<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_23_0650225</id>
	<title>An Early Look At <em>Halo: Reach</em></title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1266914820000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>KatanAlpha writes <i>"Based on all the information coming out about <em>Halo: Reach</em>, it seems that Bungie's basic philosophy has been: 'The sequels to the first <em>Halo</em> sucked. Let's fix that.' We've already seen a little bit of this with <em>Halo: ODST</em>, wherein Bungie <a href="http://www.allegedly-speaking.com/previews/reach\_preview.htm">returned to some of the core elements of <em>Halo</em> gameplay</a> and ditched many of the changes introduced in <em>Halo 2</em> and <em>3</em>. <em>Reach</em> seems to continue this idea while trying to invigorate the franchise by introducing greatly improved graphics and additional gameplay mechanics."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>KatanAlpha writes " Based on all the information coming out about Halo : Reach , it seems that Bungie 's basic philosophy has been : 'The sequels to the first Halo sucked .
Let 's fix that .
' We 've already seen a little bit of this with Halo : ODST , wherein Bungie returned to some of the core elements of Halo gameplay and ditched many of the changes introduced in Halo 2 and 3 .
Reach seems to continue this idea while trying to invigorate the franchise by introducing greatly improved graphics and additional gameplay mechanics .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KatanAlpha writes "Based on all the information coming out about Halo: Reach, it seems that Bungie's basic philosophy has been: 'The sequels to the first Halo sucked.
Let's fix that.
' We've already seen a little bit of this with Halo: ODST, wherein Bungie returned to some of the core elements of Halo gameplay and ditched many of the changes introduced in Halo 2 and 3.
Reach seems to continue this idea while trying to invigorate the franchise by introducing greatly improved graphics and additional gameplay mechanics.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242754</id>
	<title>Meh!</title>
	<author>ThirdPrize</author>
	<datestamp>1266927840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since I gave up my xbox live gold account I haven't looked back.  As a result I don't think I will be bothering with Reach.  I played the Halo 3 campaign and that sucked.  Move to next room, shoot some bad guys , get some ammo.  Rince and repeat.  The story didn't make much sense and Master Chief is a fairly unlikable hero.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since I gave up my xbox live gold account I have n't looked back .
As a result I do n't think I will be bothering with Reach .
I played the Halo 3 campaign and that sucked .
Move to next room , shoot some bad guys , get some ammo .
Rince and repeat .
The story did n't make much sense and Master Chief is a fairly unlikable hero .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since I gave up my xbox live gold account I haven't looked back.
As a result I don't think I will be bothering with Reach.
I played the Halo 3 campaign and that sucked.
Move to next room, shoot some bad guys , get some ammo.
Rince and repeat.
The story didn't make much sense and Master Chief is a fairly unlikable hero.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242566</id>
	<title>Re:The original Halo also sucked</title>
	<author>am 2k</author>
	<datestamp>1266925320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot about the part where you had to go through a whole level a second time, just backwards...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot about the part where you had to go through a whole level a second time , just backwards.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot about the part where you had to go through a whole level a second time, just backwards...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31245850</id>
	<title>Re:The sequels sucked?</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1266947340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Halo 2 is one of my favorite games ever.</p><p>True, I didn't care much for Halo 3... but I think it's a long stretch to say Halo 2 sucked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Halo 2 is one of my favorite games ever.True , I did n't care much for Halo 3... but I think it 's a long stretch to say Halo 2 sucked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Halo 2 is one of my favorite games ever.True, I didn't care much for Halo 3... but I think it's a long stretch to say Halo 2 sucked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142</id>
	<title>The sequels sucked?</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1266919380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think they really did.  They just didn't do anything vastly different than the first game.  Slight bump in graphics, tweaking mechanics a bit... disappointing, I suppose, if you are expecting massive improvements between games.  Maybe more disappointing if multiplayer is your focus, instead of the story and campaign.<br> <br>

Sometimes I think the industry is to quick to rebuild a game from scratch for the sequel, when the players really would be happy with just more story, more levels, more characters.  We didn't need the special effects in the Empire Strikes Back to be better than Star Wars; we just wanted to see what would happen next.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think they really did .
They just did n't do anything vastly different than the first game .
Slight bump in graphics , tweaking mechanics a bit... disappointing , I suppose , if you are expecting massive improvements between games .
Maybe more disappointing if multiplayer is your focus , instead of the story and campaign .
Sometimes I think the industry is to quick to rebuild a game from scratch for the sequel , when the players really would be happy with just more story , more levels , more characters .
We did n't need the special effects in the Empire Strikes Back to be better than Star Wars ; we just wanted to see what would happen next .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think they really did.
They just didn't do anything vastly different than the first game.
Slight bump in graphics, tweaking mechanics a bit... disappointing, I suppose, if you are expecting massive improvements between games.
Maybe more disappointing if multiplayer is your focus, instead of the story and campaign.
Sometimes I think the industry is to quick to rebuild a game from scratch for the sequel, when the players really would be happy with just more story, more levels, more characters.
We didn't need the special effects in the Empire Strikes Back to be better than Star Wars; we just wanted to see what would happen next.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243928</id>
	<title>Re:"Story" People vs. Game-Playing People</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266937800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I admit to being amused -- in the nicest, gentlest, least-condescending way possible -- by the "video game story people."</p></div><p>Most game stories are pretty formulaic, but some games have extremely engrossing plots to them. Admittedly, these are far and few between. Halo was not one of them, but the original Marathon from Bungie was. The exchanges between the on-board AI's as well as the archives you could access at random terminals made for a very deep storyline. The other game that had an excellent story was Deus Ex. It successfully married almost every conspiracy out there from the Illuminati, to the Knights Templar, Majestic 12 and Area 51. The game had quite a few plot twists, partly that were dependent on what actions you took, and took you to a number of locations, from New York to Paris to Hong Kong. There were times you could chose to kill someone (like agents Navarre or Gunther), and that would change the game play experience in the future, since certain weapons and upgrades might not be available to you. Much like Marathon, Deus Ex used things like books or stray notes to give you clues as to the motivation of people in the game.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I admit to being amused -- in the nicest , gentlest , least-condescending way possible -- by the " video game story people .
" Most game stories are pretty formulaic , but some games have extremely engrossing plots to them .
Admittedly , these are far and few between .
Halo was not one of them , but the original Marathon from Bungie was .
The exchanges between the on-board AI 's as well as the archives you could access at random terminals made for a very deep storyline .
The other game that had an excellent story was Deus Ex .
It successfully married almost every conspiracy out there from the Illuminati , to the Knights Templar , Majestic 12 and Area 51 .
The game had quite a few plot twists , partly that were dependent on what actions you took , and took you to a number of locations , from New York to Paris to Hong Kong .
There were times you could chose to kill someone ( like agents Navarre or Gunther ) , and that would change the game play experience in the future , since certain weapons and upgrades might not be available to you .
Much like Marathon , Deus Ex used things like books or stray notes to give you clues as to the motivation of people in the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I admit to being amused -- in the nicest, gentlest, least-condescending way possible -- by the "video game story people.
"Most game stories are pretty formulaic, but some games have extremely engrossing plots to them.
Admittedly, these are far and few between.
Halo was not one of them, but the original Marathon from Bungie was.
The exchanges between the on-board AI's as well as the archives you could access at random terminals made for a very deep storyline.
The other game that had an excellent story was Deus Ex.
It successfully married almost every conspiracy out there from the Illuminati, to the Knights Templar, Majestic 12 and Area 51.
The game had quite a few plot twists, partly that were dependent on what actions you took, and took you to a number of locations, from New York to Paris to Hong Kong.
There were times you could chose to kill someone (like agents Navarre or Gunther), and that would change the game play experience in the future, since certain weapons and upgrades might not be available to you.
Much like Marathon, Deus Ex used things like books or stray notes to give you clues as to the motivation of people in the game.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31249230</id>
	<title>What do you mean by "sucked" ?</title>
	<author>Majinace</author>
	<datestamp>1266958500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Number of copies sold for...
Halo 1: 5 million
Halo 2: 8 million
Halo 3: 8.1 million
Halo 3 ODST: 3 million

Looking at Halo sales, I can't see how you can assume that Bungie thinks Halo 2 and 3 'sucked' in comparison to the first one. I think you could make a better argument that they broke things by returning to the 'core elements'</htmltext>
<tokenext>Number of copies sold for.. . Halo 1 : 5 million Halo 2 : 8 million Halo 3 : 8.1 million Halo 3 ODST : 3 million Looking at Halo sales , I ca n't see how you can assume that Bungie thinks Halo 2 and 3 'sucked ' in comparison to the first one .
I think you could make a better argument that they broke things by returning to the 'core elements'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Number of copies sold for...
Halo 1: 5 million
Halo 2: 8 million
Halo 3: 8.1 million
Halo 3 ODST: 3 million

Looking at Halo sales, I can't see how you can assume that Bungie thinks Halo 2 and 3 'sucked' in comparison to the first one.
I think you could make a better argument that they broke things by returning to the 'core elements'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31254760</id>
	<title>...and KatanAlpha speaks for whom?</title>
	<author>nataflux</author>
	<datestamp>1266940620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you are implying that the Halo series "sucked", then you probably weren't around to witness the series unfold, or are just suffering from the "its popular, therefore it sucks" syndrome, or a little fanboyism, or all of the above.

While Halo 2 may have been the blatant sell out that it was, it was still enjoyable and it pioneered the matchmaking concept as well as provide a platform for competitive gaming to thrive on the console market.

The Halo series is a landmark in the first person genre, just the same as say Doom, Quake, and the Half Life series, of course its quite possible, probably guaranteed that without Microsoft's backing, Halo wouldn't have done as half as well as it did in sales.

The Halo canon, while it may be a cookie cutter epic, is quite easy to comprehend and paints a fairly enriching struggle between humanity and the covenant.

Halo is an advanced form of the "shooter-in-a-tube", it is an improved version of marathon, just as marathon is an improved version of Pathways into Darkness. Implying that it was meant to be more complicated than that only reveals that you weren't there to watch it grow, similar how say an adolescent child today who grew up playing Gears of War will find the first Halo game to be simple or "crappy".</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are implying that the Halo series " sucked " , then you probably were n't around to witness the series unfold , or are just suffering from the " its popular , therefore it sucks " syndrome , or a little fanboyism , or all of the above .
While Halo 2 may have been the blatant sell out that it was , it was still enjoyable and it pioneered the matchmaking concept as well as provide a platform for competitive gaming to thrive on the console market .
The Halo series is a landmark in the first person genre , just the same as say Doom , Quake , and the Half Life series , of course its quite possible , probably guaranteed that without Microsoft 's backing , Halo would n't have done as half as well as it did in sales .
The Halo canon , while it may be a cookie cutter epic , is quite easy to comprehend and paints a fairly enriching struggle between humanity and the covenant .
Halo is an advanced form of the " shooter-in-a-tube " , it is an improved version of marathon , just as marathon is an improved version of Pathways into Darkness .
Implying that it was meant to be more complicated than that only reveals that you were n't there to watch it grow , similar how say an adolescent child today who grew up playing Gears of War will find the first Halo game to be simple or " crappy " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are implying that the Halo series "sucked", then you probably weren't around to witness the series unfold, or are just suffering from the "its popular, therefore it sucks" syndrome, or a little fanboyism, or all of the above.
While Halo 2 may have been the blatant sell out that it was, it was still enjoyable and it pioneered the matchmaking concept as well as provide a platform for competitive gaming to thrive on the console market.
The Halo series is a landmark in the first person genre, just the same as say Doom, Quake, and the Half Life series, of course its quite possible, probably guaranteed that without Microsoft's backing, Halo wouldn't have done as half as well as it did in sales.
The Halo canon, while it may be a cookie cutter epic, is quite easy to comprehend and paints a fairly enriching struggle between humanity and the covenant.
Halo is an advanced form of the "shooter-in-a-tube", it is an improved version of marathon, just as marathon is an improved version of Pathways into Darkness.
Implying that it was meant to be more complicated than that only reveals that you weren't there to watch it grow, similar how say an adolescent child today who grew up playing Gears of War will find the first Halo game to be simple or "crappy".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242510</id>
	<title>Bungie's Strong arm tactics.</title>
	<author>Erythros</author>
	<datestamp>1266924660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>- Release a game that becomes very popular (See Halo 3)<br>- Create new maps as DLC(good thing)<br>- Remove the ability to play previously playable online multiplayer games without purchasing new maps.<br>- Charge for said maps<br>- repeat 3 times<br>- Overhype a Halo 3 disk with 1 extra campaign and 3-4 new maps and charge $60.00 for it, again removing multiplay online options to current players without purchase of said disk.  ONLY, worth the price if you never owned Halo 3.  Unfortunately the Majority of ODST owners already owned Halo 3.</p><p>Thankfully I took the advice of an honest reviewer about that suckfest ODST was for the price and waited until the 3 extra maps came out as DLC for only 800 MS points.</p><p>It is one thing to look towards DLC (Downloadable content) for extra revenue, but to strong arm your customer base into this is just wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>- Release a game that becomes very popular ( See Halo 3 ) - Create new maps as DLC ( good thing ) - Remove the ability to play previously playable online multiplayer games without purchasing new maps.- Charge for said maps- repeat 3 times- Overhype a Halo 3 disk with 1 extra campaign and 3-4 new maps and charge $ 60.00 for it , again removing multiplay online options to current players without purchase of said disk .
ONLY , worth the price if you never owned Halo 3 .
Unfortunately the Majority of ODST owners already owned Halo 3.Thankfully I took the advice of an honest reviewer about that suckfest ODST was for the price and waited until the 3 extra maps came out as DLC for only 800 MS points.It is one thing to look towards DLC ( Downloadable content ) for extra revenue , but to strong arm your customer base into this is just wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- Release a game that becomes very popular (See Halo 3)- Create new maps as DLC(good thing)- Remove the ability to play previously playable online multiplayer games without purchasing new maps.- Charge for said maps- repeat 3 times- Overhype a Halo 3 disk with 1 extra campaign and 3-4 new maps and charge $60.00 for it, again removing multiplay online options to current players without purchase of said disk.
ONLY, worth the price if you never owned Halo 3.
Unfortunately the Majority of ODST owners already owned Halo 3.Thankfully I took the advice of an honest reviewer about that suckfest ODST was for the price and waited until the 3 extra maps came out as DLC for only 800 MS points.It is one thing to look towards DLC (Downloadable content) for extra revenue, but to strong arm your customer base into this is just wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132</id>
	<title>The original Halo also sucked</title>
	<author>alphabetsoup</author>
	<datestamp>1266919260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some parts were fun, I admit, but mostly the levels were extremely repetitive. I especially remember the Library level - where you had to do the same thing over and over - move through hall after hall which looks exactly the same and enemies which behave the same - I have never felt so bored by an FPS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some parts were fun , I admit , but mostly the levels were extremely repetitive .
I especially remember the Library level - where you had to do the same thing over and over - move through hall after hall which looks exactly the same and enemies which behave the same - I have never felt so bored by an FPS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some parts were fun, I admit, but mostly the levels were extremely repetitive.
I especially remember the Library level - where you had to do the same thing over and over - move through hall after hall which looks exactly the same and enemies which behave the same - I have never felt so bored by an FPS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242248</id>
	<title>Someone at Bungie</title>
	<author>AHuxley</author>
	<datestamp>1266920760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>played Marathon?<br>
If you sell out and have to make creative cuts as your running at 640p due to MS hardware 'cost' cutting...what do people expect<br>
Now the 'brand' name wants to tart things up with violence, plot, bestial alien languages and unique battles?<br>
Note the total lack of words pointing to 'world size' or 'more monsters' just more tinkering efforts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>played Marathon ?
If you sell out and have to make creative cuts as your running at 640p due to MS hardware 'cost ' cutting...what do people expect Now the 'brand ' name wants to tart things up with violence , plot , bestial alien languages and unique battles ?
Note the total lack of words pointing to 'world size ' or 'more monsters ' just more tinkering efforts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>played Marathon?
If you sell out and have to make creative cuts as your running at 640p due to MS hardware 'cost' cutting...what do people expect
Now the 'brand' name wants to tart things up with violence, plot, bestial alien languages and unique battles?
Note the total lack of words pointing to 'world size' or 'more monsters' just more tinkering efforts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242178</id>
	<title>Halo: ODST</title>
	<author>FinchWorld</author>
	<datestamp>1266919860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No it didn't change anything, it was pretty much a Halo 3 expansion which cost more. It didn't really play much differently (For a non augumented human, an ODST is still strong enough to beat a brute to death with his rifle).<br>Halo 2 was worse than 3, but they were good games, not great. After the first time round theres not much else to it (unless you hunt easter eggs etc.). The only reason we still play Halo 3 is because its one of the few games that support 4 player spilt screen and LAN at the same time, so with a couple large TVs and 2 consoles we can quickly play 3v3/4v4, or have 2 per screen for co-op. Its odd such games (Im looking at you Call Of Duty) allow 4 player split screen, but as soon as you try a lan game your limited to 1 per console.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No it did n't change anything , it was pretty much a Halo 3 expansion which cost more .
It did n't really play much differently ( For a non augumented human , an ODST is still strong enough to beat a brute to death with his rifle ) .Halo 2 was worse than 3 , but they were good games , not great .
After the first time round theres not much else to it ( unless you hunt easter eggs etc. ) .
The only reason we still play Halo 3 is because its one of the few games that support 4 player spilt screen and LAN at the same time , so with a couple large TVs and 2 consoles we can quickly play 3v3/4v4 , or have 2 per screen for co-op .
Its odd such games ( Im looking at you Call Of Duty ) allow 4 player split screen , but as soon as you try a lan game your limited to 1 per console .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it didn't change anything, it was pretty much a Halo 3 expansion which cost more.
It didn't really play much differently (For a non augumented human, an ODST is still strong enough to beat a brute to death with his rifle).Halo 2 was worse than 3, but they were good games, not great.
After the first time round theres not much else to it (unless you hunt easter eggs etc.).
The only reason we still play Halo 3 is because its one of the few games that support 4 player spilt screen and LAN at the same time, so with a couple large TVs and 2 consoles we can quickly play 3v3/4v4, or have 2 per screen for co-op.
Its odd such games (Im looking at you Call Of Duty) allow 4 player split screen, but as soon as you try a lan game your limited to 1 per console.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243430</id>
	<title>Re:The original Halo also sucked</title>
	<author>TheFakeMcCoy</author>
	<datestamp>1266934500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The story to the first HALO game was great. I found my self staying up until 3am and going to with 3 hours of sleep. I couldnt wait to find out what was going to happen next. I think on the first mission I actually cheered when I found the lost marines.

Since then the books have been pretty good, however the in game storyline has become more of disappointment with each game. I'm actually ashamed of ODST, wish almost feels like a cheap knock off of one of the books.

I hope that they can actually come up with an enjoyable game rather than continue to dishearten fans of the original and try to squeeze every dollar.

Seriously, access to the Reach Beta by owning ODST. You should get odst free and access to the reach beta just for having played the 2nd and 3rd games respectivly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The story to the first HALO game was great .
I found my self staying up until 3am and going to with 3 hours of sleep .
I couldnt wait to find out what was going to happen next .
I think on the first mission I actually cheered when I found the lost marines .
Since then the books have been pretty good , however the in game storyline has become more of disappointment with each game .
I 'm actually ashamed of ODST , wish almost feels like a cheap knock off of one of the books .
I hope that they can actually come up with an enjoyable game rather than continue to dishearten fans of the original and try to squeeze every dollar .
Seriously , access to the Reach Beta by owning ODST .
You should get odst free and access to the reach beta just for having played the 2nd and 3rd games respectivly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The story to the first HALO game was great.
I found my self staying up until 3am and going to with 3 hours of sleep.
I couldnt wait to find out what was going to happen next.
I think on the first mission I actually cheered when I found the lost marines.
Since then the books have been pretty good, however the in game storyline has become more of disappointment with each game.
I'm actually ashamed of ODST, wish almost feels like a cheap knock off of one of the books.
I hope that they can actually come up with an enjoyable game rather than continue to dishearten fans of the original and try to squeeze every dollar.
Seriously, access to the Reach Beta by owning ODST.
You should get odst free and access to the reach beta just for having played the 2nd and 3rd games respectivly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242310</id>
	<title>Re:The sequels sucked?</title>
	<author>jadin</author>
	<datestamp>1266921600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>when the players really would be happy with just more story, more levels, more characters</p></div><p>As long as the price is scaled accordingly. I doubt anyone wants to pay full game price when it should be in the expansion section.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>when the players really would be happy with just more story , more levels , more charactersAs long as the price is scaled accordingly .
I doubt anyone wants to pay full game price when it should be in the expansion section .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when the players really would be happy with just more story, more levels, more charactersAs long as the price is scaled accordingly.
I doubt anyone wants to pay full game price when it should be in the expansion section.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31245626</id>
	<title>Re:Someone at Bungie</title>
	<author>Lemming Mark</author>
	<datestamp>1266946560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to other accounts I've read, the engine has been upped to support much larger distances between co-op partners (i.e. less of the annoying teleport effect) and to support up to 40 full enemy AIs, which is something like double the Halo 3 engine.  So don't write off the world size and monster count just yet<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to other accounts I 've read , the engine has been upped to support much larger distances between co-op partners ( i.e .
less of the annoying teleport effect ) and to support up to 40 full enemy AIs , which is something like double the Halo 3 engine .
So do n't write off the world size and monster count just yet .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to other accounts I've read, the engine has been upped to support much larger distances between co-op partners (i.e.
less of the annoying teleport effect) and to support up to 40 full enemy AIs, which is something like double the Halo 3 engine.
So don't write off the world size and monster count just yet ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242186</id>
	<title>Virus at link?</title>
	<author>LogicalError</author>
	<datestamp>1266919920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmm.. when I checked out the link my virus scanner reported that it blocked a virus on the site..</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm.. when I checked out the link my virus scanner reported that it blocked a virus on the site. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm.. when I checked out the link my virus scanner reported that it blocked a virus on the site..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242586</id>
	<title>It was a printing error</title>
	<author>scdeimos</author>
	<datestamp>1266925560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...it seems that <i>Bungie's</i> basic philosophy has been: 'The sequels to the first Halo sucked. Let's fix that.'</p></div><p>That's because the L lost a fleck of ink and came out I.</p><p>Actually, I really enjoyed the first Halo. I felt extremely ripped off at the end of Halo 2, though, since it felt like I'd only gotten to play half the story. I skipped Halo 3 altogether as a result.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...it seems that Bungie 's basic philosophy has been : 'The sequels to the first Halo sucked .
Let 's fix that .
'That 's because the L lost a fleck of ink and came out I.Actually , I really enjoyed the first Halo .
I felt extremely ripped off at the end of Halo 2 , though , since it felt like I 'd only gotten to play half the story .
I skipped Halo 3 altogether as a result .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...it seems that Bungie's basic philosophy has been: 'The sequels to the first Halo sucked.
Let's fix that.
'That's because the L lost a fleck of ink and came out I.Actually, I really enjoyed the first Halo.
I felt extremely ripped off at the end of Halo 2, though, since it felt like I'd only gotten to play half the story.
I skipped Halo 3 altogether as a result.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31249690</id>
	<title>Actually</title>
	<author>manekineko2</author>
	<datestamp>1266916980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the video linked in the article did address both world size and more monsters directly.  They're going for sand box style battles, with more of the feeling of vastness of stepping out of the ship in Halo 1, with more monsters and allies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the video linked in the article did address both world size and more monsters directly .
They 're going for sand box style battles , with more of the feeling of vastness of stepping out of the ship in Halo 1 , with more monsters and allies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the video linked in the article did address both world size and more monsters directly.
They're going for sand box style battles, with more of the feeling of vastness of stepping out of the ship in Halo 1, with more monsters and allies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474</id>
	<title>"Story" People vs. Game-Playing People</title>
	<author>RobotRunAmok</author>
	<datestamp>1266924300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I admit to being amused -- in the nicest, gentlest, least-condescending way possible -- by the "video game story people."  I'm just not fathoming that folks are playing games like "Halo" or "Bioshock" or whatever for their stories.  I know that they *are*, because I read about it here on slashdot, and somebody always hauls out "Planescape: Torment" as if it were "Hamlet," and it all leaves me in head-shaking mode.  Comic books have better written stories than these games -- and I mean no slight against comic books.  Is it all relative, sliding scale, are folks just happy to playing a game with more of a "plot" then, say, "Duke Nukem" or "Serious Sam?"  Or are the game stories actually regarded as being "good" as far as written stories go?</p><p>When I want a story, I read a book.  When I want to play a game, or venture into some escapism that requires a modicum of physical engagement, I play a videogame.  When I want the escapism without the physical component, I'll watch a movie like Star Wars. I'm seeing more and more, however, that that is "just me," and I'm not sure how I feel about that...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I admit to being amused -- in the nicest , gentlest , least-condescending way possible -- by the " video game story people .
" I 'm just not fathoming that folks are playing games like " Halo " or " Bioshock " or whatever for their stories .
I know that they * are * , because I read about it here on slashdot , and somebody always hauls out " Planescape : Torment " as if it were " Hamlet , " and it all leaves me in head-shaking mode .
Comic books have better written stories than these games -- and I mean no slight against comic books .
Is it all relative , sliding scale , are folks just happy to playing a game with more of a " plot " then , say , " Duke Nukem " or " Serious Sam ?
" Or are the game stories actually regarded as being " good " as far as written stories go ? When I want a story , I read a book .
When I want to play a game , or venture into some escapism that requires a modicum of physical engagement , I play a videogame .
When I want the escapism without the physical component , I 'll watch a movie like Star Wars .
I 'm seeing more and more , however , that that is " just me , " and I 'm not sure how I feel about that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I admit to being amused -- in the nicest, gentlest, least-condescending way possible -- by the "video game story people.
"  I'm just not fathoming that folks are playing games like "Halo" or "Bioshock" or whatever for their stories.
I know that they *are*, because I read about it here on slashdot, and somebody always hauls out "Planescape: Torment" as if it were "Hamlet," and it all leaves me in head-shaking mode.
Comic books have better written stories than these games -- and I mean no slight against comic books.
Is it all relative, sliding scale, are folks just happy to playing a game with more of a "plot" then, say, "Duke Nukem" or "Serious Sam?
"  Or are the game stories actually regarded as being "good" as far as written stories go?When I want a story, I read a book.
When I want to play a game, or venture into some escapism that requires a modicum of physical engagement, I play a videogame.
When I want the escapism without the physical component, I'll watch a movie like Star Wars.
I'm seeing more and more, however, that that is "just me," and I'm not sure how I feel about that...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31248530</id>
	<title>Re:Halo: ODST</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266956580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Its odd such games (Im looking at you Call Of Duty) allow 4 player split screen, but as soon as you try a lan game your limited to 1 per console.</p><p>Not really. It's because you'd end up with groups on the same screen automatically coordinating against singletons.</p><p>(And on the outright malicious end of things, you'd have hacks that take advantage of the extra player data going to the same box).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Its odd such games ( Im looking at you Call Of Duty ) allow 4 player split screen , but as soon as you try a lan game your limited to 1 per console.Not really .
It 's because you 'd end up with groups on the same screen automatically coordinating against singletons .
( And on the outright malicious end of things , you 'd have hacks that take advantage of the extra player data going to the same box ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Its odd such games (Im looking at you Call Of Duty) allow 4 player split screen, but as soon as you try a lan game your limited to 1 per console.Not really.
It's because you'd end up with groups on the same screen automatically coordinating against singletons.
(And on the outright malicious end of things, you'd have hacks that take advantage of the extra player data going to the same box).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243336</id>
	<title>Screw that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266933840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Halo sucks and so does M$; buy a PS3 you n00bs</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Halo sucks and so does M $ ; buy a PS3 you n00bs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Halo sucks and so does M$; buy a PS3 you n00bs</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242468</id>
	<title>Re:The original Halo also sucked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266924180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't really fair, the original Halo is the first FPS I can think of that had vehicles that the player could use. It is also the first time I can remember computer controlled players being useful (well manning the turret in the Warthog is what I'm really thinking about). There was also a plot, with a couple of surprises. I also particularly enjoyed the "mad dash" Warthog ride at the end - the best ending of any of the Halo games.</p><p>Now it's true that a theme of all the Halo games has been fight across a level, then turn around and fight back across it - but let's cut them some slack here, the levels were pretty nicely designed (you've picked the weakest) and there was a lot of variation in both what the player had to do, and the level design.</p><p>Halo has influenced FPS design, the original wasn't perfect, the multiplayer was very lacking for example, but a very good game indeed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't really fair , the original Halo is the first FPS I can think of that had vehicles that the player could use .
It is also the first time I can remember computer controlled players being useful ( well manning the turret in the Warthog is what I 'm really thinking about ) .
There was also a plot , with a couple of surprises .
I also particularly enjoyed the " mad dash " Warthog ride at the end - the best ending of any of the Halo games.Now it 's true that a theme of all the Halo games has been fight across a level , then turn around and fight back across it - but let 's cut them some slack here , the levels were pretty nicely designed ( you 've picked the weakest ) and there was a lot of variation in both what the player had to do , and the level design.Halo has influenced FPS design , the original was n't perfect , the multiplayer was very lacking for example , but a very good game indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't really fair, the original Halo is the first FPS I can think of that had vehicles that the player could use.
It is also the first time I can remember computer controlled players being useful (well manning the turret in the Warthog is what I'm really thinking about).
There was also a plot, with a couple of surprises.
I also particularly enjoyed the "mad dash" Warthog ride at the end - the best ending of any of the Halo games.Now it's true that a theme of all the Halo games has been fight across a level, then turn around and fight back across it - but let's cut them some slack here, the levels were pretty nicely designed (you've picked the weakest) and there was a lot of variation in both what the player had to do, and the level design.Halo has influenced FPS design, the original wasn't perfect, the multiplayer was very lacking for example, but a very good game indeed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31244044</id>
	<title>More $ 4 M$</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266938400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So?</p><p>This is just more money for slick willies beast.  Stop buying anything from them, their subsidiaries, and their partners if you can avoid it.</p><p>All these libertarian weasels, say "the market will fix itself!" No it won't; these guys are so bid that when one product is a failure, they will leverage another market segment to snuff out the competition. Then things will go back to normalcy; and back to being garbage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So ? This is just more money for slick willies beast .
Stop buying anything from them , their subsidiaries , and their partners if you can avoid it.All these libertarian weasels , say " the market will fix itself !
" No it wo n't ; these guys are so bid that when one product is a failure , they will leverage another market segment to snuff out the competition .
Then things will go back to normalcy ; and back to being garbage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So?This is just more money for slick willies beast.
Stop buying anything from them, their subsidiaries, and their partners if you can avoid it.All these libertarian weasels, say "the market will fix itself!
" No it won't; these guys are so bid that when one product is a failure, they will leverage another market segment to snuff out the competition.
Then things will go back to normalcy; and back to being garbage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31248596</id>
	<title>Re:The original Halo also sucked</title>
	<author>AmigaMMC</author>
	<datestamp>1266956760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a matter of fact the 2nd book was too game oriented as well. While I highly recommend the first book "Halo: The Fall of Reach" If you have not read it yet you're in for a treat, this book is a prequel to the game and tells the origins of Master Chief and the Spartan II project before they even had a Mjolnir armor. Great read (and the 3rd book, Halo: First Strike) is also a great read.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a matter of fact the 2nd book was too game oriented as well .
While I highly recommend the first book " Halo : The Fall of Reach " If you have not read it yet you 're in for a treat , this book is a prequel to the game and tells the origins of Master Chief and the Spartan II project before they even had a Mjolnir armor .
Great read ( and the 3rd book , Halo : First Strike ) is also a great read .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a matter of fact the 2nd book was too game oriented as well.
While I highly recommend the first book "Halo: The Fall of Reach" If you have not read it yet you're in for a treat, this book is a prequel to the game and tells the origins of Master Chief and the Spartan II project before they even had a Mjolnir armor.
Great read (and the 3rd book, Halo: First Strike) is also a great read.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242200</id>
	<title>Well that's a lot of leaps of logic</title>
	<author>fyrewulff</author>
	<datestamp>1266920100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bungie has never said the sequels suck. However they are very open about what they did wrong and right in their previous games.</p><p>As it stands, Halo 3 is still the best multiplayer experience. Halo 1's multiplayer is a glitchfest with maps that were made by a two man team with a guy that just learned how the extrude tool worked the day before. It is unbalanced and only two of it's maps supported vehicles (so of course, everyone just played those two maps). The maximum amount of Xboxes that can join a LAN is 4 so if you want more than 4 people playing, somebody is gonna have to splitscreen.</p><p>Halo 2 was leagues better but it suffered from animation glitches and the ability to escape from maps.</p><p>Halo 3 refined the balance of 2 and also fixed all the animation glitches and map escapes. After playing it, there is no reason to ever go back and play Halo 1 multiplayer beyond for a laugh. Single player I play once in a while, but the multiplayer is so bad now it's not even funny.</p><p>The removal of dual wielding doesn't even change things that much since people hardly do it in Halo 3 anyway. All it really means is that dual-able weapons will now get a damage buff, like they already did to the Needler (went from dual-capable in 2 to a single weapon in 3)</p><p>Reach so far appears to be continuing to build upon Halo 3's multiplayer design and balance. Heck, a Bungie employee is already quoted as saying that the weapons aren't going to be drastically tweaked or anything from their Halo 3 versions.</p><p>But then again, I'm probably one of the few people that started with Halo 1 in 2002 and don't worship the broke as hell pistol from 1 (which again, was actually a bug that couldn't be fixed in time for ship).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bungie has never said the sequels suck .
However they are very open about what they did wrong and right in their previous games.As it stands , Halo 3 is still the best multiplayer experience .
Halo 1 's multiplayer is a glitchfest with maps that were made by a two man team with a guy that just learned how the extrude tool worked the day before .
It is unbalanced and only two of it 's maps supported vehicles ( so of course , everyone just played those two maps ) .
The maximum amount of Xboxes that can join a LAN is 4 so if you want more than 4 people playing , somebody is gon na have to splitscreen.Halo 2 was leagues better but it suffered from animation glitches and the ability to escape from maps.Halo 3 refined the balance of 2 and also fixed all the animation glitches and map escapes .
After playing it , there is no reason to ever go back and play Halo 1 multiplayer beyond for a laugh .
Single player I play once in a while , but the multiplayer is so bad now it 's not even funny.The removal of dual wielding does n't even change things that much since people hardly do it in Halo 3 anyway .
All it really means is that dual-able weapons will now get a damage buff , like they already did to the Needler ( went from dual-capable in 2 to a single weapon in 3 ) Reach so far appears to be continuing to build upon Halo 3 's multiplayer design and balance .
Heck , a Bungie employee is already quoted as saying that the weapons are n't going to be drastically tweaked or anything from their Halo 3 versions.But then again , I 'm probably one of the few people that started with Halo 1 in 2002 and do n't worship the broke as hell pistol from 1 ( which again , was actually a bug that could n't be fixed in time for ship ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bungie has never said the sequels suck.
However they are very open about what they did wrong and right in their previous games.As it stands, Halo 3 is still the best multiplayer experience.
Halo 1's multiplayer is a glitchfest with maps that were made by a two man team with a guy that just learned how the extrude tool worked the day before.
It is unbalanced and only two of it's maps supported vehicles (so of course, everyone just played those two maps).
The maximum amount of Xboxes that can join a LAN is 4 so if you want more than 4 people playing, somebody is gonna have to splitscreen.Halo 2 was leagues better but it suffered from animation glitches and the ability to escape from maps.Halo 3 refined the balance of 2 and also fixed all the animation glitches and map escapes.
After playing it, there is no reason to ever go back and play Halo 1 multiplayer beyond for a laugh.
Single player I play once in a while, but the multiplayer is so bad now it's not even funny.The removal of dual wielding doesn't even change things that much since people hardly do it in Halo 3 anyway.
All it really means is that dual-able weapons will now get a damage buff, like they already did to the Needler (went from dual-capable in 2 to a single weapon in 3)Reach so far appears to be continuing to build upon Halo 3's multiplayer design and balance.
Heck, a Bungie employee is already quoted as saying that the weapons aren't going to be drastically tweaked or anything from their Halo 3 versions.But then again, I'm probably one of the few people that started with Halo 1 in 2002 and don't worship the broke as hell pistol from 1 (which again, was actually a bug that couldn't be fixed in time for ship).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242262</id>
	<title>Slashdot as a sucky games site</title>
	<author>Aceticon</author>
	<datestamp>1266920880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&lt;RANT type="no-more-pre-release-marketting" class="big"&gt;</p><p>Bungie is <i>supposedly</i> going to do yet another Halo, only this time it's <i>supposedly</i> going to be much better than the previous ones and here's an article with what the producer's PR/Marketoids think should be <b>said</b> on what it's <i>supposedly</i> going to be like.</p><p>Reminds me of all the articles we used to have a couple of years ago about the latest and greatest new software that was coming out: it usually turned out to be neither that greatest, as ground/breaking or the seamingly flawless experience the software house's Marketing people had described it to be for the preview.</p><p>Now we have the same type of bull as game previews in Slashdot, kinda like the almost-paid-for, page filling pap which is the standard fare of the "Previews" section of the large (and mainstream gaming industry fanboy) game sites.</p><p>Until we actually have a post by someone with hands-on gaming experience on the game, maybe we should save the space for more interesting news, like say, new developments in the area of waste treatment - more substance and less perfumed s*it.</p><p>&lt;/RANT&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bungie is supposedly going to do yet another Halo , only this time it 's supposedly going to be much better than the previous ones and here 's an article with what the producer 's PR/Marketoids think should be said on what it 's supposedly going to be like.Reminds me of all the articles we used to have a couple of years ago about the latest and greatest new software that was coming out : it usually turned out to be neither that greatest , as ground/breaking or the seamingly flawless experience the software house 's Marketing people had described it to be for the preview.Now we have the same type of bull as game previews in Slashdot , kinda like the almost-paid-for , page filling pap which is the standard fare of the " Previews " section of the large ( and mainstream gaming industry fanboy ) game sites.Until we actually have a post by someone with hands-on gaming experience on the game , maybe we should save the space for more interesting news , like say , new developments in the area of waste treatment - more substance and less perfumed s * it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bungie is supposedly going to do yet another Halo, only this time it's supposedly going to be much better than the previous ones and here's an article with what the producer's PR/Marketoids think should be said on what it's supposedly going to be like.Reminds me of all the articles we used to have a couple of years ago about the latest and greatest new software that was coming out: it usually turned out to be neither that greatest, as ground/breaking or the seamingly flawless experience the software house's Marketing people had described it to be for the preview.Now we have the same type of bull as game previews in Slashdot, kinda like the almost-paid-for, page filling pap which is the standard fare of the "Previews" section of the large (and mainstream gaming industry fanboy) game sites.Until we actually have a post by someone with hands-on gaming experience on the game, maybe we should save the space for more interesting news, like say, new developments in the area of waste treatment - more substance and less perfumed s*it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243192</id>
	<title>Re:"Story" People vs. Game-Playing People</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266932280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The point of looking for a good story in a video game as opposed to a movie or a book is that the game is interactive.  For some games that just means more immersion -- you don't just follow the main character, you *are* the main character -- but in other cases the story itself is interactive.  Picture reading Hamlet and getting to the part where he's yelling at the queen and Polonius cries out from behind the curtain -- and you get to choose whether to take the "renegade" route and stab whoever's behind the curtain or take the "paragon" route and just demand the guy identify himself.  Imagine how different the story would be from that point on.  You would want to go back and read the story again and make different choices just to see how events unfold differently.  There are games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect that really do put that much power over the storyline in your hands.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The point of looking for a good story in a video game as opposed to a movie or a book is that the game is interactive .
For some games that just means more immersion -- you do n't just follow the main character , you * are * the main character -- but in other cases the story itself is interactive .
Picture reading Hamlet and getting to the part where he 's yelling at the queen and Polonius cries out from behind the curtain -- and you get to choose whether to take the " renegade " route and stab whoever 's behind the curtain or take the " paragon " route and just demand the guy identify himself .
Imagine how different the story would be from that point on .
You would want to go back and read the story again and make different choices just to see how events unfold differently .
There are games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect that really do put that much power over the storyline in your hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point of looking for a good story in a video game as opposed to a movie or a book is that the game is interactive.
For some games that just means more immersion -- you don't just follow the main character, you *are* the main character -- but in other cases the story itself is interactive.
Picture reading Hamlet and getting to the part where he's yelling at the queen and Polonius cries out from behind the curtain -- and you get to choose whether to take the "renegade" route and stab whoever's behind the curtain or take the "paragon" route and just demand the guy identify himself.
Imagine how different the story would be from that point on.
You would want to go back and read the story again and make different choices just to see how events unfold differently.
There are games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect that really do put that much power over the storyline in your hands.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242648</id>
	<title>Re:The original Halo also sucked</title>
	<author>Winckle</author>
	<datestamp>1266926580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tribes had vehicles in 1998</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tribes had vehicles in 1998</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tribes had vehicles in 1998</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31244508</id>
	<title>Re:"Story" People vs. Game-Playing People</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1266940560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, it's true that very few people play primarily for the story. But a compelling or interesting story (and, more particularly, setting) can set a game apart from its peers. "Knights of the Old Republic" was a pretty straightforward RPG, judged exclusively by its gameplay. But the story really set it apart. Ditto for Mass Effect, Half-Life 2, Bioshock, etc.--all pretty unremarkable if judged on straight-up gameplay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it 's true that very few people play primarily for the story .
But a compelling or interesting story ( and , more particularly , setting ) can set a game apart from its peers .
" Knights of the Old Republic " was a pretty straightforward RPG , judged exclusively by its gameplay .
But the story really set it apart .
Ditto for Mass Effect , Half-Life 2 , Bioshock , etc.--all pretty unremarkable if judged on straight-up gameplay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it's true that very few people play primarily for the story.
But a compelling or interesting story (and, more particularly, setting) can set a game apart from its peers.
"Knights of the Old Republic" was a pretty straightforward RPG, judged exclusively by its gameplay.
But the story really set it apart.
Ditto for Mass Effect, Half-Life 2, Bioshock, etc.--all pretty unremarkable if judged on straight-up gameplay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242436</id>
	<title>"Sad" news ... G&#252;nter von Gravenreuth, dead a</title>
	<author>ArsenneLupin</author>
	<datestamp>1266923760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just read some "sad" news on the Internet - The infamous lawyer <a href="http://www.gravenreuth.de/" title="gravenreuth.de" rel="nofollow">G&#252;nter Freiherr von Gravenreuth</a> [gravenreuth.de] was found dead in his Munich student club this morning. He gave himself the deadly shot just as police special units looking for him were busting down the doors. I'm sure nobody in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't receive any of his "Abmahnungen", there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly a German icon. He will not be missed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just read some " sad " news on the Internet - The infamous lawyer G   nter Freiherr von Gravenreuth [ gravenreuth.de ] was found dead in his Munich student club this morning .
He gave himself the deadly shot just as police special units looking for him were busting down the doors .
I 'm sure nobody in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you did n't receive any of his " Abmahnungen " , there 's no denying his contributions to popular culture .
Truly a German icon .
He will not be missed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just read some "sad" news on the Internet - The infamous lawyer Günter Freiherr von Gravenreuth [gravenreuth.de] was found dead in his Munich student club this morning.
He gave himself the deadly shot just as police special units looking for him were busting down the doors.
I'm sure nobody in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't receive any of his "Abmahnungen", there's no denying his contributions to popular culture.
Truly a German icon.
He will not be missed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242112</id>
	<title>Additional gameplay mechanics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266918900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But will it have dynamic terrain?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But will it have dynamic terrain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But will it have dynamic terrain?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242270</id>
	<title>swordfighting!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266920940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>anyone want to swordfight with me? It's really fun, it's when two guys pull down their pants and whip out massive boners. THEN, they touch penises iuntil the other guy goes soft. Ready!? One TWO THREEEE!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>anyone want to swordfight with me ?
It 's really fun , it 's when two guys pull down their pants and whip out massive boners .
THEN , they touch penises iuntil the other guy goes soft .
Ready ! ? One TWO THREEEE !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>anyone want to swordfight with me?
It's really fun, it's when two guys pull down their pants and whip out massive boners.
THEN, they touch penises iuntil the other guy goes soft.
Ready!? One TWO THREEEE!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242950</id>
	<title>Re:"Story" People vs. Game-Playing People</title>
	<author>delinear</author>
	<datestamp>1266930120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For me it's about enhancing the feeling of immersion. The story doesn't have to be revolutionary (and that's just as well, because they're almost always not), it just has to be enough to encourage suspension of disbelief and give some level of empathy with the character(s). You're never going to get a story that comes close to the best of the written word because the two media are playing to their own strengths. In a game, you have to have the "game" parts which obviously detract from the story parts - Hamlet wouldn't be so good if five out of every six pages was just dedicated to Hamlet beating waves of enemies in sword combat, or exploring locations for health/ammo pickups.</p><p>Bioshock did this really well, IMHO - sure the main plot was nothing we've not seen before, but that's not where the feeling of immersion came from. It was more from the information you discover and piece together on your own, exploring and finding journals, tracking the journeys of characters you never actually meet in the game, discovering the origins of the characters you <i>do</i> fight/help in the game, it made the game world feel more real (dispite the slightly silly delivery mechanism of tape recordings dotted everywhere, which made if feel like these people experimenting with prototype tweeting). I know people who played through the game as a straight FPS without exploring this rich back story, without even realising it was there, and that's fine if the FPS experience is all you're after, but for people who want to feel a bit more involved with the game there was a much deeper experience to be had.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For me it 's about enhancing the feeling of immersion .
The story does n't have to be revolutionary ( and that 's just as well , because they 're almost always not ) , it just has to be enough to encourage suspension of disbelief and give some level of empathy with the character ( s ) .
You 're never going to get a story that comes close to the best of the written word because the two media are playing to their own strengths .
In a game , you have to have the " game " parts which obviously detract from the story parts - Hamlet would n't be so good if five out of every six pages was just dedicated to Hamlet beating waves of enemies in sword combat , or exploring locations for health/ammo pickups.Bioshock did this really well , IMHO - sure the main plot was nothing we 've not seen before , but that 's not where the feeling of immersion came from .
It was more from the information you discover and piece together on your own , exploring and finding journals , tracking the journeys of characters you never actually meet in the game , discovering the origins of the characters you do fight/help in the game , it made the game world feel more real ( dispite the slightly silly delivery mechanism of tape recordings dotted everywhere , which made if feel like these people experimenting with prototype tweeting ) .
I know people who played through the game as a straight FPS without exploring this rich back story , without even realising it was there , and that 's fine if the FPS experience is all you 're after , but for people who want to feel a bit more involved with the game there was a much deeper experience to be had .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me it's about enhancing the feeling of immersion.
The story doesn't have to be revolutionary (and that's just as well, because they're almost always not), it just has to be enough to encourage suspension of disbelief and give some level of empathy with the character(s).
You're never going to get a story that comes close to the best of the written word because the two media are playing to their own strengths.
In a game, you have to have the "game" parts which obviously detract from the story parts - Hamlet wouldn't be so good if five out of every six pages was just dedicated to Hamlet beating waves of enemies in sword combat, or exploring locations for health/ammo pickups.Bioshock did this really well, IMHO - sure the main plot was nothing we've not seen before, but that's not where the feeling of immersion came from.
It was more from the information you discover and piece together on your own, exploring and finding journals, tracking the journeys of characters you never actually meet in the game, discovering the origins of the characters you do fight/help in the game, it made the game world feel more real (dispite the slightly silly delivery mechanism of tape recordings dotted everywhere, which made if feel like these people experimenting with prototype tweeting).
I know people who played through the game as a straight FPS without exploring this rich back story, without even realising it was there, and that's fine if the FPS experience is all you're after, but for people who want to feel a bit more involved with the game there was a much deeper experience to be had.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31266190</id>
	<title>Re:The original Halo also sucked</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265112420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I played it on the PC. And because I was used to fast, nasty aliens that would not wait a second... not the &ldquo;standing around for a couple of seconds until you adjusted your thumbstick&rdquo; kind, I found the enemies mind-numbingly dumb. As was most of the game.</p><p>Well, there are different people on this planet. I can tolerate their views. (But we&rsquo;ll see of they can tolerate mine. Went pretty bad every time I mentioned Apple.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I played it on the PC .
And because I was used to fast , nasty aliens that would not wait a second... not the    standing around for a couple of seconds until you adjusted your thumbstick    kind , I found the enemies mind-numbingly dumb .
As was most of the game.Well , there are different people on this planet .
I can tolerate their views .
( But we    ll see of they can tolerate mine .
Went pretty bad every time I mentioned Apple .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I played it on the PC.
And because I was used to fast, nasty aliens that would not wait a second... not the “standing around for a couple of seconds until you adjusted your thumbstick” kind, I found the enemies mind-numbingly dumb.
As was most of the game.Well, there are different people on this planet.
I can tolerate their views.
(But we’ll see of they can tolerate mine.
Went pretty bad every time I mentioned Apple.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31246136</id>
	<title>Re:The original Halo also sucked</title>
	<author>Useful Wheat</author>
	<datestamp>1266948120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shadow Warrior was made in 1997, and it had vehicles you could use. You had to find repair kits scattered throughout the game, and you could use them to repair a tank, and one other vehicle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shadow Warrior was made in 1997 , and it had vehicles you could use .
You had to find repair kits scattered throughout the game , and you could use them to repair a tank , and one other vehicle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shadow Warrior was made in 1997, and it had vehicles you could use.
You had to find repair kits scattered throughout the game, and you could use them to repair a tank, and one other vehicle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242468</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31248596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31266190
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31245626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31246136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31244508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31248530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31245850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31249690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_23_0650225_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242436
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242262
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31248530
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31245850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242474
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243192
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242950
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243928
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31244508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242310
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242754
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31245626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31249690
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31248596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242468
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242648
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31246136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31266190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31243430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242566
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242510
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242112
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_23_0650225.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_23_0650225.31242200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
