it 's clearly marketed as such , like with books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Completely agree.
Sequels should be about fresh ideas and new stories, maybe reusing some old characters, or allowing you to import save data from the old game.
Otherwise, what you end up with is the computer game equivalent of some never-ending TV series.
It's incredibly frustrating to play through to the end and have no conclusion, and have no real idea whether the end will be in sight at all.
At the very least, if a game company plans on angling for the sequel, then make sure you've got the funding to design the release of your game as a trilogy or similar so that it's clearly marketed as such, like with books.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750144</id>
	<title>Re:Old games</title>
	<author>TheAndruu</author>
	<datestamp>1263396600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>For a lot of us, we were kids in those times we look back at those old games, and as kids, we had so little other things going on that we could focus our determination on finishing those games.  Now other items take priority, like work and family.

Plus most kids I knew growing up only had a few games, since you had to wait for birthdays or other holidays to get those games you really wanted.  And since our attention was divided among only a few games, we'd often pick our favorite and play it over and over.  Now I can just go out and buy a new game whenever I want, cutting down the replay time of old games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For a lot of us , we were kids in those times we look back at those old games , and as kids , we had so little other things going on that we could focus our determination on finishing those games .
Now other items take priority , like work and family .
Plus most kids I knew growing up only had a few games , since you had to wait for birthdays or other holidays to get those games you really wanted .
And since our attention was divided among only a few games , we 'd often pick our favorite and play it over and over .
Now I can just go out and buy a new game whenever I want , cutting down the replay time of old games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a lot of us, we were kids in those times we look back at those old games, and as kids, we had so little other things going on that we could focus our determination on finishing those games.
Now other items take priority, like work and family.
Plus most kids I knew growing up only had a few games, since you had to wait for birthdays or other holidays to get those games you really wanted.
And since our attention was divided among only a few games, we'd often pick our favorite and play it over and over.
Now I can just go out and buy a new game whenever I want, cutting down the replay time of old games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749046</id>
	<title>Small vs. big Ending</title>
	<author>mseeger</author>
	<datestamp>1263388020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "ending" is not going out of style. But instead of one "grand ending" there are now more smaller ones. While reaching a big ending may be quite satisfying, not all players are able to achieve it with 20-40 hours of gaming time. So several small endings may help them to enjoy games more. If this is good or bad depends on the individual taste.</p><p>I remember from my WoW-times, that killing Ragnaros or Lady Vashji (which were only small endings) for the first time was vastly more satisfying than any other game ending. Small endings does not mean small satisfaction.</p><p>CU, Martin</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " ending " is not going out of style .
But instead of one " grand ending " there are now more smaller ones .
While reaching a big ending may be quite satisfying , not all players are able to achieve it with 20-40 hours of gaming time .
So several small endings may help them to enjoy games more .
If this is good or bad depends on the individual taste.I remember from my WoW-times , that killing Ragnaros or Lady Vashji ( which were only small endings ) for the first time was vastly more satisfying than any other game ending .
Small endings does not mean small satisfaction.CU , Martin</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "ending" is not going out of style.
But instead of one "grand ending" there are now more smaller ones.
While reaching a big ending may be quite satisfying, not all players are able to achieve it with 20-40 hours of gaming time.
So several small endings may help them to enjoy games more.
If this is good or bad depends on the individual taste.I remember from my WoW-times, that killing Ragnaros or Lady Vashji (which were only small endings) for the first time was vastly more satisfying than any other game ending.
Small endings does not mean small satisfaction.CU, Martin</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750916</id>
	<title>Borderlands</title>
	<author>gregor-e</author>
	<datestamp>1263399840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Borderlands has the most unsatisfying ending of any game I've played to the end.  And the weird thing is, they roll the credits, which goes on and on, and if you wait for them to finish, you're dropped back in-game with one small task to complete.
<p>
Although the ending leaves a possible sequel, it seems a whole lot more like a 'whoops - ran out of money' ending.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Borderlands has the most unsatisfying ending of any game I 've played to the end .
And the weird thing is , they roll the credits , which goes on and on , and if you wait for them to finish , you 're dropped back in-game with one small task to complete .
Although the ending leaves a possible sequel , it seems a whole lot more like a 'whoops - ran out of money ' ending .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Borderlands has the most unsatisfying ending of any game I've played to the end.
And the weird thing is, they roll the credits, which goes on and on, and if you wait for them to finish, you're dropped back in-game with one small task to complete.
Although the ending leaves a possible sequel, it seems a whole lot more like a 'whoops - ran out of money' ending.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022</id>
	<title>Old games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263387660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Particularly before the advent of 'saving,' the completion of even a simple game could take huge amounts of patience, effort and time. The ending, like those last pages of a book, was a key reason why we started playing in the first place.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I have a PSP with custom firmware and I went back and played some of those old games and, for me, the "patience, effort and time" needed to play the same damn levels over and over again (because I kept dying at the same key spot!) began to wear very thin very quickly.</p><p>Sometimes I think we look back on old games with too much nostalgia. Whilst there are undoubtedly some really good games, a lot of them were just an exercise in frustration and slow methodical progress - something I don't derive much enjoyment from any more.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Particularly before the advent of 'saving, ' the completion of even a simple game could take huge amounts of patience , effort and time .
The ending , like those last pages of a book , was a key reason why we started playing in the first place .
I have a PSP with custom firmware and I went back and played some of those old games and , for me , the " patience , effort and time " needed to play the same damn levels over and over again ( because I kept dying at the same key spot !
) began to wear very thin very quickly.Sometimes I think we look back on old games with too much nostalgia .
Whilst there are undoubtedly some really good games , a lot of them were just an exercise in frustration and slow methodical progress - something I do n't derive much enjoyment from any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Particularly before the advent of 'saving,' the completion of even a simple game could take huge amounts of patience, effort and time.
The ending, like those last pages of a book, was a key reason why we started playing in the first place.
I have a PSP with custom firmware and I went back and played some of those old games and, for me, the "patience, effort and time" needed to play the same damn levels over and over again (because I kept dying at the same key spot!
) began to wear very thin very quickly.Sometimes I think we look back on old games with too much nostalgia.
Whilst there are undoubtedly some really good games, a lot of them were just an exercise in frustration and slow methodical progress - something I don't derive much enjoyment from any more.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749158</id>
	<title>This has nothing to do with "no ending".</title>
	<author>f0rk</author>
	<datestamp>1263389460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article mentioned something about open ended worlds, score grindeing, and top scores.<br>This has nothing to do with an ending. If a game has a story (MMOs excepted), it will most likely have a clear cut end of the story, but if you get a chance to continue after the end is a completely different thing. Its called replay value. Take Fallout 3 as an example, it has a clear cut end, but is has a DLC that unlocks gameplay after your done. This is not to continue the story, but rather give you the opportunity to extend and fill the gaps you miss if you don't do every side quest there is in the game. I would call it a rich story with the unfortunate side effect of having to much detail for the average gamer joe to be playable if mandatory.</p><p>Most open ended games are like this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article mentioned something about open ended worlds , score grindeing , and top scores.This has nothing to do with an ending .
If a game has a story ( MMOs excepted ) , it will most likely have a clear cut end of the story , but if you get a chance to continue after the end is a completely different thing .
Its called replay value .
Take Fallout 3 as an example , it has a clear cut end , but is has a DLC that unlocks gameplay after your done .
This is not to continue the story , but rather give you the opportunity to extend and fill the gaps you miss if you do n't do every side quest there is in the game .
I would call it a rich story with the unfortunate side effect of having to much detail for the average gamer joe to be playable if mandatory.Most open ended games are like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article mentioned something about open ended worlds, score grindeing, and top scores.This has nothing to do with an ending.
If a game has a story (MMOs excepted), it will most likely have a clear cut end of the story, but if you get a chance to continue after the end is a completely different thing.
Its called replay value.
Take Fallout 3 as an example, it has a clear cut end, but is has a DLC that unlocks gameplay after your done.
This is not to continue the story, but rather give you the opportunity to extend and fill the gaps you miss if you don't do every side quest there is in the game.
I would call it a rich story with the unfortunate side effect of having to much detail for the average gamer joe to be playable if mandatory.Most open ended games are like this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752298</id>
	<title>Re:Small vs. big Ending</title>
	<author>GlobalEcho</author>
	<datestamp>1263405240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>instead of one "grand ending" there are now more smaller ones. While reaching a big ending may be quite satisfying, not all players are able to achieve it with 20-40 hours of gaming time. So several small endings may help them to enjoy games more.</p></div></blockquote><p>So, you're basically saying the new thing is <b>tantric gaming</b>?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>instead of one " grand ending " there are now more smaller ones .
While reaching a big ending may be quite satisfying , not all players are able to achieve it with 20-40 hours of gaming time .
So several small endings may help them to enjoy games more.So , you 're basically saying the new thing is tantric gaming ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>instead of one "grand ending" there are now more smaller ones.
While reaching a big ending may be quite satisfying, not all players are able to achieve it with 20-40 hours of gaming time.
So several small endings may help them to enjoy games more.So, you're basically saying the new thing is tantric gaming?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749294</id>
	<title>It's the Journey.</title>
	<author>Aladrin</author>
	<datestamp>1263390840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Games should be about the journey, -not- the ending.  If a bad ending can ruin the entire game for you, then you're playing them wrong.</p><p>Personally, I prefer games that have an 'ending' but then allow you to continue playing anyhow.  End of the storyline shouldn't mean end of my playtime.  Fallout3 made this mistake, then fixed it with some DLC.  There were a -lot- of complaints about the game ending after the final quest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Games should be about the journey , -not- the ending .
If a bad ending can ruin the entire game for you , then you 're playing them wrong.Personally , I prefer games that have an 'ending ' but then allow you to continue playing anyhow .
End of the storyline should n't mean end of my playtime .
Fallout3 made this mistake , then fixed it with some DLC .
There were a -lot- of complaints about the game ending after the final quest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games should be about the journey, -not- the ending.
If a bad ending can ruin the entire game for you, then you're playing them wrong.Personally, I prefer games that have an 'ending' but then allow you to continue playing anyhow.
End of the storyline shouldn't mean end of my playtime.
Fallout3 made this mistake, then fixed it with some DLC.
There were a -lot- of complaints about the game ending after the final quest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749714</id>
	<title>Of course, just like blockbuster hollywood</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1263394200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you keep open the possibility of making more movies using the same characters....<br>a small but not very finished ending.<br>Take for example the hardcore movie Wolverine Origins (XMen). The ending with deadpool's head being severed but then his eyes still opening after it takes a fall down the 100feet high silo....makes me think they might want to imply that they technically could do some<br>Deadpool movie should there be an interest, as we all know how hard Deadpool is to kill. I actually liked deapool and thought the director made a very successful attempt at introducing him as a sort of interesting character. As for using ryan renolds to play him, well that does have merit (when you think of which comedian could actually pull off his comic awareness ability...speaking to the camera<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...a bit like Chevy Chase back in the day...)</p><p>Anyways, video games are now more successful then movies, and grossing so much revenue that really, this was the next logical step...<br>splinter cell 3,4,5,6,7....11,22,33....105,106... it does not matter as long as there is an audience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you keep open the possibility of making more movies using the same characters....a small but not very finished ending.Take for example the hardcore movie Wolverine Origins ( XMen ) .
The ending with deadpool 's head being severed but then his eyes still opening after it takes a fall down the 100feet high silo....makes me think they might want to imply that they technically could do someDeadpool movie should there be an interest , as we all know how hard Deadpool is to kill .
I actually liked deapool and thought the director made a very successful attempt at introducing him as a sort of interesting character .
As for using ryan renolds to play him , well that does have merit ( when you think of which comedian could actually pull off his comic awareness ability...speaking to the camera ...a bit like Chevy Chase back in the day... ) Anyways , video games are now more successful then movies , and grossing so much revenue that really , this was the next logical step...splinter cell 3,4,5,6,7....11,22,33....105,106... it does not matter as long as there is an audience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you keep open the possibility of making more movies using the same characters....a small but not very finished ending.Take for example the hardcore movie Wolverine Origins (XMen).
The ending with deadpool's head being severed but then his eyes still opening after it takes a fall down the 100feet high silo....makes me think they might want to imply that they technically could do someDeadpool movie should there be an interest, as we all know how hard Deadpool is to kill.
I actually liked deapool and thought the director made a very successful attempt at introducing him as a sort of interesting character.
As for using ryan renolds to play him, well that does have merit (when you think of which comedian could actually pull off his comic awareness ability...speaking to the camera ...a bit like Chevy Chase back in the day...)Anyways, video games are now more successful then movies, and grossing so much revenue that really, this was the next logical step...splinter cell 3,4,5,6,7....11,22,33....105,106... it does not matter as long as there is an audience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749288</id>
	<title>Divergence?</title>
	<author>malkavian</author>
	<datestamp>1263390720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For some games, I can see that there's no need for an ending (the 'arena' styles).  For many (personally, I'm an RPG fan, and love story), there needs to be an end.  Or at least a 'volume end', where you can say a subplot has finished, though the world goes on.<br>With DLC, I think it may well be that the world does carry on, and producers will make the longer episodic content where the 'end' of the main story still has the characters with 'loose ends' to tie up, and hints that more will be going on..  That will allow greater engine and world reuse, giving more content per release, and longer story arcs than possible with individual releases.<br>'Ends' meet a nice psychological satisfaction point.  You've seen the trials, tribulations and interplay that creates an end point, and you get to reap the rewards of your endeavours (so, multiple endings should be de-facto these days; play the way you want, and get the reward you deserve).  You get the 'payoff' that keeps people striving for something.  Nothing wrong with having sequential 'ends' and ongoing subplots, but in a lot of games, certainly for the story minded (which is quite a few), I don't think true 'endless' games, especially in single player, would work that well in the long term..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For some games , I can see that there 's no need for an ending ( the 'arena ' styles ) .
For many ( personally , I 'm an RPG fan , and love story ) , there needs to be an end .
Or at least a 'volume end ' , where you can say a subplot has finished , though the world goes on.With DLC , I think it may well be that the world does carry on , and producers will make the longer episodic content where the 'end ' of the main story still has the characters with 'loose ends ' to tie up , and hints that more will be going on.. That will allow greater engine and world reuse , giving more content per release , and longer story arcs than possible with individual releases .
'Ends ' meet a nice psychological satisfaction point .
You 've seen the trials , tribulations and interplay that creates an end point , and you get to reap the rewards of your endeavours ( so , multiple endings should be de-facto these days ; play the way you want , and get the reward you deserve ) .
You get the 'payoff ' that keeps people striving for something .
Nothing wrong with having sequential 'ends ' and ongoing subplots , but in a lot of games , certainly for the story minded ( which is quite a few ) , I do n't think true 'endless ' games , especially in single player , would work that well in the long term. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For some games, I can see that there's no need for an ending (the 'arena' styles).
For many (personally, I'm an RPG fan, and love story), there needs to be an end.
Or at least a 'volume end', where you can say a subplot has finished, though the world goes on.With DLC, I think it may well be that the world does carry on, and producers will make the longer episodic content where the 'end' of the main story still has the characters with 'loose ends' to tie up, and hints that more will be going on..  That will allow greater engine and world reuse, giving more content per release, and longer story arcs than possible with individual releases.
'Ends' meet a nice psychological satisfaction point.
You've seen the trials, tribulations and interplay that creates an end point, and you get to reap the rewards of your endeavours (so, multiple endings should be de-facto these days; play the way you want, and get the reward you deserve).
You get the 'payoff' that keeps people striving for something.
Nothing wrong with having sequential 'ends' and ongoing subplots, but in a lot of games, certainly for the story minded (which is quite a few), I don't think true 'endless' games, especially in single player, would work that well in the long term..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749040</id>
	<title>Dumb</title>
	<author>Jojoba86</author>
	<datestamp>1263388020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another dumb article proclaiming the death of something.

Counter-examples would include Half-Life 2 and the episodes, and single player in Modern Warfare. In fact Modern Warfare 2 is quite short, this seems to be the way many mass-market games are now going.  And really it's not that hard to get the ending in SMG (as opposed to 120 stars). Some people don't have time to play all the games they want (myself included), so I try to be selective so the games I do play so I get a conclusion to the story.

On the other hand I didn't like Bioshock so much, so didn't complete it, this is no different to the situation in the past.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another dumb article proclaiming the death of something .
Counter-examples would include Half-Life 2 and the episodes , and single player in Modern Warfare .
In fact Modern Warfare 2 is quite short , this seems to be the way many mass-market games are now going .
And really it 's not that hard to get the ending in SMG ( as opposed to 120 stars ) .
Some people do n't have time to play all the games they want ( myself included ) , so I try to be selective so the games I do play so I get a conclusion to the story .
On the other hand I did n't like Bioshock so much , so did n't complete it , this is no different to the situation in the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another dumb article proclaiming the death of something.
Counter-examples would include Half-Life 2 and the episodes, and single player in Modern Warfare.
In fact Modern Warfare 2 is quite short, this seems to be the way many mass-market games are now going.
And really it's not that hard to get the ending in SMG (as opposed to 120 stars).
Some people don't have time to play all the games they want (myself included), so I try to be selective so the games I do play so I get a conclusion to the story.
On the other hand I didn't like Bioshock so much, so didn't complete it, this is no different to the situation in the past.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749518</id>
	<title>My take...</title>
	<author>Crock23A</author>
	<datestamp>1263392880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Video game endings have always been of interest to me.  Ever since my siblings and I first starting Super Mario Bros. in the 1980s, that and subsequent game completions were fun to discuss and play around with.  We discovered that turning the volume all the way up on the TV during the ending song produced a much different sounding song and purposefully annoyed the adults around.  Then one of us beat Castlevaina 2: Simon's quest and I discovered not only that game endings could have awesome, uplifting music, but that there could be alternate endings!.  The simple fact that there were 2 endings gave the game great value in re-playability.  Fast forward to today and game endings have less of an impact.  More emphasis goes to the 'completion' of a game, as in getting 100\% achievements or the equivalent.  You also have to factor in the cliff-hanger endings.  Too many games leave it open to a possible sequel.  As the area matures even further I'm sure things will continue to change.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Video game endings have always been of interest to me .
Ever since my siblings and I first starting Super Mario Bros. in the 1980s , that and subsequent game completions were fun to discuss and play around with .
We discovered that turning the volume all the way up on the TV during the ending song produced a much different sounding song and purposefully annoyed the adults around .
Then one of us beat Castlevaina 2 : Simon 's quest and I discovered not only that game endings could have awesome , uplifting music , but that there could be alternate endings ! .
The simple fact that there were 2 endings gave the game great value in re-playability .
Fast forward to today and game endings have less of an impact .
More emphasis goes to the 'completion ' of a game , as in getting 100 \ % achievements or the equivalent .
You also have to factor in the cliff-hanger endings .
Too many games leave it open to a possible sequel .
As the area matures even further I 'm sure things will continue to change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Video game endings have always been of interest to me.
Ever since my siblings and I first starting Super Mario Bros. in the 1980s, that and subsequent game completions were fun to discuss and play around with.
We discovered that turning the volume all the way up on the TV during the ending song produced a much different sounding song and purposefully annoyed the adults around.
Then one of us beat Castlevaina 2: Simon's quest and I discovered not only that game endings could have awesome, uplifting music, but that there could be alternate endings!.
The simple fact that there were 2 endings gave the game great value in re-playability.
Fast forward to today and game endings have less of an impact.
More emphasis goes to the 'completion' of a game, as in getting 100\% achievements or the equivalent.
You also have to factor in the cliff-hanger endings.
Too many games leave it open to a possible sequel.
As the area matures even further I'm sure things will continue to change.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748990</id>
	<title>tetris</title>
	<author>roman\_mir</author>
	<datestamp>1263387300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So MDK is out and Tetris is in?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So MDK is out and Tetris is in ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So MDK is out and Tetris is in?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749366</id>
	<title>Re:Inaccurate</title>
	<author>plover</author>
	<datestamp>1263391560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Colossal Cave Adventure had an elaborate game ending and it was written in 1972, years before the Atari 2600 was even created.  Old school indeed.</p><p>(Of course prior to that we had Hunt the Wumpus and Blackjack, neither of which had a classic story ending.)</p><p>I think you're right regarding the story nature of games being the type that delivered entertaining endings, but I think it took a combination of time, technology and imagination to come up with the idea of a story based game.  Craps or Blackjack were easy ports of traditional "games".  Creating interactive fiction as a game took a lot longer, required a lot more resources (or careful reuse of the resources you had), and a whole lot more work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Colossal Cave Adventure had an elaborate game ending and it was written in 1972 , years before the Atari 2600 was even created .
Old school indeed .
( Of course prior to that we had Hunt the Wumpus and Blackjack , neither of which had a classic story ending .
) I think you 're right regarding the story nature of games being the type that delivered entertaining endings , but I think it took a combination of time , technology and imagination to come up with the idea of a story based game .
Craps or Blackjack were easy ports of traditional " games " .
Creating interactive fiction as a game took a lot longer , required a lot more resources ( or careful reuse of the resources you had ) , and a whole lot more work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Colossal Cave Adventure had an elaborate game ending and it was written in 1972, years before the Atari 2600 was even created.
Old school indeed.
(Of course prior to that we had Hunt the Wumpus and Blackjack, neither of which had a classic story ending.
)I think you're right regarding the story nature of games being the type that delivered entertaining endings, but I think it took a combination of time, technology and imagination to come up with the idea of a story based game.
Craps or Blackjack were easy ports of traditional "games".
Creating interactive fiction as a game took a lot longer, required a lot more resources (or careful reuse of the resources you had), and a whole lot more work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749634</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>bickerdyke</author>
	<datestamp>1263393600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sometimes, ending a show can be the best thing that's ever happened to it.</p></div><p>See "Life on Mars". I only picked up the DVDs cause I knew it would end after ca. 20 episodes (read: deliver a good ending before it bores me to death) The spin of (Ashes to Ashes) was similar enough to be considered season 3&amp;4, but different enough to stand on its own.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes , ending a show can be the best thing that 's ever happened to it.See " Life on Mars " .
I only picked up the DVDs cause I knew it would end after ca .
20 episodes ( read : deliver a good ending before it bores me to death ) The spin of ( Ashes to Ashes ) was similar enough to be considered season 3&amp;4 , but different enough to stand on its own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes, ending a show can be the best thing that's ever happened to it.See "Life on Mars".
I only picked up the DVDs cause I knew it would end after ca.
20 episodes (read: deliver a good ending before it bores me to death) The spin of (Ashes to Ashes) was similar enough to be considered season 3&amp;4, but different enough to stand on its own.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750626</id>
	<title>Tetris has an ending</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1263398580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tetris has an ending, but fewer than a dozen people have seen it. For one thing, you have to be good enough to move three pieces into place per second or more, even when they disappear after locking into place. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwC544Z37qo" title="youtube.com">Watch this video</a> [youtube.com] and fast forward to five minutes in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tetris has an ending , but fewer than a dozen people have seen it .
For one thing , you have to be good enough to move three pieces into place per second or more , even when they disappear after locking into place .
Watch this video [ youtube.com ] and fast forward to five minutes in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tetris has an ending, but fewer than a dozen people have seen it.
For one thing, you have to be good enough to move three pieces into place per second or more, even when they disappear after locking into place.
Watch this video [youtube.com] and fast forward to five minutes in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750280</id>
	<title>Endings don't mean much</title>
	<author>ledow</author>
	<datestamp>1263397200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It depends on the gamers but endings really don't mean much to me.  The first game I ever completed personally was Nonterraqueous on the Spectrum... it took ages, I had my father/brother mapping my progress as I went (we were going to send it in to a magazine but, the next day, they published someone else's map of it!) and, yes, it was fun to finish it.  But since then, an ending doesn't really mean much at all... I don't think I really complete the majority of games I play that *could* be completed... at some point, it stops being entertainment and starts being "training" and that's not why I play games.</p><p>My family have completed just about every Mario game in existence (including those stupid 100-levels things in the Paper Mario's) but we don't get satisfaction from finishing and frequently it's a curve - our excitement builds as we go through all the levels and unlock the last worlds and then when it gets to the tedious "You must have 50 stars / do 100 levels / beat these last ten extraordinarily difficult levels" part, our enthusiasm drops off and it becomes a chore.  We usually push past that, mainly because we play those games as a family, but there's little sense of achievement when we do finish things.</p><p>And we play a lot more games that don't have any ending at all... this has been true for *years* - Gauntlet never had an ending (except on NES, I believe) but it's still a brilliant game to play.  You do find yourself setting little "achievements" in those sorts of games sometimes ("Let's get to level 100 and then leave it", "Let's get further than last time", "Let's do it without skipping levels", etc.) but they are just entertainment.  I can't remember the last time I *didn't* skip a cutscene / end sequence when it was possible... possibly Half-Life 2, but I had a lot of time on my hands when I was playing that and did the full HL2+Ep1+Ep2 run through in a couple of days.</p><p>Endings are really finalisations of plot and reward for those players dedicated enough.  I get my reward from my own achievements (which sometimes include things like "I'll see if I can get that Steam achievement this time", admittedly) and from just playing the game.  Plot is really secondary to me because even when it's excellent, it gets in the way of my freedom and play-time.  To me, games for play-time, I'm under no illusion of that as an adult... I don't consider them artwork, or anything else, they are just some play-time.  If I want plot, I watch a movie or (better) read a book.  When I pick up a game, I just want to play.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It depends on the gamers but endings really do n't mean much to me .
The first game I ever completed personally was Nonterraqueous on the Spectrum... it took ages , I had my father/brother mapping my progress as I went ( we were going to send it in to a magazine but , the next day , they published someone else 's map of it !
) and , yes , it was fun to finish it .
But since then , an ending does n't really mean much at all... I do n't think I really complete the majority of games I play that * could * be completed... at some point , it stops being entertainment and starts being " training " and that 's not why I play games.My family have completed just about every Mario game in existence ( including those stupid 100-levels things in the Paper Mario 's ) but we do n't get satisfaction from finishing and frequently it 's a curve - our excitement builds as we go through all the levels and unlock the last worlds and then when it gets to the tedious " You must have 50 stars / do 100 levels / beat these last ten extraordinarily difficult levels " part , our enthusiasm drops off and it becomes a chore .
We usually push past that , mainly because we play those games as a family , but there 's little sense of achievement when we do finish things.And we play a lot more games that do n't have any ending at all... this has been true for * years * - Gauntlet never had an ending ( except on NES , I believe ) but it 's still a brilliant game to play .
You do find yourself setting little " achievements " in those sorts of games sometimes ( " Let 's get to level 100 and then leave it " , " Let 's get further than last time " , " Let 's do it without skipping levels " , etc .
) but they are just entertainment .
I ca n't remember the last time I * did n't * skip a cutscene / end sequence when it was possible... possibly Half-Life 2 , but I had a lot of time on my hands when I was playing that and did the full HL2 + Ep1 + Ep2 run through in a couple of days.Endings are really finalisations of plot and reward for those players dedicated enough .
I get my reward from my own achievements ( which sometimes include things like " I 'll see if I can get that Steam achievement this time " , admittedly ) and from just playing the game .
Plot is really secondary to me because even when it 's excellent , it gets in the way of my freedom and play-time .
To me , games for play-time , I 'm under no illusion of that as an adult... I do n't consider them artwork , or anything else , they are just some play-time .
If I want plot , I watch a movie or ( better ) read a book .
When I pick up a game , I just want to play .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It depends on the gamers but endings really don't mean much to me.
The first game I ever completed personally was Nonterraqueous on the Spectrum... it took ages, I had my father/brother mapping my progress as I went (we were going to send it in to a magazine but, the next day, they published someone else's map of it!
) and, yes, it was fun to finish it.
But since then, an ending doesn't really mean much at all... I don't think I really complete the majority of games I play that *could* be completed... at some point, it stops being entertainment and starts being "training" and that's not why I play games.My family have completed just about every Mario game in existence (including those stupid 100-levels things in the Paper Mario's) but we don't get satisfaction from finishing and frequently it's a curve - our excitement builds as we go through all the levels and unlock the last worlds and then when it gets to the tedious "You must have 50 stars / do 100 levels / beat these last ten extraordinarily difficult levels" part, our enthusiasm drops off and it becomes a chore.
We usually push past that, mainly because we play those games as a family, but there's little sense of achievement when we do finish things.And we play a lot more games that don't have any ending at all... this has been true for *years* - Gauntlet never had an ending (except on NES, I believe) but it's still a brilliant game to play.
You do find yourself setting little "achievements" in those sorts of games sometimes ("Let's get to level 100 and then leave it", "Let's get further than last time", "Let's do it without skipping levels", etc.
) but they are just entertainment.
I can't remember the last time I *didn't* skip a cutscene / end sequence when it was possible... possibly Half-Life 2, but I had a lot of time on my hands when I was playing that and did the full HL2+Ep1+Ep2 run through in a couple of days.Endings are really finalisations of plot and reward for those players dedicated enough.
I get my reward from my own achievements (which sometimes include things like "I'll see if I can get that Steam achievement this time", admittedly) and from just playing the game.
Plot is really secondary to me because even when it's excellent, it gets in the way of my freedom and play-time.
To me, games for play-time, I'm under no illusion of that as an adult... I don't consider them artwork, or anything else, they are just some play-time.
If I want plot, I watch a movie or (better) read a book.
When I pick up a game, I just want to play.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752034</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263404340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's like in Wayne's World:</p><p>"... new game called Zantar. Zantar is a gelatinous cube that eats warriors in a village. If you eat a chieftain, you go up a level. Beauty is, you can't get to the next level, kids keep coughing up quarters." - Noah Vanderhoff (copied from <a href="http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie\_scripts/w/waynes-world-script-transcript-myers.html" title="script-o-rama.com" rel="nofollow">here</a> [script-o-rama.com])</p><p>They fooled me this time... Damn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like in Wayne 's World : " ... new game called Zantar .
Zantar is a gelatinous cube that eats warriors in a village .
If you eat a chieftain , you go up a level .
Beauty is , you ca n't get to the next level , kids keep coughing up quarters .
" - Noah Vanderhoff ( copied from here [ script-o-rama.com ] ) They fooled me this time... Damn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like in Wayne's World:"... new game called Zantar.
Zantar is a gelatinous cube that eats warriors in a village.
If you eat a chieftain, you go up a level.
Beauty is, you can't get to the next level, kids keep coughing up quarters.
" - Noah Vanderhoff (copied from here [script-o-rama.com])They fooled me this time... Damn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750870</id>
	<title>Entertainment... not commitment</title>
	<author>Temujin\_12</author>
	<datestamp>1263399660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never played any of the MMOGs out there for one reason: When I play a game I'm looking for entertainment, not commitment.</p><p>Between career, marriage, kids, and trying to be involved in the community, I don't have time to sit down and dedicate hours a day to a game. If I did, then I would be doing it to the detriment of those other things. A game is just a game. Those other things are real life.</p><p>So when I look for a game to play, I look for a game that doesn't demand you spend a minimum amount of time with it in order for it to be enjoyable or has a large learning curve before it becomes enjoyable.</p><p>Recently, nearly all of my gaming (maybe 3 hours a week) is spent playing ROMS of old 8-bit and 16-bit Nintendo games. One exception to this is Wii Fit Plus. But I don't consider that a game as much as an exercise program.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never played any of the MMOGs out there for one reason : When I play a game I 'm looking for entertainment , not commitment.Between career , marriage , kids , and trying to be involved in the community , I do n't have time to sit down and dedicate hours a day to a game .
If I did , then I would be doing it to the detriment of those other things .
A game is just a game .
Those other things are real life.So when I look for a game to play , I look for a game that does n't demand you spend a minimum amount of time with it in order for it to be enjoyable or has a large learning curve before it becomes enjoyable.Recently , nearly all of my gaming ( maybe 3 hours a week ) is spent playing ROMS of old 8-bit and 16-bit Nintendo games .
One exception to this is Wii Fit Plus .
But I do n't consider that a game as much as an exercise program .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never played any of the MMOGs out there for one reason: When I play a game I'm looking for entertainment, not commitment.Between career, marriage, kids, and trying to be involved in the community, I don't have time to sit down and dedicate hours a day to a game.
If I did, then I would be doing it to the detriment of those other things.
A game is just a game.
Those other things are real life.So when I look for a game to play, I look for a game that doesn't demand you spend a minimum amount of time with it in order for it to be enjoyable or has a large learning curve before it becomes enjoyable.Recently, nearly all of my gaming (maybe 3 hours a week) is spent playing ROMS of old 8-bit and 16-bit Nintendo games.
One exception to this is Wii Fit Plus.
But I don't consider that a game as much as an exercise program.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752010</id>
	<title>duh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263404220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>end of story = end of cashflow. pure and simple. mmorpg's have to be set up this way... keep people playing, keep them paying. only a matter of time before pretty much all games are like this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>end of story = end of cashflow .
pure and simple .
mmorpg 's have to be set up this way... keep people playing , keep them paying .
only a matter of time before pretty much all games are like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>end of story = end of cashflow.
pure and simple.
mmorpg's have to be set up this way... keep people playing, keep them paying.
only a matter of time before pretty much all games are like this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749356</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263391500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the reverse side of Gundam, there's Big O.</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Big\_O</p><p>Quite a good science fiction/film noir styleanime about a city where everyone's lost their memories. Toss in giant robots, an interesting cast of friends and villains, and a Bruce Wayne like hero and you've got Big O. (A common jokes about the show is that it's what would've happened if Bruce Wayne had created a giant robot)</p><p>The original season was produced in Japan and ended on a cliffhanger with quite a few unanswered questions, but was still vaguely acceptable as an ending. A few years later Cartoon Network funded a second season (A rare occasion where a western company funds an anime). The second season was just filled with cliffhangers and pure confusion. The writer of the show was said to be angling for a third season, but funding dried up due to poor sales leaving fans with an acceptable, but question filled, ending.</p><p>Greed is exactly it. Cliffhangers are written precisely to grab people and demand that a new season is given. Most of the times writers will go "Hey, if we could do it the first time..." But this philosophy can lead to fans being left with a highly unsatisfactory, rushed ending.</p><p>Also, don't get me started on Code Geass. The first season ended with the protagonist and the antagonist (Arguable during all 26 episodes of the whole damned show as to who the good guy and who the bad guy is) standing face to face for the first time, the protagonist with a bomb strapped on his chest and a gun aimed at the antagonist. And then it ended. Had to wait a DAMNED YEAR to get the next season and learn what happened. Please, Jesus, I know the entire show was built on putting a cliffhanger at the end of each episode, but that was just purely ridiculous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the reverse side of Gundam , there 's Big O.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The \ _Big \ _OQuite a good science fiction/film noir styleanime about a city where everyone 's lost their memories .
Toss in giant robots , an interesting cast of friends and villains , and a Bruce Wayne like hero and you 've got Big O .
( A common jokes about the show is that it 's what would 've happened if Bruce Wayne had created a giant robot ) The original season was produced in Japan and ended on a cliffhanger with quite a few unanswered questions , but was still vaguely acceptable as an ending .
A few years later Cartoon Network funded a second season ( A rare occasion where a western company funds an anime ) .
The second season was just filled with cliffhangers and pure confusion .
The writer of the show was said to be angling for a third season , but funding dried up due to poor sales leaving fans with an acceptable , but question filled , ending.Greed is exactly it .
Cliffhangers are written precisely to grab people and demand that a new season is given .
Most of the times writers will go " Hey , if we could do it the first time... " But this philosophy can lead to fans being left with a highly unsatisfactory , rushed ending.Also , do n't get me started on Code Geass .
The first season ended with the protagonist and the antagonist ( Arguable during all 26 episodes of the whole damned show as to who the good guy and who the bad guy is ) standing face to face for the first time , the protagonist with a bomb strapped on his chest and a gun aimed at the antagonist .
And then it ended .
Had to wait a DAMNED YEAR to get the next season and learn what happened .
Please , Jesus , I know the entire show was built on putting a cliffhanger at the end of each episode , but that was just purely ridiculous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the reverse side of Gundam, there's Big O.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Big\_OQuite a good science fiction/film noir styleanime about a city where everyone's lost their memories.
Toss in giant robots, an interesting cast of friends and villains, and a Bruce Wayne like hero and you've got Big O.
(A common jokes about the show is that it's what would've happened if Bruce Wayne had created a giant robot)The original season was produced in Japan and ended on a cliffhanger with quite a few unanswered questions, but was still vaguely acceptable as an ending.
A few years later Cartoon Network funded a second season (A rare occasion where a western company funds an anime).
The second season was just filled with cliffhangers and pure confusion.
The writer of the show was said to be angling for a third season, but funding dried up due to poor sales leaving fans with an acceptable, but question filled, ending.Greed is exactly it.
Cliffhangers are written precisely to grab people and demand that a new season is given.
Most of the times writers will go "Hey, if we could do it the first time..." But this philosophy can lead to fans being left with a highly unsatisfactory, rushed ending.Also, don't get me started on Code Geass.
The first season ended with the protagonist and the antagonist (Arguable during all 26 episodes of the whole damned show as to who the good guy and who the bad guy is) standing face to face for the first time, the protagonist with a bomb strapped on his chest and a gun aimed at the antagonist.
And then it ended.
Had to wait a DAMNED YEAR to get the next season and learn what happened.
Please, Jesus, I know the entire show was built on putting a cliffhanger at the end of each episode, but that was just purely ridiculous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750406</id>
	<title>Re:It's the Journey.</title>
	<author>Keill</author>
	<datestamp>1263397740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's more than that - they are actually DEFINED by the process, and not any ending - a perpetual game is fully within the definition - or should be - (I've seen some theories and definitions of games that disagree though).  (The word story is not defined by the fact it must end...).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's more than that - they are actually DEFINED by the process , and not any ending - a perpetual game is fully within the definition - or should be - ( I 've seen some theories and definitions of games that disagree though ) .
( The word story is not defined by the fact it must end... ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's more than that - they are actually DEFINED by the process, and not any ending - a perpetual game is fully within the definition - or should be - (I've seen some theories and definitions of games that disagree though).
(The word story is not defined by the fact it must end...).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751736</id>
	<title>Re:Modern endings</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1263402960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Games these days generally have mid-level checkpoints and infinite continues, so there's no satisfaction in reaching the end.</p></div><p>For *YOU* there's no satisfaction. Other people have different attitudes about gaming. Me, I hate having to redo an entire level and by the time I get back to the point of fail, I forget what the hell I did wrong the first time.</p><p>The archetype of that, for me, is the quadruple pillar jump in the first Tomb Raider. It was really twitchy, but doable as you figure out the precise sequence of moves. You fail and get sent not back to the entrance of the room, but about two miles away. You had to run back through a completely eventless set of corridors just to try the jumps again. I beat it eventually, but I wanted to hunt down every programmer of the game and punch them all in the face. That's fun? How can that, in any way shape or form, by even the loosest definition, be considered fun?</p><p>Although even that can vary. With Batman Arkham Asylum, even if I beat an area successfully, I would sometimes think "I could have done that better" and go back and replay. But it's at *my* discretion. *I* decide what is fun for me.</p><p>The end user should be treated as king by the developers. I want to save anywhere at any time. I do not want to be subject to someone else's Grand Unified Theory of Gaming Challenge, especially if it's someone whose career is games and they have forgotten what it's like to have a life and career where gaming is just a hobby and time is precious. If you don't like "save anywhere" then DON'T USE IT. Let those of us who have to answer a phone or go to the bathroom have things our way, too.</p><p>I actually hope the next gen of consoles implement a system level game save, sort of like hibernate on Windows, where it just dumps the state of the machine to the hard drive, and it can power up back to that state.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Games these days generally have mid-level checkpoints and infinite continues , so there 's no satisfaction in reaching the end.For * YOU * there 's no satisfaction .
Other people have different attitudes about gaming .
Me , I hate having to redo an entire level and by the time I get back to the point of fail , I forget what the hell I did wrong the first time.The archetype of that , for me , is the quadruple pillar jump in the first Tomb Raider .
It was really twitchy , but doable as you figure out the precise sequence of moves .
You fail and get sent not back to the entrance of the room , but about two miles away .
You had to run back through a completely eventless set of corridors just to try the jumps again .
I beat it eventually , but I wanted to hunt down every programmer of the game and punch them all in the face .
That 's fun ?
How can that , in any way shape or form , by even the loosest definition , be considered fun ? Although even that can vary .
With Batman Arkham Asylum , even if I beat an area successfully , I would sometimes think " I could have done that better " and go back and replay .
But it 's at * my * discretion .
* I * decide what is fun for me.The end user should be treated as king by the developers .
I want to save anywhere at any time .
I do not want to be subject to someone else 's Grand Unified Theory of Gaming Challenge , especially if it 's someone whose career is games and they have forgotten what it 's like to have a life and career where gaming is just a hobby and time is precious .
If you do n't like " save anywhere " then DO N'T USE IT .
Let those of us who have to answer a phone or go to the bathroom have things our way , too.I actually hope the next gen of consoles implement a system level game save , sort of like hibernate on Windows , where it just dumps the state of the machine to the hard drive , and it can power up back to that state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games these days generally have mid-level checkpoints and infinite continues, so there's no satisfaction in reaching the end.For *YOU* there's no satisfaction.
Other people have different attitudes about gaming.
Me, I hate having to redo an entire level and by the time I get back to the point of fail, I forget what the hell I did wrong the first time.The archetype of that, for me, is the quadruple pillar jump in the first Tomb Raider.
It was really twitchy, but doable as you figure out the precise sequence of moves.
You fail and get sent not back to the entrance of the room, but about two miles away.
You had to run back through a completely eventless set of corridors just to try the jumps again.
I beat it eventually, but I wanted to hunt down every programmer of the game and punch them all in the face.
That's fun?
How can that, in any way shape or form, by even the loosest definition, be considered fun?Although even that can vary.
With Batman Arkham Asylum, even if I beat an area successfully, I would sometimes think "I could have done that better" and go back and replay.
But it's at *my* discretion.
*I* decide what is fun for me.The end user should be treated as king by the developers.
I want to save anywhere at any time.
I do not want to be subject to someone else's Grand Unified Theory of Gaming Challenge, especially if it's someone whose career is games and they have forgotten what it's like to have a life and career where gaming is just a hobby and time is precious.
If you don't like "save anywhere" then DON'T USE IT.
Let those of us who have to answer a phone or go to the bathroom have things our way, too.I actually hope the next gen of consoles implement a system level game save, sort of like hibernate on Windows, where it just dumps the state of the machine to the hard drive, and it can power up back to that state.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750414</id>
	<title>Well how do you have an ending in a MMO?</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1263397800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only way I've seen it work is to end the game for everyone in the MMO. For example, there was a web-based MMO called "FaitH" that ran roughly 2000-2007. It was a real time strategy game where people had abstract kingdoms (the group was a "kingdom" and the individuals were "emperors", I kid you not) and launched various "attacks" on rival kingdoms. The game ran in cycles called "eras" about 2-3 months long. The goal of the game was to harm other players. You could receive points for growing big (that was a valid strategy), but most of the time, the real points were in hideously bloody battles (the bloodier, the better). At the start of an era, everyone grew up as fast they could. Then the middle stretch (which lasted most of the game) involved a long, brutal grind of coordinated attacks and spells (usually some sort of speed up or war boost) among members of the kingdom. Finally, there was "Chaos" (I'm not spelling it right) where score from anything bloodshed-related was doubled or tripled. A lot of stuff was saved up for that. Then the era end, scores were calculated, and a huge list issued of everyone who played - sorted by score. Shortly thereafter, a new era would start.<br> <br>

A second approach was used by a web-based game called "Kings of Loathing", a parody of fantasy RPGs like WoW and Final Fantasy series. The player levels up, defeating more and more powerful monsters. At some point, they reach the final stage where the big boss (called the "Nasty Sorceress") is finally defeated and then the player reincarnates as a new player. As a reward, the player gets to keep a single skill permanently throughout the rest of their career (their stuff can be carried over, depending on the difficulty the player chooses).<br> <br>

To be honest, I can't think of other natural ways to end a player experience in an MMO except to end it for everyone in a big bang or to have some sort of reincarnation as a new player with a little something carried over from the old character. The fundamental constraint of MMOs is that they want the player to come back and play again. If you play through and finish, then what's going to draw you back?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only way I 've seen it work is to end the game for everyone in the MMO .
For example , there was a web-based MMO called " FaitH " that ran roughly 2000-2007 .
It was a real time strategy game where people had abstract kingdoms ( the group was a " kingdom " and the individuals were " emperors " , I kid you not ) and launched various " attacks " on rival kingdoms .
The game ran in cycles called " eras " about 2-3 months long .
The goal of the game was to harm other players .
You could receive points for growing big ( that was a valid strategy ) , but most of the time , the real points were in hideously bloody battles ( the bloodier , the better ) .
At the start of an era , everyone grew up as fast they could .
Then the middle stretch ( which lasted most of the game ) involved a long , brutal grind of coordinated attacks and spells ( usually some sort of speed up or war boost ) among members of the kingdom .
Finally , there was " Chaos " ( I 'm not spelling it right ) where score from anything bloodshed-related was doubled or tripled .
A lot of stuff was saved up for that .
Then the era end , scores were calculated , and a huge list issued of everyone who played - sorted by score .
Shortly thereafter , a new era would start .
A second approach was used by a web-based game called " Kings of Loathing " , a parody of fantasy RPGs like WoW and Final Fantasy series .
The player levels up , defeating more and more powerful monsters .
At some point , they reach the final stage where the big boss ( called the " Nasty Sorceress " ) is finally defeated and then the player reincarnates as a new player .
As a reward , the player gets to keep a single skill permanently throughout the rest of their career ( their stuff can be carried over , depending on the difficulty the player chooses ) .
To be honest , I ca n't think of other natural ways to end a player experience in an MMO except to end it for everyone in a big bang or to have some sort of reincarnation as a new player with a little something carried over from the old character .
The fundamental constraint of MMOs is that they want the player to come back and play again .
If you play through and finish , then what 's going to draw you back ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only way I've seen it work is to end the game for everyone in the MMO.
For example, there was a web-based MMO called "FaitH" that ran roughly 2000-2007.
It was a real time strategy game where people had abstract kingdoms (the group was a "kingdom" and the individuals were "emperors", I kid you not) and launched various "attacks" on rival kingdoms.
The game ran in cycles called "eras" about 2-3 months long.
The goal of the game was to harm other players.
You could receive points for growing big (that was a valid strategy), but most of the time, the real points were in hideously bloody battles (the bloodier, the better).
At the start of an era, everyone grew up as fast they could.
Then the middle stretch (which lasted most of the game) involved a long, brutal grind of coordinated attacks and spells (usually some sort of speed up or war boost) among members of the kingdom.
Finally, there was "Chaos" (I'm not spelling it right) where score from anything bloodshed-related was doubled or tripled.
A lot of stuff was saved up for that.
Then the era end, scores were calculated, and a huge list issued of everyone who played - sorted by score.
Shortly thereafter, a new era would start.
A second approach was used by a web-based game called "Kings of Loathing", a parody of fantasy RPGs like WoW and Final Fantasy series.
The player levels up, defeating more and more powerful monsters.
At some point, they reach the final stage where the big boss (called the "Nasty Sorceress") is finally defeated and then the player reincarnates as a new player.
As a reward, the player gets to keep a single skill permanently throughout the rest of their career (their stuff can be carried over, depending on the difficulty the player chooses).
To be honest, I can't think of other natural ways to end a player experience in an MMO except to end it for everyone in a big bang or to have some sort of reincarnation as a new player with a little something carried over from the old character.
The fundamental constraint of MMOs is that they want the player to come back and play again.
If you play through and finish, then what's going to draw you back?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752636</id>
	<title>Re:Divergence?</title>
	<author>zerobytes</author>
	<datestamp>1263406440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd have to agree with you here.  For me, gaming is all about the story and I have yet to find a story that I loved SO much that I didn't want it to end at some point.  Harry should finally face off with Voldemort, Luke should finally face his father and save the galaxy, and Mario should finally find the princess.  Preferrably, all this should happen before I turn it off because I feel it's wasting my life.  <br> <br>
It seems so many games nowadays will carrot you as long as they can until you leave the franchise in disgust or boredom rather than satisfaction.  Kill it till it's dead then reboot or revive it till it's dead again.  Wash, rinse, repeat.  This zombie-like creativity in our producers AND consumers is unfortunate.  There is nothing wrong with ending a good thing while it's still a good thing and then moving on to something better.  Sadly, it is, of course, all about the amount of money that can be sucked out of our emotional attachment to a character or a world or a cause.  Hence, teenagers and college kids are revolutionizing our industries because they haven't figured that out that it's all about the money yet.  As they see it (and we should as well), there are still great undiscovered stories, worlds, and characters out there. We're just too scared or too lazy to explore them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd have to agree with you here .
For me , gaming is all about the story and I have yet to find a story that I loved SO much that I did n't want it to end at some point .
Harry should finally face off with Voldemort , Luke should finally face his father and save the galaxy , and Mario should finally find the princess .
Preferrably , all this should happen before I turn it off because I feel it 's wasting my life .
It seems so many games nowadays will carrot you as long as they can until you leave the franchise in disgust or boredom rather than satisfaction .
Kill it till it 's dead then reboot or revive it till it 's dead again .
Wash , rinse , repeat .
This zombie-like creativity in our producers AND consumers is unfortunate .
There is nothing wrong with ending a good thing while it 's still a good thing and then moving on to something better .
Sadly , it is , of course , all about the amount of money that can be sucked out of our emotional attachment to a character or a world or a cause .
Hence , teenagers and college kids are revolutionizing our industries because they have n't figured that out that it 's all about the money yet .
As they see it ( and we should as well ) , there are still great undiscovered stories , worlds , and characters out there .
We 're just too scared or too lazy to explore them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd have to agree with you here.
For me, gaming is all about the story and I have yet to find a story that I loved SO much that I didn't want it to end at some point.
Harry should finally face off with Voldemort, Luke should finally face his father and save the galaxy, and Mario should finally find the princess.
Preferrably, all this should happen before I turn it off because I feel it's wasting my life.
It seems so many games nowadays will carrot you as long as they can until you leave the franchise in disgust or boredom rather than satisfaction.
Kill it till it's dead then reboot or revive it till it's dead again.
Wash, rinse, repeat.
This zombie-like creativity in our producers AND consumers is unfortunate.
There is nothing wrong with ending a good thing while it's still a good thing and then moving on to something better.
Sadly, it is, of course, all about the amount of money that can be sucked out of our emotional attachment to a character or a world or a cause.
Hence, teenagers and college kids are revolutionizing our industries because they haven't figured that out that it's all about the money yet.
As they see it (and we should as well), there are still great undiscovered stories, worlds, and characters out there.
We're just too scared or too lazy to explore them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749380</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263391800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FYI, Lord of the Rings Online is made by Turbine (which also does Asheron's Call and D&amp;D Online); Codemasters is just their European publisher (handling distribution, customer support, and translation for the Euro editions).</p><p>The "Epic" quests in LotRO not only tell long and involved stories that frequently have definite endings; those quest arcs do also end with cinematic cutscenes, and frequently have tie-ins with other quests in nearby areas.  It's a very good game, though it falls into the shadow of WoW for a lot of people (it's another fantasy MMO, with basically the same controls and mechanics...), despite having a number of notable differences (dramatically different art style, for example).  I encourage you to try it out if you want to see a different take on story in an MMO.</p><p>Disclaimer:  I am an ex-Turbine employee, though I spent almost all my time there on D&amp;D Online.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI , Lord of the Rings Online is made by Turbine ( which also does Asheron 's Call and D&amp;D Online ) ; Codemasters is just their European publisher ( handling distribution , customer support , and translation for the Euro editions ) .The " Epic " quests in LotRO not only tell long and involved stories that frequently have definite endings ; those quest arcs do also end with cinematic cutscenes , and frequently have tie-ins with other quests in nearby areas .
It 's a very good game , though it falls into the shadow of WoW for a lot of people ( it 's another fantasy MMO , with basically the same controls and mechanics... ) , despite having a number of notable differences ( dramatically different art style , for example ) .
I encourage you to try it out if you want to see a different take on story in an MMO.Disclaimer : I am an ex-Turbine employee , though I spent almost all my time there on D&amp;D Online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI, Lord of the Rings Online is made by Turbine (which also does Asheron's Call and D&amp;D Online); Codemasters is just their European publisher (handling distribution, customer support, and translation for the Euro editions).The "Epic" quests in LotRO not only tell long and involved stories that frequently have definite endings; those quest arcs do also end with cinematic cutscenes, and frequently have tie-ins with other quests in nearby areas.
It's a very good game, though it falls into the shadow of WoW for a lot of people (it's another fantasy MMO, with basically the same controls and mechanics...), despite having a number of notable differences (dramatically different art style, for example).
I encourage you to try it out if you want to see a different take on story in an MMO.Disclaimer:  I am an ex-Turbine employee, though I spent almost all my time there on D&amp;D Online.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30760142</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>ZosX</author>
	<datestamp>1263397320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least Big-O had some semblence of an ending. Look at Twin Peaks, where the ending is a total cliff hanger....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least Big-O had some semblence of an ending .
Look at Twin Peaks , where the ending is a total cliff hanger... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least Big-O had some semblence of an ending.
Look at Twin Peaks, where the ending is a total cliff hanger....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749016</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>JackieBrown</author>
	<datestamp>1263387600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I do want a story with a definite beginning, middle and end. This isn't to say that the game can't continue after the story has ended; I much preferred the way the Broken Steel DLC allowed you to continue exploring the Capital Wastelands in Fallout 3, after you'd beaten the original game and the continuation story.</p></div><p>My favorite like with was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark\_Sun:\_Shattered\_Lands" title="wikipedia.org">Dark Sun: Shattered Lands</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do want a story with a definite beginning , middle and end .
This is n't to say that the game ca n't continue after the story has ended ; I much preferred the way the Broken Steel DLC allowed you to continue exploring the Capital Wastelands in Fallout 3 , after you 'd beaten the original game and the continuation story.My favorite like with was Dark Sun : Shattered Lands [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do want a story with a definite beginning, middle and end.
This isn't to say that the game can't continue after the story has ended; I much preferred the way the Broken Steel DLC allowed you to continue exploring the Capital Wastelands in Fallout 3, after you'd beaten the original game and the continuation story.My favorite like with was Dark Sun: Shattered Lands [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750658</id>
	<title>Prototype did it wel</title>
	<author>anethema</author>
	<datestamp>1263398700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Prototype there was a full story with a satisfying ending. After the ending, you still had the whole world to continue playing in much as before. Gathering more secrets, killing more bases, improving your character etc.<br><br>I didn't play TOO much after the ending but it was still fun.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Prototype there was a full story with a satisfying ending .
After the ending , you still had the whole world to continue playing in much as before .
Gathering more secrets , killing more bases , improving your character etc.I did n't play TOO much after the ending but it was still fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Prototype there was a full story with a satisfying ending.
After the ending, you still had the whole world to continue playing in much as before.
Gathering more secrets, killing more bases, improving your character etc.I didn't play TOO much after the ending but it was still fun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749426</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb</title>
	<author>FictionPimp</author>
	<datestamp>1263392220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea, portal was a great game with a great ending and it was still open ended enough to allow a sequel. Even if they choose not to make a sequel it still stands by itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea , portal was a great game with a great ending and it was still open ended enough to allow a sequel .
Even if they choose not to make a sequel it still stands by itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea, portal was a great game with a great ending and it was still open ended enough to allow a sequel.
Even if they choose not to make a sequel it still stands by itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750252</id>
	<title>Re:Inaccurate</title>
	<author>rgviza</author>
	<datestamp>1263397140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Inaccurate. Arcade games and 2600 games turned over (space invaders, asteroids etc.) or you finished them (pole position, dragon's lair). PCB's didn't fry.</p><p>Been there, done it. Games you finish came about in the early 80's as a response to long lines at machines and people's capability to turn them over and play them indefinitely. If you could play for 3 days on the same quarter, the machine wasn't making any money. With pole position you finished the race. With Dragon's Lair  you rescued the princess.</p><p>Can't speak to NES because I was in college when that came out and I didn't play games any more, well, except tetris in the quad =D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Inaccurate .
Arcade games and 2600 games turned over ( space invaders , asteroids etc .
) or you finished them ( pole position , dragon 's lair ) .
PCB 's did n't fry.Been there , done it .
Games you finish came about in the early 80 's as a response to long lines at machines and people 's capability to turn them over and play them indefinitely .
If you could play for 3 days on the same quarter , the machine was n't making any money .
With pole position you finished the race .
With Dragon 's Lair you rescued the princess.Ca n't speak to NES because I was in college when that came out and I did n't play games any more , well , except tetris in the quad = D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inaccurate.
Arcade games and 2600 games turned over (space invaders, asteroids etc.
) or you finished them (pole position, dragon's lair).
PCB's didn't fry.Been there, done it.
Games you finish came about in the early 80's as a response to long lines at machines and people's capability to turn them over and play them indefinitely.
If you could play for 3 days on the same quarter, the machine wasn't making any money.
With pole position you finished the race.
With Dragon's Lair  you rescued the princess.Can't speak to NES because I was in college when that came out and I didn't play games any more, well, except tetris in the quad =D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756498</id>
	<title>Re:Misrepresents history</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263378420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would estimate that of the games I've played over the last 25 years that weren't explicitly sold as open-ended experiences, at least 80\% have had satisfying endings.</p><p>And many of the exceptions (games with disappointing "to-be-continued" cop-outs) are from the 1990s, not part of any recent trends.  The Descent series and the later Ultima games were notable offenders.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would estimate that of the games I 've played over the last 25 years that were n't explicitly sold as open-ended experiences , at least 80 \ % have had satisfying endings.And many of the exceptions ( games with disappointing " to-be-continued " cop-outs ) are from the 1990s , not part of any recent trends .
The Descent series and the later Ultima games were notable offenders .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would estimate that of the games I've played over the last 25 years that weren't explicitly sold as open-ended experiences, at least 80\% have had satisfying endings.And many of the exceptions (games with disappointing "to-be-continued" cop-outs) are from the 1990s, not part of any recent trends.
The Descent series and the later Ultima games were notable offenders.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751362</id>
	<title>Re:Honestly, it depends.</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1263401520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That isn't to say you can't have story in there with pivotal points, such as the climax of Dragon Age, or the end of <b>A Song of Fire and Ice</b>, but I know in each case that there will be more to come, and it isn't over. That's a good thing if done properly.</p></div><p>If you mean "A Song of Ice and Fire", i.e. George R.R. Martin's series, then there IS no end, and he seems to have adopted the Blizzard approach to releases... my best friend (who turned me onto the series, damn him) is afraid Martin is gonna pull a Jordan on us now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is n't to say you ca n't have story in there with pivotal points , such as the climax of Dragon Age , or the end of A Song of Fire and Ice , but I know in each case that there will be more to come , and it is n't over .
That 's a good thing if done properly.If you mean " A Song of Ice and Fire " , i.e .
George R.R .
Martin 's series , then there IS no end , and he seems to have adopted the Blizzard approach to releases... my best friend ( who turned me onto the series , damn him ) is afraid Martin is gon na pull a Jordan on us now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That isn't to say you can't have story in there with pivotal points, such as the climax of Dragon Age, or the end of A Song of Fire and Ice, but I know in each case that there will be more to come, and it isn't over.
That's a good thing if done properly.If you mean "A Song of Ice and Fire", i.e.
George R.R.
Martin's series, then there IS no end, and he seems to have adopted the Blizzard approach to releases... my best friend (who turned me onto the series, damn him) is afraid Martin is gonna pull a Jordan on us now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749374</id>
	<title>I play Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263391680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot is my favorite MMORPG with no ending and I'll keep playing it as long as at least once a week someone here ask to subscribe to my newsletter. Ok, now gimme some lovin', group hug!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot is my favorite MMORPG with no ending and I 'll keep playing it as long as at least once a week someone here ask to subscribe to my newsletter .
Ok , now gim me some lovin ' , group hug !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot is my favorite MMORPG with no ending and I'll keep playing it as long as at least once a week someone here ask to subscribe to my newsletter.
Ok, now gimme some lovin', group hug!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30753080</id>
	<title>Deus Ex</title>
	<author>ub3r n3u7r4l1st</author>
	<datestamp>1263407940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Small endings, but multiple ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Small endings , but multiple ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Small endings, but multiple ones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751384</id>
	<title>Someone has to say it</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1263401580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Congraturation!</p><p>A Winner is You!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Congraturation ! A Winner is You !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congraturation!A Winner is You!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756608</id>
	<title>Because Games are worth playing now</title>
	<author>Latinhypercube</author>
	<datestamp>1263378900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is obviously because games are worth playing now. Back in the old days, games were mostly repetitive crap with the ending breaking the monotony. Now games are rich varied experiences and don't need gimmicks to keep you playing. One example that has me hooked is Left 4 Dead, which only has 5 main levels (each 1 hour long) but the play experience is ALWAYS different, especially since you play with other real players.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is obviously because games are worth playing now .
Back in the old days , games were mostly repetitive crap with the ending breaking the monotony .
Now games are rich varied experiences and do n't need gimmicks to keep you playing .
One example that has me hooked is Left 4 Dead , which only has 5 main levels ( each 1 hour long ) but the play experience is ALWAYS different , especially since you play with other real players .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is obviously because games are worth playing now.
Back in the old days, games were mostly repetitive crap with the ending breaking the monotony.
Now games are rich varied experiences and don't need gimmicks to keep you playing.
One example that has me hooked is Left 4 Dead, which only has 5 main levels (each 1 hour long) but the play experience is ALWAYS different, especially since you play with other real players.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751820</id>
	<title>Re:Worst ending ever...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263403380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The sad thing is...EoTB isn't the only game like that.   Several of the other D&amp;Dish games of that area had the same thing happen.  The only one I can recall with anything resembling an ending was Secret of the Silver Blades.</p><p>I'm not sure if it was SSI that was responsible or some other company, but the crash to dos prompt was rather common.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The sad thing is...EoTB is n't the only game like that .
Several of the other D&amp;Dish games of that area had the same thing happen .
The only one I can recall with anything resembling an ending was Secret of the Silver Blades.I 'm not sure if it was SSI that was responsible or some other company , but the crash to dos prompt was rather common .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sad thing is...EoTB isn't the only game like that.
Several of the other D&amp;Dish games of that area had the same thing happen.
The only one I can recall with anything resembling an ending was Secret of the Silver Blades.I'm not sure if it was SSI that was responsible or some other company, but the crash to dos prompt was rather common.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756938</id>
	<title>Re:MMO's Do have a ending....</title>
	<author>Ifandbut</author>
	<datestamp>1263380460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What MMO is this? Or are you not allowed to say due to an NDA (aka SW:TOR)? I'v played a ton of MMOs and the only one that feels like it has several endings and beginnings is Final Fantasy 11. Each expansion (and the original 3 cities missions) has a distinct ending to that expansion's story. Also, several quest chains are long enough to be more then one-shot quest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What MMO is this ?
Or are you not allowed to say due to an NDA ( aka SW : TOR ) ?
I'v played a ton of MMOs and the only one that feels like it has several endings and beginnings is Final Fantasy 11 .
Each expansion ( and the original 3 cities missions ) has a distinct ending to that expansion 's story .
Also , several quest chains are long enough to be more then one-shot quest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What MMO is this?
Or are you not allowed to say due to an NDA (aka SW:TOR)?
I'v played a ton of MMOs and the only one that feels like it has several endings and beginnings is Final Fantasy 11.
Each expansion (and the original 3 cities missions) has a distinct ending to that expansion's story.
Also, several quest chains are long enough to be more then one-shot quest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750882</id>
	<title>Re:Misrepresents history</title>
	<author>DutchUncle</author>
	<datestamp>1263399660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pong and Space Invaders just got faster and faster until you couldn't possibly keep up.  No such thing as "finish"; more of a race against clock and record book.
<br> <br>
As noted above, it takes the stylistic move into "telling a story" to need an ending, and that move requires more of a computer and a database.  The first games had playing logic but very little memory.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pong and Space Invaders just got faster and faster until you could n't possibly keep up .
No such thing as " finish " ; more of a race against clock and record book .
As noted above , it takes the stylistic move into " telling a story " to need an ending , and that move requires more of a computer and a database .
The first games had playing logic but very little memory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pong and Space Invaders just got faster and faster until you couldn't possibly keep up.
No such thing as "finish"; more of a race against clock and record book.
As noted above, it takes the stylistic move into "telling a story" to need an ending, and that move requires more of a computer and a database.
The first games had playing logic but very little memory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749092</id>
	<title>No more multiple endings</title>
	<author>ElusiveJoe</author>
	<datestamp>1263388680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess games switched from book to comics style. Always save a room for a sequel, or a spin-off, or even a mix-up with another game (Mortal Kombat vs DC Universe, for example). But it doesn't mean a single release won't have an end, that's impossible. What can really disappear, is games with multiple endings like Deus Ex or Fahrenheit, because they give sequel makers a pain in the ass (think Deus Ex 2).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess games switched from book to comics style .
Always save a room for a sequel , or a spin-off , or even a mix-up with another game ( Mortal Kombat vs DC Universe , for example ) .
But it does n't mean a single release wo n't have an end , that 's impossible .
What can really disappear , is games with multiple endings like Deus Ex or Fahrenheit , because they give sequel makers a pain in the ass ( think Deus Ex 2 ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess games switched from book to comics style.
Always save a room for a sequel, or a spin-off, or even a mix-up with another game (Mortal Kombat vs DC Universe, for example).
But it doesn't mean a single release won't have an end, that's impossible.
What can really disappear, is games with multiple endings like Deus Ex or Fahrenheit, because they give sequel makers a pain in the ass (think Deus Ex 2).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751262</id>
	<title>Re:Old games</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1263401160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I have a PSP with custom firmware and I went back and played some of those old games and, for me, the "patience, effort and time" needed to play the same damn levels over and over again (because I kept dying at the same key spot!) began to wear very thin very quickly.</p><p>Sometimes I think we look back on old games with too much nostalgia. Whilst there are undoubtedly some really good games, a lot of them were just an exercise in frustration and slow methodical progress - something I don't derive much enjoyment from any more.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I was wondering about that myself, thanks to the punishment that is Mega Man 9. I couldn't figure out if I used to play games like that when I was a kid (in my sleep) and I am just getting old, or if the game is harder than past incarnations. It seems about on-par except for some "cheap" parts (the sucking-elephant/ball/pit room in concrete man, e.g.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a PSP with custom firmware and I went back and played some of those old games and , for me , the " patience , effort and time " needed to play the same damn levels over and over again ( because I kept dying at the same key spot !
) began to wear very thin very quickly.Sometimes I think we look back on old games with too much nostalgia .
Whilst there are undoubtedly some really good games , a lot of them were just an exercise in frustration and slow methodical progress - something I do n't derive much enjoyment from any more .
I was wondering about that myself , thanks to the punishment that is Mega Man 9 .
I could n't figure out if I used to play games like that when I was a kid ( in my sleep ) and I am just getting old , or if the game is harder than past incarnations .
It seems about on-par except for some " cheap " parts ( the sucking-elephant/ball/pit room in concrete man , e.g .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a PSP with custom firmware and I went back and played some of those old games and, for me, the "patience, effort and time" needed to play the same damn levels over and over again (because I kept dying at the same key spot!
) began to wear very thin very quickly.Sometimes I think we look back on old games with too much nostalgia.
Whilst there are undoubtedly some really good games, a lot of them were just an exercise in frustration and slow methodical progress - something I don't derive much enjoyment from any more.
I was wondering about that myself, thanks to the punishment that is Mega Man 9.
I couldn't figure out if I used to play games like that when I was a kid (in my sleep) and I am just getting old, or if the game is harder than past incarnations.
It seems about on-par except for some "cheap" parts (the sucking-elephant/ball/pit room in concrete man, e.g.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30753584</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>AlbinoClock</author>
	<datestamp>1263410160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's a big difference between extending the plot past the original ending (as with any game with expansions) and not having an ending at all. The climax is still a bit part of a game, even it has 20 expansions. You can't really have a story without having some form of plot resolution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a big difference between extending the plot past the original ending ( as with any game with expansions ) and not having an ending at all .
The climax is still a bit part of a game , even it has 20 expansions .
You ca n't really have a story without having some form of plot resolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a big difference between extending the plot past the original ending (as with any game with expansions) and not having an ending at all.
The climax is still a bit part of a game, even it has 20 expansions.
You can't really have a story without having some form of plot resolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751192</id>
	<title>Re:Inaccurate</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1263400920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>most Atari 2600</p></div><p>Say it with me, old-schoolers...</p><p>FUCK YOU, Sword Quest!!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>most Atari 2600Say it with me , old-schoolers...FUCK YOU , Sword Quest ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>most Atari 2600Say it with me, old-schoolers...FUCK YOU, Sword Quest!!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749392</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263391860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And then there is Seinfeld, which obey its own special laws...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And then there is Seinfeld , which obey its own special laws.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And then there is Seinfeld, which obey its own special laws...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750216</id>
	<title>Telegraphing the ending in real time</title>
	<author>pRtkL xLr8r</author>
	<datestamp>1263396960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to say, COD: Modern Warfare had one of the most satisfying endings I've ever played through.  Part of it was the fact that you knew you were near the end when you were playing it - it wasn't an abrupt "Mission Accomplished: Game Over!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to say , COD : Modern Warfare had one of the most satisfying endings I 've ever played through .
Part of it was the fact that you knew you were near the end when you were playing it - it was n't an abrupt " Mission Accomplished : Game Over !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to say, COD: Modern Warfare had one of the most satisfying endings I've ever played through.
Part of it was the fact that you knew you were near the end when you were playing it - it wasn't an abrupt "Mission Accomplished: Game Over!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30758182</id>
	<title>Re:Misrepresents history</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1263386100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What games can you remember that Actually had a decent ending?</i></p><p>Sierra games were particularly well-done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What games can you remember that Actually had a decent ending ? Sierra games were particularly well-done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What games can you remember that Actually had a decent ending?Sierra games were particularly well-done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750250</id>
	<title>Stargate</title>
	<author>phorm</author>
	<datestamp>1263397140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the things that was perhaps best for the Stargate Atlantis and SG-1 series was that they were fairly faithful to their "meme" throughout the series, and then came to a fairly definitive conclusion.<br>OK, well actually in the case of Atlantis the wraith are still out there etc - which might leave room for a movie - but the series was "completed" rather than be allowed to trail off until it was just a murmuring gurgle as it was pulled off life support.<br>IMHO, Atlantis was a fairly successful way to "conclude" one series (SG-1) and start another. There's a definitive relation between the two, and even cameos and intersecting plot-arcs, but the overall focus of the two series was different enough to lend it some uniqueness, and the characters were different between the two.</p><p>Unfortunately SG-U seems to break-down because, while having a new setting and characters, it also tries was too hard to focus on some fairly tired memes and doesn't seem to have nearly as strong a plot base as its predecessors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the things that was perhaps best for the Stargate Atlantis and SG-1 series was that they were fairly faithful to their " meme " throughout the series , and then came to a fairly definitive conclusion.OK , well actually in the case of Atlantis the wraith are still out there etc - which might leave room for a movie - but the series was " completed " rather than be allowed to trail off until it was just a murmuring gurgle as it was pulled off life support.IMHO , Atlantis was a fairly successful way to " conclude " one series ( SG-1 ) and start another .
There 's a definitive relation between the two , and even cameos and intersecting plot-arcs , but the overall focus of the two series was different enough to lend it some uniqueness , and the characters were different between the two.Unfortunately SG-U seems to break-down because , while having a new setting and characters , it also tries was too hard to focus on some fairly tired memes and does n't seem to have nearly as strong a plot base as its predecessors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the things that was perhaps best for the Stargate Atlantis and SG-1 series was that they were fairly faithful to their "meme" throughout the series, and then came to a fairly definitive conclusion.OK, well actually in the case of Atlantis the wraith are still out there etc - which might leave room for a movie - but the series was "completed" rather than be allowed to trail off until it was just a murmuring gurgle as it was pulled off life support.IMHO, Atlantis was a fairly successful way to "conclude" one series (SG-1) and start another.
There's a definitive relation between the two, and even cameos and intersecting plot-arcs, but the overall focus of the two series was different enough to lend it some uniqueness, and the characters were different between the two.Unfortunately SG-U seems to break-down because, while having a new setting and characters, it also tries was too hard to focus on some fairly tired memes and doesn't seem to have nearly as strong a plot base as its predecessors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750450</id>
	<title>huh, what?</title>
	<author>phorm</author>
	<datestamp>1263397920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In terms of profitability, an MMO etc makes more case because it requires continual investment. However a game with an ending also makes cash because what do you do when it's done... well, buy another game. Look at the Final Fantasy series. Some very basic relation between them all, but - ignoring the MMO - they all for the most-part had stories, fixed endings, and successors that sell very nicely.</p><p>As a general fan of the series, I can attest that those that have been long-term players of the series *salivate* at a new title, and certainly don't mind when one reaches the ending. That a given plot is done and is no longer to be milked is NOT a bad thing. Yes, there are crappy spinoffs like FFX-2 or "Revenant Wings," but even if they never occurred you'd still have a fairly defined ending to the originals.</p><p>Yes, I'm sure that monthly payments of $9.99 and a few shots of $30+ for addons is nice in MMO-land. But having a veritable army of geeks salivating over your next RPG (non-MMO) release with pre-orders starting at $60 is probably a pretty good sell as well.</p><p>There's also STILL a good market for remakes, for example the older NES/SNES Final Fantasy series updated for the Nintendo DS, or a good many other games that have received facelifts. I know there were a lot of people rather ticked at the unfulfilled tech demo of the PS3 (a clip from Final Fantasy VI that never actually became a full game remake), which if actually produced into a game would like have been another big money-maker.</p><p>Yes, I'm concentrating on games like Final Fantasy in particular, mainly because RPG's tend to have more in plot-land, but there are plenty of others like Zelda (heck, they sell well even though often enough the essential plot was the same), Dragon Warrior, and even Mario Bros.</p><p>An MMO that creates a continual system of revenue is a good cash-cow. It does require some maintenance (hosting, etc, see especially the issues with EVE) though and can eventually die as new MMOs come out. A solid play-through game (or movie) is a one-time investment that can still rake in a whole lot of cash, though, and a definitive ending doesn't mean that the game as a concept dies, or even that a series with a different "spin" can't evolve from it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In terms of profitability , an MMO etc makes more case because it requires continual investment .
However a game with an ending also makes cash because what do you do when it 's done... well , buy another game .
Look at the Final Fantasy series .
Some very basic relation between them all , but - ignoring the MMO - they all for the most-part had stories , fixed endings , and successors that sell very nicely.As a general fan of the series , I can attest that those that have been long-term players of the series * salivate * at a new title , and certainly do n't mind when one reaches the ending .
That a given plot is done and is no longer to be milked is NOT a bad thing .
Yes , there are crappy spinoffs like FFX-2 or " Revenant Wings , " but even if they never occurred you 'd still have a fairly defined ending to the originals.Yes , I 'm sure that monthly payments of $ 9.99 and a few shots of $ 30 + for addons is nice in MMO-land .
But having a veritable army of geeks salivating over your next RPG ( non-MMO ) release with pre-orders starting at $ 60 is probably a pretty good sell as well.There 's also STILL a good market for remakes , for example the older NES/SNES Final Fantasy series updated for the Nintendo DS , or a good many other games that have received facelifts .
I know there were a lot of people rather ticked at the unfulfilled tech demo of the PS3 ( a clip from Final Fantasy VI that never actually became a full game remake ) , which if actually produced into a game would like have been another big money-maker.Yes , I 'm concentrating on games like Final Fantasy in particular , mainly because RPG 's tend to have more in plot-land , but there are plenty of others like Zelda ( heck , they sell well even though often enough the essential plot was the same ) , Dragon Warrior , and even Mario Bros.An MMO that creates a continual system of revenue is a good cash-cow .
It does require some maintenance ( hosting , etc , see especially the issues with EVE ) though and can eventually die as new MMOs come out .
A solid play-through game ( or movie ) is a one-time investment that can still rake in a whole lot of cash , though , and a definitive ending does n't mean that the game as a concept dies , or even that a series with a different " spin " ca n't evolve from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In terms of profitability, an MMO etc makes more case because it requires continual investment.
However a game with an ending also makes cash because what do you do when it's done... well, buy another game.
Look at the Final Fantasy series.
Some very basic relation between them all, but - ignoring the MMO - they all for the most-part had stories, fixed endings, and successors that sell very nicely.As a general fan of the series, I can attest that those that have been long-term players of the series *salivate* at a new title, and certainly don't mind when one reaches the ending.
That a given plot is done and is no longer to be milked is NOT a bad thing.
Yes, there are crappy spinoffs like FFX-2 or "Revenant Wings," but even if they never occurred you'd still have a fairly defined ending to the originals.Yes, I'm sure that monthly payments of $9.99 and a few shots of $30+ for addons is nice in MMO-land.
But having a veritable army of geeks salivating over your next RPG (non-MMO) release with pre-orders starting at $60 is probably a pretty good sell as well.There's also STILL a good market for remakes, for example the older NES/SNES Final Fantasy series updated for the Nintendo DS, or a good many other games that have received facelifts.
I know there were a lot of people rather ticked at the unfulfilled tech demo of the PS3 (a clip from Final Fantasy VI that never actually became a full game remake), which if actually produced into a game would like have been another big money-maker.Yes, I'm concentrating on games like Final Fantasy in particular, mainly because RPG's tend to have more in plot-land, but there are plenty of others like Zelda (heck, they sell well even though often enough the essential plot was the same), Dragon Warrior, and even Mario Bros.An MMO that creates a continual system of revenue is a good cash-cow.
It does require some maintenance (hosting, etc, see especially the issues with EVE) though and can eventually die as new MMOs come out.
A solid play-through game (or movie) is a one-time investment that can still rake in a whole lot of cash, though, and a definitive ending doesn't mean that the game as a concept dies, or even that a series with a different "spin" can't evolve from it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749596</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>PhotoBoy</author>
	<datestamp>1263393360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate this too. I'm still upset Shenmue II ended on a massive cliffhanger with Sega clearly not intending to finish the story.</p><p>More recently Ubisoft have been doing it in a lot of their games, and in the case of the Prince of Persia reboot, they've already abandoned it for a Sands of Time sequel to cash-in on the film coming out this summer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate this too .
I 'm still upset Shenmue II ended on a massive cliffhanger with Sega clearly not intending to finish the story.More recently Ubisoft have been doing it in a lot of their games , and in the case of the Prince of Persia reboot , they 've already abandoned it for a Sands of Time sequel to cash-in on the film coming out this summer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate this too.
I'm still upset Shenmue II ended on a massive cliffhanger with Sega clearly not intending to finish the story.More recently Ubisoft have been doing it in a lot of their games, and in the case of the Prince of Persia reboot, they've already abandoned it for a Sands of Time sequel to cash-in on the film coming out this summer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749976</id>
	<title>It depends on the game, like it always has.</title>
	<author>Max Romantschuk</author>
	<datestamp>1263395640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been playing the recent Tales of Monkey Island WiiWare games/chapters, and they most definitely have clear cut endings.</p><p>For us it's been a great way to have some friends over and get back into adventure gaming. The endings are welcome, a chapter can be completed in 3-4 hours, giving a great signal when to stop, get to bed, and schedule the next time.</p><p>I believe there has always been and will always be games with and without endings. And there are hybrid approaches too: For example in Super Mario Galaxy you keep playing after you've rescued Princess Peach from Bowser. The credits roll, the game ends in a sense, but you still get to go back and unlock more stuff and look for hidden levels etc...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been playing the recent Tales of Monkey Island WiiWare games/chapters , and they most definitely have clear cut endings.For us it 's been a great way to have some friends over and get back into adventure gaming .
The endings are welcome , a chapter can be completed in 3-4 hours , giving a great signal when to stop , get to bed , and schedule the next time.I believe there has always been and will always be games with and without endings .
And there are hybrid approaches too : For example in Super Mario Galaxy you keep playing after you 've rescued Princess Peach from Bowser .
The credits roll , the game ends in a sense , but you still get to go back and unlock more stuff and look for hidden levels etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been playing the recent Tales of Monkey Island WiiWare games/chapters, and they most definitely have clear cut endings.For us it's been a great way to have some friends over and get back into adventure gaming.
The endings are welcome, a chapter can be completed in 3-4 hours, giving a great signal when to stop, get to bed, and schedule the next time.I believe there has always been and will always be games with and without endings.
And there are hybrid approaches too: For example in Super Mario Galaxy you keep playing after you've rescued Princess Peach from Bowser.
The credits roll, the game ends in a sense, but you still get to go back and unlock more stuff and look for hidden levels etc...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749572</id>
	<title>FRANCHISE</title>
	<author>Rivalz</author>
	<datestamp>1263393240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>End games pretty much died when they decided to have franchises that constantly regurgitate the same story.
This goes back for as long as I have been playing games.
Wing Commander, Wolfenstien, Donkey Kong, Pac Man.... there is always a sequel, story, and never ending story....
Now games are have no ending because the dev cycle has shrunk and demand is the same..</htmltext>
<tokenext>End games pretty much died when they decided to have franchises that constantly regurgitate the same story .
This goes back for as long as I have been playing games .
Wing Commander , Wolfenstien , Donkey Kong , Pac Man.... there is always a sequel , story , and never ending story... . Now games are have no ending because the dev cycle has shrunk and demand is the same. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>End games pretty much died when they decided to have franchises that constantly regurgitate the same story.
This goes back for as long as I have been playing games.
Wing Commander, Wolfenstien, Donkey Kong, Pac Man.... there is always a sequel, story, and never ending story....
Now games are have no ending because the dev cycle has shrunk and demand is the same..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750544</id>
	<title>Re:Old games</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1263398280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sometimes I think we look back on old games with too much nostalgia. Whilst there are undoubtedly some really good games, a lot of them were just an exercise in frustration and slow methodical progress - something I don't derive much enjoyment from any more.</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.cinemassacre.com/new/?page\_id=3130" title="cinemassacre.com">For proof of this, just watch these videos.</a> [cinemassacre.com] </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes I think we look back on old games with too much nostalgia .
Whilst there are undoubtedly some really good games , a lot of them were just an exercise in frustration and slow methodical progress - something I do n't derive much enjoyment from any more .
For proof of this , just watch these videos .
[ cinemassacre.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes I think we look back on old games with too much nostalgia.
Whilst there are undoubtedly some really good games, a lot of them were just an exercise in frustration and slow methodical progress - something I don't derive much enjoyment from any more.
For proof of this, just watch these videos.
[cinemassacre.com] 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30759656</id>
	<title>Re:Modern endings</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1263393240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For *YOU* there's no satisfaction. Other people have different attitudes about gaming. Me, I hate having to redo an entire level and by the time I get back to the point of fail, I forget what the hell I did wrong the first time.</p></div></blockquote><p>

For *YOU* this may be a problem. PC FPS's games did away with the level system back in the 90's. System Shock, Half Life, Deus Ex were continuous games, open world gaming kind of bought this back. We've also had saved games instead of checkpoints for even longer so the problem for this does not exist.<br> <br>

Now the thing I hate is when all challenge is removed because they have dumbed the game down, you don't actually remove challenge by making an infinite restore point (such as a check point or saved game) but by making a task impossible to fail. This is Bioshocks biggest fail. You can never really die and never really loose as no matter where you are in the game you will always be regenerated by the nearest vita-chamber. So it doesn't matter what you do in bioshock, you'll just be re-spawned with no penalty what so ever. I realised that system shock pioneered this but in System Shock you had to activate each chamber, so each new section was a race to activate the regeneration chamber, within this time if you died, you were dead. SShock 2 added an additional penalty for dying (cost in nanites).<br> <br>

Goals in games are about rewards and punishments, each goal has a reward but there has to be a penalty otherwise there is no challenge in attaining that reward. Remove the penalty and the reward becomes cheapened. Often the penalty for failure is to be forced to return to a previous point and lose the progress you've made. The penalty serves as a driver, without this driver games quickly become boring.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For * YOU * there 's no satisfaction .
Other people have different attitudes about gaming .
Me , I hate having to redo an entire level and by the time I get back to the point of fail , I forget what the hell I did wrong the first time .
For * YOU * this may be a problem .
PC FPS 's games did away with the level system back in the 90 's .
System Shock , Half Life , Deus Ex were continuous games , open world gaming kind of bought this back .
We 've also had saved games instead of checkpoints for even longer so the problem for this does not exist .
Now the thing I hate is when all challenge is removed because they have dumbed the game down , you do n't actually remove challenge by making an infinite restore point ( such as a check point or saved game ) but by making a task impossible to fail .
This is Bioshocks biggest fail .
You can never really die and never really loose as no matter where you are in the game you will always be regenerated by the nearest vita-chamber .
So it does n't matter what you do in bioshock , you 'll just be re-spawned with no penalty what so ever .
I realised that system shock pioneered this but in System Shock you had to activate each chamber , so each new section was a race to activate the regeneration chamber , within this time if you died , you were dead .
SShock 2 added an additional penalty for dying ( cost in nanites ) .
Goals in games are about rewards and punishments , each goal has a reward but there has to be a penalty otherwise there is no challenge in attaining that reward .
Remove the penalty and the reward becomes cheapened .
Often the penalty for failure is to be forced to return to a previous point and lose the progress you 've made .
The penalty serves as a driver , without this driver games quickly become boring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For *YOU* there's no satisfaction.
Other people have different attitudes about gaming.
Me, I hate having to redo an entire level and by the time I get back to the point of fail, I forget what the hell I did wrong the first time.
For *YOU* this may be a problem.
PC FPS's games did away with the level system back in the 90's.
System Shock, Half Life, Deus Ex were continuous games, open world gaming kind of bought this back.
We've also had saved games instead of checkpoints for even longer so the problem for this does not exist.
Now the thing I hate is when all challenge is removed because they have dumbed the game down, you don't actually remove challenge by making an infinite restore point (such as a check point or saved game) but by making a task impossible to fail.
This is Bioshocks biggest fail.
You can never really die and never really loose as no matter where you are in the game you will always be regenerated by the nearest vita-chamber.
So it doesn't matter what you do in bioshock, you'll just be re-spawned with no penalty what so ever.
I realised that system shock pioneered this but in System Shock you had to activate each chamber, so each new section was a race to activate the regeneration chamber, within this time if you died, you were dead.
SShock 2 added an additional penalty for dying (cost in nanites).
Goals in games are about rewards and punishments, each goal has a reward but there has to be a penalty otherwise there is no challenge in attaining that reward.
Remove the penalty and the reward becomes cheapened.
Often the penalty for failure is to be forced to return to a previous point and lose the progress you've made.
The penalty serves as a driver, without this driver games quickly become boring.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30753954</id>
	<title>Re:Small vs. big Ending</title>
	<author>Plekto</author>
	<datestamp>1263411540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of this is also due to the influence of Asia in our media.  Their traditional storytelling has been to have stories not have a big climax or ending but instead to be more of a "chapter" in a person's life or a part of a larger story.(ie - one person's view of a war or something).  This of course has caught on in the gaming industry as it allows for easy sequels and tie-ins with other products. IMO, it also makes for a more compelling story as sometimes the good guys don't win and thing's aren't always predictable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of this is also due to the influence of Asia in our media .
Their traditional storytelling has been to have stories not have a big climax or ending but instead to be more of a " chapter " in a person 's life or a part of a larger story .
( ie - one person 's view of a war or something ) .
This of course has caught on in the gaming industry as it allows for easy sequels and tie-ins with other products .
IMO , it also makes for a more compelling story as sometimes the good guys do n't win and thing 's are n't always predictable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of this is also due to the influence of Asia in our media.
Their traditional storytelling has been to have stories not have a big climax or ending but instead to be more of a "chapter" in a person's life or a part of a larger story.
(ie - one person's view of a war or something).
This of course has caught on in the gaming industry as it allows for easy sequels and tie-ins with other products.
IMO, it also makes for a more compelling story as sometimes the good guys don't win and thing's aren't always predictable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750808</id>
	<title>Re:Divergence?</title>
	<author>BetterSense</author>
	<datestamp>1263399300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm playing Odin sphere right now, and in that game you play through as multiple different characters, and get a different story perspective each time. You even fight different sides of the boss battles in the different storylines--kind of "fighting yourself". So every 10 hours or so, you complete a complete mini-rpg with its own character's storyline, but with an overarching storyline that involves everyone. I thought it was a fresh take on "ending" considering you get to complete a relatively short, though satisfying game, and then when you start the next character it's like starting a whole new game. Also the 2d graphics are absolutely stunning at times, easily more stunning than the photorealistic 3D wondergames whose visual impact is starting to wear off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm playing Odin sphere right now , and in that game you play through as multiple different characters , and get a different story perspective each time .
You even fight different sides of the boss battles in the different storylines--kind of " fighting yourself " .
So every 10 hours or so , you complete a complete mini-rpg with its own character 's storyline , but with an overarching storyline that involves everyone .
I thought it was a fresh take on " ending " considering you get to complete a relatively short , though satisfying game , and then when you start the next character it 's like starting a whole new game .
Also the 2d graphics are absolutely stunning at times , easily more stunning than the photorealistic 3D wondergames whose visual impact is starting to wear off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm playing Odin sphere right now, and in that game you play through as multiple different characters, and get a different story perspective each time.
You even fight different sides of the boss battles in the different storylines--kind of "fighting yourself".
So every 10 hours or so, you complete a complete mini-rpg with its own character's storyline, but with an overarching storyline that involves everyone.
I thought it was a fresh take on "ending" considering you get to complete a relatively short, though satisfying game, and then when you start the next character it's like starting a whole new game.
Also the 2d graphics are absolutely stunning at times, easily more stunning than the photorealistic 3D wondergames whose visual impact is starting to wear off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749090</id>
	<title>Modern endings</title>
	<author>lyinhart</author>
	<datestamp>1263388680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>One big change in modern game endings is the fact that it doesn't seem like much of an accomplishment to finish a games. Games these days generally have mid-level checkpoints and infinite continues, so there's no satisfaction in reaching the end. You just feel like endlessly grinding to the end.

Also, the concept of "completing" a game has changed. Whereas it once meant clearing all the stages in a game, completion might mean unlocking all the game content (e.g. 100\% completion levels in Gran Turismo, or getting all the "achievements" in some titles).</htmltext>
<tokenext>One big change in modern game endings is the fact that it does n't seem like much of an accomplishment to finish a games .
Games these days generally have mid-level checkpoints and infinite continues , so there 's no satisfaction in reaching the end .
You just feel like endlessly grinding to the end .
Also , the concept of " completing " a game has changed .
Whereas it once meant clearing all the stages in a game , completion might mean unlocking all the game content ( e.g .
100 \ % completion levels in Gran Turismo , or getting all the " achievements " in some titles ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One big change in modern game endings is the fact that it doesn't seem like much of an accomplishment to finish a games.
Games these days generally have mid-level checkpoints and infinite continues, so there's no satisfaction in reaching the end.
You just feel like endlessly grinding to the end.
Also, the concept of "completing" a game has changed.
Whereas it once meant clearing all the stages in a game, completion might mean unlocking all the game content (e.g.
100\% completion levels in Gran Turismo, or getting all the "achievements" in some titles).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749036</id>
	<title>MMO's Do have a ending....</title>
	<author>ATestR</author>
	<datestamp>1263387960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Depends on the MMO...  The one I am currently playing has LOTS of endings...  and also lots of beginnings.  As with any good game or story, it is composed of a whole bunch of substories, each of which can (somewhat) stand on its own to some extent, within the framework of the overall game.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends on the MMO... The one I am currently playing has LOTS of endings... and also lots of beginnings .
As with any good game or story , it is composed of a whole bunch of substories , each of which can ( somewhat ) stand on its own to some extent , within the framework of the overall game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends on the MMO...  The one I am currently playing has LOTS of endings...  and also lots of beginnings.
As with any good game or story, it is composed of a whole bunch of substories, each of which can (somewhat) stand on its own to some extent, within the framework of the overall game.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749948</id>
	<title>Completed stories in Japanese Culture</title>
	<author>psnyder</author>
	<datestamp>1263395580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Japanese TV stations put their most high profile dramas on at popular times just like American TV stations.  But what's interesting from an outside perspective is that these are constantly new stories, usually either 13 or 26 episodes long, with beginnings, middles, and ends.<br> <br>

Yes, there are sequels sometimes, but usually these involve the same characters with a completely new problem/story that also has a beginning, middle, and end.<br> <br>

While I'm not a huge fan of TV dramas, a few of these have sucked me in because the writers move the story along, and it makes it a lot more interesting to know that questions will be answered, and things do get resolved somehow.  What gets the audiences to watch the new shows is that they often recycle the same popular actors, just in different roles.<br> <br>

In contrast, I've seen very little of this on American TV, except from things like "special series" on HBO.  And yes, Japan has it's share of never-ending stories, but it's interesting that the most popular time slots are often filled with these "complete story" dramas.<br> <br>

Single player RPGs also seem to be more popular when I look at the game isle in Japan, than when I look in America.  And I'll often see advertisements for them (more than when in the states).  I think this is where we can still find the complete story arches and the big endings.<br> <br>

Just like TV, there's a following of certain people involved in the games (like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akira\_Toriyama#Video\_games\_.28character\_design.29" title="wikipedia.org">Akira Toriyama</a> [wikipedia.org] doing the art for example).<br> <br>

In Japan, there seems to be more of an emphasis on who is involved in these projects (TV or game), and perhaps that's what leads to more completed stories.  With a famous person involved, they can always make a new story with confidence that it will sell.  There is also more control over these famous people as they are much less like free-agents, and more like company people, doing the projects the company sets up for them.  And there's an audience willing to pay for a new story when someone they like is involved in making it.<br> <br>

The 2 games the article mentions for having scant endings are Fallout 3 and GTA 4.  These were made by American companies using a popular name for their game.  The names were the selling point, not the studio or the people that made them.  Most of the games from the 8, 16, or 32-bit eras the article has nostalgia for were made by Japanese companies.<br> <br>

While I can think of exceptions on both sides of the Pacific, there seems to be more of an emphasis on the completed story in entertainment from the Japanese side.  At least that's my anecdotal impression.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Japanese TV stations put their most high profile dramas on at popular times just like American TV stations .
But what 's interesting from an outside perspective is that these are constantly new stories , usually either 13 or 26 episodes long , with beginnings , middles , and ends .
Yes , there are sequels sometimes , but usually these involve the same characters with a completely new problem/story that also has a beginning , middle , and end .
While I 'm not a huge fan of TV dramas , a few of these have sucked me in because the writers move the story along , and it makes it a lot more interesting to know that questions will be answered , and things do get resolved somehow .
What gets the audiences to watch the new shows is that they often recycle the same popular actors , just in different roles .
In contrast , I 've seen very little of this on American TV , except from things like " special series " on HBO .
And yes , Japan has it 's share of never-ending stories , but it 's interesting that the most popular time slots are often filled with these " complete story " dramas .
Single player RPGs also seem to be more popular when I look at the game isle in Japan , than when I look in America .
And I 'll often see advertisements for them ( more than when in the states ) .
I think this is where we can still find the complete story arches and the big endings .
Just like TV , there 's a following of certain people involved in the games ( like Akira Toriyama [ wikipedia.org ] doing the art for example ) .
In Japan , there seems to be more of an emphasis on who is involved in these projects ( TV or game ) , and perhaps that 's what leads to more completed stories .
With a famous person involved , they can always make a new story with confidence that it will sell .
There is also more control over these famous people as they are much less like free-agents , and more like company people , doing the projects the company sets up for them .
And there 's an audience willing to pay for a new story when someone they like is involved in making it .
The 2 games the article mentions for having scant endings are Fallout 3 and GTA 4 .
These were made by American companies using a popular name for their game .
The names were the selling point , not the studio or the people that made them .
Most of the games from the 8 , 16 , or 32-bit eras the article has nostalgia for were made by Japanese companies .
While I can think of exceptions on both sides of the Pacific , there seems to be more of an emphasis on the completed story in entertainment from the Japanese side .
At least that 's my anecdotal impression .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Japanese TV stations put their most high profile dramas on at popular times just like American TV stations.
But what's interesting from an outside perspective is that these are constantly new stories, usually either 13 or 26 episodes long, with beginnings, middles, and ends.
Yes, there are sequels sometimes, but usually these involve the same characters with a completely new problem/story that also has a beginning, middle, and end.
While I'm not a huge fan of TV dramas, a few of these have sucked me in because the writers move the story along, and it makes it a lot more interesting to know that questions will be answered, and things do get resolved somehow.
What gets the audiences to watch the new shows is that they often recycle the same popular actors, just in different roles.
In contrast, I've seen very little of this on American TV, except from things like "special series" on HBO.
And yes, Japan has it's share of never-ending stories, but it's interesting that the most popular time slots are often filled with these "complete story" dramas.
Single player RPGs also seem to be more popular when I look at the game isle in Japan, than when I look in America.
And I'll often see advertisements for them (more than when in the states).
I think this is where we can still find the complete story arches and the big endings.
Just like TV, there's a following of certain people involved in the games (like Akira Toriyama [wikipedia.org] doing the art for example).
In Japan, there seems to be more of an emphasis on who is involved in these projects (TV or game), and perhaps that's what leads to more completed stories.
With a famous person involved, they can always make a new story with confidence that it will sell.
There is also more control over these famous people as they are much less like free-agents, and more like company people, doing the projects the company sets up for them.
And there's an audience willing to pay for a new story when someone they like is involved in making it.
The 2 games the article mentions for having scant endings are Fallout 3 and GTA 4.
These were made by American companies using a popular name for their game.
The names were the selling point, not the studio or the people that made them.
Most of the games from the 8, 16, or 32-bit eras the article has nostalgia for were made by Japanese companies.
While I can think of exceptions on both sides of the Pacific, there seems to be more of an emphasis on the completed story in entertainment from the Japanese side.
At least that's my anecdotal impression.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748972</id>
	<title>Inaccurate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263387180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>All arcade, most Atari 2600 and some NES games had no ending and consisted of stacking more and more points, until your thumbs bled or the PCB fried. That was the whole fun of it. The old school-way to do it.<br><br>It's when games started telling stories (example, Final Fantasy) that we had elaborate plots and game endings.<br><br>But now with the MMORPG craze, every publisher wants a piece of the action (and profit). Game endings are out, micro payments, subscriptions, DLCs are in.<br><br>It'll be a truly sad day when all we have to play are Disney MMO, Star Wars MMO, Warcraft MMO, Sonic MMO, Tomb Raider MMO, Halo MMO, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All arcade , most Atari 2600 and some NES games had no ending and consisted of stacking more and more points , until your thumbs bled or the PCB fried .
That was the whole fun of it .
The old school-way to do it.It 's when games started telling stories ( example , Final Fantasy ) that we had elaborate plots and game endings.But now with the MMORPG craze , every publisher wants a piece of the action ( and profit ) .
Game endings are out , micro payments , subscriptions , DLCs are in.It 'll be a truly sad day when all we have to play are Disney MMO , Star Wars MMO , Warcraft MMO , Sonic MMO , Tomb Raider MMO , Halo MMO , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All arcade, most Atari 2600 and some NES games had no ending and consisted of stacking more and more points, until your thumbs bled or the PCB fried.
That was the whole fun of it.
The old school-way to do it.It's when games started telling stories (example, Final Fantasy) that we had elaborate plots and game endings.But now with the MMORPG craze, every publisher wants a piece of the action (and profit).
Game endings are out, micro payments, subscriptions, DLCs are in.It'll be a truly sad day when all we have to play are Disney MMO, Star Wars MMO, Warcraft MMO, Sonic MMO, Tomb Raider MMO, Halo MMO, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749026</id>
	<title>Resale</title>
	<author>Grr</author>
	<datestamp>1263387780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What the article fails to mention is the underlying reason for this: resale. If a gamer finishes the game it is done, a coaster in a pretty box. If the game always has something left to do, whether in the form of downloadable content, achievements, replayability or open endedness, it will retain some value and not end up traded in for a new game quite so soon. The game resale market may seem pretty small (mostly because stores take a huge second profit margin on them), but add to that the number of copies lended to a friend or rented for the weekend. In the end significantly more people will buy their own box if it provides limitless enjoyment.<br>
In my opinion adding more value to a game is the most customer friendly way to do it. Far better than strong arming stores to not take trade ins or locking installations to hardware, creditcard and so on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What the article fails to mention is the underlying reason for this : resale .
If a gamer finishes the game it is done , a coaster in a pretty box .
If the game always has something left to do , whether in the form of downloadable content , achievements , replayability or open endedness , it will retain some value and not end up traded in for a new game quite so soon .
The game resale market may seem pretty small ( mostly because stores take a huge second profit margin on them ) , but add to that the number of copies lended to a friend or rented for the weekend .
In the end significantly more people will buy their own box if it provides limitless enjoyment .
In my opinion adding more value to a game is the most customer friendly way to do it .
Far better than strong arming stores to not take trade ins or locking installations to hardware , creditcard and so on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the article fails to mention is the underlying reason for this: resale.
If a gamer finishes the game it is done, a coaster in a pretty box.
If the game always has something left to do, whether in the form of downloadable content, achievements, replayability or open endedness, it will retain some value and not end up traded in for a new game quite so soon.
The game resale market may seem pretty small (mostly because stores take a huge second profit margin on them), but add to that the number of copies lended to a friend or rented for the weekend.
In the end significantly more people will buy their own box if it provides limitless enjoyment.
In my opinion adding more value to a game is the most customer friendly way to do it.
Far better than strong arming stores to not take trade ins or locking installations to hardware, creditcard and so on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750888</id>
	<title>DLC doesn't mean no ending.</title>
	<author>spitzig</author>
	<datestamp>1263399720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fallout 3's and Dragon Age's endings were both disappointing. But, Bioshock's was good. I think a couple of weak endings isn't enough to say that companies are moving away from endings. They still had endings. Using DLC as an example of a movement away from endings seems off. First, they don't usually stop the game from having it's original ending. Most DLC packs that add quests do so in the middle of the game. Those packs even have a "mini-ending".</p><p>Packs like Fallout 3's DLC that allowed people to play past the "ending" might redefine the word "ending" a little(since it doesn't really END the game). But, the big boss you beat is still there. So is the cutscene. And, actually, if you compare Fallout 3 to Fallout 2, the DLC is a movement BACK to the older style. Fallout 2 allowed one to play after the "ending".</p><p>However, really, considering games as a financial enterprise: I invest most of my time throughout the game. I don't want a huge investment at the end. Sure, maybe the coolest cutscene could go at the end, but I don't want the investment in the rest of the game to suffer because of the investment in the ending.</p><p>Dragon Age's ending had a solid hint at a sequel, but it was nicely done. It had a definite ending-it just said something like "Other things happened, but that's another story..." There were some plotlines open, but the main story was pretty much wrapped up. That's good. In the real world, you solve problems, but there are always more problems. Nothing ever completely ends. Movies sometimes do that too-I remember one of the Conan movies ending that way. I don't know if I'll like the way Starcraft 2 seems to be coming, though. They present the first Starcraft 2 as the first 1/3 of the story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fallout 3 's and Dragon Age 's endings were both disappointing .
But , Bioshock 's was good .
I think a couple of weak endings is n't enough to say that companies are moving away from endings .
They still had endings .
Using DLC as an example of a movement away from endings seems off .
First , they do n't usually stop the game from having it 's original ending .
Most DLC packs that add quests do so in the middle of the game .
Those packs even have a " mini-ending " .Packs like Fallout 3 's DLC that allowed people to play past the " ending " might redefine the word " ending " a little ( since it does n't really END the game ) .
But , the big boss you beat is still there .
So is the cutscene .
And , actually , if you compare Fallout 3 to Fallout 2 , the DLC is a movement BACK to the older style .
Fallout 2 allowed one to play after the " ending " .However , really , considering games as a financial enterprise : I invest most of my time throughout the game .
I do n't want a huge investment at the end .
Sure , maybe the coolest cutscene could go at the end , but I do n't want the investment in the rest of the game to suffer because of the investment in the ending.Dragon Age 's ending had a solid hint at a sequel , but it was nicely done .
It had a definite ending-it just said something like " Other things happened , but that 's another story... " There were some plotlines open , but the main story was pretty much wrapped up .
That 's good .
In the real world , you solve problems , but there are always more problems .
Nothing ever completely ends .
Movies sometimes do that too-I remember one of the Conan movies ending that way .
I do n't know if I 'll like the way Starcraft 2 seems to be coming , though .
They present the first Starcraft 2 as the first 1/3 of the story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fallout 3's and Dragon Age's endings were both disappointing.
But, Bioshock's was good.
I think a couple of weak endings isn't enough to say that companies are moving away from endings.
They still had endings.
Using DLC as an example of a movement away from endings seems off.
First, they don't usually stop the game from having it's original ending.
Most DLC packs that add quests do so in the middle of the game.
Those packs even have a "mini-ending".Packs like Fallout 3's DLC that allowed people to play past the "ending" might redefine the word "ending" a little(since it doesn't really END the game).
But, the big boss you beat is still there.
So is the cutscene.
And, actually, if you compare Fallout 3 to Fallout 2, the DLC is a movement BACK to the older style.
Fallout 2 allowed one to play after the "ending".However, really, considering games as a financial enterprise: I invest most of my time throughout the game.
I don't want a huge investment at the end.
Sure, maybe the coolest cutscene could go at the end, but I don't want the investment in the rest of the game to suffer because of the investment in the ending.Dragon Age's ending had a solid hint at a sequel, but it was nicely done.
It had a definite ending-it just said something like "Other things happened, but that's another story..." There were some plotlines open, but the main story was pretty much wrapped up.
That's good.
In the real world, you solve problems, but there are always more problems.
Nothing ever completely ends.
Movies sometimes do that too-I remember one of the Conan movies ending that way.
I don't know if I'll like the way Starcraft 2 seems to be coming, though.
They present the first Starcraft 2 as the first 1/3 of the story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30754510</id>
	<title>Sequels and laziness</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1263413820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Games have never been strong on story and no so many companies rely on sequels. An ending would just be a waste of time because it can't ever be a true ending when the publisher has 5 sequels in the works already.
<br> <br>
Gaming certainly hasn't evolved much in the past decade and in fact I'd almost say this generation was a step backwards.
<br> <br>
Gaming is coming out of the hands of the Japanese and into the hands of westerners and it's becoming shit again. I do hope we see a repeat of Atari's history.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Games have never been strong on story and no so many companies rely on sequels .
An ending would just be a waste of time because it ca n't ever be a true ending when the publisher has 5 sequels in the works already .
Gaming certainly has n't evolved much in the past decade and in fact I 'd almost say this generation was a step backwards .
Gaming is coming out of the hands of the Japanese and into the hands of westerners and it 's becoming shit again .
I do hope we see a repeat of Atari 's history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games have never been strong on story and no so many companies rely on sequels.
An ending would just be a waste of time because it can't ever be a true ending when the publisher has 5 sequels in the works already.
Gaming certainly hasn't evolved much in the past decade and in fact I'd almost say this generation was a step backwards.
Gaming is coming out of the hands of the Japanese and into the hands of westerners and it's becoming shit again.
I do hope we see a repeat of Atari's history.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749370</id>
	<title>Worst ending ever...</title>
	<author>tangent3</author>
	<datestamp>1263391560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the ending from Eye of the Beholder, fast forward to 4:45</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dmbryaF6pU" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dmbryaF6pU</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>After killing Xanathar, you get 2 pages of text and throw out into C:\&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the ending from Eye of the Beholder , fast forward to 4 : 45http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 2dmbryaF6pU [ youtube.com ] After killing Xanathar , you get 2 pages of text and throw out into C : \ &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the ending from Eye of the Beholder, fast forward to 4:45http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dmbryaF6pU [youtube.com]After killing Xanathar, you get 2 pages of text and throw out into C:\&gt;</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756882</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Ifandbut</author>
	<datestamp>1263380220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll agree with what you said about the Epic quest. Granted I am only level 30 right now and only half way through book 2, however book 1 and the prologue were very cool and actually makes me want to go read the books.</p><p>That said I think LotRO falls somewhere between WoW and Final Fantasy XI in the story telling realm. It is better then WoW because alot of the story feels like it is directed at you instead of you being a passive observer like in WoW. Also, the occasional cutscenes at the end of a chapter helps alot.</p><p>However, Final Fantasy XI is still the pinnacle of story telling in a MMO for me. Each story cutscene had you as the hero, your party members were just along for the ride. Not only that, there were in-game cutscenes for a ton of the minor quest. Some of the minor quest actually approach the coolness of the main storyline (the A Timely Visit quest as well as the Artifact Armor lines).</p><p>I'm looking forward to seeing how Bioware does the story telling in TOR.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll agree with what you said about the Epic quest .
Granted I am only level 30 right now and only half way through book 2 , however book 1 and the prologue were very cool and actually makes me want to go read the books.That said I think LotRO falls somewhere between WoW and Final Fantasy XI in the story telling realm .
It is better then WoW because alot of the story feels like it is directed at you instead of you being a passive observer like in WoW .
Also , the occasional cutscenes at the end of a chapter helps alot.However , Final Fantasy XI is still the pinnacle of story telling in a MMO for me .
Each story cutscene had you as the hero , your party members were just along for the ride .
Not only that , there were in-game cutscenes for a ton of the minor quest .
Some of the minor quest actually approach the coolness of the main storyline ( the A Timely Visit quest as well as the Artifact Armor lines ) .I 'm looking forward to seeing how Bioware does the story telling in TOR .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll agree with what you said about the Epic quest.
Granted I am only level 30 right now and only half way through book 2, however book 1 and the prologue were very cool and actually makes me want to go read the books.That said I think LotRO falls somewhere between WoW and Final Fantasy XI in the story telling realm.
It is better then WoW because alot of the story feels like it is directed at you instead of you being a passive observer like in WoW.
Also, the occasional cutscenes at the end of a chapter helps alot.However, Final Fantasy XI is still the pinnacle of story telling in a MMO for me.
Each story cutscene had you as the hero, your party members were just along for the ride.
Not only that, there were in-game cutscenes for a ton of the minor quest.
Some of the minor quest actually approach the coolness of the main storyline (the A Timely Visit quest as well as the Artifact Armor lines).I'm looking forward to seeing how Bioware does the story telling in TOR.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751680</id>
	<title>Re:Of course, just like blockbuster hollywood</title>
	<author>delinear</author>
	<datestamp>1263402780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh don't worry, they're doing a lot more than just implying a <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1431045/" title="imdb.com">Deadpool movie</a> [imdb.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh do n't worry , they 're doing a lot more than just implying a Deadpool movie [ imdb.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh don't worry, they're doing a lot more than just implying a Deadpool movie [imdb.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30772954</id>
	<title>Arcade Endings?</title>
	<author>IAmRenegadeX</author>
	<datestamp>1263473280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Classic games like Pac-Man really don't ever end (unless you call score/level roll-overs or freezes "endings"). A timely Pac-Man remake with a proper ending might cut to his guest appearance on "The Biggest Loser"...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..not sure if that refers to the player who keeps going until the end...or...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Classic games like Pac-Man really do n't ever end ( unless you call score/level roll-overs or freezes " endings " ) .
A timely Pac-Man remake with a proper ending might cut to his guest appearance on " The Biggest Loser " ... ..not sure if that refers to the player who keeps going until the end...or.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Classic games like Pac-Man really don't ever end (unless you call score/level roll-overs or freezes "endings").
A timely Pac-Man remake with a proper ending might cut to his guest appearance on "The Biggest Loser"... ..not sure if that refers to the player who keeps going until the end...or...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751606</id>
	<title>Re:Old games</title>
	<author>rwv</author>
	<datestamp>1263402480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the "patience, effort and time" needed to play the same damn levels over and over again (because I kept dying at the same key spot!) began to wear very thin very quickly.</p></div><p>I recall the running jump onto the single block in world 8-1 of Super Mario Bros being a particular nuisance.

</p><p>And saving 2 sets of P-Wings for level 8 of Super Mario Bros 3 so I could fly over the stupid gunships.

</p><p>But those endings... "Congrats, you saved the Princess" aren't that fulfilling.  You just know the Princess is going to get herself captured again.  The fulfillment is the journey to get from the beginning to the end.  If games do successfully provide that, then let then write a crappy ending and sell DLC.  I play to enjoy the game, not the ending.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the " patience , effort and time " needed to play the same damn levels over and over again ( because I kept dying at the same key spot !
) began to wear very thin very quickly.I recall the running jump onto the single block in world 8-1 of Super Mario Bros being a particular nuisance .
And saving 2 sets of P-Wings for level 8 of Super Mario Bros 3 so I could fly over the stupid gunships .
But those endings... " Congrats , you saved the Princess " are n't that fulfilling .
You just know the Princess is going to get herself captured again .
The fulfillment is the journey to get from the beginning to the end .
If games do successfully provide that , then let then write a crappy ending and sell DLC .
I play to enjoy the game , not the ending .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the "patience, effort and time" needed to play the same damn levels over and over again (because I kept dying at the same key spot!
) began to wear very thin very quickly.I recall the running jump onto the single block in world 8-1 of Super Mario Bros being a particular nuisance.
And saving 2 sets of P-Wings for level 8 of Super Mario Bros 3 so I could fly over the stupid gunships.
But those endings... "Congrats, you saved the Princess" aren't that fulfilling.
You just know the Princess is going to get herself captured again.
The fulfillment is the journey to get from the beginning to the end.
If games do successfully provide that, then let then write a crappy ending and sell DLC.
I play to enjoy the game, not the ending.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30759324</id>
	<title>Re:Resale</title>
	<author>Psaakyrn</author>
	<datestamp>1263391140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then the problem is that games are built as a product, not as art. Any DVD medium-ed movie is also liable for resale, yet they certainly don't reduce sales of movies substantially.</p><p>If the game is good, EVEN IF IT IS A STRAIGHT-FORWARD LINEAR GAME, people will still replay it, just as people will still re-watch the original Matrix.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then the problem is that games are built as a product , not as art .
Any DVD medium-ed movie is also liable for resale , yet they certainly do n't reduce sales of movies substantially.If the game is good , EVEN IF IT IS A STRAIGHT-FORWARD LINEAR GAME , people will still replay it , just as people will still re-watch the original Matrix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then the problem is that games are built as a product, not as art.
Any DVD medium-ed movie is also liable for resale, yet they certainly don't reduce sales of movies substantially.If the game is good, EVEN IF IT IS A STRAIGHT-FORWARD LINEAR GAME, people will still replay it, just as people will still re-watch the original Matrix.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751588</id>
	<title>The Gears of War series</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263402420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...Is a prime example of this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Is a prime example of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Is a prime example of this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751026</id>
	<title>Re:Modern endings</title>
	<author>spitzig</author>
	<datestamp>1263400260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why play a game if it feels like "grinding"? I recently tried an MMORPG(I don't usually play them). When it started feeling like grinding, I stopped. I play games because they are fun. They make me happy. Sometimes the ending is part of that.</p><p>Back when I was a kid, and couldn't afford as many games, had more time to waste, AND games were shorter, I'd almost always finish a game I bought. Things are different now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why play a game if it feels like " grinding " ?
I recently tried an MMORPG ( I do n't usually play them ) .
When it started feeling like grinding , I stopped .
I play games because they are fun .
They make me happy .
Sometimes the ending is part of that.Back when I was a kid , and could n't afford as many games , had more time to waste , AND games were shorter , I 'd almost always finish a game I bought .
Things are different now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why play a game if it feels like "grinding"?
I recently tried an MMORPG(I don't usually play them).
When it started feeling like grinding, I stopped.
I play games because they are fun.
They make me happy.
Sometimes the ending is part of that.Back when I was a kid, and couldn't afford as many games, had more time to waste, AND games were shorter, I'd almost always finish a game I bought.
Things are different now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749566</id>
	<title>Honestly, it depends.</title>
	<author>TaggartAleslayer</author>
	<datestamp>1263393180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not all books, films, or games need to wrap everything up in one installment. Pick up Fellowship of the Ring sometime and let me know how much you would enjoy the series if you stopped right there. Do the same with any other famous trilogy or long running series. The Empire Strikes Back certainly didn't end with everything tidied up in the story-arc department.</p><p>Just because we've become used to single, stand-alone, do it once and be done with it video game packages, doesn't mean they all have to be that way, or that entertainment in general is best appreciated in that format.</p><p>I personally enjoy when a game remains open-ended. I don't mind cliffhanger endings as long as the experience is rewarding. The key is making the experience rewarding. That's the reason I purchase games like Dragon Age. I want the game to continue. I want the expansions and extended content. It's the same reason I read series like Game of Thrones. I like my characters and established universe to keep going.</p><p>That isn't to say you can't have story in there with pivotal points, such as the climax of Dragon Age, or the end of A Song of Fire and Ice, but I know in each case that there will be more to come, and it isn't over. That's a good thing if done properly.</p><p>There's room for both sorts of stories. There always has been and there always will be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all books , films , or games need to wrap everything up in one installment .
Pick up Fellowship of the Ring sometime and let me know how much you would enjoy the series if you stopped right there .
Do the same with any other famous trilogy or long running series .
The Empire Strikes Back certainly did n't end with everything tidied up in the story-arc department.Just because we 've become used to single , stand-alone , do it once and be done with it video game packages , does n't mean they all have to be that way , or that entertainment in general is best appreciated in that format.I personally enjoy when a game remains open-ended .
I do n't mind cliffhanger endings as long as the experience is rewarding .
The key is making the experience rewarding .
That 's the reason I purchase games like Dragon Age .
I want the game to continue .
I want the expansions and extended content .
It 's the same reason I read series like Game of Thrones .
I like my characters and established universe to keep going.That is n't to say you ca n't have story in there with pivotal points , such as the climax of Dragon Age , or the end of A Song of Fire and Ice , but I know in each case that there will be more to come , and it is n't over .
That 's a good thing if done properly.There 's room for both sorts of stories .
There always has been and there always will be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all books, films, or games need to wrap everything up in one installment.
Pick up Fellowship of the Ring sometime and let me know how much you would enjoy the series if you stopped right there.
Do the same with any other famous trilogy or long running series.
The Empire Strikes Back certainly didn't end with everything tidied up in the story-arc department.Just because we've become used to single, stand-alone, do it once and be done with it video game packages, doesn't mean they all have to be that way, or that entertainment in general is best appreciated in that format.I personally enjoy when a game remains open-ended.
I don't mind cliffhanger endings as long as the experience is rewarding.
The key is making the experience rewarding.
That's the reason I purchase games like Dragon Age.
I want the game to continue.
I want the expansions and extended content.
It's the same reason I read series like Game of Thrones.
I like my characters and established universe to keep going.That isn't to say you can't have story in there with pivotal points, such as the climax of Dragon Age, or the end of A Song of Fire and Ice, but I know in each case that there will be more to come, and it isn't over.
That's a good thing if done properly.There's room for both sorts of stories.
There always has been and there always will be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749048</id>
	<title>The first never-ending MMORPG</title>
	<author>Max(10)</author>
	<datestamp>1263388080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There is no real 'finish' to most MMORPGs.</p></div><p>Duke Nukem 3D was one of the last multiplayer games to feature <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbMqfkM9Bc0" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">a cool ending</a> [youtube.com]. 3D Realms then decided to set a new trend of never-ending MMORPGs with Duke Nukem Forever. Playing other MMORPGs while waiting for the release of Duke Nukem Forever is the first never-ending MMORPG.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no real 'finish ' to most MMORPGs.Duke Nukem 3D was one of the last multiplayer games to feature a cool ending [ youtube.com ] .
3D Realms then decided to set a new trend of never-ending MMORPGs with Duke Nukem Forever .
Playing other MMORPGs while waiting for the release of Duke Nukem Forever is the first never-ending MMORPG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no real 'finish' to most MMORPGs.Duke Nukem 3D was one of the last multiplayer games to feature a cool ending [youtube.com].
3D Realms then decided to set a new trend of never-ending MMORPGs with Duke Nukem Forever.
Playing other MMORPGs while waiting for the release of Duke Nukem Forever is the first never-ending MMORPG.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748970</id>
	<title>Half baked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263387120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To MMORPGs you can also add "sandbox" games, where the player would probably prefer being able to roam around rather than being forcibly kicked out.</p><p>But other than that, I struggle to think of games that lacked a real ending. Fable 2? MGS4? Dragon Age? The concept of endings still seems pretty entrenched.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To MMORPGs you can also add " sandbox " games , where the player would probably prefer being able to roam around rather than being forcibly kicked out.But other than that , I struggle to think of games that lacked a real ending .
Fable 2 ?
MGS4 ? Dragon Age ?
The concept of endings still seems pretty entrenched .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To MMORPGs you can also add "sandbox" games, where the player would probably prefer being able to roam around rather than being forcibly kicked out.But other than that, I struggle to think of games that lacked a real ending.
Fable 2?
MGS4? Dragon Age?
The concept of endings still seems pretty entrenched.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751272</id>
	<title>Re:Ok for MMOs, perhaps...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263401220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For MMOs, I think this is forgivable. After all, they're supposed to be persistent worlds. That said, a competent MMO developer will set up storylines for players to work through (either at their own pace, or a pace forced by in-game world events). The two MMOs I've played both do this; WoW and Final Fantasy XI. I understand that the real masters in this field are Codemasters, with Lord of the Rings Online, but a variety of other factors have always kept me away from that game. Interestingly, I understand that Blizzard will actually be adding a proper ending cutscene in the next WoW patch, for guilds that manage to take down Arthas. Given this will be the culmination of a major plot arc that kicked off years ago in Warcraft 3, I heartily approve.</p></div><p>I agree with all your major points but there is something that my inner pedant can't leave alone.  I play Lord of the Rings Online (and have since part of the closed Beta) and the story lines are indeed masterful.  However, Codemasters has nothing to do with the development of the game, they are just the European distributor.  <a href="http://www.turbine.com/" title="turbine.com" rel="nofollow">Turbine</a> [turbine.com] is the game's developer and so they are responsible for all aspects of the game.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For MMOs , I think this is forgivable .
After all , they 're supposed to be persistent worlds .
That said , a competent MMO developer will set up storylines for players to work through ( either at their own pace , or a pace forced by in-game world events ) .
The two MMOs I 've played both do this ; WoW and Final Fantasy XI .
I understand that the real masters in this field are Codemasters , with Lord of the Rings Online , but a variety of other factors have always kept me away from that game .
Interestingly , I understand that Blizzard will actually be adding a proper ending cutscene in the next WoW patch , for guilds that manage to take down Arthas .
Given this will be the culmination of a major plot arc that kicked off years ago in Warcraft 3 , I heartily approve.I agree with all your major points but there is something that my inner pedant ca n't leave alone .
I play Lord of the Rings Online ( and have since part of the closed Beta ) and the story lines are indeed masterful .
However , Codemasters has nothing to do with the development of the game , they are just the European distributor .
Turbine [ turbine.com ] is the game 's developer and so they are responsible for all aspects of the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For MMOs, I think this is forgivable.
After all, they're supposed to be persistent worlds.
That said, a competent MMO developer will set up storylines for players to work through (either at their own pace, or a pace forced by in-game world events).
The two MMOs I've played both do this; WoW and Final Fantasy XI.
I understand that the real masters in this field are Codemasters, with Lord of the Rings Online, but a variety of other factors have always kept me away from that game.
Interestingly, I understand that Blizzard will actually be adding a proper ending cutscene in the next WoW patch, for guilds that manage to take down Arthas.
Given this will be the culmination of a major plot arc that kicked off years ago in Warcraft 3, I heartily approve.I agree with all your major points but there is something that my inner pedant can't leave alone.
I play Lord of the Rings Online (and have since part of the closed Beta) and the story lines are indeed masterful.
However, Codemasters has nothing to do with the development of the game, they are just the European distributor.
Turbine [turbine.com] is the game's developer and so they are responsible for all aspects of the game.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748984</id>
	<title>Misrepresents history</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1263387240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My memory of classic games is of games that you'd have to be superhuman to finish.</p><p>Games like Thrust, that do have a set number of levels - but then you play through again with reverse gravity, then with invisible landscapes, then with both at once.</p><p>Or Chuckie Egg, where you end up contending with all the enemies at once, turned invisible.</p><p>Elite didn't stop when you reached Elite status. You could play on and on.</p><p>Yes, there were also games on home computers and 8/16 bit consoles with a beginning, middle and end , and a "Congraturations" page.</p><p>But open ended games came first, and since then it's always been the case that both types of game were out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My memory of classic games is of games that you 'd have to be superhuman to finish.Games like Thrust , that do have a set number of levels - but then you play through again with reverse gravity , then with invisible landscapes , then with both at once.Or Chuckie Egg , where you end up contending with all the enemies at once , turned invisible.Elite did n't stop when you reached Elite status .
You could play on and on.Yes , there were also games on home computers and 8/16 bit consoles with a beginning , middle and end , and a " Congraturations " page.But open ended games came first , and since then it 's always been the case that both types of game were out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My memory of classic games is of games that you'd have to be superhuman to finish.Games like Thrust, that do have a set number of levels - but then you play through again with reverse gravity, then with invisible landscapes, then with both at once.Or Chuckie Egg, where you end up contending with all the enemies at once, turned invisible.Elite didn't stop when you reached Elite status.
You could play on and on.Yes, there were also games on home computers and 8/16 bit consoles with a beginning, middle and end , and a "Congraturations" page.But open ended games came first, and since then it's always been the case that both types of game were out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749674</id>
	<title>it's not the ending...</title>
	<author>Ephemeriis</author>
	<datestamp>1263393960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It isn't the ending that's going out of style, it's the plot.</p><p>The reason we had an <i>ending</i> before, is because we had a plot.  There was a <i>beginning</i> a <i>middle</i> and an <i>end</i>.  Exposition, rising action, climax, and resolution.  These days a lot of games don't have much of a plot.</p><p>Instead, you'll have a setting...  You're some random soldier in WWII, or a grunt running around World of Warcraft...  And there really isn't any exposition or climax or anything like that...  It's just kind of <i>a day in the life of</i>...</p><p>And that's fine for something like an MMO or a multiplayer-oriented FPS or something...</p><p>But I'm starting to see single-player games that don't have much of a plot either.  Individual missions/levels/whatever might have some kind of plot to them...  Maybe you're trying to keep the enemy from capturing the fuel dump or whatever...  But the game as a whole is just kind of a collection of random missions strung together.  There isn't any real story being told - other than <i>these are the things that this guy did</i>.</p><p>And when you have no overall plot, you can't really have much of an ending.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't the ending that 's going out of style , it 's the plot.The reason we had an ending before , is because we had a plot .
There was a beginning a middle and an end .
Exposition , rising action , climax , and resolution .
These days a lot of games do n't have much of a plot.Instead , you 'll have a setting... You 're some random soldier in WWII , or a grunt running around World of Warcraft... And there really is n't any exposition or climax or anything like that... It 's just kind of a day in the life of...And that 's fine for something like an MMO or a multiplayer-oriented FPS or something...But I 'm starting to see single-player games that do n't have much of a plot either .
Individual missions/levels/whatever might have some kind of plot to them... Maybe you 're trying to keep the enemy from capturing the fuel dump or whatever... But the game as a whole is just kind of a collection of random missions strung together .
There is n't any real story being told - other than these are the things that this guy did.And when you have no overall plot , you ca n't really have much of an ending .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't the ending that's going out of style, it's the plot.The reason we had an ending before, is because we had a plot.
There was a beginning a middle and an end.
Exposition, rising action, climax, and resolution.
These days a lot of games don't have much of a plot.Instead, you'll have a setting...  You're some random soldier in WWII, or a grunt running around World of Warcraft...  And there really isn't any exposition or climax or anything like that...  It's just kind of a day in the life of...And that's fine for something like an MMO or a multiplayer-oriented FPS or something...But I'm starting to see single-player games that don't have much of a plot either.
Individual missions/levels/whatever might have some kind of plot to them...  Maybe you're trying to keep the enemy from capturing the fuel dump or whatever...  But the game as a whole is just kind of a collection of random missions strung together.
There isn't any real story being told - other than these are the things that this guy did.And when you have no overall plot, you can't really have much of an ending.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30753954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30753584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30760142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749026
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30759656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30759324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749026
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749026
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30758182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30753080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_13_0551220_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30758866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30753954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30753080
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750252
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750752
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756498
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30758182
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749136
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756938
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30759324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751736
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30759656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751026
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751680
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751262
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750406
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751820
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749048
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749374
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30756882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749140
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30758866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30753584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749042
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749596
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749356
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30760142
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30748970
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749426
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749948
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30754510
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30751362
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750888
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749272
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_13_0551220.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30749288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30752636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_13_0551220.30750808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
