<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_04_0727249</id>
	<title>Sony May Charge For PlayStation Network</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1265275020000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>In an interview with IGN, Sony's VP of marketing, Peter Dille, responded to a question about the PlayStation Network by saying that the company is <a href="http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/106/1065686p1.html">considering charging for the service</a>. He said, "It's been our philosophy not to charge for it from launch up until now, but Kaz recently went on the record as saying that's something we're looking at. I can confirm that as well. That's something that we're actively thinking about. What's the best way to approach that if we were to do that? You know, no announcements at this point in time, but it's something we're thinking about." This follows news of a customer survey from last month that <a href="http://www.joystiq.com/2010/01/06/psn-survey-hints-at-upcoming-subscription-based-features/">listed possibilities for subscription-based PSN features</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In an interview with IGN , Sony 's VP of marketing , Peter Dille , responded to a question about the PlayStation Network by saying that the company is considering charging for the service .
He said , " It 's been our philosophy not to charge for it from launch up until now , but Kaz recently went on the record as saying that 's something we 're looking at .
I can confirm that as well .
That 's something that we 're actively thinking about .
What 's the best way to approach that if we were to do that ?
You know , no announcements at this point in time , but it 's something we 're thinking about .
" This follows news of a customer survey from last month that listed possibilities for subscription-based PSN features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In an interview with IGN, Sony's VP of marketing, Peter Dille, responded to a question about the PlayStation Network by saying that the company is considering charging for the service.
He said, "It's been our philosophy not to charge for it from launch up until now, but Kaz recently went on the record as saying that's something we're looking at.
I can confirm that as well.
That's something that we're actively thinking about.
What's the best way to approach that if we were to do that?
You know, no announcements at this point in time, but it's something we're thinking about.
" This follows news of a customer survey from last month that listed possibilities for subscription-based PSN features.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023782</id>
	<title>Re:Wouldn't be worth it.</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1265306040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The idea of companies is to make more money, not less.  The revenue they would lose over renting the games out (they don't just get free money, they have to give the publisher of those games that they rent money too...same with the movies) would far surpass that subscription fee.<br> <br>The reality is that it is probably too expensive to run PSN for free and they are going to be like the 360 very soon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The idea of companies is to make more money , not less .
The revenue they would lose over renting the games out ( they do n't just get free money , they have to give the publisher of those games that they rent money too...same with the movies ) would far surpass that subscription fee .
The reality is that it is probably too expensive to run PSN for free and they are going to be like the 360 very soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idea of companies is to make more money, not less.
The revenue they would lose over renting the games out (they don't just get free money, they have to give the publisher of those games that they rent money too...same with the movies) would far surpass that subscription fee.
The reality is that it is probably too expensive to run PSN for free and they are going to be like the 360 very soon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020722</id>
	<title>They had better make it worthwhile first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265287500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having 'endured' PSN I can safely say it was the most infuriating console experience I have ever had.. and i have owned essentially every console from the NES to now. The whole thing feels like it was designed by a committee of investment bankers and is about as fun as filling out a tax return. Seriously, I think going online with the Dreamcast and Dreamkey was more enjoyable... and it was at 56k!</p><p>The fact the Wii and 360 wipe the floor with the PS3 when it comes to the online 'store' and other online features, I can't imagine any sensible person would pay for such an experience.</p><p>It is just leading everyone into the sales model of buying half the game from the shop and the other half online...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having 'endured ' PSN I can safely say it was the most infuriating console experience I have ever had.. and i have owned essentially every console from the NES to now .
The whole thing feels like it was designed by a committee of investment bankers and is about as fun as filling out a tax return .
Seriously , I think going online with the Dreamcast and Dreamkey was more enjoyable... and it was at 56k ! The fact the Wii and 360 wipe the floor with the PS3 when it comes to the online 'store ' and other online features , I ca n't imagine any sensible person would pay for such an experience.It is just leading everyone into the sales model of buying half the game from the shop and the other half online.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having 'endured' PSN I can safely say it was the most infuriating console experience I have ever had.. and i have owned essentially every console from the NES to now.
The whole thing feels like it was designed by a committee of investment bankers and is about as fun as filling out a tax return.
Seriously, I think going online with the Dreamcast and Dreamkey was more enjoyable... and it was at 56k!The fact the Wii and 360 wipe the floor with the PS3 when it comes to the online 'store' and other online features, I can't imagine any sensible person would pay for such an experience.It is just leading everyone into the sales model of buying half the game from the shop and the other half online...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022914</id>
	<title>Re:Reasonable price &amp; improved functionality</title>
	<author>socsoc</author>
	<datestamp>1265301960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who would pay for a game newsletter or reviews?  You mention them as free perks, but as a supporting argument to why they should charge for it.  I'll go to the biased sources that don't own any consoles for my reviews, thanks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who would pay for a game newsletter or reviews ?
You mention them as free perks , but as a supporting argument to why they should charge for it .
I 'll go to the biased sources that do n't own any consoles for my reviews , thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who would pay for a game newsletter or reviews?
You mention them as free perks, but as a supporting argument to why they should charge for it.
I'll go to the biased sources that don't own any consoles for my reviews, thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021980</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>socsoc</author>
	<datestamp>1265297400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I let my gold account expire when my 360 died and bought a ps3 instead, the PSN network being free was one of the reasons. It's starting to frustrate me though. I don't know the specifics behind how it works, but the EA titles that I play seem to make one machine the host, rather than use a dedicated server, and that really sucks when you are on the 16th hole of Tiger and suddenly it all craps out. Maybe that's an EA thing because it seems to be a different environment than PSN proper, but Live never gave me those issues (20mbit fiber, it's not me).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I let my gold account expire when my 360 died and bought a ps3 instead , the PSN network being free was one of the reasons .
It 's starting to frustrate me though .
I do n't know the specifics behind how it works , but the EA titles that I play seem to make one machine the host , rather than use a dedicated server , and that really sucks when you are on the 16th hole of Tiger and suddenly it all craps out .
Maybe that 's an EA thing because it seems to be a different environment than PSN proper , but Live never gave me those issues ( 20mbit fiber , it 's not me ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I let my gold account expire when my 360 died and bought a ps3 instead, the PSN network being free was one of the reasons.
It's starting to frustrate me though.
I don't know the specifics behind how it works, but the EA titles that I play seem to make one machine the host, rather than use a dedicated server, and that really sucks when you are on the 16th hole of Tiger and suddenly it all craps out.
Maybe that's an EA thing because it seems to be a different environment than PSN proper, but Live never gave me those issues (20mbit fiber, it's not me).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31030566</id>
	<title>Re:Wouldn't be worth it.</title>
	<author>CronoCloud</author>
	<datestamp>1265300460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PSN Store already supports movie and game rentals, though there are no rentable games as of yet.  Check the information properties of games you've downloaded from PSN and you'll see an "Expiration Date" field, which is blank for purchases.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PSN Store already supports movie and game rentals , though there are no rentable games as of yet .
Check the information properties of games you 've downloaded from PSN and you 'll see an " Expiration Date " field , which is blank for purchases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PSN Store already supports movie and game rentals, though there are no rentable games as of yet.
Check the information properties of games you've downloaded from PSN and you'll see an "Expiration Date" field, which is blank for purchases.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021248</id>
	<title>Re:I wont buy a PS3 until PSN is subscription base</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265293080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you really believe that charging a subscription fee is going to reduce the number of annoying tards? Just think about that for a second. Which is the most likely demographic to pay for online gaming subscriptions? That's right. Annoying tards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you really believe that charging a subscription fee is going to reduce the number of annoying tards ?
Just think about that for a second .
Which is the most likely demographic to pay for online gaming subscriptions ?
That 's right .
Annoying tards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you really believe that charging a subscription fee is going to reduce the number of annoying tards?
Just think about that for a second.
Which is the most likely demographic to pay for online gaming subscriptions?
That's right.
Annoying tards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021734</id>
	<title>It depends</title>
	<author>sqlrob</author>
	<datestamp>1265296200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it's charge for multiplayer? meh, I'm single player only 90+\% of the time</p><p>If it's charge for demos,Netflix or patches? DIAF Sony.</p><p>Gamefly like subscription to all the games on PSN? Count me in, if it's a reasonable price.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's charge for multiplayer ?
meh , I 'm single player only 90 + \ % of the timeIf it 's charge for demos,Netflix or patches ?
DIAF Sony.Gamefly like subscription to all the games on PSN ?
Count me in , if it 's a reasonable price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's charge for multiplayer?
meh, I'm single player only 90+\% of the timeIf it's charge for demos,Netflix or patches?
DIAF Sony.Gamefly like subscription to all the games on PSN?
Count me in, if it's a reasonable price.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020510</id>
	<title>Re:Who's hosting the Game? Sony or Publisher/Dev?</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1265284440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Playstation Home? Charge for it.</i>
<p>
Home is festooned with adverts, sponsored zones and as you say trinkets for $$$. It's already commercialized enough and charging for it would be stupid.
</p><p>
Personally I think Sony have plenty of means of keeping online free and making money. They're already doing lots of them - pushing PSN, selling / renting videos, premium avatars &amp; themes, advertising, qore etc. They could add to that model with IPTV, game rentals (hourly, daily, weekly, monthly etc.), streaming music &amp; video, network storage &amp; game load/saves etc. There is no reason that they should have to charge for any functionality that the PS3 already offers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Playstation Home ?
Charge for it .
Home is festooned with adverts , sponsored zones and as you say trinkets for $ $ $ .
It 's already commercialized enough and charging for it would be stupid .
Personally I think Sony have plenty of means of keeping online free and making money .
They 're already doing lots of them - pushing PSN , selling / renting videos , premium avatars &amp; themes , advertising , qore etc .
They could add to that model with IPTV , game rentals ( hourly , daily , weekly , monthly etc .
) , streaming music &amp; video , network storage &amp; game load/saves etc .
There is no reason that they should have to charge for any functionality that the PS3 already offers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Playstation Home?
Charge for it.
Home is festooned with adverts, sponsored zones and as you say trinkets for $$$.
It's already commercialized enough and charging for it would be stupid.
Personally I think Sony have plenty of means of keeping online free and making money.
They're already doing lots of them - pushing PSN, selling / renting videos, premium avatars &amp; themes, advertising, qore etc.
They could add to that model with IPTV, game rentals (hourly, daily, weekly, monthly etc.
), streaming music &amp; video, network storage &amp; game load/saves etc.
There is no reason that they should have to charge for any functionality that the PS3 already offers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020866</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265289420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars</p><p>Yeah. I don't think they'd be as suicidal for charging for access to all multiplayer gaming, like the surcharge pirates at Microsoft impose on everyone (want to play Castle Crashers, two at my place, two at your's? Okay, pony up the money for four Gold accounts, chumps).</p><p>If it was something like the mentioned "cloud storage space for games"... then it might be worth it. If I could upload saved games to their network, and download it at my friends house, avoiding the annoying of finding my USB drive, plugging it in, copying it, etc., that would be worth some money to me. Especially since it'd provide backup insurance for my saves in case my PS3 dies or gets stolen.</p><p>I don't give a rat's ass about early access to demos or the other nonsensical features they test marketed to people in Europe, and I think that cross-game voice chat should be a *core fucking feature*. The state of voice chat on the PS3 is abysmal compared with how easy it is on the Xbox360.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console warsYeah .
I do n't think they 'd be as suicidal for charging for access to all multiplayer gaming , like the surcharge pirates at Microsoft impose on everyone ( want to play Castle Crashers , two at my place , two at your 's ?
Okay , pony up the money for four Gold accounts , chumps ) .If it was something like the mentioned " cloud storage space for games " ... then it might be worth it .
If I could upload saved games to their network , and download it at my friends house , avoiding the annoying of finding my USB drive , plugging it in , copying it , etc. , that would be worth some money to me .
Especially since it 'd provide backup insurance for my saves in case my PS3 dies or gets stolen.I do n't give a rat 's ass about early access to demos or the other nonsensical features they test marketed to people in Europe , and I think that cross-game voice chat should be a * core fucking feature * .
The state of voice chat on the PS3 is abysmal compared with how easy it is on the Xbox360 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console warsYeah.
I don't think they'd be as suicidal for charging for access to all multiplayer gaming, like the surcharge pirates at Microsoft impose on everyone (want to play Castle Crashers, two at my place, two at your's?
Okay, pony up the money for four Gold accounts, chumps).If it was something like the mentioned "cloud storage space for games"... then it might be worth it.
If I could upload saved games to their network, and download it at my friends house, avoiding the annoying of finding my USB drive, plugging it in, copying it, etc., that would be worth some money to me.
Especially since it'd provide backup insurance for my saves in case my PS3 dies or gets stolen.I don't give a rat's ass about early access to demos or the other nonsensical features they test marketed to people in Europe, and I think that cross-game voice chat should be a *core fucking feature*.
The state of voice chat on the PS3 is abysmal compared with how easy it is on the Xbox360.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31048122</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265452980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sony isn't going to start charging. This is only more trolling by Slashdot.</p><p>Of course they are "thinking about it". All companies "think about" all sorts of stuff all of the time. If they didn't, then they probably don't have plans in place for varying outcomes and will eventually fail.</p><p>I'm thinking about shooting Soulskill in the face. That doesn't mean that I necessarily would, even if given the chance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sony is n't going to start charging .
This is only more trolling by Slashdot.Of course they are " thinking about it " .
All companies " think about " all sorts of stuff all of the time .
If they did n't , then they probably do n't have plans in place for varying outcomes and will eventually fail.I 'm thinking about shooting Soulskill in the face .
That does n't mean that I necessarily would , even if given the chance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sony isn't going to start charging.
This is only more trolling by Slashdot.Of course they are "thinking about it".
All companies "think about" all sorts of stuff all of the time.
If they didn't, then they probably don't have plans in place for varying outcomes and will eventually fail.I'm thinking about shooting Soulskill in the face.
That doesn't mean that I necessarily would, even if given the chance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020650</id>
	<title>You're telling me...</title>
	<author>gaelfx</author>
	<datestamp>1265286360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>...there's a Playstation Network now? Finally, no need to invite my friends over to play games! All those harsh, awkward social interactions I've been going through these years were totally unnecessary!</htmltext>
<tokenext>...there 's a Playstation Network now ?
Finally , no need to invite my friends over to play games !
All those harsh , awkward social interactions I 've been going through these years were totally unnecessary !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...there's a Playstation Network now?
Finally, no need to invite my friends over to play games!
All those harsh, awkward social interactions I've been going through these years were totally unnecessary!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020300</id>
	<title>Not working in my country anyways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265281680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The PSN doesn't work in my country even though I've exchanged quite a few emails over the three years I have my PS3. On multiple occasions I've been promised that "we're just about to launch the service" and nothing happened ever since. This is quite a drawback in the whole PS3 experience since I know that demo's and free content on the PSN is half the fun.
I actually wanted to purchase some upgrades to one of the games I own, but since Sony wasn't really interested in my money then I sure as hell won't spend any money on the PSN should it come as a paid service.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The PSN does n't work in my country even though I 've exchanged quite a few emails over the three years I have my PS3 .
On multiple occasions I 've been promised that " we 're just about to launch the service " and nothing happened ever since .
This is quite a drawback in the whole PS3 experience since I know that demo 's and free content on the PSN is half the fun .
I actually wanted to purchase some upgrades to one of the games I own , but since Sony was n't really interested in my money then I sure as hell wo n't spend any money on the PSN should it come as a paid service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The PSN doesn't work in my country even though I've exchanged quite a few emails over the three years I have my PS3.
On multiple occasions I've been promised that "we're just about to launch the service" and nothing happened ever since.
This is quite a drawback in the whole PS3 experience since I know that demo's and free content on the PSN is half the fun.
I actually wanted to purchase some upgrades to one of the games I own, but since Sony wasn't really interested in my money then I sure as hell won't spend any money on the PSN should it come as a paid service.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022932</id>
	<title>Re:If I have to pay...</title>
	<author>socsoc</author>
	<datestamp>1265302080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't blame PSN for problems with BT. Problems with your service provider don't reflect on the content provider.  Do you blame your auto company when the roads are closed?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't blame PSN for problems with BT .
Problems with your service provider do n't reflect on the content provider .
Do you blame your auto company when the roads are closed ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't blame PSN for problems with BT.
Problems with your service provider don't reflect on the content provider.
Do you blame your auto company when the roads are closed?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024770</id>
	<title>Re:Wouldn't be worth it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265310480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as movies go, why would PSN want to compete with netflix, a decent movie watching service that will already stream lots of movies onto your PS3 with your subscription to netflix.</p><p>The competition doesn't make sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as movies go , why would PSN want to compete with netflix , a decent movie watching service that will already stream lots of movies onto your PS3 with your subscription to netflix.The competition does n't make sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as movies go, why would PSN want to compete with netflix, a decent movie watching service that will already stream lots of movies onto your PS3 with your subscription to netflix.The competition doesn't make sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</id>
	<title>When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265278860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money, I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars.  The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional, not essential for having a good gaming experience, and priced modestly.  Otherwise, I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum, just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money , I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars .
The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional , not essential for having a good gaming experience , and priced modestly .
Otherwise , I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum , just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money, I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars.
The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional, not essential for having a good gaming experience, and priced modestly.
Otherwise, I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum, just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31027396</id>
	<title>Then offer a refund</title>
	<author>gearloos</author>
	<datestamp>1265279940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>PSN being free weighed heavily on my buying decision. If Sony wants to start charging for it fine, I'll take my refund now Sony. You sold it to me based on a free PSN- If it's not, give me my money back. Ohh and give me back my money for all the games I have purchased. I'll play my Wii more now. Thanks</htmltext>
<tokenext>PSN being free weighed heavily on my buying decision .
If Sony wants to start charging for it fine , I 'll take my refund now Sony .
You sold it to me based on a free PSN- If it 's not , give me my money back .
Ohh and give me back my money for all the games I have purchased .
I 'll play my Wii more now .
Thanks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PSN being free weighed heavily on my buying decision.
If Sony wants to start charging for it fine, I'll take my refund now Sony.
You sold it to me based on a free PSN- If it's not, give me my money back.
Ohh and give me back my money for all the games I have purchased.
I'll play my Wii more now.
Thanks</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022044</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>DdJ</author>
	<datestamp>1265297700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Otherwise, I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum, just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.</p></div><p>The thing is, <em>not</em> doing it will <em>also</em> amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot.</p><p>The network is far from free to run, and is losing money.  Unless they can figure out another way to monetize it (eg. advertising infrastructure, "subscription fee" from <em>developers</em>, whatever), I don't think anyone can realistically expect it to remain free forever.  At some point it has to stop, unless someone can figure out another way for it to be free and profitable (on an ongoing basis -- just as a marketing tool to get people to buy PS3 won't cut it forever).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Otherwise , I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum , just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.The thing is , not doing it will also amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot.The network is far from free to run , and is losing money .
Unless they can figure out another way to monetize it ( eg .
advertising infrastructure , " subscription fee " from developers , whatever ) , I do n't think anyone can realistically expect it to remain free forever .
At some point it has to stop , unless someone can figure out another way for it to be free and profitable ( on an ongoing basis -- just as a marketing tool to get people to buy PS3 wo n't cut it forever ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Otherwise, I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum, just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.The thing is, not doing it will also amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot.The network is far from free to run, and is losing money.
Unless they can figure out another way to monetize it (eg.
advertising infrastructure, "subscription fee" from developers, whatever), I don't think anyone can realistically expect it to remain free forever.
At some point it has to stop, unless someone can figure out another way for it to be free and profitable (on an ongoing basis -- just as a marketing tool to get people to buy PS3 won't cut it forever).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021174</id>
	<title>Charge for Home, not for Store</title>
	<author>Jim Hall</author>
	<datestamp>1265292600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd prefer that PSN remain free, since this is a huge plus in the PS3's favor. However, the realist in me recognizes there is significant cost in Sony operating the servers and network infrastructure to support PSN on an ongoing basis. If they had to charge for it, I'm with you on these points:</p><ul>
<li> <b>PlayStation Home - charge for it.</b> It's already an MMO of sorts, just a social MMO, and people generally accept that you pay a subscription fee to play MMOs. (Disclaimer: I use Home, and I would probably pay a subscription fee for it.)</li><li> <b>PlayStation Store - needs to stay free.</b> I already buy all my PSP games from PlayStation Store, as well as rent movies from it. I'm paying $$ to Sony each time I buy a game or rent a movie, so I'd stop using this if they charged me just to access the Store service.</li></ul><p>However, I'm not sure I'm with you on this:</p><ul> <li> <b>Multiplayer</b> </li></ul><p>It needs to be one or the other - either charge a monthly fee for this, or leave it free. If Sony tried to come up with a mixed model for what online games require an online subscription, and which don't, it would really confuse and frustrate gamers. They don't want to do that.</p><p>Personally, I'd pay a (small) subscription fee to play online on two conditions: (1) I shouldn't have to play with 12 year olds who like to call everyone a Mexican Jew lizard; (2) I don't play online games all the time, so it would be nice to be able to buy into a month-to-month plan, or an annual plan, and I should be able to pay for both through PlayStation Store.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd prefer that PSN remain free , since this is a huge plus in the PS3 's favor .
However , the realist in me recognizes there is significant cost in Sony operating the servers and network infrastructure to support PSN on an ongoing basis .
If they had to charge for it , I 'm with you on these points : PlayStation Home - charge for it .
It 's already an MMO of sorts , just a social MMO , and people generally accept that you pay a subscription fee to play MMOs .
( Disclaimer : I use Home , and I would probably pay a subscription fee for it .
) PlayStation Store - needs to stay free .
I already buy all my PSP games from PlayStation Store , as well as rent movies from it .
I 'm paying $ $ to Sony each time I buy a game or rent a movie , so I 'd stop using this if they charged me just to access the Store service.However , I 'm not sure I 'm with you on this : Multiplayer It needs to be one or the other - either charge a monthly fee for this , or leave it free .
If Sony tried to come up with a mixed model for what online games require an online subscription , and which do n't , it would really confuse and frustrate gamers .
They do n't want to do that.Personally , I 'd pay a ( small ) subscription fee to play online on two conditions : ( 1 ) I should n't have to play with 12 year olds who like to call everyone a Mexican Jew lizard ; ( 2 ) I do n't play online games all the time , so it would be nice to be able to buy into a month-to-month plan , or an annual plan , and I should be able to pay for both through PlayStation Store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd prefer that PSN remain free, since this is a huge plus in the PS3's favor.
However, the realist in me recognizes there is significant cost in Sony operating the servers and network infrastructure to support PSN on an ongoing basis.
If they had to charge for it, I'm with you on these points:
 PlayStation Home - charge for it.
It's already an MMO of sorts, just a social MMO, and people generally accept that you pay a subscription fee to play MMOs.
(Disclaimer: I use Home, and I would probably pay a subscription fee for it.
) PlayStation Store - needs to stay free.
I already buy all my PSP games from PlayStation Store, as well as rent movies from it.
I'm paying $$ to Sony each time I buy a game or rent a movie, so I'd stop using this if they charged me just to access the Store service.However, I'm not sure I'm with you on this:  Multiplayer It needs to be one or the other - either charge a monthly fee for this, or leave it free.
If Sony tried to come up with a mixed model for what online games require an online subscription, and which don't, it would really confuse and frustrate gamers.
They don't want to do that.Personally, I'd pay a (small) subscription fee to play online on two conditions: (1) I shouldn't have to play with 12 year olds who like to call everyone a Mexican Jew lizard; (2) I don't play online games all the time, so it would be nice to be able to buy into a month-to-month plan, or an annual plan, and I should be able to pay for both through PlayStation Store.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022210</id>
	<title>Re:The effect of Paying for PSN?</title>
	<author>godfra</author>
	<datestamp>1265298480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>So you would <b>literary</b> throw your PS3 out the window</i> <br> <br>
Verily, this Playstation has become a financial burden of prodigious proportions, therefore I promulgate now, that I shall have no more to do with it, and plan to dispense with the economically burdensome device forthwith!<br> <br>
With that being said, I bid you good day Sir!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you would literary throw your PS3 out the window Verily , this Playstation has become a financial burden of prodigious proportions , therefore I promulgate now , that I shall have no more to do with it , and plan to dispense with the economically burdensome device forthwith !
With that being said , I bid you good day Sir !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you would literary throw your PS3 out the window  
Verily, this Playstation has become a financial burden of prodigious proportions, therefore I promulgate now, that I shall have no more to do with it, and plan to dispense with the economically burdensome device forthwith!
With that being said, I bid you good day Sir!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020342</id>
	<title>Oh, good...</title>
	<author>ButtercupSaiyan</author>
	<datestamp>1265282280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>That means more customers for Nintendo and Blizzard Entertainment / Activision then...</htmltext>
<tokenext>That means more customers for Nintendo and Blizzard Entertainment / Activision then.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That means more customers for Nintendo and Blizzard Entertainment / Activision then...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024662</id>
	<title>Re:As Long as...</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1265310000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I kind of like the idea of people needing to pay to play online, only because it puts a bit of monetary incentive on not beng an ass-hat. There's a bit of dis-incentive to mod your console, use in-game exploits, etc. There will still be ass-hats, but hopefully fewer of them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I kind of like the idea of people needing to pay to play online , only because it puts a bit of monetary incentive on not beng an ass-hat .
There 's a bit of dis-incentive to mod your console , use in-game exploits , etc .
There will still be ass-hats , but hopefully fewer of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I kind of like the idea of people needing to pay to play online, only because it puts a bit of monetary incentive on not beng an ass-hat.
There's a bit of dis-incentive to mod your console, use in-game exploits, etc.
There will still be ass-hats, but hopefully fewer of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020696</id>
	<title>PS3 sucks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265287080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only faggots play it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only faggots play it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only faggots play it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022418</id>
	<title>Re:They'd be stupid not to</title>
	<author>jgtg32a</author>
	<datestamp>1265299620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Live provides nothing that justifies $40 a year, but $50 a year is just cheap enough where most will pay with out complaining and at worst people like me will bitch about it on the internet but still pay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Live provides nothing that justifies $ 40 a year , but $ 50 a year is just cheap enough where most will pay with out complaining and at worst people like me will bitch about it on the internet but still pay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Live provides nothing that justifies $40 a year, but $50 a year is just cheap enough where most will pay with out complaining and at worst people like me will bitch about it on the internet but still pay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021834</id>
	<title>Way to Save Money: Stop developing Home</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265296740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, what an absolute waste. Sony jumped in to develop this when Second Life was generating tons of (unwarranted) press.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , what an absolute waste .
Sony jumped in to develop this when Second Life was generating tons of ( unwarranted ) press .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, what an absolute waste.
Sony jumped in to develop this when Second Life was generating tons of (unwarranted) press.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020192</id>
	<title>And people ask me why I don't play consoles</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1265280000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least not multiplayer.</p><p>And it's not even so much that I have troubles using the console controllers for FPS games. It's simply that something like this isn't easy to enforce in the PC world. If anything, the maker of a certain game can enforce a "pay to play multiplayer" rule, which would basically mean for me that I can't play this game (since I won't pay to play just another FPS game online when there's a lot that are offered free), it would not mean that the platform becomes worthless altogether.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least not multiplayer.And it 's not even so much that I have troubles using the console controllers for FPS games .
It 's simply that something like this is n't easy to enforce in the PC world .
If anything , the maker of a certain game can enforce a " pay to play multiplayer " rule , which would basically mean for me that I ca n't play this game ( since I wo n't pay to play just another FPS game online when there 's a lot that are offered free ) , it would not mean that the platform becomes worthless altogether .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least not multiplayer.And it's not even so much that I have troubles using the console controllers for FPS games.
It's simply that something like this isn't easy to enforce in the PC world.
If anything, the maker of a certain game can enforce a "pay to play multiplayer" rule, which would basically mean for me that I can't play this game (since I won't pay to play just another FPS game online when there's a lot that are offered free), it would not mean that the platform becomes worthless altogether.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023892</id>
	<title>I have an Xbox and only reason I bought the PS3...</title>
	<author>Stone316</author>
	<datestamp>1265306640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>was because I wanted a blu-ray player and as an added bonus it played games and the online was free.   If they started to charge for online multiple player there is no way I would pay for both the PS3 and Xbox.  One would have to go...  Since we are big Halo fans here I think I know which console would win.</p><p>Should the profits from blu-ray sales offset their losses?  I've heard tho that blu-ray movie sales are poor as well.. I can understand why now that I have a blu-ray player.  Upscaled DVD's are good enough and personally when I see a title in both DVD and Bluray at the store and the Bluray is 5-15+$ more, then I buy the DVD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>was because I wanted a blu-ray player and as an added bonus it played games and the online was free .
If they started to charge for online multiple player there is no way I would pay for both the PS3 and Xbox .
One would have to go... Since we are big Halo fans here I think I know which console would win.Should the profits from blu-ray sales offset their losses ?
I 've heard tho that blu-ray movie sales are poor as well.. I can understand why now that I have a blu-ray player .
Upscaled DVD 's are good enough and personally when I see a title in both DVD and Bluray at the store and the Bluray is 5-15 + $ more , then I buy the DVD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>was because I wanted a blu-ray player and as an added bonus it played games and the online was free.
If they started to charge for online multiple player there is no way I would pay for both the PS3 and Xbox.
One would have to go...  Since we are big Halo fans here I think I know which console would win.Should the profits from blu-ray sales offset their losses?
I've heard tho that blu-ray movie sales are poor as well.. I can understand why now that I have a blu-ray player.
Upscaled DVD's are good enough and personally when I see a title in both DVD and Bluray at the store and the Bluray is 5-15+$ more, then I buy the DVD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31026396</id>
	<title>Re:They'd be stupid not to</title>
	<author>rhsanborn</author>
	<datestamp>1265275500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Plus, they get to keep the whole of that cost. They subsidize some development, hardware/bandwidth costs, and community development costs. But, as opposed to the, percentage of game cost, license fee they get from games, that whole fee goes directly into their coffers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus , they get to keep the whole of that cost .
They subsidize some development , hardware/bandwidth costs , and community development costs .
But , as opposed to the , percentage of game cost , license fee they get from games , that whole fee goes directly into their coffers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus, they get to keep the whole of that cost.
They subsidize some development, hardware/bandwidth costs, and community development costs.
But, as opposed to the, percentage of game cost, license fee they get from games, that whole fee goes directly into their coffers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022258</id>
	<title>I'm all for it if it stops the spam</title>
	<author>TheTyrannyOfForcedRe</author>
	<datestamp>1265298720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope they do charge for it.  I'm sick and tired of being spammed with movies/games/etc every time I fire up my P3.  I use it to play bluray.  That's it.  I have no interest in online movie rental or ps3 games.  The giant thumbnail previews littered throughout XMB interface really piss me off.  Don't even get me started on the ticker thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope they do charge for it .
I 'm sick and tired of being spammed with movies/games/etc every time I fire up my P3 .
I use it to play bluray .
That 's it .
I have no interest in online movie rental or ps3 games .
The giant thumbnail previews littered throughout XMB interface really piss me off .
Do n't even get me started on the ticker thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope they do charge for it.
I'm sick and tired of being spammed with movies/games/etc every time I fire up my P3.
I use it to play bluray.
That's it.
I have no interest in online movie rental or ps3 games.
The giant thumbnail previews littered throughout XMB interface really piss me off.
Don't even get me started on the ticker thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020798</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>williamhb</author>
	<datestamp>1265288700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money, I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars. The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional, not essential for having a good gaming experience, and priced modestly. Otherwise, I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum, just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.</p></div><p>Very much worse than the PS2 to PS3 transition.  With the PS3, Sony has started to gain real traction as a "just works" media and entertainment hub for ordinary folk and families (rather than techies).  For instance, the sales success of PlayTV (cheap, easy, and friendly digital tv recording functionality), LittleBigPlanet, etc -- it's starting to conquer the Wii's territory now more people have high-definition tvs.  As soon as it's "$X/month subscription", families and casual users won't look at it.  They'd reckon that kind of "all-you-can-eat" pricing means it's for hard-core WoW/XBox360 8-hours-a-day types, not for them.  "Not only do I not want to spend that much of my time playing it, I don't want to be playing <i>against</i> people who spend that much time on it either."</p><p>The PS2/3 transition, in comparison, was a temporary problem -- PS2 support was there because otherwise at first launch it would have looked like there was very little you could play on the PS3.  Pissing off the hardcore PS2 players ("I have to keep both boxes?") was minor in comparison because most people do not consider themselves hardcore gamers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money , I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars .
The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional , not essential for having a good gaming experience , and priced modestly .
Otherwise , I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum , just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.Very much worse than the PS2 to PS3 transition .
With the PS3 , Sony has started to gain real traction as a " just works " media and entertainment hub for ordinary folk and families ( rather than techies ) .
For instance , the sales success of PlayTV ( cheap , easy , and friendly digital tv recording functionality ) , LittleBigPlanet , etc -- it 's starting to conquer the Wii 's territory now more people have high-definition tvs .
As soon as it 's " $ X/month subscription " , families and casual users wo n't look at it .
They 'd reckon that kind of " all-you-can-eat " pricing means it 's for hard-core WoW/XBox360 8-hours-a-day types , not for them .
" Not only do I not want to spend that much of my time playing it , I do n't want to be playing against people who spend that much time on it either .
" The PS2/3 transition , in comparison , was a temporary problem -- PS2 support was there because otherwise at first launch it would have looked like there was very little you could play on the PS3 .
Pissing off the hardcore PS2 players ( " I have to keep both boxes ?
" ) was minor in comparison because most people do not consider themselves hardcore gamers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money, I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars.
The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional, not essential for having a good gaming experience, and priced modestly.
Otherwise, I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum, just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.Very much worse than the PS2 to PS3 transition.
With the PS3, Sony has started to gain real traction as a "just works" media and entertainment hub for ordinary folk and families (rather than techies).
For instance, the sales success of PlayTV (cheap, easy, and friendly digital tv recording functionality), LittleBigPlanet, etc -- it's starting to conquer the Wii's territory now more people have high-definition tvs.
As soon as it's "$X/month subscription", families and casual users won't look at it.
They'd reckon that kind of "all-you-can-eat" pricing means it's for hard-core WoW/XBox360 8-hours-a-day types, not for them.
"Not only do I not want to spend that much of my time playing it, I don't want to be playing against people who spend that much time on it either.
"The PS2/3 transition, in comparison, was a temporary problem -- PS2 support was there because otherwise at first launch it would have looked like there was very little you could play on the PS3.
Pissing off the hardcore PS2 players ("I have to keep both boxes?
") was minor in comparison because most people do not consider themselves hardcore gamers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020416</id>
	<title>If I have to pay...</title>
	<author>emanem</author>
	<datestamp>1265283240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...I might as well call it a day.<br>
The service is cr*p (with SF4 for example is full of lag cheaters and they <b>don't</b> get banned), movies you can buy cost a lot as well (plus on a side note if I downaload 10 of them I exceed my 100 GB monthly max limit on my <i>ultra-in-theory-unlimited</i> BT account - I discovered that because of this...sigh) and are badly compressed.<br>
And they even think to start charging people?<br>
This is the good time I might stop buying any SONY product in future.<br>
Cheers,</htmltext>
<tokenext>...I might as well call it a day .
The service is cr * p ( with SF4 for example is full of lag cheaters and they do n't get banned ) , movies you can buy cost a lot as well ( plus on a side note if I downaload 10 of them I exceed my 100 GB monthly max limit on my ultra-in-theory-unlimited BT account - I discovered that because of this...sigh ) and are badly compressed .
And they even think to start charging people ?
This is the good time I might stop buying any SONY product in future .
Cheers,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...I might as well call it a day.
The service is cr*p (with SF4 for example is full of lag cheaters and they don't get banned), movies you can buy cost a lot as well (plus on a side note if I downaload 10 of them I exceed my 100 GB monthly max limit on my ultra-in-theory-unlimited BT account - I discovered that because of this...sigh) and are badly compressed.
And they even think to start charging people?
This is the good time I might stop buying any SONY product in future.
Cheers,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021676</id>
	<title>Re:I wont buy a PS3 until PSN is subscription base</title>
	<author>mr\_gorkajuice</author>
	<datestamp>1265295840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Which is the most likely demographic to pay for online gaming subscriptions? That's right. Annoying tards.</p></div><p>Anything remotely resembling statistics to back that up? My gut feeling disagrees entirely.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is the most likely demographic to pay for online gaming subscriptions ?
That 's right .
Annoying tards.Anything remotely resembling statistics to back that up ?
My gut feeling disagrees entirely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is the most likely demographic to pay for online gaming subscriptions?
That's right.
Annoying tards.Anything remotely resembling statistics to back that up?
My gut feeling disagrees entirely.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020252</id>
	<title>Reasonable price &amp; improved functionality</title>
	<author>EspressoFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1265281080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, if the price is reasonable and they use the extra income to improve the platform features (connection speed, connectivity, etc.) and perhaps offer more free perks (game newsletter, reviews, etc.), then it will probably be worth it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if the price is reasonable and they use the extra income to improve the platform features ( connection speed , connectivity , etc .
) and perhaps offer more free perks ( game newsletter , reviews , etc .
) , then it will probably be worth it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if the price is reasonable and they use the extra income to improve the platform features (connection speed, connectivity, etc.
) and perhaps offer more free perks (game newsletter, reviews, etc.
), then it will probably be worth it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024758</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>CaseM</author>
	<datestamp>1265310420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tend to think of shit like this as "negotiation by proxy". Talk about doing "really, really horrible" to the media, then do something only  just a "little" horrible the next iteration. Look for the PS4 to start charging for PSN access.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tend to think of shit like this as " negotiation by proxy " .
Talk about doing " really , really horrible " to the media , then do something only just a " little " horrible the next iteration .
Look for the PS4 to start charging for PSN access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tend to think of shit like this as "negotiation by proxy".
Talk about doing "really, really horrible" to the media, then do something only  just a "little" horrible the next iteration.
Look for the PS4 to start charging for PSN access.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31025066</id>
	<title>My pipe dream...</title>
	<author>nilbog</author>
	<datestamp>1265311920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they'll surprise us and do something awesome like content streaming over PSN.  So you pay your monthly fee but you get streaming content like netflix has.</p><p>But probably not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they 'll surprise us and do something awesome like content streaming over PSN .
So you pay your monthly fee but you get streaming content like netflix has.But probably not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they'll surprise us and do something awesome like content streaming over PSN.
So you pay your monthly fee but you get streaming content like netflix has.But probably not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024144</id>
	<title>Very bad idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265307840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this would destroy playstation</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this would destroy playstation</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this would destroy playstation</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020900</id>
	<title>Re:And people ask me why I don't play consoles</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265289720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't play consoles because after years of free service, they are considering charging for it? WTF?  You, sir, are fucking retarded.  I sincerely mean it - you sound like your brain really struggles to function accurately.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't play consoles because after years of free service , they are considering charging for it ?
WTF ? You , sir , are fucking retarded .
I sincerely mean it - you sound like your brain really struggles to function accurately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't play consoles because after years of free service, they are considering charging for it?
WTF?  You, sir, are fucking retarded.
I sincerely mean it - you sound like your brain really struggles to function accurately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020192</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021632</id>
	<title>Re:They'd be stupid not to</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1265295540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last stats they released said around 25 million Gold subscribers, at &pound;40 a year, that's &pound;1 billion (around $1.5 billion US) income per year from Live subscriptions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last stats they released said around 25 million Gold subscribers , at   40 a year , that 's   1 billion ( around $ 1.5 billion US ) income per year from Live subscriptions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last stats they released said around 25 million Gold subscribers, at £40 a year, that's £1 billion (around $1.5 billion US) income per year from Live subscriptions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020484</id>
	<title>I was seriously thinking of buying one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265284140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but I'll wait now until they've thought this through. Maybe I'll just upgrade my PC instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but I 'll wait now until they 've thought this through .
Maybe I 'll just upgrade my PC instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but I'll wait now until they've thought this through.
Maybe I'll just upgrade my PC instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020130</id>
	<title>hasn't sony run out of ammo yet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265279100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>how can they keep shooting them selves in the foot???<br>
<br>
or do they not know that you can pick up an updated xbox (refurb) for under 175 and it won't die like the eariler ones<br>
so now all they have on xbox is the free service, and they want to take that away, dolts....

<br>
ooo i know why! they are finally going to release GT:5  it can't be true! <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)<br>
<br>
ps first post</htmltext>
<tokenext>how can they keep shooting them selves in the foot ? ? ?
or do they not know that you can pick up an updated xbox ( refurb ) for under 175 and it wo n't die like the eariler ones so now all they have on xbox is the free service , and they want to take that away , dolts... . ooo i know why !
they are finally going to release GT : 5 it ca n't be true !
: - ) ps first post</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how can they keep shooting them selves in the foot???
or do they not know that you can pick up an updated xbox (refurb) for under 175 and it won't die like the eariler ones
so now all they have on xbox is the free service, and they want to take that away, dolts....


ooo i know why!
they are finally going to release GT:5  it can't be true!
:-)

ps first post</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020704</id>
	<title>Screw you, Sony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265287140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I ain't payin' for nothin'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ai n't payin ' for nothin'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I ain't payin' for nothin'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023436</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>Aphoxema</author>
	<datestamp>1265304360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money, I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars.  The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional, not essential for having a good gaming experience, and priced modestly.  Otherwise, I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum, just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.</p></div><p>Yeah, I <em>just bought</em> a PS3 last weekend and that purchase was based on PSN membership being without cost. I'm a little outraged at the thought that they're even considering charging for the service <em>now</em></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money , I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars .
The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional , not essential for having a good gaming experience , and priced modestly .
Otherwise , I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum , just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.Yeah , I just bought a PS3 last weekend and that purchase was based on PSN membership being without cost .
I 'm a little outraged at the thought that they 're even considering charging for the service now</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a gamer who has made purchasing decisions based on the fact that PSN is free and Xbox Live costs money, I believe this would be a big negative for Sony at a time when they are actually making headway in the console wars.
The only way I see this working out is if all the current services offered by PSN are free and these new features are optional, not essential for having a good gaming experience, and priced modestly.
Otherwise, I think this will amount to Sony shooting themselves in the foot when they have momentum, just like they did with the PS2 to PS3 transition.Yeah, I just bought a PS3 last weekend and that purchase was based on PSN membership being without cost.
I'm a little outraged at the thought that they're even considering charging for the service now
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023630</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1265305200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No.  That would be incredibly stupid reason to be so unbelievably stupid.<br> <br>If you want to show off that your service is free and your competitors isn't, you just state it.  Or you release some new gimmicky app that is free on the network that catches some headlines.  You do it in a positive way.<br> <br>Doing it this way, you make all the people who were potentially going to buy your console take pause.  They will want to see if you start charging or not and hold off on purchasing.<br> <br>The only reason you say this is that charging is going to be a reality.  You do it this way to ease it in to the consumer's minds instead of just dropping it one morning to everyone's angry surprise.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
That would be incredibly stupid reason to be so unbelievably stupid .
If you want to show off that your service is free and your competitors is n't , you just state it .
Or you release some new gimmicky app that is free on the network that catches some headlines .
You do it in a positive way .
Doing it this way , you make all the people who were potentially going to buy your console take pause .
They will want to see if you start charging or not and hold off on purchasing .
The only reason you say this is that charging is going to be a reality .
You do it this way to ease it in to the consumer 's minds instead of just dropping it one morning to everyone 's angry surprise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
That would be incredibly stupid reason to be so unbelievably stupid.
If you want to show off that your service is free and your competitors isn't, you just state it.
Or you release some new gimmicky app that is free on the network that catches some headlines.
You do it in a positive way.
Doing it this way, you make all the people who were potentially going to buy your console take pause.
They will want to see if you start charging or not and hold off on purchasing.
The only reason you say this is that charging is going to be a reality.
You do it this way to ease it in to the consumer's minds instead of just dropping it one morning to everyone's angry surprise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020404</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1265283060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd go further - such move would be so unbelievably stupid that I can't help but suspect there's something else at play here.</p><p>Spreading such rumors and causing a bit of an "outrage"...which has a "side effect" of spreading the message that Sony network service is free, while MS one is not?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd go further - such move would be so unbelievably stupid that I ca n't help but suspect there 's something else at play here.Spreading such rumors and causing a bit of an " outrage " ...which has a " side effect " of spreading the message that Sony network service is free , while MS one is not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd go further - such move would be so unbelievably stupid that I can't help but suspect there's something else at play here.Spreading such rumors and causing a bit of an "outrage"...which has a "side effect" of spreading the message that Sony network service is free, while MS one is not?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021102</id>
	<title>And why not Prepare the sheep</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265291820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would Sony make a public hint. The best way for the public to get used to the idea of charging, is to hint. This get's them a lot of free publicity and lets those that are against it vent. After things calm down some months later, then start the pay to play. There certainly will be a lot less yelling and screaming later simply because the idea has already been planted and people have vented. The public are already prepared for the inevitable thanks to the PR from the months previously.</p><p>The fact is that the game companies have always wanted to capitalize on every aspect when they rented you that purchase of your favorite game. All game companies are laying the groundwork by removing completely or now with BFC2 limiting dedicated servers. They're now making ports of games to the PC rather than creating games for the PC and porting them to consoles. Now the only games that exist are one made for the consoles. The market is now console driven with no alternative for customers to jump over to PC's for free online play.</p><p>Face the reality. Console players as a majority are sheep and always have been. Consoles have always attracted the lowest common denominator of those least computer literate. Console players accept that the game is always the same. They like the fact it never changes in how it is played and there is no added community content. They are used to having no control over their gaming fate. The console mob never had a sense of community, so never had any kind of common voice or creative element. This is exactly the type that will bend over and pay yet again.</p><p>Now that there is a captive audience that is used to the boring and mundane and are not aware of the history or an alternative, The companies have exactly what they have dreamed of. Online play is simply another avenue for generating huge revenue. As the CEO of Activision has stated clearly. His intention is to ring every last dollar out of the COD franchise and other IP. Why would Sony NOT do the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would Sony make a public hint .
The best way for the public to get used to the idea of charging , is to hint .
This get 's them a lot of free publicity and lets those that are against it vent .
After things calm down some months later , then start the pay to play .
There certainly will be a lot less yelling and screaming later simply because the idea has already been planted and people have vented .
The public are already prepared for the inevitable thanks to the PR from the months previously.The fact is that the game companies have always wanted to capitalize on every aspect when they rented you that purchase of your favorite game .
All game companies are laying the groundwork by removing completely or now with BFC2 limiting dedicated servers .
They 're now making ports of games to the PC rather than creating games for the PC and porting them to consoles .
Now the only games that exist are one made for the consoles .
The market is now console driven with no alternative for customers to jump over to PC 's for free online play.Face the reality .
Console players as a majority are sheep and always have been .
Consoles have always attracted the lowest common denominator of those least computer literate .
Console players accept that the game is always the same .
They like the fact it never changes in how it is played and there is no added community content .
They are used to having no control over their gaming fate .
The console mob never had a sense of community , so never had any kind of common voice or creative element .
This is exactly the type that will bend over and pay yet again.Now that there is a captive audience that is used to the boring and mundane and are not aware of the history or an alternative , The companies have exactly what they have dreamed of .
Online play is simply another avenue for generating huge revenue .
As the CEO of Activision has stated clearly .
His intention is to ring every last dollar out of the COD franchise and other IP .
Why would Sony NOT do the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would Sony make a public hint.
The best way for the public to get used to the idea of charging, is to hint.
This get's them a lot of free publicity and lets those that are against it vent.
After things calm down some months later, then start the pay to play.
There certainly will be a lot less yelling and screaming later simply because the idea has already been planted and people have vented.
The public are already prepared for the inevitable thanks to the PR from the months previously.The fact is that the game companies have always wanted to capitalize on every aspect when they rented you that purchase of your favorite game.
All game companies are laying the groundwork by removing completely or now with BFC2 limiting dedicated servers.
They're now making ports of games to the PC rather than creating games for the PC and porting them to consoles.
Now the only games that exist are one made for the consoles.
The market is now console driven with no alternative for customers to jump over to PC's for free online play.Face the reality.
Console players as a majority are sheep and always have been.
Consoles have always attracted the lowest common denominator of those least computer literate.
Console players accept that the game is always the same.
They like the fact it never changes in how it is played and there is no added community content.
They are used to having no control over their gaming fate.
The console mob never had a sense of community, so never had any kind of common voice or creative element.
This is exactly the type that will bend over and pay yet again.Now that there is a captive audience that is used to the boring and mundane and are not aware of the history or an alternative, The companies have exactly what they have dreamed of.
Online play is simply another avenue for generating huge revenue.
As the CEO of Activision has stated clearly.
His intention is to ring every last dollar out of the COD franchise and other IP.
Why would Sony NOT do the same.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31027284</id>
	<title>Sony Needs 2 Make Money? SOLVED</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265279280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd pay for PSN if it delivered pr0n.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd pay for PSN if it delivered pr0n .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd pay for PSN if it delivered pr0n.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023272</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>The Moof</author>
	<datestamp>1265303580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Last time <a href="http://kotaku.com/5429592/survey-sony-considering-premium-playstation-network-subscriptions" title="kotaku.com">this came up</a> [kotaku.com], Sony wasn't thinking about charging for what's already there (and they explicitly stated that), but for additional features. From my link (dated Dec 18, 2009):<p><div class="quote"><p>The subscription offering would provide new premium features you could choose to pay for and are in addition to the features currently available for free such as access to online multiplayer gaming (current features would remain free).</p></div><p>There's even a grid of their tier options and new features at that link.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Last time this came up [ kotaku.com ] , Sony was n't thinking about charging for what 's already there ( and they explicitly stated that ) , but for additional features .
From my link ( dated Dec 18 , 2009 ) : The subscription offering would provide new premium features you could choose to pay for and are in addition to the features currently available for free such as access to online multiplayer gaming ( current features would remain free ) .There 's even a grid of their tier options and new features at that link .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last time this came up [kotaku.com], Sony wasn't thinking about charging for what's already there (and they explicitly stated that), but for additional features.
From my link (dated Dec 18, 2009):The subscription offering would provide new premium features you could choose to pay for and are in addition to the features currently available for free such as access to online multiplayer gaming (current features would remain free).There's even a grid of their tier options and new features at that link.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020592</id>
	<title>Mmm Yummy FUD!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265285640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't all the info related to PSN going paid service been that the current service would remain free but all the new toys would be part of a pay service? I know everyone here like to hate on the PS3 but it's kind of pathetic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't all the info related to PSN going paid service been that the current service would remain free but all the new toys would be part of a pay service ?
I know everyone here like to hate on the PS3 but it 's kind of pathetic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't all the info related to PSN going paid service been that the current service would remain free but all the new toys would be part of a pay service?
I know everyone here like to hate on the PS3 but it's kind of pathetic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020152</id>
	<title>IT makes sense to align costs and revenues</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265279520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Running the PSN network must cost big money. It kinda makes sense to have subscriptions to cover those recurring costs, instead of counting on games revenues, which are one-off, to offset them.</p><p>I'm not saying it's nice or a good think for customers, just that it is logical. Maybe game prices can go down now that games don't have to pay for the network costs, and people can choose cheaper standalone play or pay for network play if the wish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Running the PSN network must cost big money .
It kinda makes sense to have subscriptions to cover those recurring costs , instead of counting on games revenues , which are one-off , to offset them.I 'm not saying it 's nice or a good think for customers , just that it is logical .
Maybe game prices can go down now that games do n't have to pay for the network costs , and people can choose cheaper standalone play or pay for network play if the wish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Running the PSN network must cost big money.
It kinda makes sense to have subscriptions to cover those recurring costs, instead of counting on games revenues, which are one-off, to offset them.I'm not saying it's nice or a good think for customers, just that it is logical.
Maybe game prices can go down now that games don't have to pay for the network costs, and people can choose cheaper standalone play or pay for network play if the wish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31025048</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>BlackBloq</author>
	<datestamp>1265311800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
   I like the fact that accounts can be canceled if they cheat and whatnot. Only kiddies need it for free. They just need a N word police now!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the fact that accounts can be canceled if they cheat and whatnot .
Only kiddies need it for free .
They just need a N word police now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
   I like the fact that accounts can be canceled if they cheat and whatnot.
Only kiddies need it for free.
They just need a N word police now!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022260</id>
	<title>A threat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265298720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they charge I will never buy another sony product in my entire life. That would be the absolute dirtiest trick in the book leading people on about a free service then changing it over. And advertising campaign designed to manipulate the consumer to buy the product, based on the fact that it's "does everything" is horrible. This bait and switch is the worst thing sony could do for the life of it's current console and any future consoles. Hope fully their retarded marketing team will walk up and smell the caramel macchiato or whatever the hell they drink.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they charge I will never buy another sony product in my entire life .
That would be the absolute dirtiest trick in the book leading people on about a free service then changing it over .
And advertising campaign designed to manipulate the consumer to buy the product , based on the fact that it 's " does everything " is horrible .
This bait and switch is the worst thing sony could do for the life of it 's current console and any future consoles .
Hope fully their retarded marketing team will walk up and smell the caramel macchiato or whatever the hell they drink .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they charge I will never buy another sony product in my entire life.
That would be the absolute dirtiest trick in the book leading people on about a free service then changing it over.
And advertising campaign designed to manipulate the consumer to buy the product, based on the fact that it's "does everything" is horrible.
This bait and switch is the worst thing sony could do for the life of it's current console and any future consoles.
Hope fully their retarded marketing team will walk up and smell the caramel macchiato or whatever the hell they drink.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022464</id>
	<title>Re:They'd be stupid not to</title>
	<author>socsoc</author>
	<datestamp>1265299800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except it doesn't cost everyone 40 quid. Even with the exchange rate, I can get one in the US for helluva lot cheaper than the equivalent of &pound;40.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except it does n't cost everyone 40 quid .
Even with the exchange rate , I can get one in the US for helluva lot cheaper than the equivalent of   40 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except it doesn't cost everyone 40 quid.
Even with the exchange rate, I can get one in the US for helluva lot cheaper than the equivalent of £40.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021542</id>
	<title>For "Premium" features, not the base stuff!!!!</title>
	<author>Dr. Manhattan</author>
	<datestamp>1265295060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The charges would be for <i>new</i> and <i>extra</i> features. <i>Not</i> what it already does.
<p>
<a href="http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/213014/premium-psn-service-planned-wont-affect-online-gaming/" title="gamepro.com">http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/213014/premium-psn-service-planned-wont-affect-online-gaming/</a> [gamepro.com]
</p><p>
"Sony is considering adding a subscription-based version of the PlayStation Network, but the company denies that it will charge customers to play games online."
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.next-gen.biz/news/sony-may-introduce-psn-subscription-model" title="next-gen.biz">http://www.next-gen.biz/news/sony-may-introduce-psn-subscription-model</a> [next-gen.biz]
</p><p>
"Especially in the online area, we are studying the possibility of introducing a subscription model, offering premium content and services, <i>in addition to</i> the current free services." (Emphasis added.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The charges would be for new and extra features .
Not what it already does .
http : //www.gamepro.com/article/news/213014/premium-psn-service-planned-wont-affect-online-gaming/ [ gamepro.com ] " Sony is considering adding a subscription-based version of the PlayStation Network , but the company denies that it will charge customers to play games online .
" http : //www.next-gen.biz/news/sony-may-introduce-psn-subscription-model [ next-gen.biz ] " Especially in the online area , we are studying the possibility of introducing a subscription model , offering premium content and services , in addition to the current free services .
" ( Emphasis added .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The charges would be for new and extra features.
Not what it already does.
http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/213014/premium-psn-service-planned-wont-affect-online-gaming/ [gamepro.com]

"Sony is considering adding a subscription-based version of the PlayStation Network, but the company denies that it will charge customers to play games online.
"

http://www.next-gen.biz/news/sony-may-introduce-psn-subscription-model [next-gen.biz]

"Especially in the online area, we are studying the possibility of introducing a subscription model, offering premium content and services, in addition to the current free services.
" (Emphasis added.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020876</id>
	<title>I wont buy a PS3 until PSN is subscription based.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265289480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my experience on friends consoles and the like i've noticed theres a significantly larger bunch of grifers, whiners and other anoying tards in abundance on the PSN purely because its free, having to put a few dollars a month to play on Live doesnt eliminate the problem but it really keeps a large percentage of the riff raff out of my games, and I'm all for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience on friends consoles and the like i 've noticed theres a significantly larger bunch of grifers , whiners and other anoying tards in abundance on the PSN purely because its free , having to put a few dollars a month to play on Live doesnt eliminate the problem but it really keeps a large percentage of the riff raff out of my games , and I 'm all for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience on friends consoles and the like i've noticed theres a significantly larger bunch of grifers, whiners and other anoying tards in abundance on the PSN purely because its free, having to put a few dollars a month to play on Live doesnt eliminate the problem but it really keeps a large percentage of the riff raff out of my games, and I'm all for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024084</id>
	<title>Re:Who's hosting the Game? Sony or Publisher/Dev?</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1265307540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If people start using the PS3 to download Blu-ray movies to watch them my head may explode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If people start using the PS3 to download Blu-ray movies to watch them my head may explode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If people start using the PS3 to download Blu-ray movies to watch them my head may explode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020154</id>
	<title>As Long as...</title>
	<author>TheQuantumShift</author>
	<datestamp>1265279520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Multiplayer is free, I couldn't care less. I don't want "Early access to content" or the like, I just want to fire up Street Fighter and get my ass handed to me. I don't want "Exclusive themes" or access to psone games I played a decade ago; I just want to be able to virtually shoot a guy in the face once in a while...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Multiplayer is free , I could n't care less .
I do n't want " Early access to content " or the like , I just want to fire up Street Fighter and get my ass handed to me .
I do n't want " Exclusive themes " or access to psone games I played a decade ago ; I just want to be able to virtually shoot a guy in the face once in a while.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multiplayer is free, I couldn't care less.
I don't want "Early access to content" or the like, I just want to fire up Street Fighter and get my ass handed to me.
I don't want "Exclusive themes" or access to psone games I played a decade ago; I just want to be able to virtually shoot a guy in the face once in a while...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31028542</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>mrchaotica</author>
	<datestamp>1265286180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The network is far from free to run, and is losing money. Unless they can figure out another way to monetize it (eg. advertising infrastructure, "subscription fee" from developers, whatever), I don't think anyone can realistically expect it to remain free forever.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sony didn't <em>have</em> to insist on chaining the PS3 to a proprietary gaming portal, you know. They <em>could</em> have just let it use the Internet like a normal PC!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The network is far from free to run , and is losing money .
Unless they can figure out another way to monetize it ( eg .
advertising infrastructure , " subscription fee " from developers , whatever ) , I do n't think anyone can realistically expect it to remain free forever.Sony did n't have to insist on chaining the PS3 to a proprietary gaming portal , you know .
They could have just let it use the Internet like a normal PC !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The network is far from free to run, and is losing money.
Unless they can figure out another way to monetize it (eg.
advertising infrastructure, "subscription fee" from developers, whatever), I don't think anyone can realistically expect it to remain free forever.Sony didn't have to insist on chaining the PS3 to a proprietary gaming portal, you know.
They could have just let it use the Internet like a normal PC!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022624</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>Chibinium</author>
	<datestamp>1265300580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right now, I talk to my friends while playing BlazBlue, and randomly buy DLCs for Valkyria and Assassin's Creed II. Why ruin a good relationship, Sony?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right now , I talk to my friends while playing BlazBlue , and randomly buy DLCs for Valkyria and Assassin 's Creed II .
Why ruin a good relationship , Sony ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right now, I talk to my friends while playing BlazBlue, and randomly buy DLCs for Valkyria and Assassin's Creed II.
Why ruin a good relationship, Sony?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024680</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>gollito</author>
	<datestamp>1265310120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The way I understand it is they will offer a Premium PSN alongside the free PSN.
<p>
I would love to have the option for a pay-for network that gives me reliable connections, etc.  At least you would have a choice to pay for playing online.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The way I understand it is they will offer a Premium PSN alongside the free PSN .
I would love to have the option for a pay-for network that gives me reliable connections , etc .
At least you would have a choice to pay for playing online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way I understand it is they will offer a Premium PSN alongside the free PSN.
I would love to have the option for a pay-for network that gives me reliable connections, etc.
At least you would have a choice to pay for playing online.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020832</id>
	<title>Re:They'd be stupid not to</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265289120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not sure how much money MS make on live, gold subscriptions cost less than the price of a single new game and are only payable once per year per customer (not even counting all the customers who never use live, I'm not sure what the online:offline ratio is, this may or may not be a significant figure). I'd be surprised if they had much money left over after providing the service, selling content is where the big money is in this for them, and they can do that whether the service is free or paid. I think subscriptions for Live just help them provide a good service, which probably indirectly helps sales, this move is almost certainly going to be about not <i>losing</i> money rather than <i>making</i> money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure how much money MS make on live , gold subscriptions cost less than the price of a single new game and are only payable once per year per customer ( not even counting all the customers who never use live , I 'm not sure what the online : offline ratio is , this may or may not be a significant figure ) .
I 'd be surprised if they had much money left over after providing the service , selling content is where the big money is in this for them , and they can do that whether the service is free or paid .
I think subscriptions for Live just help them provide a good service , which probably indirectly helps sales , this move is almost certainly going to be about not losing money rather than making money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure how much money MS make on live, gold subscriptions cost less than the price of a single new game and are only payable once per year per customer (not even counting all the customers who never use live, I'm not sure what the online:offline ratio is, this may or may not be a significant figure).
I'd be surprised if they had much money left over after providing the service, selling content is where the big money is in this for them, and they can do that whether the service is free or paid.
I think subscriptions for Live just help them provide a good service, which probably indirectly helps sales, this move is almost certainly going to be about not losing money rather than making money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020250</id>
	<title>Who's hosting the Game? Sony or Publisher/Dev?</title>
	<author>Amigori</author>
	<datestamp>1265281020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here's how I see it:
<ul> <li> <b>Playstation Home?</b>  Charge for it.  I used it a few times when I first signed up, but it doesn't really do anything.  I'm sure the costs outweigh the virtual trinkets and mini games they sell.</li><li> <b>Playstation Store?</b>  Access needs to be free.  Any store costs should be included in the price of the game/movie/tv show/theme pack/etc.  Plus, on the movies side, it costs enough already to rent or buy movies.</li><li> <b>Multiplayer Games?</b>  Who is hosting the server?  EA, R*, etc?  The hosting cost should be figured into the price of the game.  Or they (Pub/Dev) charge a separate subscription fee.  Sony hosting the server?  Charge for it, XBox Live style.  </li></ul><p>
I have no issue with paying for PSN as long as the price is reasonable.  I paid for XBox Live for years, before I got rid of my XBox. $60/yr is perfect, $5/mo.  That's $5m per month with 1m users (random user number).  I couldn't see servers, bandwidth, datacenter, licensing, and power costs being beyond $60m per year, but then again, IANA MMO SysAd.  Any more than $60, and it will fail.  <i>Maybe</i> they could get away with a $100/yr price if they included a full Skype client, with video...maybe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's how I see it : Playstation Home ?
Charge for it .
I used it a few times when I first signed up , but it does n't really do anything .
I 'm sure the costs outweigh the virtual trinkets and mini games they sell .
Playstation Store ?
Access needs to be free .
Any store costs should be included in the price of the game/movie/tv show/theme pack/etc .
Plus , on the movies side , it costs enough already to rent or buy movies .
Multiplayer Games ?
Who is hosting the server ?
EA , R * , etc ?
The hosting cost should be figured into the price of the game .
Or they ( Pub/Dev ) charge a separate subscription fee .
Sony hosting the server ?
Charge for it , XBox Live style .
I have no issue with paying for PSN as long as the price is reasonable .
I paid for XBox Live for years , before I got rid of my XBox .
$ 60/yr is perfect , $ 5/mo .
That 's $ 5m per month with 1m users ( random user number ) .
I could n't see servers , bandwidth , datacenter , licensing , and power costs being beyond $ 60m per year , but then again , IANA MMO SysAd .
Any more than $ 60 , and it will fail .
Maybe they could get away with a $ 100/yr price if they included a full Skype client , with video...maybe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's how I see it:
  Playstation Home?
Charge for it.
I used it a few times when I first signed up, but it doesn't really do anything.
I'm sure the costs outweigh the virtual trinkets and mini games they sell.
Playstation Store?
Access needs to be free.
Any store costs should be included in the price of the game/movie/tv show/theme pack/etc.
Plus, on the movies side, it costs enough already to rent or buy movies.
Multiplayer Games?
Who is hosting the server?
EA, R*, etc?
The hosting cost should be figured into the price of the game.
Or they (Pub/Dev) charge a separate subscription fee.
Sony hosting the server?
Charge for it, XBox Live style.
I have no issue with paying for PSN as long as the price is reasonable.
I paid for XBox Live for years, before I got rid of my XBox.
$60/yr is perfect, $5/mo.
That's $5m per month with 1m users (random user number).
I couldn't see servers, bandwidth, datacenter, licensing, and power costs being beyond $60m per year, but then again, IANA MMO SysAd.
Any more than $60, and it will fail.
Maybe they could get away with a $100/yr price if they included a full Skype client, with video...maybe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020304</id>
	<title>The effect of Paying for PSN?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265281740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I can imagine my neighbors would hear me shouting "Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii" as my PS3 sailed past their windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I can imagine my neighbors would hear me shouting " Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii " as my PS3 sailed past their windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I can imagine my neighbors would hear me shouting "Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii" as my PS3 sailed past their windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020468</id>
	<title>In 50 years from now</title>
	<author>PePe242</author>
	<datestamp>1265283960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Someone will come up with an incredible concept of plug&amp;play.

Not the standard plug&amp;login&amp;pay&amp;update&amp;playEventuallyIfyouHaveTheCorrectDLC</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone will come up with an incredible concept of plug&amp;play .
Not the standard plug&amp;login&amp;pay&amp;update&amp;playEventuallyIfyouHaveTheCorrectDLC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone will come up with an incredible concept of plug&amp;play.
Not the standard plug&amp;login&amp;pay&amp;update&amp;playEventuallyIfyouHaveTheCorrectDLC</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31037024</id>
	<title>Bad idea.</title>
	<author>Weemz</author>
	<datestamp>1265397240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm a heavy gamer and for the last couple years have played nothing but xbox dishing out my fair amount of coin for a live membership. I recently got a PS3 and one of it's best features is that I DON"T PAY for online. This was such a nice change from Microsoft's policy and if they end up changing this they are going to loose a lot of gamers to other consoles.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a heavy gamer and for the last couple years have played nothing but xbox dishing out my fair amount of coin for a live membership .
I recently got a PS3 and one of it 's best features is that I DON " T PAY for online .
This was such a nice change from Microsoft 's policy and if they end up changing this they are going to loose a lot of gamers to other consoles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a heavy gamer and for the last couple years have played nothing but xbox dishing out my fair amount of coin for a live membership.
I recently got a PS3 and one of it's best features is that I DON"T PAY for online.
This was such a nice change from Microsoft's policy and if they end up changing this they are going to loose a lot of gamers to other consoles.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024056</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1265307360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Something like a Gold and Silver Subscriptions?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something like a Gold and Silver Subscriptions ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something like a Gold and Silver Subscriptions?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020118</id>
	<title>They'd be stupid not to</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265278860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From a purely business perspective, MS must be making a killing on live. Sony gaming needs to make some money somehow: they're still making loss on every PS3 sold, their investment in exclusive games has produced some good games but they've all been fairly mediocre sellers, the PSPgo is a massive flop and PSN must be eating some money.</p><p>Last I read, Sony had lost more on the PS3 than the profit from PS1 and PS2 combined. That's seriously bad business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From a purely business perspective , MS must be making a killing on live .
Sony gaming needs to make some money somehow : they 're still making loss on every PS3 sold , their investment in exclusive games has produced some good games but they 've all been fairly mediocre sellers , the PSPgo is a massive flop and PSN must be eating some money.Last I read , Sony had lost more on the PS3 than the profit from PS1 and PS2 combined .
That 's seriously bad business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a purely business perspective, MS must be making a killing on live.
Sony gaming needs to make some money somehow: they're still making loss on every PS3 sold, their investment in exclusive games has produced some good games but they've all been fairly mediocre sellers, the PSPgo is a massive flop and PSN must be eating some money.Last I read, Sony had lost more on the PS3 than the profit from PS1 and PS2 combined.
That's seriously bad business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020262</id>
	<title>Re:IT makes sense to align costs and revenues</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265281380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>the PSN already charges for content. It charges the PUBLISHER. Companies have to pay 16cents a gigabyte of content downloaded (demos included).</htmltext>
<tokenext>the PSN already charges for content .
It charges the PUBLISHER .
Companies have to pay 16cents a gigabyte of content downloaded ( demos included ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the PSN already charges for content.
It charges the PUBLISHER.
Companies have to pay 16cents a gigabyte of content downloaded (demos included).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022832</id>
	<title>Re:Wouldn't be worth it.</title>
	<author>socsoc</author>
	<datestamp>1265301540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Err, nobody played Calling All Cars multiplayer because it wasn't fun and took less than 30 min in single player to complete.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Err , nobody played Calling All Cars multiplayer because it was n't fun and took less than 30 min in single player to complete .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Err, nobody played Calling All Cars multiplayer because it wasn't fun and took less than 30 min in single player to complete.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020624</id>
	<title>PREMIUM ONLY!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265286060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This should be for PREMIUM only, NOT access to the service in general.<br>If they make it for accessing PSN and networked games, they will kill PSN.<br>Just because a bunch of idiots actually buy stuff on PS Home, doesn't mean to say that everyone else on PSN will subscribe to a monthly fee.</p><p>God damn, if they actually go through with this, they need to fire every single person who agreed with the decision.<br>Free PSN is one of the biggest attractions to PS3 for most people.<br>If they made it paid-for, next to Live it would pretty much be a polished turd.</p><p>This is yet another stupid decision of theirs coming back to bite them in the ass.<br>"Fully free" services are always a bad idea.  Free access to updates and online play, and premium services for everything else, absolutely no other way.<br>Anything else is going to screw you over at some point, whether it is less sales due to a fully paid-for service, or losing money to a fully free service.<br>Microsoft actually got it right for once.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This should be for PREMIUM only , NOT access to the service in general.If they make it for accessing PSN and networked games , they will kill PSN.Just because a bunch of idiots actually buy stuff on PS Home , does n't mean to say that everyone else on PSN will subscribe to a monthly fee.God damn , if they actually go through with this , they need to fire every single person who agreed with the decision.Free PSN is one of the biggest attractions to PS3 for most people.If they made it paid-for , next to Live it would pretty much be a polished turd.This is yet another stupid decision of theirs coming back to bite them in the ass .
" Fully free " services are always a bad idea .
Free access to updates and online play , and premium services for everything else , absolutely no other way.Anything else is going to screw you over at some point , whether it is less sales due to a fully paid-for service , or losing money to a fully free service.Microsoft actually got it right for once .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This should be for PREMIUM only, NOT access to the service in general.If they make it for accessing PSN and networked games, they will kill PSN.Just because a bunch of idiots actually buy stuff on PS Home, doesn't mean to say that everyone else on PSN will subscribe to a monthly fee.God damn, if they actually go through with this, they need to fire every single person who agreed with the decision.Free PSN is one of the biggest attractions to PS3 for most people.If they made it paid-for, next to Live it would pretty much be a polished turd.This is yet another stupid decision of theirs coming back to bite them in the ass.
"Fully free" services are always a bad idea.
Free access to updates and online play, and premium services for everything else, absolutely no other way.Anything else is going to screw you over at some point, whether it is less sales due to a fully paid-for service, or losing money to a fully free service.Microsoft actually got it right for once.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020522</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265284560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is, whilst yes, the PS3 is making headway, it's coming at too big a cost to them.</p><p>It's not clear that the PS3 is even making a profit on the hardware itself yet, certainly it wasn't even as recently as 6 months back. The PSN costs a lot to run, so they're effectively subsidising that too. This of course becomes more of a big deal when they have to fund additional features to try and keep up with XBox live but do not receive income for it like Microsoft does with Live.</p><p>So yeah they certainly have momentum now, but it's costing them too much to be sustainable, so they have a choice of breaking even and pissing people off, or continuing to haemorrhage money in the hope that some day they will indeed be able to make it all back.</p><p>Microsoft made the same mistake with the original XBox in that it costs them a fortune, but they learnt from it, sure they still lost money on the hardware for a while, but not so much that they couldn't get it profitable within a few years. They also realised that XBox live is a good way to help fill that gap, in that by charging for it, they're both avoiding losing money there, and making up for some of the money lost on the hardware as well as being able to use the money to fund continued development.</p><p>Of course, I agree it's nice to have things for free, but sometimes that just isn't practical, at least in the long run. I'd wager this is why Nintendo didn't really bother with a decent online experience at all- because it would be just an additional cost for them that detracts from their profit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is , whilst yes , the PS3 is making headway , it 's coming at too big a cost to them.It 's not clear that the PS3 is even making a profit on the hardware itself yet , certainly it was n't even as recently as 6 months back .
The PSN costs a lot to run , so they 're effectively subsidising that too .
This of course becomes more of a big deal when they have to fund additional features to try and keep up with XBox live but do not receive income for it like Microsoft does with Live.So yeah they certainly have momentum now , but it 's costing them too much to be sustainable , so they have a choice of breaking even and pissing people off , or continuing to haemorrhage money in the hope that some day they will indeed be able to make it all back.Microsoft made the same mistake with the original XBox in that it costs them a fortune , but they learnt from it , sure they still lost money on the hardware for a while , but not so much that they could n't get it profitable within a few years .
They also realised that XBox live is a good way to help fill that gap , in that by charging for it , they 're both avoiding losing money there , and making up for some of the money lost on the hardware as well as being able to use the money to fund continued development.Of course , I agree it 's nice to have things for free , but sometimes that just is n't practical , at least in the long run .
I 'd wager this is why Nintendo did n't really bother with a decent online experience at all- because it would be just an additional cost for them that detracts from their profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is, whilst yes, the PS3 is making headway, it's coming at too big a cost to them.It's not clear that the PS3 is even making a profit on the hardware itself yet, certainly it wasn't even as recently as 6 months back.
The PSN costs a lot to run, so they're effectively subsidising that too.
This of course becomes more of a big deal when they have to fund additional features to try and keep up with XBox live but do not receive income for it like Microsoft does with Live.So yeah they certainly have momentum now, but it's costing them too much to be sustainable, so they have a choice of breaking even and pissing people off, or continuing to haemorrhage money in the hope that some day they will indeed be able to make it all back.Microsoft made the same mistake with the original XBox in that it costs them a fortune, but they learnt from it, sure they still lost money on the hardware for a while, but not so much that they couldn't get it profitable within a few years.
They also realised that XBox live is a good way to help fill that gap, in that by charging for it, they're both avoiding losing money there, and making up for some of the money lost on the hardware as well as being able to use the money to fund continued development.Of course, I agree it's nice to have things for free, but sometimes that just isn't practical, at least in the long run.
I'd wager this is why Nintendo didn't really bother with a decent online experience at all- because it would be just an additional cost for them that detracts from their profit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020482</id>
	<title>I forsee a meeting of products, here</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1265284140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Specifically footwear and small-arms ammunition, the latter delivered at velocity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Specifically footwear and small-arms ammunition , the latter delivered at velocity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Specifically footwear and small-arms ammunition, the latter delivered at velocity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023212</id>
	<title>Re:IT makes sense to align costs and revenues</title>
	<author>ArundelCastle</author>
	<datestamp>1265303280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe game prices can go down now that games don't have to pay for the network costs, and people can choose...</p></div><p>This is the new economy. Retail prices don't go down anymore, they just take longer to increase when the manufacturer cuts costs.<br>When was the last time you bought a candy bar?  Notice they're getting lighter?<br>Lowering a MSRP sends a bad message, that's what Wal-mart (and in our gaming context, Steam) is for.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe game prices can go down now that games do n't have to pay for the network costs , and people can choose...This is the new economy .
Retail prices do n't go down anymore , they just take longer to increase when the manufacturer cuts costs.When was the last time you bought a candy bar ?
Notice they 're getting lighter ? Lowering a MSRP sends a bad message , that 's what Wal-mart ( and in our gaming context , Steam ) is for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe game prices can go down now that games don't have to pay for the network costs, and people can choose...This is the new economy.
Retail prices don't go down anymore, they just take longer to increase when the manufacturer cuts costs.When was the last time you bought a candy bar?
Notice they're getting lighter?Lowering a MSRP sends a bad message, that's what Wal-mart (and in our gaming context, Steam) is for.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023348</id>
	<title>Re:They'd be stupid not to</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265303880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Last stats they released said around 25 million Gold subscribers, at &pound;40 a year, that's &pound;1 billion (around $1.5 billion US) income per year from Live subscriptions.</p></div><p>Actually, a one year Live subscription in the U.S. is around $45-50 (amazon actually has it for $40). This equates to something closer to &pound;28.50 for you.</p><p>Correctly assuming that the majority of Live subscribers are located in the U.S. the total income from Live is closer to &pound;712,500,000 or $1.25 Billion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Last stats they released said around 25 million Gold subscribers , at   40 a year , that 's   1 billion ( around $ 1.5 billion US ) income per year from Live subscriptions.Actually , a one year Live subscription in the U.S. is around $ 45-50 ( amazon actually has it for $ 40 ) .
This equates to something closer to   28.50 for you.Correctly assuming that the majority of Live subscribers are located in the U.S. the total income from Live is closer to   712,500,000 or $ 1.25 Billion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last stats they released said around 25 million Gold subscribers, at £40 a year, that's £1 billion (around $1.5 billion US) income per year from Live subscriptions.Actually, a one year Live subscription in the U.S. is around $45-50 (amazon actually has it for $40).
This equates to something closer to £28.50 for you.Correctly assuming that the majority of Live subscribers are located in the U.S. the total income from Live is closer to £712,500,000 or $1.25 Billion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196</id>
	<title>Wouldn't be worth it.</title>
	<author>bhunachchicken</author>
	<datestamp>1265280060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the major advantages that PSN has over Xbox is the fact that the online play is free.</p><p>I actually don't play games online a lot, but it's nice that it's there, so that I can dip in and out of it. It came in VERY handy during Demon's Souls.</p><p>What would be better is if the online play remained free and Sony offered a subscription model that allowed players access to game and movie rentals.</p><p>What if, for &pound;5 per month, you could rent one PSN game and a couple of movies? Once you'd finished playing the game, you could relinquish your "lease" on it and download another. Something like this would likely have saved the Calling All Cars servers, which were shut down because no one was playing the game!</p><p>There are lots of games on PSN that I would play, but given that they cost about &pound;10, are non-refundable and may actually turn out to be crap, I can't justify the risk.</p><p>The movie rental feature would be a great incentive, too. PSN offers a hell of a lot of movies to rent, but given that you can actually BUY a physical copy for less (Aliens: &pound;3 on DVD; &pound;6.99!!!! on PSN), it's not worth it.</p><p>Also, PSN needs to make renting movies the priority over selling-to-own. There are many films on there that I would much prefer to rent than buy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the major advantages that PSN has over Xbox is the fact that the online play is free.I actually do n't play games online a lot , but it 's nice that it 's there , so that I can dip in and out of it .
It came in VERY handy during Demon 's Souls.What would be better is if the online play remained free and Sony offered a subscription model that allowed players access to game and movie rentals.What if , for   5 per month , you could rent one PSN game and a couple of movies ?
Once you 'd finished playing the game , you could relinquish your " lease " on it and download another .
Something like this would likely have saved the Calling All Cars servers , which were shut down because no one was playing the game ! There are lots of games on PSN that I would play , but given that they cost about   10 , are non-refundable and may actually turn out to be crap , I ca n't justify the risk.The movie rental feature would be a great incentive , too .
PSN offers a hell of a lot of movies to rent , but given that you can actually BUY a physical copy for less ( Aliens :   3 on DVD ;   6.99 ! ! ! !
on PSN ) , it 's not worth it.Also , PSN needs to make renting movies the priority over selling-to-own .
There are many films on there that I would much prefer to rent than buy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the major advantages that PSN has over Xbox is the fact that the online play is free.I actually don't play games online a lot, but it's nice that it's there, so that I can dip in and out of it.
It came in VERY handy during Demon's Souls.What would be better is if the online play remained free and Sony offered a subscription model that allowed players access to game and movie rentals.What if, for £5 per month, you could rent one PSN game and a couple of movies?
Once you'd finished playing the game, you could relinquish your "lease" on it and download another.
Something like this would likely have saved the Calling All Cars servers, which were shut down because no one was playing the game!There are lots of games on PSN that I would play, but given that they cost about £10, are non-refundable and may actually turn out to be crap, I can't justify the risk.The movie rental feature would be a great incentive, too.
PSN offers a hell of a lot of movies to rent, but given that you can actually BUY a physical copy for less (Aliens: £3 on DVD; £6.99!!!!
on PSN), it's not worth it.Also, PSN needs to make renting movies the priority over selling-to-own.
There are many films on there that I would much prefer to rent than buy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022068</id>
	<title>Re:When Hell freezes over...</title>
	<author>ViViDboarder</author>
	<datestamp>1265297820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think this would be a really BAD way to let people know it's free.<br> <br>
If I was just about to buy a new system and heard this I'd be like, "PS3 is free for a while now but they are going to start charging soon!  Screw that."</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this would be a really BAD way to let people know it 's free .
If I was just about to buy a new system and heard this I 'd be like , " PS3 is free for a while now but they are going to start charging soon !
Screw that .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this would be a really BAD way to let people know it's free.
If I was just about to buy a new system and heard this I'd be like, "PS3 is free for a while now but they are going to start charging soon!
Screw that.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020148</id>
	<title>what could possibly go wrong?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265279400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good luck with that Sony, Here's a bigger gun aim it at your foot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck with that Sony , Here 's a bigger gun aim it at your foot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck with that Sony, Here's a bigger gun aim it at your foot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31025048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31026396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31030566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31048122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31028542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_04_0727249_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020342
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024662
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021248
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020900
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31025048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31048122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020522
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022044
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31028542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020404
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023630
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022068
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022914
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020130
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31030566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020262
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022258
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31027284
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020832
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021632
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31023348
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022464
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31026396
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022418
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020484
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020722
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31021174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31024084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020510
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_04_0727249.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31020416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_04_0727249.31022932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
