<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_15_0738222</id>
	<title>Wii Hardware Upgrade Won't Happen Soon</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1263585120000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>As high-definition graphics become more and more entrenched in this generation of game consoles, Nintendo has had to deal with constant speculation about a new version of the Wii that would increase its capabilities. Today, Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime bluntly <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/the\_thread/techbeat/archives/2010/01/nintendo\_no\_wii.html">denied that a hardware revision was imminent</a>, saying, "We are confident the Wii home entertainment console has a very long life in front of it." He added, "In terms of what the future holds, we've gone on record to say that the next step for Nintendo in home consoles will not be to simply make it HD, but to add more and more capability, and we'll do that when we've totally <a href="http://www.industrygamers.com/news/nintendo-well-add-hd-when-all-experiences-are-tapped-out-for-existing-wii/">tapped out all of the experiences for the existing Wii</a>. And we're nowhere near doing that yet."</htmltext>
<tokenext>As high-definition graphics become more and more entrenched in this generation of game consoles , Nintendo has had to deal with constant speculation about a new version of the Wii that would increase its capabilities .
Today , Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime bluntly denied that a hardware revision was imminent , saying , " We are confident the Wii home entertainment console has a very long life in front of it .
" He added , " In terms of what the future holds , we 've gone on record to say that the next step for Nintendo in home consoles will not be to simply make it HD , but to add more and more capability , and we 'll do that when we 've totally tapped out all of the experiences for the existing Wii .
And we 're nowhere near doing that yet .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As high-definition graphics become more and more entrenched in this generation of game consoles, Nintendo has had to deal with constant speculation about a new version of the Wii that would increase its capabilities.
Today, Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime bluntly denied that a hardware revision was imminent, saying, "We are confident the Wii home entertainment console has a very long life in front of it.
" He added, "In terms of what the future holds, we've gone on record to say that the next step for Nintendo in home consoles will not be to simply make it HD, but to add more and more capability, and we'll do that when we've totally tapped out all of the experiences for the existing Wii.
And we're nowhere near doing that yet.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777238</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Negatyfus</author>
	<datestamp>1263558480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have often wondered if what I saw the Xbox 360 put out would have been possible on the Xbox. My conclusion is: no, it wouldn't have been. It would have been a scaled-down, lesser experience. The consoles are power-beasts this generation and can barf up some very impressive things. Not only in terms of graphics do the games provide a better feeling, but also in amount of enemies on-screen, AI and animation. The latter plays a big role in gameplay.

I also like in-game cut-scenes. The Xbox could do that, sure, but for the first time they actually look like something worth watching. No blocky polygons and blurry textures to distract you from the story that is unfolding. I appreciate all the people shouting "Gameplay over graphics, rawr!!" but they are both important. The fanatics can play with their emulators, if they'd like, but I do like a good graphical experience (both on consoles and PC).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have often wondered if what I saw the Xbox 360 put out would have been possible on the Xbox .
My conclusion is : no , it would n't have been .
It would have been a scaled-down , lesser experience .
The consoles are power-beasts this generation and can barf up some very impressive things .
Not only in terms of graphics do the games provide a better feeling , but also in amount of enemies on-screen , AI and animation .
The latter plays a big role in gameplay .
I also like in-game cut-scenes .
The Xbox could do that , sure , but for the first time they actually look like something worth watching .
No blocky polygons and blurry textures to distract you from the story that is unfolding .
I appreciate all the people shouting " Gameplay over graphics , rawr ! !
" but they are both important .
The fanatics can play with their emulators , if they 'd like , but I do like a good graphical experience ( both on consoles and PC ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have often wondered if what I saw the Xbox 360 put out would have been possible on the Xbox.
My conclusion is: no, it wouldn't have been.
It would have been a scaled-down, lesser experience.
The consoles are power-beasts this generation and can barf up some very impressive things.
Not only in terms of graphics do the games provide a better feeling, but also in amount of enemies on-screen, AI and animation.
The latter plays a big role in gameplay.
I also like in-game cut-scenes.
The Xbox could do that, sure, but for the first time they actually look like something worth watching.
No blocky polygons and blurry textures to distract you from the story that is unfolding.
I appreciate all the people shouting "Gameplay over graphics, rawr!!
" but they are both important.
The fanatics can play with their emulators, if they'd like, but I do like a good graphical experience (both on consoles and PC).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30784156</id>
	<title>Re:I just bought a Wii Fit</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1263551040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is innovative about 3D &amp; FPS?... (BTW that genre owns much of its success to how easy it can show shiny gfx; which in itself is a bad thing usually, IMHO - takes away the focus from other aspects of games; makes for example 1st gen games on any console shitty &amp; mostly about gfx)</p><p>Similarly with peripherals (c'mon, you know well that in practice we're stuck mostly with mouse &amp; keyboard game mechanics on PCs...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;/ ) or even "LAN" to a degree - there was a time when link cables were relatively practical, even with the requirement of two TVs, in comparison to the practicality of having two PCs in one place; and there's multiplayer mode almost not existing on PCs - all players using one screen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is innovative about 3D &amp; FPS ? .. .
( BTW that genre owns much of its success to how easy it can show shiny gfx ; which in itself is a bad thing usually , IMHO - takes away the focus from other aspects of games ; makes for example 1st gen games on any console shitty &amp; mostly about gfx ) Similarly with peripherals ( c'mon , you know well that in practice we 're stuck mostly with mouse &amp; keyboard game mechanics on PCs... ; / ) or even " LAN " to a degree - there was a time when link cables were relatively practical , even with the requirement of two TVs , in comparison to the practicality of having two PCs in one place ; and there 's multiplayer mode almost not existing on PCs - all players using one screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is innovative about 3D &amp; FPS?...
(BTW that genre owns much of its success to how easy it can show shiny gfx; which in itself is a bad thing usually, IMHO - takes away the focus from other aspects of games; makes for example 1st gen games on any console shitty &amp; mostly about gfx)Similarly with peripherals (c'mon, you know well that in practice we're stuck mostly with mouse &amp; keyboard game mechanics on PCs... ;/ ) or even "LAN" to a degree - there was a time when link cables were relatively practical, even with the requirement of two TVs, in comparison to the practicality of having two PCs in one place; and there's multiplayer mode almost not existing on PCs - all players using one screen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30781040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778902</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263570840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you just pointed out two games that started life as gamecube game and were just ported to the wii for their first release. good job picking games actually designed for the wii</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you just pointed out two games that started life as gamecube game and were just ported to the wii for their first release .
good job picking games actually designed for the wii</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you just pointed out two games that started life as gamecube game and were just ported to the wii for their first release.
good job picking games actually designed for the wii</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780032</id>
	<title>Re:Hm. It sure wouldn't hurt to update it a little</title>
	<author>PitaBred</author>
	<datestamp>1263576960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If he has an HDTV, make sure he has the component cables. That fixed all of the issues I had with the Wii's graphics (other than the resolution). Let the TV do the upscaling... most of them are pretty good at that any more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If he has an HDTV , make sure he has the component cables .
That fixed all of the issues I had with the Wii 's graphics ( other than the resolution ) .
Let the TV do the upscaling... most of them are pretty good at that any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If he has an HDTV, make sure he has the component cables.
That fixed all of the issues I had with the Wii's graphics (other than the resolution).
Let the TV do the upscaling... most of them are pretty good at that any more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778620</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1263569400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games: 25 dollars.</p></div><p>Since when was Player 1's Nunchuk accessory eliminated from the standard bundle?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>unless they're some hokey peripheral game like WiiFit, where you're going to pay 100 dollars.</p></div><p>It's not the only peripheral game. Cross-platform peripheral games include DDR, Guitar Hero, and Rock Band, even on your favored X [] O. And if you're including MotionPlus in the Wii's price, do you plan to include Natal in the 360's or Eye in the PS3's?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Want to buy Mario Kart and get two little steering wheel controllers? 90 dollars.</p></div><p>The Wii Wheel is a piece of plastic. There are third-party replacements: after you buy the game and one wheel, additional wheels cost $15 or so.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games : 25 dollars.Since when was Player 1 's Nunchuk accessory eliminated from the standard bundle ? unless they 're some hokey peripheral game like WiiFit , where you 're going to pay 100 dollars.It 's not the only peripheral game .
Cross-platform peripheral games include DDR , Guitar Hero , and Rock Band , even on your favored X [ ] O. And if you 're including MotionPlus in the Wii 's price , do you plan to include Natal in the 360 's or Eye in the PS3 's ? Want to buy Mario Kart and get two little steering wheel controllers ?
90 dollars.The Wii Wheel is a piece of plastic .
There are third-party replacements : after you buy the game and one wheel , additional wheels cost $ 15 or so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games: 25 dollars.Since when was Player 1's Nunchuk accessory eliminated from the standard bundle?unless they're some hokey peripheral game like WiiFit, where you're going to pay 100 dollars.It's not the only peripheral game.
Cross-platform peripheral games include DDR, Guitar Hero, and Rock Band, even on your favored X [] O. And if you're including MotionPlus in the Wii's price, do you plan to include Natal in the 360's or Eye in the PS3's?Want to buy Mario Kart and get two little steering wheel controllers?
90 dollars.The Wii Wheel is a piece of plastic.
There are third-party replacements: after you buy the game and one wheel, additional wheels cost $15 or so.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777948</id>
	<title>Re:I'd like one change</title>
	<author>Nimey</author>
	<datestamp>1263565500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And since the Wii's got a proprietary connector on its end, it's another chance for Nintendo to make a mint on accessories.</p><p>I know you can get component cables for it from 3rd parties at a lower price, but the average user won't know that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And since the Wii 's got a proprietary connector on its end , it 's another chance for Nintendo to make a mint on accessories.I know you can get component cables for it from 3rd parties at a lower price , but the average user wo n't know that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And since the Wii's got a proprietary connector on its end, it's another chance for Nintendo to make a mint on accessories.I know you can get component cables for it from 3rd parties at a lower price, but the average user won't know that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776504</id>
	<title>Applaud the man.</title>
	<author>ledow</author>
	<datestamp>1263549480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good for Nintendo.  I don't really care about flashy sequels and having to re-buy consoles/accessories/games or hope that the backward compatibility works (if there is one).  I just want people to carry on making games for a console that almost everyone has played.  It's good business sense to keep your customers on a stable platform and sell optional extras / games that enhance their original purchase's value without *forcing* them to upgrade and alienating them, not to mention keeping the online Wii stores alive - how many people who have never touched emulation have been playing emulated titles on Wii without even knowing?  It's good gaming sense (what matters is the game and the price, not the number of / type of peripherals, graphics, sound...) and at the end of the day, the Wii is forefront on the general public's mind... not including persistent gamers, people would struggle to give the correct name of the current version of the Xbox / Playstation, and would probably name Wii first.</p><p>"Wii 2" isn't required.  Wii already proved that state-of-the-art isn't required, just a little bit of fun and know-how and something a bit different.  Whether you hate it or not, you've played Wii at least once and tried it.  I know that I can't say the same about the Xbox (any version) / Playstation (any version past the original PS1) consoles, yet my PC is full of every genre of game.  Give it another 5 years or so, then people will be making games that actually test the limits of the Wii to the extreme all the time, then a successor that has full backwards compatibility will sell like hot cakes.  And, to be honest, everyone I know that owns a Wii would actually be happier with some bundled accessory that enhances the whole console rather than a whole new console... a "HD addon" or even some processing upgrade that the Wii can interface with (like the N64 memory expansion modules, or the SuperFX/DSP chips that were in SNES games - Nintendo know what they are doing when it comes to getting the most out of a huge investment, which is why they're pretty much the only one making a decent return on hardware alone, not just the software).</p><p>If it works, and it sells, and it makes money, don't ditch it for a sequel... enhance it a bit at a time, one expenditure at a time, and keep your customers happy without shoving them between major purchases and platforms.  If only MS could follow the same suit...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good for Nintendo .
I do n't really care about flashy sequels and having to re-buy consoles/accessories/games or hope that the backward compatibility works ( if there is one ) .
I just want people to carry on making games for a console that almost everyone has played .
It 's good business sense to keep your customers on a stable platform and sell optional extras / games that enhance their original purchase 's value without * forcing * them to upgrade and alienating them , not to mention keeping the online Wii stores alive - how many people who have never touched emulation have been playing emulated titles on Wii without even knowing ?
It 's good gaming sense ( what matters is the game and the price , not the number of / type of peripherals , graphics , sound... ) and at the end of the day , the Wii is forefront on the general public 's mind... not including persistent gamers , people would struggle to give the correct name of the current version of the Xbox / Playstation , and would probably name Wii first .
" Wii 2 " is n't required .
Wii already proved that state-of-the-art is n't required , just a little bit of fun and know-how and something a bit different .
Whether you hate it or not , you 've played Wii at least once and tried it .
I know that I ca n't say the same about the Xbox ( any version ) / Playstation ( any version past the original PS1 ) consoles , yet my PC is full of every genre of game .
Give it another 5 years or so , then people will be making games that actually test the limits of the Wii to the extreme all the time , then a successor that has full backwards compatibility will sell like hot cakes .
And , to be honest , everyone I know that owns a Wii would actually be happier with some bundled accessory that enhances the whole console rather than a whole new console... a " HD addon " or even some processing upgrade that the Wii can interface with ( like the N64 memory expansion modules , or the SuperFX/DSP chips that were in SNES games - Nintendo know what they are doing when it comes to getting the most out of a huge investment , which is why they 're pretty much the only one making a decent return on hardware alone , not just the software ) .If it works , and it sells , and it makes money , do n't ditch it for a sequel... enhance it a bit at a time , one expenditure at a time , and keep your customers happy without shoving them between major purchases and platforms .
If only MS could follow the same suit.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good for Nintendo.
I don't really care about flashy sequels and having to re-buy consoles/accessories/games or hope that the backward compatibility works (if there is one).
I just want people to carry on making games for a console that almost everyone has played.
It's good business sense to keep your customers on a stable platform and sell optional extras / games that enhance their original purchase's value without *forcing* them to upgrade and alienating them, not to mention keeping the online Wii stores alive - how many people who have never touched emulation have been playing emulated titles on Wii without even knowing?
It's good gaming sense (what matters is the game and the price, not the number of / type of peripherals, graphics, sound...) and at the end of the day, the Wii is forefront on the general public's mind... not including persistent gamers, people would struggle to give the correct name of the current version of the Xbox / Playstation, and would probably name Wii first.
"Wii 2" isn't required.
Wii already proved that state-of-the-art isn't required, just a little bit of fun and know-how and something a bit different.
Whether you hate it or not, you've played Wii at least once and tried it.
I know that I can't say the same about the Xbox (any version) / Playstation (any version past the original PS1) consoles, yet my PC is full of every genre of game.
Give it another 5 years or so, then people will be making games that actually test the limits of the Wii to the extreme all the time, then a successor that has full backwards compatibility will sell like hot cakes.
And, to be honest, everyone I know that owns a Wii would actually be happier with some bundled accessory that enhances the whole console rather than a whole new console... a "HD addon" or even some processing upgrade that the Wii can interface with (like the N64 memory expansion modules, or the SuperFX/DSP chips that were in SNES games - Nintendo know what they are doing when it comes to getting the most out of a huge investment, which is why they're pretty much the only one making a decent return on hardware alone, not just the software).If it works, and it sells, and it makes money, don't ditch it for a sequel... enhance it a bit at a time, one expenditure at a time, and keep your customers happy without shoving them between major purchases and platforms.
If only MS could follow the same suit...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778896</id>
	<title>Re:Applaud the man.</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1263570780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"State of the art" isn't required, but it doesn't hurt.  One move that could be smart, assuming their console sales are flagging, is to not produce a Wii 2 (where Wii:Wii 2::XBox:XBox360) but produce something more like a Wii Rev2 (more like Wii:Wii Rev2::Playstation2:Playstation2 slim).
</p><p>So they could keep both backward and forward compatibility with all the games and peripherals, but just upgrade the hardware.  They could provide some extra features like HD upscaling of games, DVD playback (or even Bluray), HDMI-out, and any other tweaks or upgrades they can think of.
</p><p>I don't know of a game console that has done this sort of thing, where they add features but keep backward and forward compatibility with the last-generation console, but it seems like it could be a good idea.
</p><p>On the other hand, I bet then everyone would start asking them to allow developers to break compatibility with the past console to take advantage of the newer hardware, so maybe they wouldn't be able to maintain their position of complete compatibility with the previous version.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" State of the art " is n't required , but it does n't hurt .
One move that could be smart , assuming their console sales are flagging , is to not produce a Wii 2 ( where Wii : Wii 2 : : XBox : XBox360 ) but produce something more like a Wii Rev2 ( more like Wii : Wii Rev2 : : Playstation2 : Playstation2 slim ) .
So they could keep both backward and forward compatibility with all the games and peripherals , but just upgrade the hardware .
They could provide some extra features like HD upscaling of games , DVD playback ( or even Bluray ) , HDMI-out , and any other tweaks or upgrades they can think of .
I do n't know of a game console that has done this sort of thing , where they add features but keep backward and forward compatibility with the last-generation console , but it seems like it could be a good idea .
On the other hand , I bet then everyone would start asking them to allow developers to break compatibility with the past console to take advantage of the newer hardware , so maybe they would n't be able to maintain their position of complete compatibility with the previous version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"State of the art" isn't required, but it doesn't hurt.
One move that could be smart, assuming their console sales are flagging, is to not produce a Wii 2 (where Wii:Wii 2::XBox:XBox360) but produce something more like a Wii Rev2 (more like Wii:Wii Rev2::Playstation2:Playstation2 slim).
So they could keep both backward and forward compatibility with all the games and peripherals, but just upgrade the hardware.
They could provide some extra features like HD upscaling of games, DVD playback (or even Bluray), HDMI-out, and any other tweaks or upgrades they can think of.
I don't know of a game console that has done this sort of thing, where they add features but keep backward and forward compatibility with the last-generation console, but it seems like it could be a good idea.
On the other hand, I bet then everyone would start asking them to allow developers to break compatibility with the past console to take advantage of the newer hardware, so maybe they wouldn't be able to maintain their position of complete compatibility with the previous version.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30799578</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>KDR\_11k</author>
	<datestamp>1263754200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pfft. The PS2 played Earth Defense Force 2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pfft .
The PS2 played Earth Defense Force 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pfft.
The PS2 played Earth Defense Force 2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30799608</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>KDR\_11k</author>
	<datestamp>1263754440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For most people PS2 level is the cutoff point where they'll stop paying extra for more graphics. Or the other wayaround, PS" level is sufficient to not prevent them from buying a console. HD on the Wii would be nice, nobody disputes that but no HD is no reason not to buy the system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For most people PS2 level is the cutoff point where they 'll stop paying extra for more graphics .
Or the other wayaround , PS " level is sufficient to not prevent them from buying a console .
HD on the Wii would be nice , nobody disputes that but no HD is no reason not to buy the system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For most people PS2 level is the cutoff point where they'll stop paying extra for more graphics.
Or the other wayaround, PS" level is sufficient to not prevent them from buying a console.
HD on the Wii would be nice, nobody disputes that but no HD is no reason not to buy the system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778212</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263567180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That&rsquo;s because Pixar avoids the uncanny valley like hell. And they are right to do so.<br>Pixar could already go practically 100\% on making realistic humans. But that tiny bit missing would make it a very creepy experience. Which perhaps works if it&rsquo;s supposed to be a monster in a horror movie. But not in your typical Pixar movie.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>I agree, that we are past &ldquo;realism&rdquo; as an ideal.<br>Nowadays, it&rsquo;s like art: You try to create a style. Its own &ldquo;realism&rdquo;.<br>Like Finding Nemo, which at first had so much realism, that it creeped people out. Then they changed the whole style to something less realistic, and more fitting. Which worked nicely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That    s because Pixar avoids the uncanny valley like hell .
And they are right to do so.Pixar could already go practically 100 \ % on making realistic humans .
But that tiny bit missing would make it a very creepy experience .
Which perhaps works if it    s supposed to be a monster in a horror movie .
But not in your typical Pixar movie .
; ) I agree , that we are past    realism    as an ideal.Nowadays , it    s like art : You try to create a style .
Its own    realism    .Like Finding Nemo , which at first had so much realism , that it creeped people out .
Then they changed the whole style to something less realistic , and more fitting .
Which worked nicely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That’s because Pixar avoids the uncanny valley like hell.
And they are right to do so.Pixar could already go practically 100\% on making realistic humans.
But that tiny bit missing would make it a very creepy experience.
Which perhaps works if it’s supposed to be a monster in a horror movie.
But not in your typical Pixar movie.
;)I agree, that we are past “realism” as an ideal.Nowadays, it’s like art: You try to create a style.
Its own “realism”.Like Finding Nemo, which at first had so much realism, that it creeped people out.
Then they changed the whole style to something less realistic, and more fitting.
Which worked nicely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776642</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777444</id>
	<title>needs hard drive</title>
	<author>MickyTheIdiot</author>
	<datestamp>1263561000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It looks like no one has even mentioned the biggest problem I have with the Wii (a console a otherwise love): no hard drive.</p><p>Of course, I don't think this would be a massive hardware change for it.  Homebrewers are already putting hard drives on it.  Maybe they release a Wii 2.0 with hard drive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It looks like no one has even mentioned the biggest problem I have with the Wii ( a console a otherwise love ) : no hard drive.Of course , I do n't think this would be a massive hardware change for it .
Homebrewers are already putting hard drives on it .
Maybe they release a Wii 2.0 with hard drive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It looks like no one has even mentioned the biggest problem I have with the Wii (a console a otherwise love): no hard drive.Of course, I don't think this would be a massive hardware change for it.
Homebrewers are already putting hard drives on it.
Maybe they release a Wii 2.0 with hard drive?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777102</id>
	<title>He would say that no matter what</title>
	<author>Lord Kenja</author>
	<datestamp>1263557220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody would ever admit they have an updated product coming, until they are close to releasing it. Official confirmation of a new Wii would kill the sales of the current one. So they would have to be ready before doing so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody would ever admit they have an updated product coming , until they are close to releasing it .
Official confirmation of a new Wii would kill the sales of the current one .
So they would have to be ready before doing so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody would ever admit they have an updated product coming, until they are close to releasing it.
Official confirmation of a new Wii would kill the sales of the current one.
So they would have to be ready before doing so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30782150</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>TemporalBeing</author>
	<datestamp>1263585360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And nothing in NES to Atari 2600. And nothing Atari 2600 to the Telstar. etc.</p></div> </blockquote><p>

I still play my NES you insensitive clod.
<br> <br>
I would also still be playing an Atari 5200, but my parents gave it away years ago.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And nothing in NES to Atari 2600 .
And nothing Atari 2600 to the Telstar .
etc . I still play my NES you insensitive clod .
I would also still be playing an Atari 5200 , but my parents gave it away years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And nothing in NES to Atari 2600.
And nothing Atari 2600 to the Telstar.
etc. 

I still play my NES you insensitive clod.
I would also still be playing an Atari 5200, but my parents gave it away years ago.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263550740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2.  There are new things the current gen of consoles offer... networking, motion sensing, better storage... but if you look fundamentally at the games, I don't think the improved graphics make them any more fun.  There's nothing on the 360 that couldn't have been done on the x-box, if the developers had just cut back the complexity of the graphics; and it would have been no less fun.<br> <br>

At some point, the majority of televisions will transition over to HD, and so it will make sense that the Wii needs to upgrade to meet that.  But I see no point in upgrading purely to get a boost in graphics.<br> <br>

Fire Emblem, by the way, is the best game I've played on any console this gen...  and they could have made it for the Nintendo DS with almost no changes in gameplay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2 .
There are new things the current gen of consoles offer... networking , motion sensing , better storage... but if you look fundamentally at the games , I do n't think the improved graphics make them any more fun .
There 's nothing on the 360 that could n't have been done on the x-box , if the developers had just cut back the complexity of the graphics ; and it would have been no less fun .
At some point , the majority of televisions will transition over to HD , and so it will make sense that the Wii needs to upgrade to meet that .
But I see no point in upgrading purely to get a boost in graphics .
Fire Emblem , by the way , is the best game I 've played on any console this gen... and they could have made it for the Nintendo DS with almost no changes in gameplay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2.
There are new things the current gen of consoles offer... networking, motion sensing, better storage... but if you look fundamentally at the games, I don't think the improved graphics make them any more fun.
There's nothing on the 360 that couldn't have been done on the x-box, if the developers had just cut back the complexity of the graphics; and it would have been no less fun.
At some point, the majority of televisions will transition over to HD, and so it will make sense that the Wii needs to upgrade to meet that.
But I see no point in upgrading purely to get a boost in graphics.
Fire Emblem, by the way, is the best game I've played on any console this gen...  and they could have made it for the Nintendo DS with almost no changes in gameplay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780070</id>
	<title>Re:it will make me consider another system</title>
	<author>VGPowerlord</author>
	<datestamp>1263577140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I've not picked up the hdmi cable because 480 wont look much different from composite.</p></div></blockquote><p>No, you've not picked up the hdmi cable because the Wii doesn't have an hdmi cable.</p><p>See the comment above mine for info about the component cable you <b>can</b> get.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've not picked up the hdmi cable because 480 wont look much different from composite.No , you 've not picked up the hdmi cable because the Wii does n't have an hdmi cable.See the comment above mine for info about the component cable you can get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've not picked up the hdmi cable because 480 wont look much different from composite.No, you've not picked up the hdmi cable because the Wii doesn't have an hdmi cable.See the comment above mine for info about the component cable you can get.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777776</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777246</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263558600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>here is the counter arguement - HD graphics allow you to place details in the game that otherwise would be impossible. translucent walls, fog, 3d sound. they all add to the atmosphere of the game and CAN make a more enjoyable and immersive experience.<p>
having said that, i'm flat out thinking of more then a handfull of games that actually make use of it. that's not a problem with HD however, it's a problem with our current distribution system for gaming, which favours the wrong people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>here is the counter arguement - HD graphics allow you to place details in the game that otherwise would be impossible .
translucent walls , fog , 3d sound .
they all add to the atmosphere of the game and CAN make a more enjoyable and immersive experience .
having said that , i 'm flat out thinking of more then a handfull of games that actually make use of it .
that 's not a problem with HD however , it 's a problem with our current distribution system for gaming , which favours the wrong people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>here is the counter arguement - HD graphics allow you to place details in the game that otherwise would be impossible.
translucent walls, fog, 3d sound.
they all add to the atmosphere of the game and CAN make a more enjoyable and immersive experience.
having said that, i'm flat out thinking of more then a handfull of games that actually make use of it.
that's not a problem with HD however, it's a problem with our current distribution system for gaming, which favours the wrong people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776456</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1263548940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, they already made the decision to drop out of the graphics arms race, and instead concentrate an features that made the system more usable.  That strategy has paid off handsomely. Why go back on it now?</p><p>I wonder if consumers are beginning to get tired of all that expensive tech that ends up being obsolete in a year or two. The recession is a factor, but even before, we saw people asking themselves if they really wanted Blu-Ray, HD, or whatever.  The fact that cheap-but-fun Nintendo products are outselling the fancier competition is consistent with that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , they already made the decision to drop out of the graphics arms race , and instead concentrate an features that made the system more usable .
That strategy has paid off handsomely .
Why go back on it now ? I wonder if consumers are beginning to get tired of all that expensive tech that ends up being obsolete in a year or two .
The recession is a factor , but even before , we saw people asking themselves if they really wanted Blu-Ray , HD , or whatever .
The fact that cheap-but-fun Nintendo products are outselling the fancier competition is consistent with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, they already made the decision to drop out of the graphics arms race, and instead concentrate an features that made the system more usable.
That strategy has paid off handsomely.
Why go back on it now?I wonder if consumers are beginning to get tired of all that expensive tech that ends up being obsolete in a year or two.
The recession is a factor, but even before, we saw people asking themselves if they really wanted Blu-Ray, HD, or whatever.
The fact that cheap-but-fun Nintendo products are outselling the fancier competition is consistent with that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777452</id>
	<title>Play Movies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263561060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agree with the execs - hardware is fine for now - but they really need to figure a way to play dvd and cd content....  would love to drop the dvd player from my living room....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agree with the execs - hardware is fine for now - but they really need to figure a way to play dvd and cd content.... would love to drop the dvd player from my living room... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agree with the execs - hardware is fine for now - but they really need to figure a way to play dvd and cd content....  would love to drop the dvd player from my living room....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780992</id>
	<title>More peripherals... *sigh*</title>
	<author>rxan</author>
	<datestamp>1263580860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the next step for Nintendo in home consoles will not be to simply make it HD, but to add more and more capability, and we'll do that when we've totally tapped out all of the experiences for the existing Wii. And we're nowhere near doing that yet.</p></div><p>Translation:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and we'll do that when there's no way that we can add another piece of plastic to the platform.</p><p>Come on Nintendo. Stop with the peripherals PLEASE. The classic controller is awful. Motion Plus is an afterthought. The Balance Board is a failure and is already being replaced by third-party peripherals. All you're doing is fragmenting your market and providing players with half-baked experiences. Come to your senses already.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the next step for Nintendo in home consoles will not be to simply make it HD , but to add more and more capability , and we 'll do that when we 've totally tapped out all of the experiences for the existing Wii .
And we 're nowhere near doing that yet.Translation : ...and we 'll do that when there 's no way that we can add another piece of plastic to the platform.Come on Nintendo .
Stop with the peripherals PLEASE .
The classic controller is awful .
Motion Plus is an afterthought .
The Balance Board is a failure and is already being replaced by third-party peripherals .
All you 're doing is fragmenting your market and providing players with half-baked experiences .
Come to your senses already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the next step for Nintendo in home consoles will not be to simply make it HD, but to add more and more capability, and we'll do that when we've totally tapped out all of the experiences for the existing Wii.
And we're nowhere near doing that yet.Translation: ...and we'll do that when there's no way that we can add another piece of plastic to the platform.Come on Nintendo.
Stop with the peripherals PLEASE.
The classic controller is awful.
Motion Plus is an afterthought.
The Balance Board is a failure and is already being replaced by third-party peripherals.
All you're doing is fragmenting your market and providing players with half-baked experiences.
Come to your senses already.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777776</id>
	<title>it will make me consider another system</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263564480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just picked up a 55 inch tv... I've not picked up the hdmi cable because 480 wont look much different from composite. I have doubts I am going to by many more wii games because of this. Seems like it would be a wasted investment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just picked up a 55 inch tv... I 've not picked up the hdmi cable because 480 wont look much different from composite .
I have doubts I am going to by many more wii games because of this .
Seems like it would be a wasted investment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just picked up a 55 inch tv... I've not picked up the hdmi cable because 480 wont look much different from composite.
I have doubts I am going to by many more wii games because of this.
Seems like it would be a wasted investment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778122</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1263566640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I&rsquo;ll make a bold statement:</p><p>I am a game designer. And you know which games I personally like to play most?<br>Small innovative (flash) games and the like! (Think kongregate.com.)</p><p>It sees that big budget games tend to go all aesthetics and technology.<br>But small games go more in the direction of good gameplay (mechanics).</p><p>I wish people would not forget, that it&rsquo;s all four (story, gameplay, aesthetics, and technology) that are relevant.<br>And the quality of a game, is all those things, <em>multiplied</em> with each other. (With story having the biggest factor, but the others being not much less relevant.)<br>They have to support each other.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I    ll make a bold statement : I am a game designer .
And you know which games I personally like to play most ? Small innovative ( flash ) games and the like !
( Think kongregate.com .
) It sees that big budget games tend to go all aesthetics and technology.But small games go more in the direction of good gameplay ( mechanics ) .I wish people would not forget , that it    s all four ( story , gameplay , aesthetics , and technology ) that are relevant.And the quality of a game , is all those things , multiplied with each other .
( With story having the biggest factor , but the others being not much less relevant .
) They have to support each other .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I’ll make a bold statement:I am a game designer.
And you know which games I personally like to play most?Small innovative (flash) games and the like!
(Think kongregate.com.
)It sees that big budget games tend to go all aesthetics and technology.But small games go more in the direction of good gameplay (mechanics).I wish people would not forget, that it’s all four (story, gameplay, aesthetics, and technology) that are relevant.And the quality of a game, is all those things, multiplied with each other.
(With story having the biggest factor, but the others being not much less relevant.
)They have to support each other.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777654</id>
	<title>Re:I'd like one change</title>
	<author>LordVader717</author>
	<datestamp>1263563100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree that it would be a great idea, but not because of any picture quality. The advantage would be being able to use it with computer monitors which don't have SD component inputs.<br>Even the GameCube had some kind of obscure digital output for japanese TVs, even on the american and european models. Surely a HDMI port can't be that challenging.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that it would be a great idea , but not because of any picture quality .
The advantage would be being able to use it with computer monitors which do n't have SD component inputs.Even the GameCube had some kind of obscure digital output for japanese TVs , even on the american and european models .
Surely a HDMI port ca n't be that challenging .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that it would be a great idea, but not because of any picture quality.
The advantage would be being able to use it with computer monitors which don't have SD component inputs.Even the GameCube had some kind of obscure digital output for japanese TVs, even on the american and european models.
Surely a HDMI port can't be that challenging.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30781040</id>
	<title>I just bought a Wii Fit</title>
	<author>X86Daddy</author>
	<datestamp>1263581040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've owned a Wii just over a year... first console owned since my 8-bit NES.  I find that my desire for high-quality graphics games, networked play, innovation, and so much more (like the ability to modify with 3rd party content) is completely satisfied with PC gaming.  No console can compete in those arenas, IMO, so I saw no need to buy any.</p><p>The Wii actually did something <strong>new</strong> for me: made games more physically interactive.  I remember daydreaming about hacking a PC joystick to a treadmill to control Doom in 3 screen mode for immersive gameplay and thinking how cool that would be.  I bought one of the no-base motion sensing PC joysticks, 3D shutter glasses, and the P5 Glove in the late '90s / early '00s, which worked sorta okay to various degrees, often requiring cooperation of multiple parties (game dev + driver authors) to deliver a really good gaming experience above and beyond the norm.  The Wii, as a console, gets that cooperation by default, while introducing truly interesting innovations in game-play.  The developers can actually rely on the installed user-base having the peripherals and not worrying about compatibility issues, etc... so games keep coming out for the balance board, the nunchuck, the DDR pads, the guitars, and now the Motion +.  They're absolutely right that they haven't finished exploring this space.  The loveliest graphics will always be on the PC... frankly, I expected innovations to remain there too (LAN play, expansions, 3rd party mods, the whole FPS genre, neat new peripherals, 3D), but the Wii has really impressed me in bringing some of that back to consoles.</p><p>No console's graphics are going to impress me... even if top-of-the-line or ground breaking at release time, the PC will bypass it shortly. Nintendo spent its efforts in areas that actually could impress me.  My only (minor) complaint is that Nintendo has failed, software-wise, to deliver the media-playback set-top-box functionality that the others do decently.  MPlayerCE is okay, but Nintendo really should deliver something like that for all of its customers (not just homebrew hackers, who they actively oppose anyway) to further reduce the benefits of the other consoles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've owned a Wii just over a year... first console owned since my 8-bit NES .
I find that my desire for high-quality graphics games , networked play , innovation , and so much more ( like the ability to modify with 3rd party content ) is completely satisfied with PC gaming .
No console can compete in those arenas , IMO , so I saw no need to buy any.The Wii actually did something new for me : made games more physically interactive .
I remember daydreaming about hacking a PC joystick to a treadmill to control Doom in 3 screen mode for immersive gameplay and thinking how cool that would be .
I bought one of the no-base motion sensing PC joysticks , 3D shutter glasses , and the P5 Glove in the late '90s / early '00s , which worked sorta okay to various degrees , often requiring cooperation of multiple parties ( game dev + driver authors ) to deliver a really good gaming experience above and beyond the norm .
The Wii , as a console , gets that cooperation by default , while introducing truly interesting innovations in game-play .
The developers can actually rely on the installed user-base having the peripherals and not worrying about compatibility issues , etc... so games keep coming out for the balance board , the nunchuck , the DDR pads , the guitars , and now the Motion + .
They 're absolutely right that they have n't finished exploring this space .
The loveliest graphics will always be on the PC... frankly , I expected innovations to remain there too ( LAN play , expansions , 3rd party mods , the whole FPS genre , neat new peripherals , 3D ) , but the Wii has really impressed me in bringing some of that back to consoles.No console 's graphics are going to impress me... even if top-of-the-line or ground breaking at release time , the PC will bypass it shortly .
Nintendo spent its efforts in areas that actually could impress me .
My only ( minor ) complaint is that Nintendo has failed , software-wise , to deliver the media-playback set-top-box functionality that the others do decently .
MPlayerCE is okay , but Nintendo really should deliver something like that for all of its customers ( not just homebrew hackers , who they actively oppose anyway ) to further reduce the benefits of the other consoles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've owned a Wii just over a year... first console owned since my 8-bit NES.
I find that my desire for high-quality graphics games, networked play, innovation, and so much more (like the ability to modify with 3rd party content) is completely satisfied with PC gaming.
No console can compete in those arenas, IMO, so I saw no need to buy any.The Wii actually did something new for me: made games more physically interactive.
I remember daydreaming about hacking a PC joystick to a treadmill to control Doom in 3 screen mode for immersive gameplay and thinking how cool that would be.
I bought one of the no-base motion sensing PC joysticks, 3D shutter glasses, and the P5 Glove in the late '90s / early '00s, which worked sorta okay to various degrees, often requiring cooperation of multiple parties (game dev + driver authors) to deliver a really good gaming experience above and beyond the norm.
The Wii, as a console, gets that cooperation by default, while introducing truly interesting innovations in game-play.
The developers can actually rely on the installed user-base having the peripherals and not worrying about compatibility issues, etc... so games keep coming out for the balance board, the nunchuck, the DDR pads, the guitars, and now the Motion +.
They're absolutely right that they haven't finished exploring this space.
The loveliest graphics will always be on the PC... frankly, I expected innovations to remain there too (LAN play, expansions, 3rd party mods, the whole FPS genre, neat new peripherals, 3D), but the Wii has really impressed me in bringing some of that back to consoles.No console's graphics are going to impress me... even if top-of-the-line or ground breaking at release time, the PC will bypass it shortly.
Nintendo spent its efforts in areas that actually could impress me.
My only (minor) complaint is that Nintendo has failed, software-wise, to deliver the media-playback set-top-box functionality that the others do decently.
MPlayerCE is okay, but Nintendo really should deliver something like that for all of its customers (not just homebrew hackers, who they actively oppose anyway) to further reduce the benefits of the other consoles.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777150</id>
	<title>Re:Hm. It sure wouldn't hurt to update it a little</title>
	<author>walshy007</author>
	<datestamp>1263557580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>sd consoles always look like shit on HDTV's unless you either have a really good upscaler or you have an analog HDTV (huzzah for analog rear projection)</htmltext>
<tokenext>sd consoles always look like shit on HDTV 's unless you either have a really good upscaler or you have an analog HDTV ( huzzah for analog rear projection )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sd consoles always look like shit on HDTV's unless you either have a really good upscaler or you have an analog HDTV (huzzah for analog rear projection)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600</id>
	<title>I'd like one change</title>
	<author>samael</author>
	<datestamp>1263550680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An HDMI cable.  Every other device connected to the TV has one, but the Wii insists on converting to analogue and back again.  I can't think of any reason why this would be terribly expensive or difficult to do.  They wouldn't even need to support higher resolutions - just the same ones over HDMI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An HDMI cable .
Every other device connected to the TV has one , but the Wii insists on converting to analogue and back again .
I ca n't think of any reason why this would be terribly expensive or difficult to do .
They would n't even need to support higher resolutions - just the same ones over HDMI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An HDMI cable.
Every other device connected to the TV has one, but the Wii insists on converting to analogue and back again.
I can't think of any reason why this would be terribly expensive or difficult to do.
They wouldn't even need to support higher resolutions - just the same ones over HDMI.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1263547860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>In addition to that, half the games don't even make full use of the graphics capabilities already available.  Zelda, for example, looked basically the same as on game cube.  Right now I'm playing fire-emblem, and while it's a great game, the graphics aren't much better than you would see on PS1.  It's kind of amazing to me now, that after all these years of chasing graphics, finally there is a console that ignores the race and still does well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In addition to that , half the games do n't even make full use of the graphics capabilities already available .
Zelda , for example , looked basically the same as on game cube .
Right now I 'm playing fire-emblem , and while it 's a great game , the graphics are n't much better than you would see on PS1 .
It 's kind of amazing to me now , that after all these years of chasing graphics , finally there is a console that ignores the race and still does well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In addition to that, half the games don't even make full use of the graphics capabilities already available.
Zelda, for example, looked basically the same as on game cube.
Right now I'm playing fire-emblem, and while it's a great game, the graphics aren't much better than you would see on PS1.
It's kind of amazing to me now, that after all these years of chasing graphics, finally there is a console that ignores the race and still does well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208</id>
	<title>It makes sense really</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1263588780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wii has a large userbase of casual gamers. There wouldn't really be anything that new for then. HD sure, but I know many people who really aren't that interested in it. I am, sure, I would love a Wii HD with Motion Capture Plus. But thats probably not the case for majority of people, especially girls who usually don't understand why their boyfriends/husbands want a huge HDTV.</p><p>The only thing Wii was missing was the better motion sensors, but it wasn't possible financially at that point, the technology was too costly for competing with better priced console. After that it would be just everything that more hardcore players would want, and that isn't Nintendo's largest market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wii has a large userbase of casual gamers .
There would n't really be anything that new for then .
HD sure , but I know many people who really are n't that interested in it .
I am , sure , I would love a Wii HD with Motion Capture Plus .
But thats probably not the case for majority of people , especially girls who usually do n't understand why their boyfriends/husbands want a huge HDTV.The only thing Wii was missing was the better motion sensors , but it was n't possible financially at that point , the technology was too costly for competing with better priced console .
After that it would be just everything that more hardcore players would want , and that is n't Nintendo 's largest market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wii has a large userbase of casual gamers.
There wouldn't really be anything that new for then.
HD sure, but I know many people who really aren't that interested in it.
I am, sure, I would love a Wii HD with Motion Capture Plus.
But thats probably not the case for majority of people, especially girls who usually don't understand why their boyfriends/husbands want a huge HDTV.The only thing Wii was missing was the better motion sensors, but it wasn't possible financially at that point, the technology was too costly for competing with better priced console.
After that it would be just everything that more hardcore players would want, and that isn't Nintendo's largest market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30799638</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>KDR\_11k</author>
	<datestamp>1263754680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I'll add is that mechanics are fine and all but it ultimately comes down to the content you run through those mechanics. Modern Sonic games have no mechanics that would make them automatically inferior to old ones, it's the level design that does. Those who only look at mechanics see New Super Mario Bros Wii and say "been there done that", those who look at content see "more Mario levels!". Those who look at mechanics only produce games like Little Big Planet where you are supposed to provide your own levels, those who look at content decide they'd rather buy a game that already comes with content they want (and so LBP flopped).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I 'll add is that mechanics are fine and all but it ultimately comes down to the content you run through those mechanics .
Modern Sonic games have no mechanics that would make them automatically inferior to old ones , it 's the level design that does .
Those who only look at mechanics see New Super Mario Bros Wii and say " been there done that " , those who look at content see " more Mario levels ! " .
Those who look at mechanics only produce games like Little Big Planet where you are supposed to provide your own levels , those who look at content decide they 'd rather buy a game that already comes with content they want ( and so LBP flopped ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I'll add is that mechanics are fine and all but it ultimately comes down to the content you run through those mechanics.
Modern Sonic games have no mechanics that would make them automatically inferior to old ones, it's the level design that does.
Those who only look at mechanics see New Super Mario Bros Wii and say "been there done that", those who look at content see "more Mario levels!".
Those who look at mechanics only produce games like Little Big Planet where you are supposed to provide your own levels, those who look at content decide they'd rather buy a game that already comes with content they want (and so LBP flopped).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30808966</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1263835800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>holy shit that looks amazing!</i><br>Oh there are such moments, the ending credits of GTA4 with thier incrediblly detailed flyovers are the example that immediately springs to mind.</p><p>but at least what i find is that when i'm actually playing (as apposed to staring at credits etc) that stops mattering as all my concentration is focused on the task in hand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>holy shit that looks amazing ! Oh there are such moments , the ending credits of GTA4 with thier incrediblly detailed flyovers are the example that immediately springs to mind.but at least what i find is that when i 'm actually playing ( as apposed to staring at credits etc ) that stops mattering as all my concentration is focused on the task in hand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>holy shit that looks amazing!Oh there are such moments, the ending credits of GTA4 with thier incrediblly detailed flyovers are the example that immediately springs to mind.but at least what i find is that when i'm actually playing (as apposed to staring at credits etc) that stops mattering as all my concentration is focused on the task in hand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778814</id>
	<title>Nintendo is more closed than Microsoft</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1263570300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I just want people to carry on making games</p></div><p>People don't make games for Nintendo; companies do. From <a href="http://warioworld.com/apply/" title="warioworld.com">Nintendo's developer qualifications</a> [warioworld.com]: "In addition, an Authorized Developer will have a stable business organization with secure office facilities separate from a personal residence ( Home offices do not meet this requirement )". You must have Nintendo confused with Microsoft and its XNA Creators Club.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>how many people who have never touched emulation have been playing emulated titles on Wii without even knowing?</p></div><p>They know it's emulation; it's called "Virtual Console" for cricket's sake. The big problem is that Nintendo isn't willing to rewrite Earthbound for Super NES to take out the Beatles music.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>yet my PC is full of every genre of game.</p></div><p>Except possibly the sort of multi-controller party game that sells well on Wii (and on the other consoles). Well-known publishers don't see a big market for those on PC because PC monitors (e.g. 13" laptop or 17" desktop) tend to be much smaller than TVs that four people can actually fit around. They haven't yet made PC games to take advantage of the fact that flat-panel TVs work as PC monitors too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just want people to carry on making gamesPeople do n't make games for Nintendo ; companies do .
From Nintendo 's developer qualifications [ warioworld.com ] : " In addition , an Authorized Developer will have a stable business organization with secure office facilities separate from a personal residence ( Home offices do not meet this requirement ) " .
You must have Nintendo confused with Microsoft and its XNA Creators Club.how many people who have never touched emulation have been playing emulated titles on Wii without even knowing ? They know it 's emulation ; it 's called " Virtual Console " for cricket 's sake .
The big problem is that Nintendo is n't willing to rewrite Earthbound for Super NES to take out the Beatles music.yet my PC is full of every genre of game.Except possibly the sort of multi-controller party game that sells well on Wii ( and on the other consoles ) .
Well-known publishers do n't see a big market for those on PC because PC monitors ( e.g .
13 " laptop or 17 " desktop ) tend to be much smaller than TVs that four people can actually fit around .
They have n't yet made PC games to take advantage of the fact that flat-panel TVs work as PC monitors too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just want people to carry on making gamesPeople don't make games for Nintendo; companies do.
From Nintendo's developer qualifications [warioworld.com]: "In addition, an Authorized Developer will have a stable business organization with secure office facilities separate from a personal residence ( Home offices do not meet this requirement )".
You must have Nintendo confused with Microsoft and its XNA Creators Club.how many people who have never touched emulation have been playing emulated titles on Wii without even knowing?They know it's emulation; it's called "Virtual Console" for cricket's sake.
The big problem is that Nintendo isn't willing to rewrite Earthbound for Super NES to take out the Beatles music.yet my PC is full of every genre of game.Except possibly the sort of multi-controller party game that sells well on Wii (and on the other consoles).
Well-known publishers don't see a big market for those on PC because PC monitors (e.g.
13" laptop or 17" desktop) tend to be much smaller than TVs that four people can actually fit around.
They haven't yet made PC games to take advantage of the fact that flat-panel TVs work as PC monitors too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30788696</id>
	<title>LOL @ graphics haters</title>
	<author>TheBuzzSaw</author>
	<datestamp>1263635160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is painful listening to people moan and groan over "how terrible the graphics are on the Wii". Did you know that the Wii has superior graphics power to that of the original XBox? Last generation, everyone geeked out over how beautiful XBox graphics were. Suddenly, that level is inadequate and terrible? I'm not implying that Wii rivals its current competitors' graphics power at all, but the hypocrisy over ripping on the Wii's graphics becomes old fast. "The Wii's graphics suck." OK, so, have you tossed all your PS2 and XBox games into the trash yet? Those games are most certainly UNBEARABLE by today's standard. How can you even look at them?</p><p>I like graphics. I recently purchased an NVIDIA GTX 275 because I wanted my games to perform better. My NVIDIA 8500 GT simply was not doing the job (plus, it overheated and died a miserable death). However, <b>graphics cannot save a game from terrible gameplay</b>. If I want "flawless graphics", I'll go watch a movie. At least those approach actual realism. For my games, I welcome the idea that graphics improve my level of immersion into the game, but I better be having fun. If I like a game HIGH settings, I guarantee that I like the game on LOW settings too. I can't think of a game I played and said, "It had potential, but the graphics were not good enough for me." Yes, I am one of those gamers who runs DOSBOX and fires up the classics in their 320x240 glory now and again.</p><p>Wii took the industry by storm, and the competitors refuse to admit it. Sony has been the most mathematically challenged at times. One month, the Wii outsold it 4:1. The following month, Wii only outsold it 3:1, and Sony interpreted that as "catching up". Well, it is certainly a step in the right direction, but the gap in sales still WIDENED that month. Phailure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is painful listening to people moan and groan over " how terrible the graphics are on the Wii " .
Did you know that the Wii has superior graphics power to that of the original XBox ?
Last generation , everyone geeked out over how beautiful XBox graphics were .
Suddenly , that level is inadequate and terrible ?
I 'm not implying that Wii rivals its current competitors ' graphics power at all , but the hypocrisy over ripping on the Wii 's graphics becomes old fast .
" The Wii 's graphics suck .
" OK , so , have you tossed all your PS2 and XBox games into the trash yet ?
Those games are most certainly UNBEARABLE by today 's standard .
How can you even look at them ? I like graphics .
I recently purchased an NVIDIA GTX 275 because I wanted my games to perform better .
My NVIDIA 8500 GT simply was not doing the job ( plus , it overheated and died a miserable death ) .
However , graphics can not save a game from terrible gameplay .
If I want " flawless graphics " , I 'll go watch a movie .
At least those approach actual realism .
For my games , I welcome the idea that graphics improve my level of immersion into the game , but I better be having fun .
If I like a game HIGH settings , I guarantee that I like the game on LOW settings too .
I ca n't think of a game I played and said , " It had potential , but the graphics were not good enough for me .
" Yes , I am one of those gamers who runs DOSBOX and fires up the classics in their 320x240 glory now and again.Wii took the industry by storm , and the competitors refuse to admit it .
Sony has been the most mathematically challenged at times .
One month , the Wii outsold it 4 : 1 .
The following month , Wii only outsold it 3 : 1 , and Sony interpreted that as " catching up " .
Well , it is certainly a step in the right direction , but the gap in sales still WIDENED that month .
Phailure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is painful listening to people moan and groan over "how terrible the graphics are on the Wii".
Did you know that the Wii has superior graphics power to that of the original XBox?
Last generation, everyone geeked out over how beautiful XBox graphics were.
Suddenly, that level is inadequate and terrible?
I'm not implying that Wii rivals its current competitors' graphics power at all, but the hypocrisy over ripping on the Wii's graphics becomes old fast.
"The Wii's graphics suck.
" OK, so, have you tossed all your PS2 and XBox games into the trash yet?
Those games are most certainly UNBEARABLE by today's standard.
How can you even look at them?I like graphics.
I recently purchased an NVIDIA GTX 275 because I wanted my games to perform better.
My NVIDIA 8500 GT simply was not doing the job (plus, it overheated and died a miserable death).
However, graphics cannot save a game from terrible gameplay.
If I want "flawless graphics", I'll go watch a movie.
At least those approach actual realism.
For my games, I welcome the idea that graphics improve my level of immersion into the game, but I better be having fun.
If I like a game HIGH settings, I guarantee that I like the game on LOW settings too.
I can't think of a game I played and said, "It had potential, but the graphics were not good enough for me.
" Yes, I am one of those gamers who runs DOSBOX and fires up the classics in their 320x240 glory now and again.Wii took the industry by storm, and the competitors refuse to admit it.
Sony has been the most mathematically challenged at times.
One month, the Wii outsold it 4:1.
The following month, Wii only outsold it 3:1, and Sony interpreted that as "catching up".
Well, it is certainly a step in the right direction, but the gap in sales still WIDENED that month.
Phailure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30791706</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>phoenix\_rizzen</author>
	<datestamp>1263668460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In Canada the Wii costs around 200 bucks at Costco, which is the cheapest I've seen it, and around 200 dollars cheaper than the xbox. But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games: 25 dollars. A second controller and nunchuk, around 50 bucks total. Want to get motionplus for both of those to improve the motion sensing? 50 dollars. You're now at 325</p></div></blockquote><p>The Wii comes with 1 wiimote and 1 nunchuk.  And you can now buy Wiimote+MotionPlus in one box, for less than buying a Wiimote and a MotionPlus separately.  The total price is still below $300 CDN for everything you need for 2 players.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Canada the Wii costs around 200 bucks at Costco , which is the cheapest I 've seen it , and around 200 dollars cheaper than the xbox .
But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games : 25 dollars .
A second controller and nunchuk , around 50 bucks total .
Want to get motionplus for both of those to improve the motion sensing ?
50 dollars .
You 're now at 325The Wii comes with 1 wiimote and 1 nunchuk .
And you can now buy Wiimote + MotionPlus in one box , for less than buying a Wiimote and a MotionPlus separately .
The total price is still below $ 300 CDN for everything you need for 2 players .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Canada the Wii costs around 200 bucks at Costco, which is the cheapest I've seen it, and around 200 dollars cheaper than the xbox.
But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games: 25 dollars.
A second controller and nunchuk, around 50 bucks total.
Want to get motionplus for both of those to improve the motion sensing?
50 dollars.
You're now at 325The Wii comes with 1 wiimote and 1 nunchuk.
And you can now buy Wiimote+MotionPlus in one box, for less than buying a Wiimote and a MotionPlus separately.
The total price is still below $300 CDN for everything you need for 2 players.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779114</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263572040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But your argument assumes that games have gotten better over time.  Have they?</p><p>What makes a game "better" than another game?</p><p>I still miss the days of Space War on the Atari.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But your argument assumes that games have gotten better over time .
Have they ? What makes a game " better " than another game ? I still miss the days of Space War on the Atari .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But your argument assumes that games have gotten better over time.
Have they?What makes a game "better" than another game?I still miss the days of Space War on the Atari.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30823142</id>
	<title>Re:Applaud the man.</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1263932520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Wii proved that state of the art isn't required to make a lot of money.  That doesn't mean there isn't a market for people who want something that pushes the edge.  You may be happy with the Wii, but if all three companies did the same thing I would be disappointed.<br> <br>And seriously, what are you talking about?  Nintendo is the king of making you buy a million different accessories to play its games.  The longer this generation goes on, the more apparent the weakness of the Wii will be.  Not just graphically, but in AI and type of games possible.<br> <br>Honestly, they are going to deny having another console until they are about to release it.  So really, you can't say good for Nintendo since you have no idea what the real situation is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Wii proved that state of the art is n't required to make a lot of money .
That does n't mean there is n't a market for people who want something that pushes the edge .
You may be happy with the Wii , but if all three companies did the same thing I would be disappointed .
And seriously , what are you talking about ?
Nintendo is the king of making you buy a million different accessories to play its games .
The longer this generation goes on , the more apparent the weakness of the Wii will be .
Not just graphically , but in AI and type of games possible .
Honestly , they are going to deny having another console until they are about to release it .
So really , you ca n't say good for Nintendo since you have no idea what the real situation is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Wii proved that state of the art isn't required to make a lot of money.
That doesn't mean there isn't a market for people who want something that pushes the edge.
You may be happy with the Wii, but if all three companies did the same thing I would be disappointed.
And seriously, what are you talking about?
Nintendo is the king of making you buy a million different accessories to play its games.
The longer this generation goes on, the more apparent the weakness of the Wii will be.
Not just graphically, but in AI and type of games possible.
Honestly, they are going to deny having another console until they are about to release it.
So really, you can't say good for Nintendo since you have no idea what the real situation is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777136</id>
	<title>Nintendo does good</title>
	<author>mikeFromBavaria</author>
	<datestamp>1263557460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>not to upgrade the hardware for now. I think they better should come up with some more new gameplays.
the Wii has already proved that it is not important to have the best graphics engine but to have good games!

<a href="http://www.webdesigns-rosenheim.de/" title="webdesigns-rosenheim.de" rel="nofollow">Webdesign</a> [webdesigns-rosenheim.de]</htmltext>
<tokenext>not to upgrade the hardware for now .
I think they better should come up with some more new gameplays .
the Wii has already proved that it is not important to have the best graphics engine but to have good games !
Webdesign [ webdesigns-rosenheim.de ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not to upgrade the hardware for now.
I think they better should come up with some more new gameplays.
the Wii has already proved that it is not important to have the best graphics engine but to have good games!
Webdesign [webdesigns-rosenheim.de]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779488</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1263574200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe that's why I perceived Avatar as a breakthrough; with the combination of 3d and how they composited things, the humans looked very real, in an unreal yet very convincing setting, and it didn't feel weird (as opposed to, say, the Polar Express).
<p>
I think the uncanny valley has been bridged.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe that 's why I perceived Avatar as a breakthrough ; with the combination of 3d and how they composited things , the humans looked very real , in an unreal yet very convincing setting , and it did n't feel weird ( as opposed to , say , the Polar Express ) .
I think the uncanny valley has been bridged .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe that's why I perceived Avatar as a breakthrough; with the combination of 3d and how they composited things, the humans looked very real, in an unreal yet very convincing setting, and it didn't feel weird (as opposed to, say, the Polar Express).
I think the uncanny valley has been bridged.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778460</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>bberens</author>
	<datestamp>1263568620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>..because they nickle and dime you to death with cheap peripherals, and people buy them.</p> </div><p>Generally speaking the peripherals you mentioned are geared towards different markets.  Wii fit and its platform is really popular with moms.  The Wii motion plus is popular with FPS players (young men), the "put this thing on the wii-mote so it looks like a golf club" type stuff is generally for the younger kid crowd.  The success of the Wii is that it markets to many different demographics.  It's going to be unlikely that all of those peripherals would be purchased for the same person, even if they happen to be purchased within the same household.  Meanwhile the XBox 360 and Playstation 3 are still focused almost solely on the young male crowd.  That's fine and all, but it's unfair to suggest that any single demographic targeted by the Wii must purchase a bunch of peripherals.  Besides, those cheesy peripherals are part of the fun.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>..because they nickle and dime you to death with cheap peripherals , and people buy them .
Generally speaking the peripherals you mentioned are geared towards different markets .
Wii fit and its platform is really popular with moms .
The Wii motion plus is popular with FPS players ( young men ) , the " put this thing on the wii-mote so it looks like a golf club " type stuff is generally for the younger kid crowd .
The success of the Wii is that it markets to many different demographics .
It 's going to be unlikely that all of those peripherals would be purchased for the same person , even if they happen to be purchased within the same household .
Meanwhile the XBox 360 and Playstation 3 are still focused almost solely on the young male crowd .
That 's fine and all , but it 's unfair to suggest that any single demographic targeted by the Wii must purchase a bunch of peripherals .
Besides , those cheesy peripherals are part of the fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ..because they nickle and dime you to death with cheap peripherals, and people buy them.
Generally speaking the peripherals you mentioned are geared towards different markets.
Wii fit and its platform is really popular with moms.
The Wii motion plus is popular with FPS players (young men), the "put this thing on the wii-mote so it looks like a golf club" type stuff is generally for the younger kid crowd.
The success of the Wii is that it markets to many different demographics.
It's going to be unlikely that all of those peripherals would be purchased for the same person, even if they happen to be purchased within the same household.
Meanwhile the XBox 360 and Playstation 3 are still focused almost solely on the young male crowd.
That's fine and all, but it's unfair to suggest that any single demographic targeted by the Wii must purchase a bunch of peripherals.
Besides, those cheesy peripherals are part of the fun.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779900</id>
	<title>It's the Netflix, stupid</title>
	<author>Luyseyal</author>
	<datestamp>1263576360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason I care about Wii HD is so I can watch Netflix HD and maybe Hulu if they ever allow the Wii on their videos. We're not really interested in a PS3 or 360, though a convergence device would be awesome.</p><p>-l</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason I care about Wii HD is so I can watch Netflix HD and maybe Hulu if they ever allow the Wii on their videos .
We 're not really interested in a PS3 or 360 , though a convergence device would be awesome.-l</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason I care about Wii HD is so I can watch Netflix HD and maybe Hulu if they ever allow the Wii on their videos.
We're not really interested in a PS3 or 360, though a convergence device would be awesome.-l</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778062</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Obyron</author>
	<datestamp>1263566220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>They jumped out of the graphics arms race and into the peripherals arms race. In Canada the Wii costs around 200 bucks at Costco, which is the cheapest I've seen it, and around 200 dollars cheaper than the xbox. But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games: 25 dollars. A second controller and nunchuk, around 50 bucks total. Want to get motionplus for both of those to improve the motion sensing? 50 dollars. You're now at 325, compared to the xbox with a second controller which gets you to about 450 (and also comes with the Elite system, Modern Warfare 2, and a 250gb hard drive). The average new game for the 360 up here runs 60-70 dollars. For the Wii they're slightly cheaper... unless they're some hokey peripheral game like WiiFit, where you're going to pay 100 dollars. Want another balance board? That'll be 60 or 70 dollars. Want to buy Mario Kart and get two little steering wheel controllers? 90 dollars. If the Wii is not the most outright profitable console of this generation I'd be shocked, because they nickle and dime you to death with cheap peripherals, and people buy them. It seems like every game they come out with comes with some new gadget you need to buy, and I hardly think that's an accident. I'd like to see Microsoft and Sony put out a commercial comparing Total Cost of Ownership, because even if you're paying for Xbox Live Gold every a year, you'll probably end up spending more money for your Wii.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They jumped out of the graphics arms race and into the peripherals arms race .
In Canada the Wii costs around 200 bucks at Costco , which is the cheapest I 've seen it , and around 200 dollars cheaper than the xbox .
But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games : 25 dollars .
A second controller and nunchuk , around 50 bucks total .
Want to get motionplus for both of those to improve the motion sensing ?
50 dollars .
You 're now at 325 , compared to the xbox with a second controller which gets you to about 450 ( and also comes with the Elite system , Modern Warfare 2 , and a 250gb hard drive ) .
The average new game for the 360 up here runs 60-70 dollars .
For the Wii they 're slightly cheaper... unless they 're some hokey peripheral game like WiiFit , where you 're going to pay 100 dollars .
Want another balance board ?
That 'll be 60 or 70 dollars .
Want to buy Mario Kart and get two little steering wheel controllers ?
90 dollars .
If the Wii is not the most outright profitable console of this generation I 'd be shocked , because they nickle and dime you to death with cheap peripherals , and people buy them .
It seems like every game they come out with comes with some new gadget you need to buy , and I hardly think that 's an accident .
I 'd like to see Microsoft and Sony put out a commercial comparing Total Cost of Ownership , because even if you 're paying for Xbox Live Gold every a year , you 'll probably end up spending more money for your Wii .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They jumped out of the graphics arms race and into the peripherals arms race.
In Canada the Wii costs around 200 bucks at Costco, which is the cheapest I've seen it, and around 200 dollars cheaper than the xbox.
But you need to get a nunchuk to play certain games: 25 dollars.
A second controller and nunchuk, around 50 bucks total.
Want to get motionplus for both of those to improve the motion sensing?
50 dollars.
You're now at 325, compared to the xbox with a second controller which gets you to about 450 (and also comes with the Elite system, Modern Warfare 2, and a 250gb hard drive).
The average new game for the 360 up here runs 60-70 dollars.
For the Wii they're slightly cheaper... unless they're some hokey peripheral game like WiiFit, where you're going to pay 100 dollars.
Want another balance board?
That'll be 60 or 70 dollars.
Want to buy Mario Kart and get two little steering wheel controllers?
90 dollars.
If the Wii is not the most outright profitable console of this generation I'd be shocked, because they nickle and dime you to death with cheap peripherals, and people buy them.
It seems like every game they come out with comes with some new gadget you need to buy, and I hardly think that's an accident.
I'd like to see Microsoft and Sony put out a commercial comparing Total Cost of Ownership, because even if you're paying for Xbox Live Gold every a year, you'll probably end up spending more money for your Wii.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778952</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1263571080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Translucency and fog have been used to great effect on previous gen consoles.  Hell, on the N64 it seems like there's nothing but fog.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Translucency and fog have been used to great effect on previous gen consoles .
Hell , on the N64 it seems like there 's nothing but fog .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Translucency and fog have been used to great effect on previous gen consoles.
Hell, on the N64 it seems like there's nothing but fog.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776280</id>
	<title>Tapped out, eh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263546720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So that means the next lame dancing game for wii will be "Tap-dancing with the Stars"? Or another tap-fest like WarioWare titles of yore? I just can't read far enough into what all these execs say when they talk about the "long life" of their consoles that remain entertaining for 2.5 years at best.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So that means the next lame dancing game for wii will be " Tap-dancing with the Stars " ?
Or another tap-fest like WarioWare titles of yore ?
I just ca n't read far enough into what all these execs say when they talk about the " long life " of their consoles that remain entertaining for 2.5 years at best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So that means the next lame dancing game for wii will be "Tap-dancing with the Stars"?
Or another tap-fest like WarioWare titles of yore?
I just can't read far enough into what all these execs say when they talk about the "long life" of their consoles that remain entertaining for 2.5 years at best.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779356</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1263573480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea, I was high through most of the N64 Generation too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea , I was high through most of the N64 Generation too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea, I was high through most of the N64 Generation too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776608</id>
	<title>Hm. It sure wouldn't hurt to update it a little...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263550800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't own a Wii myself, I own a Xbox 360, on which I rarely play though. One of my best friends owns a Wii though, and of course we throw in a game or two when we are at their place. And everytime, after some minutes, I am at the point where the graphics really get to me. Not that it doesn't have the latest whatchamacallit-shaders, huge textures, hardware geometry tesselation and all that, no, but that that it simply does not do antialiasing and / or HD. It is just all so freaking jaggy it is a pain to look at (on a 52" LCD in this case). I personally might buy a Wii HD if it came out if it added nothing to the feature list but a very good upscaling algorithm to 1080p and HDMI. That's all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't own a Wii myself , I own a Xbox 360 , on which I rarely play though .
One of my best friends owns a Wii though , and of course we throw in a game or two when we are at their place .
And everytime , after some minutes , I am at the point where the graphics really get to me .
Not that it does n't have the latest whatchamacallit-shaders , huge textures , hardware geometry tesselation and all that , no , but that that it simply does not do antialiasing and / or HD .
It is just all so freaking jaggy it is a pain to look at ( on a 52 " LCD in this case ) .
I personally might buy a Wii HD if it came out if it added nothing to the feature list but a very good upscaling algorithm to 1080p and HDMI .
That 's all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't own a Wii myself, I own a Xbox 360, on which I rarely play though.
One of my best friends owns a Wii though, and of course we throw in a game or two when we are at their place.
And everytime, after some minutes, I am at the point where the graphics really get to me.
Not that it doesn't have the latest whatchamacallit-shaders, huge textures, hardware geometry tesselation and all that, no, but that that it simply does not do antialiasing and / or HD.
It is just all so freaking jaggy it is a pain to look at (on a 52" LCD in this case).
I personally might buy a Wii HD if it came out if it added nothing to the feature list but a very good upscaling algorithm to 1080p and HDMI.
That's all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778782</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>bluefoxlucid</author>
	<datestamp>1263570120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I appreciate all the people shouting "Gameplay over graphics, rawr!!" but they are both important.).</p></div><p>I found and still do find the graphics in Golden Sun amazing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I appreciate all the people shouting " Gameplay over graphics , rawr ! !
" but they are both important .
) .I found and still do find the graphics in Golden Sun amazing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I appreciate all the people shouting "Gameplay over graphics, rawr!!
" but they are both important.
).I found and still do find the graphics in Golden Sun amazing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30787120</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263569580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Might I recommend an old Homebrew game they actually put on an old Playstation Underground issue called "Garzu vs Garzu".</p><p>It was a very basic game and the soundeffects sound like they came from Simpson sound bites but it was very fun for 2 players.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Might I recommend an old Homebrew game they actually put on an old Playstation Underground issue called " Garzu vs Garzu " .It was a very basic game and the soundeffects sound like they came from Simpson sound bites but it was very fun for 2 players .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Might I recommend an old Homebrew game they actually put on an old Playstation Underground issue called "Garzu vs Garzu".It was a very basic game and the soundeffects sound like they came from Simpson sound bites but it was very fun for 2 players.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1263561960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2. There are new things the current gen of consoles offer... networking, motion sensing, better storage... but if you look fundamentally at the games, I don't think the improved graphics make them any more fun. There's nothing on the 360 that couldn't have been done on the x-box, if the developers had just cut back the complexity of the graphics; and it would have been no less fun.</i>
<p>
The "graphics don't matter" argument doesn't hold much water. If we go down that route, then through backwards induction there was nothing in the PS2 that couldn't be done on the PS1 with cut back graphics. And nothing on the PS1 that couldn't be done on the Sega Saturn. And nothing in the Sega Saturn to Sega Megadrive. And nothing in the Sega Megadrive to NES. And nothing in NES to Atari 2600. And nothing Atari 2600 to the Telstar. etc.
</p><p>
Except of course graphics wasn't the only thing that changed between console generations. Processing power, memory, storage, general throughput, controllers, number of players, modelling, animation, audio, networking, physics are all improved. Each generation was capable of delivering experiences that you simply couldn't get on the one before. Do all these things guarantee a better game? Of course not, but they are powerful tools that can and should be used to deliver the best experience.
</p><p>
An obvious example of this would be Dead Rising. The concept worked so well on the 360 because the console had the power to render hundreds of zombies. A veritable horde of them. When the game was ported to the Wii, even with cut down graphics, the game had been emasculated so you were lucky to see a dozen zombies at once. The game lost its soul in the transition. Some games simply do not translate well even if you cut down the graphics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2 .
There are new things the current gen of consoles offer... networking , motion sensing , better storage... but if you look fundamentally at the games , I do n't think the improved graphics make them any more fun .
There 's nothing on the 360 that could n't have been done on the x-box , if the developers had just cut back the complexity of the graphics ; and it would have been no less fun .
The " graphics do n't matter " argument does n't hold much water .
If we go down that route , then through backwards induction there was nothing in the PS2 that could n't be done on the PS1 with cut back graphics .
And nothing on the PS1 that could n't be done on the Sega Saturn .
And nothing in the Sega Saturn to Sega Megadrive .
And nothing in the Sega Megadrive to NES .
And nothing in NES to Atari 2600 .
And nothing Atari 2600 to the Telstar .
etc . Except of course graphics was n't the only thing that changed between console generations .
Processing power , memory , storage , general throughput , controllers , number of players , modelling , animation , audio , networking , physics are all improved .
Each generation was capable of delivering experiences that you simply could n't get on the one before .
Do all these things guarantee a better game ?
Of course not , but they are powerful tools that can and should be used to deliver the best experience .
An obvious example of this would be Dead Rising .
The concept worked so well on the 360 because the console had the power to render hundreds of zombies .
A veritable horde of them .
When the game was ported to the Wii , even with cut down graphics , the game had been emasculated so you were lucky to see a dozen zombies at once .
The game lost its soul in the transition .
Some games simply do not translate well even if you cut down the graphics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2.
There are new things the current gen of consoles offer... networking, motion sensing, better storage... but if you look fundamentally at the games, I don't think the improved graphics make them any more fun.
There's nothing on the 360 that couldn't have been done on the x-box, if the developers had just cut back the complexity of the graphics; and it would have been no less fun.
The "graphics don't matter" argument doesn't hold much water.
If we go down that route, then through backwards induction there was nothing in the PS2 that couldn't be done on the PS1 with cut back graphics.
And nothing on the PS1 that couldn't be done on the Sega Saturn.
And nothing in the Sega Saturn to Sega Megadrive.
And nothing in the Sega Megadrive to NES.
And nothing in NES to Atari 2600.
And nothing Atari 2600 to the Telstar.
etc.

Except of course graphics wasn't the only thing that changed between console generations.
Processing power, memory, storage, general throughput, controllers, number of players, modelling, animation, audio, networking, physics are all improved.
Each generation was capable of delivering experiences that you simply couldn't get on the one before.
Do all these things guarantee a better game?
Of course not, but they are powerful tools that can and should be used to deliver the best experience.
An obvious example of this would be Dead Rising.
The concept worked so well on the 360 because the console had the power to render hundreds of zombies.
A veritable horde of them.
When the game was ported to the Wii, even with cut down graphics, the game had been emasculated so you were lucky to see a dozen zombies at once.
The game lost its soul in the transition.
Some games simply do not translate well even if you cut down the graphics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778492</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1263568740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There's nothing on the 360 that couldn't have been done on the x-box</p></div><p>Xbox Live Indie Games. I don't think the original Xbox HW had enough CPU and RAM to absorb the overhead of the managed XNA environment.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's nothing on the 360 that could n't have been done on the x-boxXbox Live Indie Games .
I do n't think the original Xbox HW had enough CPU and RAM to absorb the overhead of the managed XNA environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's nothing on the 360 that couldn't have been done on the x-boxXbox Live Indie Games.
I don't think the original Xbox HW had enough CPU and RAM to absorb the overhead of the managed XNA environment.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777710</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>NeMon'ess</author>
	<datestamp>1263563580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sounds like you're in the minority of console gamers who never has moments like "holy shit that looks amazing!" Better graphics make that possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like you 're in the minority of console gamers who never has moments like " holy shit that looks amazing !
" Better graphics make that possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like you're in the minority of console gamers who never has moments like "holy shit that looks amazing!
" Better graphics make that possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776642</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>bronney</author>
	<datestamp>1263551160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly bro, ever notice the people in Pixar's film don't exactly look like people?  Yet their movie completely rocks?  It's always the content.  The actors do play a part but if you've seen great actors in shit high budget movies you'd know what I mean<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly bro , ever notice the people in Pixar 's film do n't exactly look like people ?
Yet their movie completely rocks ?
It 's always the content .
The actors do play a part but if you 've seen great actors in shit high budget movies you 'd know what I mean : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly bro, ever notice the people in Pixar's film don't exactly look like people?
Yet their movie completely rocks?
It's always the content.
The actors do play a part but if you've seen great actors in shit high budget movies you'd know what I mean :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779274</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>eln</author>
	<datestamp>1263573120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's kind of funny, because historically translucency and fog have been used to limit the number of things that had to be rendered on screen, and to reduce the detail needed on each one.  Most games that advertised levels in big open areas tended to obscure the open areas with fog so they wouldn't need ridiculously expensive hardware to render them.  Similarly, windows would be translucent rather than transparent in order to simplify the rendering of stuff on the other side of them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's kind of funny , because historically translucency and fog have been used to limit the number of things that had to be rendered on screen , and to reduce the detail needed on each one .
Most games that advertised levels in big open areas tended to obscure the open areas with fog so they would n't need ridiculously expensive hardware to render them .
Similarly , windows would be translucent rather than transparent in order to simplify the rendering of stuff on the other side of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's kind of funny, because historically translucency and fog have been used to limit the number of things that had to be rendered on screen, and to reduce the detail needed on each one.
Most games that advertised levels in big open areas tended to obscure the open areas with fog so they wouldn't need ridiculously expensive hardware to render them.
Similarly, windows would be translucent rather than transparent in order to simplify the rendering of stuff on the other side of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777976</id>
	<title>Re:I'd like one change</title>
	<author>Juju</author>
	<datestamp>1263565620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should offer higher resolutions with HDMI and they could probably keep it compatible and do some better texturing/upscaling like what was done for PS2 emulation on the PS3 (or PS one on the PS2.)<br>There is no reason to remain on low def analog!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should offer higher resolutions with HDMI and they could probably keep it compatible and do some better texturing/upscaling like what was done for PS2 emulation on the PS3 ( or PS one on the PS2 .
) There is no reason to remain on low def analog !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should offer higher resolutions with HDMI and they could probably keep it compatible and do some better texturing/upscaling like what was done for PS2 emulation on the PS3 (or PS one on the PS2.
)There is no reason to remain on low def analog!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779020</id>
	<title>Re:Hm. It sure wouldn't hurt to update it a little</title>
	<author>$1uck</author>
	<datestamp>1263571560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I also have an Xbox 360, I do play it fair amount and like it.  Every once in awhile I'm tempted to get a wii.  More to play old school games that you can download than to play any of the new stuff (which seems largely gimmicky and mostly shovelware imo).   If they would re-release classic games (like the original zelda, smb, metroid, even kid icarus) in high def,  I would be all over that in a heart beat.  Seriously change nothing about the games except the graphics/artwork.  That would sell me on a wii  as it is the virtual console *almost* does.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I also have an Xbox 360 , I do play it fair amount and like it .
Every once in awhile I 'm tempted to get a wii .
More to play old school games that you can download than to play any of the new stuff ( which seems largely gimmicky and mostly shovelware imo ) .
If they would re-release classic games ( like the original zelda , smb , metroid , even kid icarus ) in high def , I would be all over that in a heart beat .
Seriously change nothing about the games except the graphics/artwork .
That would sell me on a wii as it is the virtual console * almost * does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also have an Xbox 360, I do play it fair amount and like it.
Every once in awhile I'm tempted to get a wii.
More to play old school games that you can download than to play any of the new stuff (which seems largely gimmicky and mostly shovelware imo).
If they would re-release classic games (like the original zelda, smb, metroid, even kid icarus) in high def,  I would be all over that in a heart beat.
Seriously change nothing about the games except the graphics/artwork.
That would sell me on a wii  as it is the virtual console *almost* does.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779156</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>nxtw</author>
	<datestamp>1263572340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2.</p></div></blockquote><p>I found PS2 graphics in some games underwhelming, primarily because many of them seemed to disable anti-aliasing/image quality enhancements for higher frame rates.  AA made graphics look better on the Dreamcast, which was actually released before the PS2.</p><blockquote><div><p>but if you look fundamentally at the games, I don't think the improved graphics make them any more fun</p></div></blockquote><p>There is one important exception you might consider: frame rate.  Games that can't keep the frame rate around 30 fps are rather annoying to me, especially when the frame rate drops during action.</p><p>I think having a high frame rate is important in racing games - it makes games like Burnout series, which aims to render at a constant 60 fps, much more enjoyable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2.I found PS2 graphics in some games underwhelming , primarily because many of them seemed to disable anti-aliasing/image quality enhancements for higher frame rates .
AA made graphics look better on the Dreamcast , which was actually released before the PS2.but if you look fundamentally at the games , I do n't think the improved graphics make them any more funThere is one important exception you might consider : frame rate .
Games that ca n't keep the frame rate around 30 fps are rather annoying to me , especially when the frame rate drops during action.I think having a high frame rate is important in racing games - it makes games like Burnout series , which aims to render at a constant 60 fps , much more enjoyable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've stopped caring about advances in graphics since about the time of the PS2.I found PS2 graphics in some games underwhelming, primarily because many of them seemed to disable anti-aliasing/image quality enhancements for higher frame rates.
AA made graphics look better on the Dreamcast, which was actually released before the PS2.but if you look fundamentally at the games, I don't think the improved graphics make them any more funThere is one important exception you might consider: frame rate.
Games that can't keep the frame rate around 30 fps are rather annoying to me, especially when the frame rate drops during action.I think having a high frame rate is important in racing games - it makes games like Burnout series, which aims to render at a constant 60 fps, much more enjoyable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780254</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1263577980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The "graphics don't matter" argument doesn't hold much water. If we go down that route, then through backwards induction [...]</p></div><p>Nope. He established a baseline and said "this is good enough". I'd tend to agree. I played Jak and Daxter on the PS2 and it was stunningly beautiful. There's nothing wrong with advancing past that, but my aesthetic meter was already maxed out. As long as a new console can look that good, I'm cool with it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The " graphics do n't matter " argument does n't hold much water .
If we go down that route , then through backwards induction [ ... ] Nope .
He established a baseline and said " this is good enough " .
I 'd tend to agree .
I played Jak and Daxter on the PS2 and it was stunningly beautiful .
There 's nothing wrong with advancing past that , but my aesthetic meter was already maxed out .
As long as a new console can look that good , I 'm cool with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "graphics don't matter" argument doesn't hold much water.
If we go down that route, then through backwards induction [...]Nope.
He established a baseline and said "this is good enough".
I'd tend to agree.
I played Jak and Daxter on the PS2 and it was stunningly beautiful.
There's nothing wrong with advancing past that, but my aesthetic meter was already maxed out.
As long as a new console can look that good, I'm cool with it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776868</id>
	<title>Re:I'd like one change</title>
	<author>the person standing</author>
	<datestamp>1263554040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't see a problem with analogue connection. Most people wouldn't be able to use it anyway and there would be no noticable improvement in picture quality, not even for the highest resulution the Wii can support. I prefer to use my HDMI inputs for devices which really benefit from it.

HDMI would just add production cost without actual benefit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see a problem with analogue connection .
Most people would n't be able to use it anyway and there would be no noticable improvement in picture quality , not even for the highest resulution the Wii can support .
I prefer to use my HDMI inputs for devices which really benefit from it .
HDMI would just add production cost without actual benefit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see a problem with analogue connection.
Most people wouldn't be able to use it anyway and there would be no noticable improvement in picture quality, not even for the highest resulution the Wii can support.
I prefer to use my HDMI inputs for devices which really benefit from it.
HDMI would just add production cost without actual benefit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778858</id>
	<title>Re:It makes sense really</title>
	<author>osgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1263570600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's kind of a straw man argument, isn't it?  You even quoted the part where he said he stopped caring around the time of the PS2.  Regressing his position to before that time wouldn't seem to make much sense.</p><p>Besides, when people say that "graphics don't matter", they mean that gameplay mechanics are typically paramount with them.  They normally say that because graphics are too often used as a crutch that can never really make up for poor gameplay.</p><p>It's really a style vs substance debate, which is a matter of personal preference.  YMMV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's kind of a straw man argument , is n't it ?
You even quoted the part where he said he stopped caring around the time of the PS2 .
Regressing his position to before that time would n't seem to make much sense.Besides , when people say that " graphics do n't matter " , they mean that gameplay mechanics are typically paramount with them .
They normally say that because graphics are too often used as a crutch that can never really make up for poor gameplay.It 's really a style vs substance debate , which is a matter of personal preference .
YMMV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's kind of a straw man argument, isn't it?
You even quoted the part where he said he stopped caring around the time of the PS2.
Regressing his position to before that time wouldn't seem to make much sense.Besides, when people say that "graphics don't matter", they mean that gameplay mechanics are typically paramount with them.
They normally say that because graphics are too often used as a crutch that can never really make up for poor gameplay.It's really a style vs substance debate, which is a matter of personal preference.
YMMV.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30788380</id>
	<title>Not sure I want upgrade</title>
	<author>MatthewEMacLeod</author>
	<datestamp>1263584880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With everything beginning to be less and less focused on controllers, I am going to have a hard time winning. Age really is a factor in video games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With everything beginning to be less and less focused on controllers , I am going to have a hard time winning .
Age really is a factor in video games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With everything beginning to be less and less focused on controllers, I am going to have a hard time winning.
Age really is a factor in video games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30799608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30791706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30787120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30799578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30808966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30782150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30784156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30781040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30823142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30799638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_15_0738222_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_0738222.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777444
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_0738222.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30781040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30784156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_0738222.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_0738222.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777948
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_0738222.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_0738222.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780070
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_0738222.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30788696
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_0738222.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778062
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778460
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30791706
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776602
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777246
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779274
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778952
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779356
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778122
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30787120
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30799638
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777710
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30808966
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777550
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30782150
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30799608
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779114
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30780254
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778858
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778492
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779156
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30777238
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30799578
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776642
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778212
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30779488
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778902
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_15_0738222.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30776504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30823142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_15_0738222.30778896
</commentlist>
</conversation>
