<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_05_0719258</id>
	<title>New <em>Call of Duty</em> Titles Announced, Fired Devs Sue For Name</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1267793040000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>eldavojohn writes <i>"Activision has <a href="http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/03/activision-announces-new-call-of-duty-titles-lawsuit-filed.ars">announced new <em>Call of Duty</em> titles</a> while <a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/03/02/1620223/Infinity-Ward-Lead-Developers-Axed-Unexpectedly">fired Infinity Ward Developer leads</a> Jason West and Vince Zampella <a href="http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/702970/Infinity-Wards-Jason-West-And-Vince-Zampella-File-Lawsuit-Against-Activision-.html">sue them for the rights to the name</a>.  According to Activision, 'The company intends to expand the <em>Call of Duty</em> brand with the same focus seen in its Blizzard Entertainment business unit. This will include a focus on high-margin digital online content and further[ing] the brand as the leading action entertainment franchise in new geographies, new genres and with new digital business models.'  Ars opines that Activision is set to over-saturate the market with tons of <em>CoD</em> titles similar to how it expertly brought down <em>Guitar Hero</em>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " Activision has announced new Call of Duty titles while fired Infinity Ward Developer leads Jason West and Vince Zampella sue them for the rights to the name .
According to Activision , 'The company intends to expand the Call of Duty brand with the same focus seen in its Blizzard Entertainment business unit .
This will include a focus on high-margin digital online content and further [ ing ] the brand as the leading action entertainment franchise in new geographies , new genres and with new digital business models .
' Ars opines that Activision is set to over-saturate the market with tons of CoD titles similar to how it expertly brought down Guitar Hero .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "Activision has announced new Call of Duty titles while fired Infinity Ward Developer leads Jason West and Vince Zampella sue them for the rights to the name.
According to Activision, 'The company intends to expand the Call of Duty brand with the same focus seen in its Blizzard Entertainment business unit.
This will include a focus on high-margin digital online content and further[ing] the brand as the leading action entertainment franchise in new geographies, new genres and with new digital business models.
'  Ars opines that Activision is set to over-saturate the market with tons of CoD titles similar to how it expertly brought down Guitar Hero.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370074</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>Eraesr</author>
	<datestamp>1267799460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They were a splinter group of 2015, Inc. who were responsible for Medal of Honor - Allied Assault, then published by Electronic Arts. And back then it was indeed EA that was the evil company so they left 2015 and formed Infinity Ward. EA then milked MoH to death and IW were acquired by Activision where they made Call of Duty. Seems history is about to repeat itself. Back to EA maybe?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>They were a splinter group of 2015 , Inc. who were responsible for Medal of Honor - Allied Assault , then published by Electronic Arts .
And back then it was indeed EA that was the evil company so they left 2015 and formed Infinity Ward .
EA then milked MoH to death and IW were acquired by Activision where they made Call of Duty .
Seems history is about to repeat itself .
Back to EA maybe ?
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were a splinter group of 2015, Inc. who were responsible for Medal of Honor - Allied Assault, then published by Electronic Arts.
And back then it was indeed EA that was the evil company so they left 2015 and formed Infinity Ward.
EA then milked MoH to death and IW were acquired by Activision where they made Call of Duty.
Seems history is about to repeat itself.
Back to EA maybe?
;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372940</id>
	<title>Re:I really don't understand.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267814100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you ever heard of the legend of the hydra?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever heard of the legend of the hydra ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever heard of the legend of the hydra?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370462</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1267801920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Soap, file that injunction NOW!"</p><p>"Ramirez, take point on the deposition."</p><p>"Hooah"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Soap , file that injunction NOW !
" " Ramirez , take point on the deposition .
" " Hooah "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Soap, file that injunction NOW!
""Ramirez, take point on the deposition.
""Hooah"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372284</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>mjwalshe</author>
	<datestamp>1267810680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>6 hours to "respond" &amp; without being told what the charge was actually about.

mm in the UK that would be an automatic win at an IT (Industrial Tribuneral)</htmltext>
<tokenext>6 hours to " respond " &amp; without being told what the charge was actually about .
mm in the UK that would be an automatic win at an IT ( Industrial Tribuneral )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>6 hours to "respond" &amp; without being told what the charge was actually about.
mm in the UK that would be an automatic win at an IT (Industrial Tribuneral)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372860</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory Penny Arcade</title>
	<author>Hadlock</author>
	<datestamp>1267813740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Activision is making a wide variety of (crap) games; you don't have to go out and buy them. The CEO's job is to make lots of profit for the shareholders by any means he can. If you don't like the rules of that "IRL" game, buy independent games, or at least games that aren't distributed by publicly held corporations. Nobody is forcing you to buy Activision's games...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Activision is making a wide variety of ( crap ) games ; you do n't have to go out and buy them .
The CEO 's job is to make lots of profit for the shareholders by any means he can .
If you do n't like the rules of that " IRL " game , buy independent games , or at least games that are n't distributed by publicly held corporations .
Nobody is forcing you to buy Activision 's games.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Activision is making a wide variety of (crap) games; you don't have to go out and buy them.
The CEO's job is to make lots of profit for the shareholders by any means he can.
If you don't like the rules of that "IRL" game, buy independent games, or at least games that aren't distributed by publicly held corporations.
Nobody is forcing you to buy Activision's games...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371272</id>
	<title>Re:Mother Fluckers.</title>
	<author>Urza9814</author>
	<datestamp>1267806000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree that the campaign in MW2 was worse - personally I think it's because they went way too over the top. I mean the first one the stories were a bit out there but still somewhat believable. In the second one...no. Not at all. But I do think there are a lot of things they did right. The beginning of the campaign was great. The multiplayer missions are great - even though the majority of the time I'm playing them solo. I can't compare the online play as I've only done that in MW2. But anyway, I think they got a lot of things right, they were just trying too hard to be more intense and more shocking than the original. And they were trying to do it too many times.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that the campaign in MW2 was worse - personally I think it 's because they went way too over the top .
I mean the first one the stories were a bit out there but still somewhat believable .
In the second one...no .
Not at all .
But I do think there are a lot of things they did right .
The beginning of the campaign was great .
The multiplayer missions are great - even though the majority of the time I 'm playing them solo .
I ca n't compare the online play as I 've only done that in MW2 .
But anyway , I think they got a lot of things right , they were just trying too hard to be more intense and more shocking than the original .
And they were trying to do it too many times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that the campaign in MW2 was worse - personally I think it's because they went way too over the top.
I mean the first one the stories were a bit out there but still somewhat believable.
In the second one...no.
Not at all.
But I do think there are a lot of things they did right.
The beginning of the campaign was great.
The multiplayer missions are great - even though the majority of the time I'm playing them solo.
I can't compare the online play as I've only done that in MW2.
But anyway, I think they got a lot of things right, they were just trying too hard to be more intense and more shocking than the original.
And they were trying to do it too many times.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370960</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>KnownIssues</author>
	<datestamp>1267804620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I still can't understand why IW choose to let them be bought out though</p></div><p>Apparently you don't understand the appeal of <i>even more</i> money.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still ca n't understand why IW choose to let them be bought out thoughApparently you do n't understand the appeal of even more money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still can't understand why IW choose to let them be bought out thoughApparently you don't understand the appeal of even more money.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370852</id>
	<title>Obligatory Penny Arcade</title>
	<author>Moryath</author>
	<datestamp>1267804080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/12/5/" title="penny-arcade.com">Right Here</a> [penny-arcade.com].</p><p>Developers and franchise holders need to learn not to sign with Activision. Or at the very least, avoid letting their franchise get locked in and their companies bought out.</p><p>Look at the list of franchises Activision has "run into the fucking ground" over the years.</p><p>Tony Hawk and the O2 Sports line? Check. And sadly, two of the best games in that line - Shaun Palmer Pro Snowboarding, Mat Hoffman Pro BMX - weren't skateboarding, and were probably better for not surviving since they existed in the merits of the sport rather than the "yeah skateboarders are a bunch of vandals and criminals and you can be thieves and thugs just like them" crap message of the later games.</p><p>Spider-Man games? Oh good fucking grief. Just when we thought they had learned their lesson, since Spidey 2 for PS2/Xbox was stellar (exception made for the really crappy DS and PSP ports that still used the old Spidey-1 engine), out comes Spidey 3 and it's a completely retarded title with psychotic, seizure-looking "fighting" and "press X to not die" boss battles. Sigh. Then they went and tried to redeem the engine with "Prototype"... good concept, poor execution.</p><p>In fact, their games based on Marvel in general have been crappier and crappier. The "storyline" of Ultimate Alliance 2 was pure turdburger, and the gameplay is just so much recycled crap. We lost a great fighting game franchise when Marvel went "Activision exclusive" and Marvel vs Capcom died, but what did they replace it with? Stinker after stinker of X-men "fighting game" titles, Baldurs-Gate-Lite beat-em-up "RPG" titles, and more stinky steaming turdburger movie tie-in titles than you can think of.</p><p>Their James Bond "let's rip off the CoD engine and try to make a spy game" titles? Oh god. Especially the Quantum of Solace "Well we never finished the Casino Royale game so we'll just stick the levels in this one" crap.</p><p>Guitar Hero? Let's see. Guitar Hero 1-4, "World Tour", 5, Aerosmith, Van Halen, Metallica, "Smash Hits", Band Hero, DJ Hero, "Rocks the 80s", "Greatest Hits", Guitar Hero Mobile, Guitar Hero On Tour, Guitar Hero On Tour Decades, Guitar Hero "Backstage Pass", "Guitar Hero Game Trivia Quiz for iPhone", "Guitar Hero Carabiner" for mobile phones... Can we say franchise fatigue? Yes, I'm pretty sure we can.</p><p>It's no surprise why Harmonix picked up, said "fuck it" to their brand name, and just started over with Rock Band. Plus, Activision's online store for music is crap beyond crap, trying to force you to buy everything as album packs with no previews. With Rock Band, I mostly grab the tracks I want one at a time, unless I find a real reason to buy the "pack" or album set, and I listen to the preview first (got burned once by one of their really crap-ass David Bowie covers, never again will I purchase unlistened... but that was my own damn fault for not previewing). And as much as I hate supporting EA over anyone, in the case of Rock Band vs Guitar Hero, EA is the lesser of two evils by far.</p><p>Enough is enough... Activision needs to either kick Kotick out, preferably skidding on his face rather than just landing on his fat ass, or else die so the good companies they bought up (Blizzard?) can go back out and be independent and innovative once more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right Here [ penny-arcade.com ] .Developers and franchise holders need to learn not to sign with Activision .
Or at the very least , avoid letting their franchise get locked in and their companies bought out.Look at the list of franchises Activision has " run into the fucking ground " over the years.Tony Hawk and the O2 Sports line ?
Check. And sadly , two of the best games in that line - Shaun Palmer Pro Snowboarding , Mat Hoffman Pro BMX - were n't skateboarding , and were probably better for not surviving since they existed in the merits of the sport rather than the " yeah skateboarders are a bunch of vandals and criminals and you can be thieves and thugs just like them " crap message of the later games.Spider-Man games ?
Oh good fucking grief .
Just when we thought they had learned their lesson , since Spidey 2 for PS2/Xbox was stellar ( exception made for the really crappy DS and PSP ports that still used the old Spidey-1 engine ) , out comes Spidey 3 and it 's a completely retarded title with psychotic , seizure-looking " fighting " and " press X to not die " boss battles .
Sigh. Then they went and tried to redeem the engine with " Prototype " ... good concept , poor execution.In fact , their games based on Marvel in general have been crappier and crappier .
The " storyline " of Ultimate Alliance 2 was pure turdburger , and the gameplay is just so much recycled crap .
We lost a great fighting game franchise when Marvel went " Activision exclusive " and Marvel vs Capcom died , but what did they replace it with ?
Stinker after stinker of X-men " fighting game " titles , Baldurs-Gate-Lite beat-em-up " RPG " titles , and more stinky steaming turdburger movie tie-in titles than you can think of.Their James Bond " let 's rip off the CoD engine and try to make a spy game " titles ?
Oh god .
Especially the Quantum of Solace " Well we never finished the Casino Royale game so we 'll just stick the levels in this one " crap.Guitar Hero ?
Let 's see .
Guitar Hero 1-4 , " World Tour " , 5 , Aerosmith , Van Halen , Metallica , " Smash Hits " , Band Hero , DJ Hero , " Rocks the 80s " , " Greatest Hits " , Guitar Hero Mobile , Guitar Hero On Tour , Guitar Hero On Tour Decades , Guitar Hero " Backstage Pass " , " Guitar Hero Game Trivia Quiz for iPhone " , " Guitar Hero Carabiner " for mobile phones... Can we say franchise fatigue ?
Yes , I 'm pretty sure we can.It 's no surprise why Harmonix picked up , said " fuck it " to their brand name , and just started over with Rock Band .
Plus , Activision 's online store for music is crap beyond crap , trying to force you to buy everything as album packs with no previews .
With Rock Band , I mostly grab the tracks I want one at a time , unless I find a real reason to buy the " pack " or album set , and I listen to the preview first ( got burned once by one of their really crap-ass David Bowie covers , never again will I purchase unlistened... but that was my own damn fault for not previewing ) .
And as much as I hate supporting EA over anyone , in the case of Rock Band vs Guitar Hero , EA is the lesser of two evils by far.Enough is enough... Activision needs to either kick Kotick out , preferably skidding on his face rather than just landing on his fat ass , or else die so the good companies they bought up ( Blizzard ?
) can go back out and be independent and innovative once more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right Here [penny-arcade.com].Developers and franchise holders need to learn not to sign with Activision.
Or at the very least, avoid letting their franchise get locked in and their companies bought out.Look at the list of franchises Activision has "run into the fucking ground" over the years.Tony Hawk and the O2 Sports line?
Check. And sadly, two of the best games in that line - Shaun Palmer Pro Snowboarding, Mat Hoffman Pro BMX - weren't skateboarding, and were probably better for not surviving since they existed in the merits of the sport rather than the "yeah skateboarders are a bunch of vandals and criminals and you can be thieves and thugs just like them" crap message of the later games.Spider-Man games?
Oh good fucking grief.
Just when we thought they had learned their lesson, since Spidey 2 for PS2/Xbox was stellar (exception made for the really crappy DS and PSP ports that still used the old Spidey-1 engine), out comes Spidey 3 and it's a completely retarded title with psychotic, seizure-looking "fighting" and "press X to not die" boss battles.
Sigh. Then they went and tried to redeem the engine with "Prototype"... good concept, poor execution.In fact, their games based on Marvel in general have been crappier and crappier.
The "storyline" of Ultimate Alliance 2 was pure turdburger, and the gameplay is just so much recycled crap.
We lost a great fighting game franchise when Marvel went "Activision exclusive" and Marvel vs Capcom died, but what did they replace it with?
Stinker after stinker of X-men "fighting game" titles, Baldurs-Gate-Lite beat-em-up "RPG" titles, and more stinky steaming turdburger movie tie-in titles than you can think of.Their James Bond "let's rip off the CoD engine and try to make a spy game" titles?
Oh god.
Especially the Quantum of Solace "Well we never finished the Casino Royale game so we'll just stick the levels in this one" crap.Guitar Hero?
Let's see.
Guitar Hero 1-4, "World Tour", 5, Aerosmith, Van Halen, Metallica, "Smash Hits", Band Hero, DJ Hero, "Rocks the 80s", "Greatest Hits", Guitar Hero Mobile, Guitar Hero On Tour, Guitar Hero On Tour Decades, Guitar Hero "Backstage Pass", "Guitar Hero Game Trivia Quiz for iPhone", "Guitar Hero Carabiner" for mobile phones... Can we say franchise fatigue?
Yes, I'm pretty sure we can.It's no surprise why Harmonix picked up, said "fuck it" to their brand name, and just started over with Rock Band.
Plus, Activision's online store for music is crap beyond crap, trying to force you to buy everything as album packs with no previews.
With Rock Band, I mostly grab the tracks I want one at a time, unless I find a real reason to buy the "pack" or album set, and I listen to the preview first (got burned once by one of their really crap-ass David Bowie covers, never again will I purchase unlistened... but that was my own damn fault for not previewing).
And as much as I hate supporting EA over anyone, in the case of Rock Band vs Guitar Hero, EA is the lesser of two evils by far.Enough is enough... Activision needs to either kick Kotick out, preferably skidding on his face rather than just landing on his fat ass, or else die so the good companies they bought up (Blizzard?
) can go back out and be independent and innovative once more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371236</id>
	<title>Are bankers really so brain-dead?</title>
	<author>twokay</author>
	<datestamp>1267805820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think we all know the answer to that.
<br>
<br>
Its all about maximum profit in the shortest amount of time. If you can make 500 million running a game into the ground the publisher doest care, they made 500 million pumping out a generic video game by riding on the success and innovation of someone else. Its pure profit. Sure you need something new to run into the ground after 3-5 years, but by that time all the execs got their bonuses and everyone* is happy.
<br>
<br>
*everyone making money</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we all know the answer to that .
Its all about maximum profit in the shortest amount of time .
If you can make 500 million running a game into the ground the publisher doest care , they made 500 million pumping out a generic video game by riding on the success and innovation of someone else .
Its pure profit .
Sure you need something new to run into the ground after 3-5 years , but by that time all the execs got their bonuses and everyone * is happy .
* everyone making money</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we all know the answer to that.
Its all about maximum profit in the shortest amount of time.
If you can make 500 million running a game into the ground the publisher doest care, they made 500 million pumping out a generic video game by riding on the success and innovation of someone else.
Its pure profit.
Sure you need something new to run into the ground after 3-5 years, but by that time all the execs got their bonuses and everyone* is happy.
*everyone making money</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369790</id>
	<title>Activision strikes again and the site goes down :)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267796940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Server Error in '/' Application."</p><p>Yup, the G4 link is dead already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Server Error in '/ ' Application .
" Yup , the G4 link is dead already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Server Error in '/' Application.
"Yup, the G4 link is dead already.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370256</id>
	<title>Just... wow.</title>
	<author>cbope</author>
	<datestamp>1267800840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, the quote in the summary is so full of "buy our stock because we will make you tons of money" speak. Based on that one quote alone the company will never have to do real work ever again and the majority stockholders will all be multi-billionaires soon.</p><p>(not that they ever did any real work in the first place)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , the quote in the summary is so full of " buy our stock because we will make you tons of money " speak .
Based on that one quote alone the company will never have to do real work ever again and the majority stockholders will all be multi-billionaires soon .
( not that they ever did any real work in the first place )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, the quote in the summary is so full of "buy our stock because we will make you tons of money" speak.
Based on that one quote alone the company will never have to do real work ever again and the majority stockholders will all be multi-billionaires soon.
(not that they ever did any real work in the first place)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371366</id>
	<title>Re:Some very rich lawyers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267806480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meanwhile innovation will continue and businesses will choose to operate over here because our country has the best IP laws.</p><p>I hate Software Patent as much as the next guy, but at least we have some means besides a more powerful copyright to protect our software without divulging anything to the world (GPL).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meanwhile innovation will continue and businesses will choose to operate over here because our country has the best IP laws.I hate Software Patent as much as the next guy , but at least we have some means besides a more powerful copyright to protect our software without divulging anything to the world ( GPL ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meanwhile innovation will continue and businesses will choose to operate over here because our country has the best IP laws.I hate Software Patent as much as the next guy, but at least we have some means besides a more powerful copyright to protect our software without divulging anything to the world (GPL).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370712</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>pickupjojo</author>
	<datestamp>1267803480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or "Modern War Fair".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or " Modern War Fair " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or "Modern War Fair".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370526</id>
	<title>WTF?</title>
	<author>Radish03</author>
	<datestamp>1267802220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>According to Activision, 'The company intends to expand the Call of Duty brand with the same focus seen in its Blizzard Entertainment business unit.'</i> <br> <br>What?  Blizzard has put out seven titles (four of which are expansions) in the last decade.  Activision has put out nine titles in the Guitar/Whatever Hero line in just the last three years (not counting portable titles), and it sounds like they have similar plans for the Call of Duty line.  I think what they mean to say is "We think we can turn Call of Duty into a subscription based FPS that prints money for us like World of Warcraft.  And if we farm out five more shovelware titles in the same line, they'll sell based on brand recognition alone."</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to Activision , 'The company intends to expand the Call of Duty brand with the same focus seen in its Blizzard Entertainment business unit .
' What ?
Blizzard has put out seven titles ( four of which are expansions ) in the last decade .
Activision has put out nine titles in the Guitar/Whatever Hero line in just the last three years ( not counting portable titles ) , and it sounds like they have similar plans for the Call of Duty line .
I think what they mean to say is " We think we can turn Call of Duty into a subscription based FPS that prints money for us like World of Warcraft .
And if we farm out five more shovelware titles in the same line , they 'll sell based on brand recognition alone .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to Activision, 'The company intends to expand the Call of Duty brand with the same focus seen in its Blizzard Entertainment business unit.
'  What?
Blizzard has put out seven titles (four of which are expansions) in the last decade.
Activision has put out nine titles in the Guitar/Whatever Hero line in just the last three years (not counting portable titles), and it sounds like they have similar plans for the Call of Duty line.
I think what they mean to say is "We think we can turn Call of Duty into a subscription based FPS that prints money for us like World of Warcraft.
And if we farm out five more shovelware titles in the same line, they'll sell based on brand recognition alone.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370496</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>greyline</author>
	<datestamp>1267802100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Call of Duty: Let's Run this Shit into the Ground</htmltext>
<tokenext>Call of Duty : Let 's Run this Shit into the Ground</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Call of Duty: Let's Run this Shit into the Ground</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372122</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267809900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The REAL issue seems to be that <a href="http://kotaku.com/5486210/rumor-infinity-ward-had-been-courting-ea-other-publishers" title="kotaku.com" rel="nofollow">Activision was afraid</a> [kotaku.com] that the two were going to jump ship and go back to EA...</p> </div><p>If this is true, then Activision is run by insane people and their stockholders should be very, very worried.</p><p>It's not necessarily insane to fire employees.  Even employees who are really good at what they do.  There are times and places where shit like that happens and in the cold calculation of business you may calculate that it may make you more pennies to fire them than it does to keep them around.  It happens.</p><p>But it IS insane to fire employees because you're worried that they're going to quit and go work for a competitor.  That's just completely batshit nuts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The REAL issue seems to be that Activision was afraid [ kotaku.com ] that the two were going to jump ship and go back to EA... If this is true , then Activision is run by insane people and their stockholders should be very , very worried.It 's not necessarily insane to fire employees .
Even employees who are really good at what they do .
There are times and places where shit like that happens and in the cold calculation of business you may calculate that it may make you more pennies to fire them than it does to keep them around .
It happens.But it IS insane to fire employees because you 're worried that they 're going to quit and go work for a competitor .
That 's just completely batshit nuts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The REAL issue seems to be that Activision was afraid [kotaku.com] that the two were going to jump ship and go back to EA... If this is true, then Activision is run by insane people and their stockholders should be very, very worried.It's not necessarily insane to fire employees.
Even employees who are really good at what they do.
There are times and places where shit like that happens and in the cold calculation of business you may calculate that it may make you more pennies to fire them than it does to keep them around.
It happens.But it IS insane to fire employees because you're worried that they're going to quit and go work for a competitor.
That's just completely batshit nuts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372488</id>
	<title>Re:Mother Fluckers.</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1267811880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Fuck you, Activision. Fuck you for becomming the new EA.</p></div><p>The funny thing is that, for all its launch problems (servers being down etc), EA's Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is shaping up to be a much better game than Modern Warfare 2, at least on the multiplayer front.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck you , Activision .
Fuck you for becomming the new EA.The funny thing is that , for all its launch problems ( servers being down etc ) , EA 's Battlefield : Bad Company 2 is shaping up to be a much better game than Modern Warfare 2 , at least on the multiplayer front .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck you, Activision.
Fuck you for becomming the new EA.The funny thing is that, for all its launch problems (servers being down etc), EA's Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is shaping up to be a much better game than Modern Warfare 2, at least on the multiplayer front.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372848</id>
	<title>I hope they win</title>
	<author>CherniyVolk</author>
	<datestamp>1267813680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First, the new CoD MW2 is nice.  But there are some major issues with this game regarding multiplayer.</p><p>First, bring back dedicated servers.  If I decide to join a server hosted in Bahrain, from San Diego, yeah... lag.  Nothing is worse than blatant interruption of game play, I'd rather play throw lag than be interrupted for long periods of time waiting for host migration, connecting to new host, waiting for other players... 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.... just because someone decided to leave.  The time wasted waiting to continue far exceeds even the time loss dealing with noticable lag from a dedicated server.  Not to mention the heavy negative of being outright interrupted.</p><p>They have destroyed the community values of FPS games with this new system.  With Unreal Tournament, there were a handful of servers I went to, constantly.  Handles became familiar, even considering regulars as friends.  Clans used to be stronger, more prevalent... a bit harder to do in CoD MW2.  I can't help to notice a dramatic reduction in Clan Tags in CoD MW2, but this only reflects the total destruction of social aspect of the game as no social congregations can be made reliably and every round is full of strangers you haven't seen before, and may never see again.  Yes, I know about friends list, I know you can try to jimmy the distribution and I have seen clan tags in CoD... just no where near as much.</p><p>Also, where are the custom maps?  What was ridiculously boring about other CoDs was the lack of wide use of custom maps.   Unreal Tournament, full of custom maps, anyone remember the giant maps... of like an office... chair was 100 feet tall?  Man, those were the best.</p><p>Anyways, I couldn't care less for CoD MW2.  If they die and never release another game I figure that's a good thing.</p><p>They need to bring back dedicated servers, what they are doing now sucks ass.  There's no social glue with the game, so when I finally get bored of the maps why play anymore?  On the other hand, Unreal Tournament some servers only had one map, but I continued to play because friends and familiar people played on that server too; some where considered 'home' for friendly clans... etc etc.  Here, it's just pure insanity and stupidity, why play?</p><p>Some people like this new crap network arch they have going on.  I think they haven't really thought about it thoroughly, maybe they are stupid, maybe they can't think further ahead than five minutes, maybe they are just dumb.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , the new CoD MW2 is nice .
But there are some major issues with this game regarding multiplayer.First , bring back dedicated servers .
If I decide to join a server hosted in Bahrain , from San Diego , yeah... lag. Nothing is worse than blatant interruption of game play , I 'd rather play throw lag than be interrupted for long periods of time waiting for host migration , connecting to new host , waiting for other players... 5 , 4 , 3 , 2 , 1.... just because someone decided to leave .
The time wasted waiting to continue far exceeds even the time loss dealing with noticable lag from a dedicated server .
Not to mention the heavy negative of being outright interrupted.They have destroyed the community values of FPS games with this new system .
With Unreal Tournament , there were a handful of servers I went to , constantly .
Handles became familiar , even considering regulars as friends .
Clans used to be stronger , more prevalent... a bit harder to do in CoD MW2 .
I ca n't help to notice a dramatic reduction in Clan Tags in CoD MW2 , but this only reflects the total destruction of social aspect of the game as no social congregations can be made reliably and every round is full of strangers you have n't seen before , and may never see again .
Yes , I know about friends list , I know you can try to jimmy the distribution and I have seen clan tags in CoD... just no where near as much.Also , where are the custom maps ?
What was ridiculously boring about other CoDs was the lack of wide use of custom maps .
Unreal Tournament , full of custom maps , anyone remember the giant maps... of like an office... chair was 100 feet tall ?
Man , those were the best.Anyways , I could n't care less for CoD MW2 .
If they die and never release another game I figure that 's a good thing.They need to bring back dedicated servers , what they are doing now sucks ass .
There 's no social glue with the game , so when I finally get bored of the maps why play anymore ?
On the other hand , Unreal Tournament some servers only had one map , but I continued to play because friends and familiar people played on that server too ; some where considered 'home ' for friendly clans... etc etc .
Here , it 's just pure insanity and stupidity , why play ? Some people like this new crap network arch they have going on .
I think they have n't really thought about it thoroughly , maybe they are stupid , maybe they ca n't think further ahead than five minutes , maybe they are just dumb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, the new CoD MW2 is nice.
But there are some major issues with this game regarding multiplayer.First, bring back dedicated servers.
If I decide to join a server hosted in Bahrain, from San Diego, yeah... lag.  Nothing is worse than blatant interruption of game play, I'd rather play throw lag than be interrupted for long periods of time waiting for host migration, connecting to new host, waiting for other players... 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.... just because someone decided to leave.
The time wasted waiting to continue far exceeds even the time loss dealing with noticable lag from a dedicated server.
Not to mention the heavy negative of being outright interrupted.They have destroyed the community values of FPS games with this new system.
With Unreal Tournament, there were a handful of servers I went to, constantly.
Handles became familiar, even considering regulars as friends.
Clans used to be stronger, more prevalent... a bit harder to do in CoD MW2.
I can't help to notice a dramatic reduction in Clan Tags in CoD MW2, but this only reflects the total destruction of social aspect of the game as no social congregations can be made reliably and every round is full of strangers you haven't seen before, and may never see again.
Yes, I know about friends list, I know you can try to jimmy the distribution and I have seen clan tags in CoD... just no where near as much.Also, where are the custom maps?
What was ridiculously boring about other CoDs was the lack of wide use of custom maps.
Unreal Tournament, full of custom maps, anyone remember the giant maps... of like an office... chair was 100 feet tall?
Man, those were the best.Anyways, I couldn't care less for CoD MW2.
If they die and never release another game I figure that's a good thing.They need to bring back dedicated servers, what they are doing now sucks ass.
There's no social glue with the game, so when I finally get bored of the maps why play anymore?
On the other hand, Unreal Tournament some servers only had one map, but I continued to play because friends and familiar people played on that server too; some where considered 'home' for friendly clans... etc etc.
Here, it's just pure insanity and stupidity, why play?Some people like this new crap network arch they have going on.
I think they haven't really thought about it thoroughly, maybe they are stupid, maybe they can't think further ahead than five minutes, maybe they are just dumb.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371170</id>
	<title>Re:Why are publishers so brain-dead?</title>
	<author>Asclepius99</author>
	<datestamp>1267805580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What I find even more astounding is that gaming companies don't seem to understand that customers don't only think about brands in terms of titles for specific games (Call of Duty, Guitar Hero, etc.) but that we also think about brand in terms of the company that produces it (Acitivision Blizzard, EA, etc.).  If they start making a bunch of low quality CoD games, customers will keep that in mind when looking at other Activision franchises.  If you can build yourself up as a reputable game studio that always puts a lot of effort into their games then customers are going to be more likely to try new things (not just established franchise sequels) you produce than if you're known for corner-cutting and churning out sequels/spin-offs just for the cash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I find even more astounding is that gaming companies do n't seem to understand that customers do n't only think about brands in terms of titles for specific games ( Call of Duty , Guitar Hero , etc .
) but that we also think about brand in terms of the company that produces it ( Acitivision Blizzard , EA , etc. ) .
If they start making a bunch of low quality CoD games , customers will keep that in mind when looking at other Activision franchises .
If you can build yourself up as a reputable game studio that always puts a lot of effort into their games then customers are going to be more likely to try new things ( not just established franchise sequels ) you produce than if you 're known for corner-cutting and churning out sequels/spin-offs just for the cash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I find even more astounding is that gaming companies don't seem to understand that customers don't only think about brands in terms of titles for specific games (Call of Duty, Guitar Hero, etc.
) but that we also think about brand in terms of the company that produces it (Acitivision Blizzard, EA, etc.).
If they start making a bunch of low quality CoD games, customers will keep that in mind when looking at other Activision franchises.
If you can build yourself up as a reputable game studio that always puts a lot of effort into their games then customers are going to be more likely to try new things (not just established franchise sequels) you produce than if you're known for corner-cutting and churning out sequels/spin-offs just for the cash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369968</id>
	<title>Oversaturation of the Brand</title>
	<author>Crock23A</author>
	<datestamp>1267798560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know the real story is the lawsuit and the mud-slinging but let's not forget what Activision has done to the Guitar Hero franchise.  There are like 25 games out in 5 years and they have milked it to death.  Now COD (7) is on the way and you can bet there will be spin-offs and the like all over the place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know the real story is the lawsuit and the mud-slinging but let 's not forget what Activision has done to the Guitar Hero franchise .
There are like 25 games out in 5 years and they have milked it to death .
Now COD ( 7 ) is on the way and you can bet there will be spin-offs and the like all over the place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know the real story is the lawsuit and the mud-slinging but let's not forget what Activision has done to the Guitar Hero franchise.
There are like 25 games out in 5 years and they have milked it to death.
Now COD (7) is on the way and you can bet there will be spin-offs and the like all over the place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370930</id>
	<title>Ha-lo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267804440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How has no one mentioned the Halo line?</p><p>Halo 1, 2, 3, ODST, Wars, and now Reach. All which seem to have been quite successful despite the overuse of the series.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How has no one mentioned the Halo line ? Halo 1 , 2 , 3 , ODST , Wars , and now Reach .
All which seem to have been quite successful despite the overuse of the series .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How has no one mentioned the Halo line?Halo 1, 2, 3, ODST, Wars, and now Reach.
All which seem to have been quite successful despite the overuse of the series.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846</id>
	<title>Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>anomnomnomymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267797480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Call of Duty: Activision Warfare<br> <br>
On a more serious note: I'm feeling a bit doublesided about the whole debacle of Activision firing Jason West and Vince Zampella: On one hand it's a shame to see that two apparently talented developers are so easy to fire, on the other hand: They brought this onto themselves when they decided to sell the company to Activision.<br>
If they'd done some proper research they would have seen how horrible Activision has been treating their studios/games the past few years (loads of developers have been fleeing to other publishers), so this shouldn't come as a surprise.<br> <br>
I still can't understand why IW choose to let them be bought out though: They were/are a very succesful studio, and they sold for a very low price. Sounded like a dumb move at the time, and after hearing about the incredible sales figures for CoD:MW2, it sounds even more stupid that they've taken that step.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Call of Duty : Activision Warfare On a more serious note : I 'm feeling a bit doublesided about the whole debacle of Activision firing Jason West and Vince Zampella : On one hand it 's a shame to see that two apparently talented developers are so easy to fire , on the other hand : They brought this onto themselves when they decided to sell the company to Activision .
If they 'd done some proper research they would have seen how horrible Activision has been treating their studios/games the past few years ( loads of developers have been fleeing to other publishers ) , so this should n't come as a surprise .
I still ca n't understand why IW choose to let them be bought out though : They were/are a very succesful studio , and they sold for a very low price .
Sounded like a dumb move at the time , and after hearing about the incredible sales figures for CoD : MW2 , it sounds even more stupid that they 've taken that step .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Call of Duty: Activision Warfare 
On a more serious note: I'm feeling a bit doublesided about the whole debacle of Activision firing Jason West and Vince Zampella: On one hand it's a shame to see that two apparently talented developers are so easy to fire, on the other hand: They brought this onto themselves when they decided to sell the company to Activision.
If they'd done some proper research they would have seen how horrible Activision has been treating their studios/games the past few years (loads of developers have been fleeing to other publishers), so this shouldn't come as a surprise.
I still can't understand why IW choose to let them be bought out though: They were/are a very succesful studio, and they sold for a very low price.
Sounded like a dumb move at the time, and after hearing about the incredible sales figures for CoD:MW2, it sounds even more stupid that they've taken that step.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372730</id>
	<title>Teabag games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267813140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Activision is what I tend to call teabag games. That is, take the idea for a game being to a game like a teabag for a cup of tea. You take a fresh one out of the box, you brew your tea, and it will be good. Likewise, you take a fresh idea out of your head and turn it into a game, it will be good.</p><p>Thinking that the same bag of tea leaves will give you another good cup of tea, since it did it once before, is maybe an idea that springs to your mind, but it is about as wrong as it could be.</p><p>Like teabags make one good cup of tea, game ideas make one good game. You can of course use the same blend that gave you a great cup of tea, but you have to break open another bag of tea and use this. Not the one you already used. That one is spent and its flavour was poured into your first cup of tea. Likewise, the same general formula will allow you to make another good game, but you still have to invest into another bag of tea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Activision is what I tend to call teabag games .
That is , take the idea for a game being to a game like a teabag for a cup of tea .
You take a fresh one out of the box , you brew your tea , and it will be good .
Likewise , you take a fresh idea out of your head and turn it into a game , it will be good.Thinking that the same bag of tea leaves will give you another good cup of tea , since it did it once before , is maybe an idea that springs to your mind , but it is about as wrong as it could be.Like teabags make one good cup of tea , game ideas make one good game .
You can of course use the same blend that gave you a great cup of tea , but you have to break open another bag of tea and use this .
Not the one you already used .
That one is spent and its flavour was poured into your first cup of tea .
Likewise , the same general formula will allow you to make another good game , but you still have to invest into another bag of tea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Activision is what I tend to call teabag games.
That is, take the idea for a game being to a game like a teabag for a cup of tea.
You take a fresh one out of the box, you brew your tea, and it will be good.
Likewise, you take a fresh idea out of your head and turn it into a game, it will be good.Thinking that the same bag of tea leaves will give you another good cup of tea, since it did it once before, is maybe an idea that springs to your mind, but it is about as wrong as it could be.Like teabags make one good cup of tea, game ideas make one good game.
You can of course use the same blend that gave you a great cup of tea, but you have to break open another bag of tea and use this.
Not the one you already used.
That one is spent and its flavour was poured into your first cup of tea.
Likewise, the same general formula will allow you to make another good game, but you still have to invest into another bag of tea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31373298</id>
	<title>Re:Mother Fluckers.</title>
	<author>bigstrat2003</author>
	<datestamp>1267815840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And it's a great game single-player, too. It's basically what Modern Warfare 2 should have been, I'm happy they made it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And it 's a great game single-player , too .
It 's basically what Modern Warfare 2 should have been , I 'm happy they made it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it's a great game single-player, too.
It's basically what Modern Warfare 2 should have been, I'm happy they made it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370174</id>
	<title>Mother Fluckers.</title>
	<author>Pojut</author>
	<datestamp>1267800240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fuck you, Activision.  Modern Warfare was awesome.  Modern Warfare 2 was ok.  At this point, the series has no where to go but downhill.  Why kill it like this?</p><p>Fuck you, Activision.  Fuck you for becomming the new EA.  Fuck you for treating your employees like shit.  Fuck you for diluting the gaming industry and making it all about the money even more than it already was.</p><p>Fuck you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck you , Activision .
Modern Warfare was awesome .
Modern Warfare 2 was ok. At this point , the series has no where to go but downhill .
Why kill it like this ? Fuck you , Activision .
Fuck you for becomming the new EA .
Fuck you for treating your employees like shit .
Fuck you for diluting the gaming industry and making it all about the money even more than it already was.Fuck you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck you, Activision.
Modern Warfare was awesome.
Modern Warfare 2 was ok.  At this point, the series has no where to go but downhill.
Why kill it like this?Fuck you, Activision.
Fuck you for becomming the new EA.
Fuck you for treating your employees like shit.
Fuck you for diluting the gaming industry and making it all about the money even more than it already was.Fuck you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370636</id>
	<title>Why are publishers so brain-dead?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267802820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I never understand it when publishers want to kill the original creators and just flood the market with games under the same brand. Yeah, sure, it'll probably pick up a quick buck in the short term (for people who hang onto the brand). But once the gamers cotton onto the fact that all the new games suck (as they invariably will) they'll stop buying. So it's short term gain (most likely) and long term loss/failure</p><p>Whereas, if they keep the original creators they don't get the short term "insta-cash". But they get continual quality and therefore a more dependable revenue stream. I just don't get the mind set of publishers when they favor the former solution. Are they really <i>that</i> stupid?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never understand it when publishers want to kill the original creators and just flood the market with games under the same brand .
Yeah , sure , it 'll probably pick up a quick buck in the short term ( for people who hang onto the brand ) .
But once the gamers cotton onto the fact that all the new games suck ( as they invariably will ) they 'll stop buying .
So it 's short term gain ( most likely ) and long term loss/failureWhereas , if they keep the original creators they do n't get the short term " insta-cash " .
But they get continual quality and therefore a more dependable revenue stream .
I just do n't get the mind set of publishers when they favor the former solution .
Are they really that stupid ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never understand it when publishers want to kill the original creators and just flood the market with games under the same brand.
Yeah, sure, it'll probably pick up a quick buck in the short term (for people who hang onto the brand).
But once the gamers cotton onto the fact that all the new games suck (as they invariably will) they'll stop buying.
So it's short term gain (most likely) and long term loss/failureWhereas, if they keep the original creators they don't get the short term "insta-cash".
But they get continual quality and therefore a more dependable revenue stream.
I just don't get the mind set of publishers when they favor the former solution.
Are they really that stupid?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371862</id>
	<title>New idea for a Game!!!!!</title>
	<author>neptunusmaris</author>
	<datestamp>1267808700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bear with me...

A pr0n (or norpo) game called:

Call of Booty: Modern Whorefare


YES</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bear with me.. . A pr0n ( or norpo ) game called : Call of Booty : Modern Whorefare YES</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bear with me...

A pr0n (or norpo) game called:

Call of Booty: Modern Whorefare


YES</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370092</id>
	<title>I must have missed something</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267799580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ars opines that Activision is set to over-saturate the market with tons of CoD titles similar to how it expertly brought down Guitar Hero.</p></div><p>Brought down? It's still wildly popular.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ars opines that Activision is set to over-saturate the market with tons of CoD titles similar to how it expertly brought down Guitar Hero.Brought down ?
It 's still wildly popular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ars opines that Activision is set to over-saturate the market with tons of CoD titles similar to how it expertly brought down Guitar Hero.Brought down?
It's still wildly popular.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371062</id>
	<title>Re:Why are publishers so brain-dead?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267804980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I never understand it when publishers want to kill the original creators and just flood the market with games under the same brand. Yeah, sure, it'll probably pick up a quick buck in the short term (for people who hang onto the brand). But once the gamers cotton onto the fact that all the new games suck (as they invariably will) they'll stop buying. So it's short term gain (most likely) and long term loss/failure</p><p>Whereas, if they keep the original creators they don't get the short term "insta-cash". But they get continual quality and therefore a more dependable revenue stream. I just don't get the mind set of publishers when they favor the former solution. Are they really <i>that</i> stupid?</p></div><p>If you can make 4 Billion in 3 years by over-exploiting your own franchies versus maybe making 4 Billion or more spread out over 10 years in smaller payouts. Would you go for the long term option?</p><p>There's always going to be an idiot consumer market, the people who buy stuff based soley on brandname alone the trick is keeping them faithfull. If Activision can find new franchises to exploit faster than they can over-exploit them they could be here for a long time. I don't like Bobby Kotick or his ideas on how to run a good publisher, but you have to hand it to him, he is pretty good at what he does.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I never understand it when publishers want to kill the original creators and just flood the market with games under the same brand .
Yeah , sure , it 'll probably pick up a quick buck in the short term ( for people who hang onto the brand ) .
But once the gamers cotton onto the fact that all the new games suck ( as they invariably will ) they 'll stop buying .
So it 's short term gain ( most likely ) and long term loss/failureWhereas , if they keep the original creators they do n't get the short term " insta-cash " .
But they get continual quality and therefore a more dependable revenue stream .
I just do n't get the mind set of publishers when they favor the former solution .
Are they really that stupid ? If you can make 4 Billion in 3 years by over-exploiting your own franchies versus maybe making 4 Billion or more spread out over 10 years in smaller payouts .
Would you go for the long term option ? There 's always going to be an idiot consumer market , the people who buy stuff based soley on brandname alone the trick is keeping them faithfull .
If Activision can find new franchises to exploit faster than they can over-exploit them they could be here for a long time .
I do n't like Bobby Kotick or his ideas on how to run a good publisher , but you have to hand it to him , he is pretty good at what he does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never understand it when publishers want to kill the original creators and just flood the market with games under the same brand.
Yeah, sure, it'll probably pick up a quick buck in the short term (for people who hang onto the brand).
But once the gamers cotton onto the fact that all the new games suck (as they invariably will) they'll stop buying.
So it's short term gain (most likely) and long term loss/failureWhereas, if they keep the original creators they don't get the short term "insta-cash".
But they get continual quality and therefore a more dependable revenue stream.
I just don't get the mind set of publishers when they favor the former solution.
Are they really that stupid?If you can make 4 Billion in 3 years by over-exploiting your own franchies versus maybe making 4 Billion or more spread out over 10 years in smaller payouts.
Would you go for the long term option?There's always going to be an idiot consumer market, the people who buy stuff based soley on brandname alone the trick is keeping them faithfull.
If Activision can find new franchises to exploit faster than they can over-exploit them they could be here for a long time.
I don't like Bobby Kotick or his ideas on how to run a good publisher, but you have to hand it to him, he is pretty good at what he does.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371694</id>
	<title>Asking a question about servers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267807980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As anonymous coward, with a score of 0.</p><p>Could Activision be forced to take down the servers due to legal action (Not paying the developers)?  If so, what happens to CoD:MW2?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As anonymous coward , with a score of 0.Could Activision be forced to take down the servers due to legal action ( Not paying the developers ) ?
If so , what happens to CoD : MW2 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As anonymous coward, with a score of 0.Could Activision be forced to take down the servers due to legal action (Not paying the developers)?
If so, what happens to CoD:MW2?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369918</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267798080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except they weren't a successful studio when they got bought, they were a small studio trying to release their first game.  and at the time, activision was not nearly as reviled as they are now.  if you're a brand new developer and one of the largest publishers in the world offers to buy you but let you maintain creative control, you don't say no.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except they were n't a successful studio when they got bought , they were a small studio trying to release their first game .
and at the time , activision was not nearly as reviled as they are now .
if you 're a brand new developer and one of the largest publishers in the world offers to buy you but let you maintain creative control , you do n't say no .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except they weren't a successful studio when they got bought, they were a small studio trying to release their first game.
and at the time, activision was not nearly as reviled as they are now.
if you're a brand new developer and one of the largest publishers in the world offers to buy you but let you maintain creative control, you don't say no.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31374464</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>BobMcD</author>
	<datestamp>1267821000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's like a husband suspecting that his wife is cheating, turned the house upside down looking for evidence, and then the only "evidence" he can find is an off handed email from a year ago and kicks her out saying "you know what you've done"...</p></div><p>Perhaps, if his wife has been bickering about keeping a separate bank account and flips back and forth between keeping his last name and dropping it.  It seems really clear that the wife in this scenario isn't planning to stay faithful, even if there's no proof that she has yet strayed.</p><p>There are some articles linked to the one you linked that talk about some goings-on over there.  Your depiction that only includes this piece of the story does make it seem as if Activision is crazy, but the whole picture seems less so.</p><p>I do wonder if they didn't overreact, but it seems clear that IW was seeking to branch MW from CoD.  They may or may not have been doing so in a bid to break away and take 'their' title with them.  If Activision fired them to make that impossible, then I'd say that is likely wise business.  If IW's contracts aren't such that this kind of move is impossible, then they probably need to hire a better law firm to draw those sorts of things up.</p><p>Sounds like the courts will be the ones that eventually get to the bottom of it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like a husband suspecting that his wife is cheating , turned the house upside down looking for evidence , and then the only " evidence " he can find is an off handed email from a year ago and kicks her out saying " you know what you 've done " ...Perhaps , if his wife has been bickering about keeping a separate bank account and flips back and forth between keeping his last name and dropping it .
It seems really clear that the wife in this scenario is n't planning to stay faithful , even if there 's no proof that she has yet strayed.There are some articles linked to the one you linked that talk about some goings-on over there .
Your depiction that only includes this piece of the story does make it seem as if Activision is crazy , but the whole picture seems less so.I do wonder if they did n't overreact , but it seems clear that IW was seeking to branch MW from CoD .
They may or may not have been doing so in a bid to break away and take 'their ' title with them .
If Activision fired them to make that impossible , then I 'd say that is likely wise business .
If IW 's contracts are n't such that this kind of move is impossible , then they probably need to hire a better law firm to draw those sorts of things up.Sounds like the courts will be the ones that eventually get to the bottom of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like a husband suspecting that his wife is cheating, turned the house upside down looking for evidence, and then the only "evidence" he can find is an off handed email from a year ago and kicks her out saying "you know what you've done"...Perhaps, if his wife has been bickering about keeping a separate bank account and flips back and forth between keeping his last name and dropping it.
It seems really clear that the wife in this scenario isn't planning to stay faithful, even if there's no proof that she has yet strayed.There are some articles linked to the one you linked that talk about some goings-on over there.
Your depiction that only includes this piece of the story does make it seem as if Activision is crazy, but the whole picture seems less so.I do wonder if they didn't overreact, but it seems clear that IW was seeking to branch MW from CoD.
They may or may not have been doing so in a bid to break away and take 'their' title with them.
If Activision fired them to make that impossible, then I'd say that is likely wise business.
If IW's contracts aren't such that this kind of move is impossible, then they probably need to hire a better law firm to draw those sorts of things up.Sounds like the courts will be the ones that eventually get to the bottom of it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369864</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267797600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I prefer "Modern Lawfare" or "Call Of Jury".<br> <br>
Or you could combine.. "Call Of Jury: Modern Lawfare".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer " Modern Lawfare " or " Call Of Jury " .
Or you could combine.. " Call Of Jury : Modern Lawfare " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer "Modern Lawfare" or "Call Of Jury".
Or you could combine.. "Call Of Jury: Modern Lawfare".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267799400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>According the legal brief that IW filed they didn't "SELL" to Activision, Activision simply bought them out. Also after MW1 West and Zampella signed a contract with Activision that gave them exclusive rights to the "Modern Warfare" name, stating that no game can hold that title, nor can any Call of duty game take place after the Vietnam War without written consent from both of them. It also promised them royalties for for any past or present Call of Duty game or any game built on an engine developed by IW. It also promised them creative freedoms to explore new IPs instead of just churning out COD games.  The only "hitch" was that the two had to make another Modern Warfare (MW2) and that they had to deliver it by November 15th..
<br> <br>
Well, they delivered the game, and did so 5 days before it was due. honestly I think even if Activision has valid grounds for letting them go, they still owe them what was promised in that contract since it the two of them clearly met their end of the bargain. Kotaku has the whole legal briefing... <a href="http://kotaku.com/5485703/ousted-infinity-ward-founders-lawsuit-against-activision-the-court-documents/gallery/" title="kotaku.com">it's eye opening</a> [kotaku.com]
<br> <br>
The REAL issue seems to be that <a href="http://kotaku.com/5486210/rumor-infinity-ward-had-been-courting-ea-other-publishers" title="kotaku.com">Activision was afraid</a> [kotaku.com] that the two were going to jump ship and go back to EA... The legal brief also goes into details of ridiculous month-long interrogation techniques Activision put the IW developers though trying to find evidence against West and Zampella. The final termination was based on comments made by them at a meeting over a year ago, and they were given 6 hours to "respond" to the charge of "insubordination" without being told what the charge was actually about.
<br> <br>
It's like a husband suspecting that his wife is cheating, turned the house upside down looking for evidence, and then the only "evidence" he can find is an off handed email from a year ago and kicks her out saying "you know what you've done"...</htmltext>
<tokenext>According the legal brief that IW filed they did n't " SELL " to Activision , Activision simply bought them out .
Also after MW1 West and Zampella signed a contract with Activision that gave them exclusive rights to the " Modern Warfare " name , stating that no game can hold that title , nor can any Call of duty game take place after the Vietnam War without written consent from both of them .
It also promised them royalties for for any past or present Call of Duty game or any game built on an engine developed by IW .
It also promised them creative freedoms to explore new IPs instead of just churning out COD games .
The only " hitch " was that the two had to make another Modern Warfare ( MW2 ) and that they had to deliver it by November 15th. . Well , they delivered the game , and did so 5 days before it was due .
honestly I think even if Activision has valid grounds for letting them go , they still owe them what was promised in that contract since it the two of them clearly met their end of the bargain .
Kotaku has the whole legal briefing... it 's eye opening [ kotaku.com ] The REAL issue seems to be that Activision was afraid [ kotaku.com ] that the two were going to jump ship and go back to EA... The legal brief also goes into details of ridiculous month-long interrogation techniques Activision put the IW developers though trying to find evidence against West and Zampella .
The final termination was based on comments made by them at a meeting over a year ago , and they were given 6 hours to " respond " to the charge of " insubordination " without being told what the charge was actually about .
It 's like a husband suspecting that his wife is cheating , turned the house upside down looking for evidence , and then the only " evidence " he can find is an off handed email from a year ago and kicks her out saying " you know what you 've done " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According the legal brief that IW filed they didn't "SELL" to Activision, Activision simply bought them out.
Also after MW1 West and Zampella signed a contract with Activision that gave them exclusive rights to the "Modern Warfare" name, stating that no game can hold that title, nor can any Call of duty game take place after the Vietnam War without written consent from both of them.
It also promised them royalties for for any past or present Call of Duty game or any game built on an engine developed by IW.
It also promised them creative freedoms to explore new IPs instead of just churning out COD games.
The only "hitch" was that the two had to make another Modern Warfare (MW2) and that they had to deliver it by November 15th..
 
Well, they delivered the game, and did so 5 days before it was due.
honestly I think even if Activision has valid grounds for letting them go, they still owe them what was promised in that contract since it the two of them clearly met their end of the bargain.
Kotaku has the whole legal briefing... it's eye opening [kotaku.com]
 
The REAL issue seems to be that Activision was afraid [kotaku.com] that the two were going to jump ship and go back to EA... The legal brief also goes into details of ridiculous month-long interrogation techniques Activision put the IW developers though trying to find evidence against West and Zampella.
The final termination was based on comments made by them at a meeting over a year ago, and they were given 6 hours to "respond" to the charge of "insubordination" without being told what the charge was actually about.
It's like a husband suspecting that his wife is cheating, turned the house upside down looking for evidence, and then the only "evidence" he can find is an off handed email from a year ago and kicks her out saying "you know what you've done"...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369854</id>
	<title>iGnAA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267797480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">GAY NIGGERS FROM your replies ra7her cycle; take a and what supplies 4ny doubt: FreeBSD Reasons why anyone</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>GAY NIGGERS FROM your replies ra7her cycle ; take a and what supplies 4ny doubt : FreeBSD Reasons why anyone [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GAY NIGGERS FROM your replies ra7her cycle; take a and what supplies 4ny doubt: FreeBSD Reasons why anyone [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370532</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1267802220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I picture Doctor Faustus crying out to a judge "But I made the deal with the devil in good faith!! I couldn't have known he would screw me!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I picture Doctor Faustus crying out to a judge " But I made the deal with the devil in good faith ! !
I could n't have known he would screw me !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I picture Doctor Faustus crying out to a judge "But I made the deal with the devil in good faith!!
I couldn't have known he would screw me!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31375376</id>
	<title>Here's an idea...</title>
	<author>nilbog</author>
	<datestamp>1267782420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's an idea: let's create a game that trains legions of nothing-to-lose nerds how to proficiently use an arsenal of modern weaponry.  Then let's do stuff to really piss them off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's an idea : let 's create a game that trains legions of nothing-to-lose nerds how to proficiently use an arsenal of modern weaponry .
Then let 's do stuff to really piss them off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's an idea: let's create a game that trains legions of nothing-to-lose nerds how to proficiently use an arsenal of modern weaponry.
Then let's do stuff to really piss them off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31373692</id>
	<title>Re:I really don't understand.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267817460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like a new line of IP for a independent game company to start. Want to place bets that Activision would still buy it? Heh...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like a new line of IP for a independent game company to start .
Want to place bets that Activision would still buy it ?
Heh.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like a new line of IP for a independent game company to start.
Want to place bets that Activision would still buy it?
Heh...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371024</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>KnownIssues</author>
	<datestamp>1267804800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>According the legal brief that IW filed they didn't "SELL" to Activision, Activision simply bought them out.</p></div><p>This is a sincere question. How can you buy something that isn't for sale? Unless you're the government.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>According the legal brief that IW filed they did n't " SELL " to Activision , Activision simply bought them out.This is a sincere question .
How can you buy something that is n't for sale ?
Unless you 're the government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According the legal brief that IW filed they didn't "SELL" to Activision, Activision simply bought them out.This is a sincere question.
How can you buy something that isn't for sale?
Unless you're the government.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370596</id>
	<title>A great lesson</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1267802580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This should be a quite instructive case for small developers and individuals who might be tempted to sell out to a major studio, foolishly thinking it will only make their product better and that they won't get screwed in the end.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This should be a quite instructive case for small developers and individuals who might be tempted to sell out to a major studio , foolishly thinking it will only make their product better and that they wo n't get screwed in the end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This should be a quite instructive case for small developers and individuals who might be tempted to sell out to a major studio, foolishly thinking it will only make their product better and that they won't get screwed in the end.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31378300</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>bertoelcon</author>
	<datestamp>1267805640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since I saw
<a href="http://filetrip.net/f4688-Ace-Attorney-DS-Casemaker-1-1.html" title="filetrip.net">this</a> [filetrip.net] the other day I may try to make that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since I saw this [ filetrip.net ] the other day I may try to make that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since I saw
this [filetrip.net] the other day I may try to make that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369906</id>
	<title>It's all about control</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267797900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In their countersue Jason West and Vince Zampella claim that they have the right for "creative authority and approval for any "Modern Warfare" titles set in the post-Vietnam era, near future, or distant future".</p><p>Is it coincidence that Activision is announcing the development of several COD games at the same time?</p><p>What I suspect happened is that Activision just started developing these games without consulting Jason West and Vince Zampella, and then went to talk to them thinking they could just force them to do what they wanted.<br>When they refused, they got fired.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In their countersue Jason West and Vince Zampella claim that they have the right for " creative authority and approval for any " Modern Warfare " titles set in the post-Vietnam era , near future , or distant future " .Is it coincidence that Activision is announcing the development of several COD games at the same time ? What I suspect happened is that Activision just started developing these games without consulting Jason West and Vince Zampella , and then went to talk to them thinking they could just force them to do what they wanted.When they refused , they got fired .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In their countersue Jason West and Vince Zampella claim that they have the right for "creative authority and approval for any "Modern Warfare" titles set in the post-Vietnam era, near future, or distant future".Is it coincidence that Activision is announcing the development of several COD games at the same time?What I suspect happened is that Activision just started developing these games without consulting Jason West and Vince Zampella, and then went to talk to them thinking they could just force them to do what they wanted.When they refused, they got fired.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370764</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>grapeape</author>
	<datestamp>1267803660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thats true if you go back to the recent past but if you go back to the time when IW was purchased, Activision was the less evil of the big 3 (EA, Ubisoft and Activision).  In the time since, EA has worked hard to improve its image, taking chances on new IP, taking a more hands off approach with developers, listening to customer feedback, etc.  Meanwhile Activision has gutted 7 studios, Radical and Neversoft then they closed Underground Studios, Luxoflux, Shaba Studios and Red Octane.  Add in Kotick's public "supposed-misquotes" such as</p><p>"really [reward] profit and nothing else"</p><p>"skepticism, pessimism, and fear" is promoted within the company with the goal of "keeping people focused on the deep depression."</p><p>"The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games."</p><p>The big difference now is that back in the day when EA was the most evil, they were buying up rights to game genres (NFL, etc) and rehashing old titles with nothing new to offer.  There was really no one person to focus nerd rage at.  With activision gamers have their very own Darth Vader...minus the cool costume.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats true if you go back to the recent past but if you go back to the time when IW was purchased , Activision was the less evil of the big 3 ( EA , Ubisoft and Activision ) .
In the time since , EA has worked hard to improve its image , taking chances on new IP , taking a more hands off approach with developers , listening to customer feedback , etc .
Meanwhile Activision has gutted 7 studios , Radical and Neversoft then they closed Underground Studios , Luxoflux , Shaba Studios and Red Octane .
Add in Kotick 's public " supposed-misquotes " such as " really [ reward ] profit and nothing else " " skepticism , pessimism , and fear " is promoted within the company with the goal of " keeping people focused on the deep depression .
" " The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games .
" The big difference now is that back in the day when EA was the most evil , they were buying up rights to game genres ( NFL , etc ) and rehashing old titles with nothing new to offer .
There was really no one person to focus nerd rage at .
With activision gamers have their very own Darth Vader...minus the cool costume .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats true if you go back to the recent past but if you go back to the time when IW was purchased, Activision was the less evil of the big 3 (EA, Ubisoft and Activision).
In the time since, EA has worked hard to improve its image, taking chances on new IP, taking a more hands off approach with developers, listening to customer feedback, etc.
Meanwhile Activision has gutted 7 studios, Radical and Neversoft then they closed Underground Studios, Luxoflux, Shaba Studios and Red Octane.
Add in Kotick's public "supposed-misquotes" such as"really [reward] profit and nothing else""skepticism, pessimism, and fear" is promoted within the company with the goal of "keeping people focused on the deep depression.
""The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games.
"The big difference now is that back in the day when EA was the most evil, they were buying up rights to game genres (NFL, etc) and rehashing old titles with nothing new to offer.
There was really no one person to focus nerd rage at.
With activision gamers have their very own Darth Vader...minus the cool costume.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370914</id>
	<title>Call of Money: Activision Lawfare.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267804380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems to be a rather fitting title for me for the sequel.</p><p>Splut.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems to be a rather fitting title for me for the sequel.Splut .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems to be a rather fitting title for me for the sequel.Splut.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371762</id>
	<title>As a scorned PC gamer...</title>
	<author>dr\_wheel</author>
	<datestamp>1267808280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... allow me to say, good for them. They really put the screws to the PC community with Modern Warfare 2.</p><p>Infinity Ward sold their souls a long time ago. Zampella and West, I hope Bobby Kotick rapes your franchise for the next decade or two. Karma is a bitch, boys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... allow me to say , good for them .
They really put the screws to the PC community with Modern Warfare 2.Infinity Ward sold their souls a long time ago .
Zampella and West , I hope Bobby Kotick rapes your franchise for the next decade or two .
Karma is a bitch , boys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... allow me to say, good for them.
They really put the screws to the PC community with Modern Warfare 2.Infinity Ward sold their souls a long time ago.
Zampella and West, I hope Bobby Kotick rapes your franchise for the next decade or two.
Karma is a bitch, boys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31375278</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>FearForWings</author>
	<datestamp>1267781880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you have misinterpreted this quote. What they want to do is turn CoD into a <a href="http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/call-of-duty-6/1068560p1.html?RSSwhen2010-02-11\_105600&amp;RSSid=1068560" title="gamespy.com" rel="nofollow">pay to play</a> [gamespy.com] game, where they get monthly fees for multilayer game play like WoW.  While I can't find the links now, there was a secretive poll by Activision to judge this possibility and other innuendos like your quote to suggest that this is where they are trying to go. </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you have misinterpreted this quote .
What they want to do is turn CoD into a pay to play [ gamespy.com ] game , where they get monthly fees for multilayer game play like WoW .
While I ca n't find the links now , there was a secretive poll by Activision to judge this possibility and other innuendos like your quote to suggest that this is where they are trying to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you have misinterpreted this quote.
What they want to do is turn CoD into a pay to play [gamespy.com] game, where they get monthly fees for multilayer game play like WoW.
While I can't find the links now, there was a secretive poll by Activision to judge this possibility and other innuendos like your quote to suggest that this is where they are trying to go. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370100</id>
	<title>EA bounty?</title>
	<author>wct</author>
	<datestamp>1267799640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting quote from Vince Zampella's profile on LinkedIn:</p><p>"...Rumor in the industry is that EA placed a million-dollar bounty for snapping up any IW studio lead, like Vince. Just the fact that the rumor is out there should speak volumes about how badly people want Vince working on their products"</p><p>Jesse Heinig, Production Coordinator, Infinity Ward<br>reported to Vince at Infinity Ward</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting quote from Vince Zampella 's profile on LinkedIn : " ...Rumor in the industry is that EA placed a million-dollar bounty for snapping up any IW studio lead , like Vince .
Just the fact that the rumor is out there should speak volumes about how badly people want Vince working on their products " Jesse Heinig , Production Coordinator , Infinity Wardreported to Vince at Infinity Ward</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting quote from Vince Zampella's profile on LinkedIn:"...Rumor in the industry is that EA placed a million-dollar bounty for snapping up any IW studio lead, like Vince.
Just the fact that the rumor is out there should speak volumes about how badly people want Vince working on their products"Jesse Heinig, Production Coordinator, Infinity Wardreported to Vince at Infinity Ward
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369806</id>
	<title>I really don't understand.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267797120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>All that really has to be done to solve 70\% of the problems with the game industry is assassinating Bobby Kotick. Why won't somebody <i>get on it</i> already?</htmltext>
<tokenext>All that really has to be done to solve 70 \ % of the problems with the game industry is assassinating Bobby Kotick .
Why wo n't somebody get on it already ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All that really has to be done to solve 70\% of the problems with the game industry is assassinating Bobby Kotick.
Why won't somebody get on it already?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31375350</id>
	<title>I can't wait for...</title>
	<author>nilbog</author>
	<datestamp>1267782300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't wait for Call Of Duty Metallica Edition World Tour.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait for Call Of Duty Metallica Edition World Tour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait for Call Of Duty Metallica Edition World Tour.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31375856</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1267785000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><strong>"Remember, no German!"</strong></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Remember , no German !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Remember, no German!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370736</id>
	<title>Good luck to all those showing Activision the..</title>
	<author>twokay</author>
	<datestamp>1267803540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>..finger.
<br>
<br>
I was beginning to think that the IW owners and developers had sold out completely, and if MW2 was any sign of things to come in the COD franchise, it would be hard to argue otherwise.
<br>
But at least this shows that some of them aren't willing to be completely screwed over, and restores some of my faith in the core IW guys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>..finger .
I was beginning to think that the IW owners and developers had sold out completely , and if MW2 was any sign of things to come in the COD franchise , it would be hard to argue otherwise .
But at least this shows that some of them are n't willing to be completely screwed over , and restores some of my faith in the core IW guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..finger.
I was beginning to think that the IW owners and developers had sold out completely, and if MW2 was any sign of things to come in the COD franchise, it would be hard to argue otherwise.
But at least this shows that some of them aren't willing to be completely screwed over, and restores some of my faith in the core IW guys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369770</id>
	<title>Some very rich lawyers</title>
	<author>assemblerex</author>
	<datestamp>1267796700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>will probably be the only end result, after ten years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>will probably be the only end result , after ten years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>will probably be the only end result, after ten years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371410</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>ClosedEyesSeeing</author>
	<datestamp>1267806660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or you could combine.. "Call Of Jury: Modern Lawfare".</p></div><p>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix\_Wright:\_Ace\_Attorney" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Phoenix Wright</a> [wikipedia.org] in:
<br>
<b>Call of Jury: Modern Lawfare</b></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or you could combine.. " Call Of Jury : Modern Lawfare " .
Phoenix Wright [ wikipedia.org ] in : Call of Jury : Modern Lawfare</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or you could combine.. "Call Of Jury: Modern Lawfare".
Phoenix Wright [wikipedia.org] in:

Call of Jury: Modern Lawfare
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31378634</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1267809360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no way Activision would have thought this would end without a lawsuit.  The question is, what do they have up their sleeves if they think they can win?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no way Activision would have thought this would end without a lawsuit .
The question is , what do they have up their sleeves if they think they can win ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no way Activision would have thought this would end without a lawsuit.
The question is, what do they have up their sleeves if they think they can win?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370926</id>
	<title>Re:Mother Fluckers.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267804440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well said and to that I add: I will never purchase another Activision published game again. I have better things to do than support money grubbing assholes. Fuck that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said and to that I add : I will never purchase another Activision published game again .
I have better things to do than support money grubbing assholes .
Fuck that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said and to that I add: I will never purchase another Activision published game again.
I have better things to do than support money grubbing assholes.
Fuck that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31373676</id>
	<title>Re:Might I suggest the title?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267817400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>well, the way our goddamned laws are set up in the US, pretty much any company can buy your land for pretty much any reason.  even if you refuse to sell, they can take it, and give you "reasonable market value" which, btw, just went way down since this area will have little to no resale value after we get done with it.<br>Google Mississippi nissan plant.  It really upset a lot of people down here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>well , the way our goddamned laws are set up in the US , pretty much any company can buy your land for pretty much any reason .
even if you refuse to sell , they can take it , and give you " reasonable market value " which , btw , just went way down since this area will have little to no resale value after we get done with it.Google Mississippi nissan plant .
It really upset a lot of people down here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, the way our goddamned laws are set up in the US, pretty much any company can buy your land for pretty much any reason.
even if you refuse to sell, they can take it, and give you "reasonable market value" which, btw, just went way down since this area will have little to no resale value after we get done with it.Google Mississippi nissan plant.
It really upset a lot of people down here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371578</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>lollacopter</author>
	<datestamp>1267807500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I for one look forward to Call of Duty: Beatles edition
  "love, love me do..... BOOM HEADSHOT !"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one look forward to Call of Duty : Beatles edition " love , love me do..... BOOM HEADSHOT !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one look forward to Call of Duty: Beatles edition
  "love, love me do..... BOOM HEADSHOT !
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372580</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267812300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bingo.</p><p>COD MMO is on the horizon.</p><p>Also, why do you think Starcraft2 suddenly became 3 games?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bingo.COD MMO is on the horizon.Also , why do you think Starcraft2 suddenly became 3 games ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bingo.COD MMO is on the horizon.Also, why do you think Starcraft2 suddenly became 3 games?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370526</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31378634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31373692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31373298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31374464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31373676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31378300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31375278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0719258_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370256
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372488
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31373298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370926
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371762
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31375278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371578
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372730
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31373692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372940
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370852
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372860
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369968
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370066
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31372284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31378634
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31374464
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371024
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31373676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369864
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371410
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31378300
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370462
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31369918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31370764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0719258.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0719258.31371862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
