<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_15_218259</id>
	<title>Bethesda Unveils New Co-op Dungeon Crawler</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1268649420000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Bethesda Softworks took advantage of the recent Game Developers Conference to take the wraps off a new game called <em>Hunted: The Demon's Forge</em> that they're partnering with development studio inXile to create. It's planned for the PC, Xbox 360, and PS3, though no release window has been set. It's a third-person action game with a swords &amp; sorcery setting, and it <a href="http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/03/bethesdas-new-property-online-co-op-dungeon-crawler-a-hoy.ars">features two heroes as they fight their way through monster-filled dungeons</a>. The game is designed such that two users can play together online (no split-screen), each controlling one of the heroes. ShackNews summed it up thus: "From what I saw, <em>Hunted</em> rolled up ideas from a number of different games to <a href="http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/62799">create its modern reinterpretation of the dungeon crawl</a>. There was the raw action appeal of wading through waves of goblins, spiders, and related denizens. The skill system and weapon upgrades bring in the character development side from a role playing game. And the co-op design with its warrior and archer dynamic introduces the reward of playing together like an MMO."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bethesda Softworks took advantage of the recent Game Developers Conference to take the wraps off a new game called Hunted : The Demon 's Forge that they 're partnering with development studio inXile to create .
It 's planned for the PC , Xbox 360 , and PS3 , though no release window has been set .
It 's a third-person action game with a swords &amp; sorcery setting , and it features two heroes as they fight their way through monster-filled dungeons .
The game is designed such that two users can play together online ( no split-screen ) , each controlling one of the heroes .
ShackNews summed it up thus : " From what I saw , Hunted rolled up ideas from a number of different games to create its modern reinterpretation of the dungeon crawl .
There was the raw action appeal of wading through waves of goblins , spiders , and related denizens .
The skill system and weapon upgrades bring in the character development side from a role playing game .
And the co-op design with its warrior and archer dynamic introduces the reward of playing together like an MMO .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bethesda Softworks took advantage of the recent Game Developers Conference to take the wraps off a new game called Hunted: The Demon's Forge that they're partnering with development studio inXile to create.
It's planned for the PC, Xbox 360, and PS3, though no release window has been set.
It's a third-person action game with a swords &amp; sorcery setting, and it features two heroes as they fight their way through monster-filled dungeons.
The game is designed such that two users can play together online (no split-screen), each controlling one of the heroes.
ShackNews summed it up thus: "From what I saw, Hunted rolled up ideas from a number of different games to create its modern reinterpretation of the dungeon crawl.
There was the raw action appeal of wading through waves of goblins, spiders, and related denizens.
The skill system and weapon upgrades bring in the character development side from a role playing game.
And the co-op design with its warrior and archer dynamic introduces the reward of playing together like an MMO.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489524</id>
	<title>Re:Can't quite pinpoint...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268656440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm guessing it'll be a lot like Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance (and the sequel.) Just based on the blurbs I've read.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm guessing it 'll be a lot like Baldur 's Gate Dark Alliance ( and the sequel .
) Just based on the blurbs I 've read .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm guessing it'll be a lot like Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance (and the sequel.
) Just based on the blurbs I've read.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490946</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Kingrames</author>
	<datestamp>1268665320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they do it as bad as Fallout 3, the will be dozens of amazing, free, fan-made addons and patches to the game, and a few crappy addons you pay for.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they do it as bad as Fallout 3 , the will be dozens of amazing , free , fan-made addons and patches to the game , and a few crappy addons you pay for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they do it as bad as Fallout 3, the will be dozens of amazing, free, fan-made addons and patches to the game, and a few crappy addons you pay for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31494474</id>
	<title>Re:Bethesda Games</title>
	<author>CronoCloud</author>
	<datestamp>1268750160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fallout 3 doesn't have level scaling.  There are certain places you simply don't want to go as a level 1 character, or places that would be extremely difficult to go to.  Also, with Broken Steel, your low level character could run into one of the new enemies, Feral Ghoul Reaver, early in the game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fallout 3 does n't have level scaling .
There are certain places you simply do n't want to go as a level 1 character , or places that would be extremely difficult to go to .
Also , with Broken Steel , your low level character could run into one of the new enemies , Feral Ghoul Reaver , early in the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fallout 3 doesn't have level scaling.
There are certain places you simply don't want to go as a level 1 character, or places that would be extremely difficult to go to.
Also, with Broken Steel, your low level character could run into one of the new enemies, Feral Ghoul Reaver, early in the game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491700</id>
	<title>Please not anohter Hellgate London</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268671860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as it's not like Hellgate London...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...please God.... anything but something like that again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as it 's not like Hellgate London... ...please God.... anything but something like that again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as it's not like Hellgate London... ...please God.... anything but something like that again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489206</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Lunix Nutcase</author>
	<datestamp>1268654520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh, and having two people play together makes it like a massively multiplayer online game? Right.</p></div><p>No.  They said that you get the reward of being able to play together with a friend like you would in an MMO.  Not that this constitutes the game BEING an MMO.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , and having two people play together makes it like a massively multiplayer online game ?
Right.No. They said that you get the reward of being able to play together with a friend like you would in an MMO .
Not that this constitutes the game BEING an MMO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, and having two people play together makes it like a massively multiplayer online game?
Right.No.  They said that you get the reward of being able to play together with a friend like you would in an MMO.
Not that this constitutes the game BEING an MMO.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491448</id>
	<title>Re:Why can't I play with my buddy on the couch</title>
	<author>LingNoi</author>
	<datestamp>1268669160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could be because split screen uses more resources like they state in the article or because split screen needs more development time, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could be because split screen uses more resources like they state in the article or because split screen needs more development time , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could be because split screen uses more resources like they state in the article or because split screen needs more development time, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489074</id>
	<title>Bad idea for the future</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1268653800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> The game is designed such that two users can play together online (no split-screen), each controlling one of the heroes.</p> </div><p>

Wonderful! I like nothing better than to play RPGs that are going to stop working in 5 years! <br> <br>

The problem with all these online console games is servers are going to be turned off far sooner than with PC equivalents (chances are, servers for WoW are going to be up in 2020 and beyond) making the game almost unplayable. Even with PC games, you can host your own server, you can't do that really with console games. <br> <br>

I don't mind paying a -bit- of money for games that are going to go away in 5 years, for example I play The Orange Box on the 360 because I only paid ~$7 used but I'm sure not gonna pay $60 for online-focused games.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The game is designed such that two users can play together online ( no split-screen ) , each controlling one of the heroes .
Wonderful ! I like nothing better than to play RPGs that are going to stop working in 5 years !
The problem with all these online console games is servers are going to be turned off far sooner than with PC equivalents ( chances are , servers for WoW are going to be up in 2020 and beyond ) making the game almost unplayable .
Even with PC games , you can host your own server , you ca n't do that really with console games .
I do n't mind paying a -bit- of money for games that are going to go away in 5 years , for example I play The Orange Box on the 360 because I only paid ~ $ 7 used but I 'm sure not gon na pay $ 60 for online-focused games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The game is designed such that two users can play together online (no split-screen), each controlling one of the heroes.
Wonderful! I like nothing better than to play RPGs that are going to stop working in 5 years!
The problem with all these online console games is servers are going to be turned off far sooner than with PC equivalents (chances are, servers for WoW are going to be up in 2020 and beyond) making the game almost unplayable.
Even with PC games, you can host your own server, you can't do that really with console games.
I don't mind paying a -bit- of money for games that are going to go away in 5 years, for example I play The Orange Box on the 360 because I only paid ~$7 used but I'm sure not gonna pay $60 for online-focused games.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489304</id>
	<title>Abbreviations...</title>
	<author>nschubach</author>
	<datestamp>1268655000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>multiplayer MUD</p></div><p>Hopefully I can use my NIC Card to play some Local LAN network games as well!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>multiplayer MUDHopefully I can use my NIC Card to play some Local LAN network games as well !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>multiplayer MUDHopefully I can use my NIC Card to play some Local LAN network games as well!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489156</id>
	<title>Gaaahh!! WHERE'S ES:V?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268654220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want a new elder scrolls dash nabbit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want a new elder scrolls dash nabbit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want a new elder scrolls dash nabbit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489362</id>
	<title>Re:Can't quite pinpoint...</title>
	<author>nschubach</author>
	<datestamp>1268655420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>2. To me, the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Demon's Souls.  How are they going to top DS's brutality and innovate features?</p></div><p>To each his own.  I actually bought two copies of Demon's Souls because I imported the wrong language at first... and I figured it would be more fun if I could understand what was going on... I didn't.  Replaying the same level over and over again to complete it isn't what I'd label fun.  Also, logging in to play with a friend and having some ass hole join your game to kill you because he needs the black "karma" isn't fun.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>2 .
To me , the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Demon 's Souls .
How are they going to top DS 's brutality and innovate features ? To each his own .
I actually bought two copies of Demon 's Souls because I imported the wrong language at first... and I figured it would be more fun if I could understand what was going on... I did n't .
Replaying the same level over and over again to complete it is n't what I 'd label fun .
Also , logging in to play with a friend and having some ass hole join your game to kill you because he needs the black " karma " is n't fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2.
To me, the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Demon's Souls.
How are they going to top DS's brutality and innovate features?To each his own.
I actually bought two copies of Demon's Souls because I imported the wrong language at first... and I figured it would be more fun if I could understand what was going on... I didn't.
Replaying the same level over and over again to complete it isn't what I'd label fun.
Also, logging in to play with a friend and having some ass hole join your game to kill you because he needs the black "karma" isn't fun.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492800</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Andtalath</author>
	<datestamp>1268732340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Roguelike games are turn-based.
Diablo was the first Real-time implementation of it.

But, no, Diablo isn't roguelike, even if it evolved from it and it's obvious that they had played lots of those games.

So, diablo-like is fully acceptable.

Also, games never pop out of a vacuum, they always borrow from other games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Roguelike games are turn-based .
Diablo was the first Real-time implementation of it .
But , no , Diablo is n't roguelike , even if it evolved from it and it 's obvious that they had played lots of those games .
So , diablo-like is fully acceptable .
Also , games never pop out of a vacuum , they always borrow from other games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Roguelike games are turn-based.
Diablo was the first Real-time implementation of it.
But, no, Diablo isn't roguelike, even if it evolved from it and it's obvious that they had played lots of those games.
So, diablo-like is fully acceptable.
Also, games never pop out of a vacuum, they always borrow from other games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054</id>
	<title>Can't quite pinpoint...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268653680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read some of the previews of this game and I am cautiously optimistic but a couple of worries:</p><p>1. "the raw action appeal of wading through waves of goblins, spiders, and related denizens" sounds an awful lot like Dynasty Warriors/Musou series and while I understand some people are into that, and that's totally fine, I find the games terribly boring.  I could be reading too much into the phrasing here, but it's hard to pinpoint what this game is trying to do exactly.</p><p>2. To me, the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Demon's Souls.  How are they going to top DS's brutality and innovate features?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read some of the previews of this game and I am cautiously optimistic but a couple of worries : 1 .
" the raw action appeal of wading through waves of goblins , spiders , and related denizens " sounds an awful lot like Dynasty Warriors/Musou series and while I understand some people are into that , and that 's totally fine , I find the games terribly boring .
I could be reading too much into the phrasing here , but it 's hard to pinpoint what this game is trying to do exactly.2 .
To me , the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Demon 's Souls .
How are they going to top DS 's brutality and innovate features ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read some of the previews of this game and I am cautiously optimistic but a couple of worries:1.
"the raw action appeal of wading through waves of goblins, spiders, and related denizens" sounds an awful lot like Dynasty Warriors/Musou series and while I understand some people are into that, and that's totally fine, I find the games terribly boring.
I could be reading too much into the phrasing here, but it's hard to pinpoint what this game is trying to do exactly.2.
To me, the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Demon's Souls.
How are they going to top DS's brutality and innovate features?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491232</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1268667420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Diablo clone"? The proper term is "roguelike".</i></p><p>Well to be serious for a moment, as a lover of both Nethack and Diablo II, I'd say it's worth distinguishing between these two genres.  The things that are commonly called "roguelikes" are clearly aping rogue, and the Diablo Clones with their emphasis on real-time combat are clearly aping Diablo, by intent if nothing else.  Diablo clearly owes a huge debt to Rogue-likes, but I wouldn't say it is one simply because it shakes up some of the fundamental gameplay principles.  Even nethack is just adding much loved complexity and nuance on the same frame.</p><p>So, just like (to pick a random awesome example) Super Metroid was in a very real sense just an expansion of basic 2d platformer/shooter ideas from games like Castelvania and Contra, but it modernized and in the process shook up the concept enough to create something new and itself something that would be specifically replicated in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Diablo clone " ?
The proper term is " roguelike " .Well to be serious for a moment , as a lover of both Nethack and Diablo II , I 'd say it 's worth distinguishing between these two genres .
The things that are commonly called " roguelikes " are clearly aping rogue , and the Diablo Clones with their emphasis on real-time combat are clearly aping Diablo , by intent if nothing else .
Diablo clearly owes a huge debt to Rogue-likes , but I would n't say it is one simply because it shakes up some of the fundamental gameplay principles .
Even nethack is just adding much loved complexity and nuance on the same frame.So , just like ( to pick a random awesome example ) Super Metroid was in a very real sense just an expansion of basic 2d platformer/shooter ideas from games like Castelvania and Contra , but it modernized and in the process shook up the concept enough to create something new and itself something that would be specifically replicated in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Diablo clone"?
The proper term is "roguelike".Well to be serious for a moment, as a lover of both Nethack and Diablo II, I'd say it's worth distinguishing between these two genres.
The things that are commonly called "roguelikes" are clearly aping rogue, and the Diablo Clones with their emphasis on real-time combat are clearly aping Diablo, by intent if nothing else.
Diablo clearly owes a huge debt to Rogue-likes, but I wouldn't say it is one simply because it shakes up some of the fundamental gameplay principles.
Even nethack is just adding much loved complexity and nuance on the same frame.So, just like (to pick a random awesome example) Super Metroid was in a very real sense just an expansion of basic 2d platformer/shooter ideas from games like Castelvania and Contra, but it modernized and in the process shook up the concept enough to create something new and itself something that would be specifically replicated in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489298</id>
	<title>Re:Can't quite pinpoint...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268655000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How are they going to top DS's brutality</i></p><p>Easy!</p><p><tt>bloodSpurtAmount *= 10;</tt></p><p><i> and innovate features?</i></p><p>Uh...</p><p><tt>bloodSpurtAmount *= 20;</tt></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How are they going to top DS 's brutalityEasy ! bloodSpurtAmount * = 10 ; and innovate features ? Uh...bloodSpurtAmount * = 20 ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How are they going to top DS's brutalityEasy!bloodSpurtAmount *= 10; and innovate features?Uh...bloodSpurtAmount *= 20;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31488996</id>
	<title>Lol neckbeards</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268653320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do neckbeards like dungeon crawlers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do neckbeards like dungeon crawlers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do neckbeards like dungeon crawlers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31496714</id>
	<title>no split screen for PC?</title>
	<author>arcade video gamer</author>
	<datestamp>1268758380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A coop PC game pretty much has to have splitscreen unless users connect via LAN or internet. Its rare to find a PC game that allows for 2 players on 1 computer these days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A coop PC game pretty much has to have splitscreen unless users connect via LAN or internet .
Its rare to find a PC game that allows for 2 players on 1 computer these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A coop PC game pretty much has to have splitscreen unless users connect via LAN or internet.
Its rare to find a PC game that allows for 2 players on 1 computer these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491068</id>
	<title>Will the PC interface be a XBOX port?</title>
	<author>John Saffran</author>
	<datestamp>1268666160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hopefully this time they won't get lazy and just port the XBOX interface to PC like they did with Oblivion<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully this time they wo n't get lazy and just port the XBOX interface to PC like they did with Oblivion . .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully this time they won't get lazy and just port the XBOX interface to PC like they did with Oblivion ..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490508</id>
	<title>Re:Are you kidding?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268662140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And yet Diablo 2 is a watered down rogue-like game with better graphics and all thinking removed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And yet Diablo 2 is a watered down rogue-like game with better graphics and all thinking removed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And yet Diablo 2 is a watered down rogue-like game with better graphics and all thinking removed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489802</id>
	<title>Re:How many games</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1268658000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only the good ones.  I'm playing through Ocarina of Time right now.  Still brilliant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only the good ones .
I 'm playing through Ocarina of Time right now .
Still brilliant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only the good ones.
I'm playing through Ocarina of Time right now.
Still brilliant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31503078</id>
	<title>Re:Bethesda Games</title>
	<author>zuperduperman</author>
	<datestamp>1268743140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't mind the level scaling.   The problems you encountered are possibly a result of "inefficient" leveling up which is a bit of an issue since you really have no idea how the leveling works for the first 20 levels or so.  But if you get to know the game a bit and then start again, leveling up efficiently all the way(which means, making sure you always max out the bonus points you receive at each level transition) then you do actually get better relative to the enemies in the game.
<p>
I do wish there were more really *hard* challenges that have super rewards instead of the rather bland quests that seem grand and then give you as a result a few hundred gold or a mediocre weapon that's worse than what you already have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't mind the level scaling .
The problems you encountered are possibly a result of " inefficient " leveling up which is a bit of an issue since you really have no idea how the leveling works for the first 20 levels or so .
But if you get to know the game a bit and then start again , leveling up efficiently all the way ( which means , making sure you always max out the bonus points you receive at each level transition ) then you do actually get better relative to the enemies in the game .
I do wish there were more really * hard * challenges that have super rewards instead of the rather bland quests that seem grand and then give you as a result a few hundred gold or a mediocre weapon that 's worse than what you already have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't mind the level scaling.
The problems you encountered are possibly a result of "inefficient" leveling up which is a bit of an issue since you really have no idea how the leveling works for the first 20 levels or so.
But if you get to know the game a bit and then start again, leveling up efficiently all the way(which means, making sure you always max out the bonus points you receive at each level transition) then you do actually get better relative to the enemies in the game.
I do wish there were more really *hard* challenges that have super rewards instead of the rather bland quests that seem grand and then give you as a result a few hundred gold or a mediocre weapon that's worse than what you already have.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128</id>
	<title>Why can't I play with my buddy on the couch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268654100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The game is designed such that two users can play together online (no split-screen)</p></div><p>Well why the fuck not? Online is great and all but I become increasingly annoyed by the fact that I can play with my buddy who is 300+ miles away but the instant he comes over to visit we can't play without doing some wacky setup with extra TV's and consoles. Seriously is it that hard? I've dealt with splitscreen multiplayer since the NES so why is it so hard to find now?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The game is designed such that two users can play together online ( no split-screen ) Well why the fuck not ?
Online is great and all but I become increasingly annoyed by the fact that I can play with my buddy who is 300 + miles away but the instant he comes over to visit we ca n't play without doing some wacky setup with extra TV 's and consoles .
Seriously is it that hard ?
I 've dealt with splitscreen multiplayer since the NES so why is it so hard to find now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The game is designed such that two users can play together online (no split-screen)Well why the fuck not?
Online is great and all but I become increasingly annoyed by the fact that I can play with my buddy who is 300+ miles away but the instant he comes over to visit we can't play without doing some wacky setup with extra TV's and consoles.
Seriously is it that hard?
I've dealt with splitscreen multiplayer since the NES so why is it so hard to find now?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489272</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1268654880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Diablo clone"?  The proper term is "roguelike".</p><p>Now get off my lawn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Diablo clone " ?
The proper term is " roguelike " .Now get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Diablo clone"?
The proper term is "roguelike".Now get off my lawn!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492266</id>
	<title>Misleading press-release</title>
	<author>CaptainNerdCave</author>
	<datestamp>1268679000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I really wish press-releases would stop using "PC" when they really mean "Windows-only".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really wish press-releases would stop using " PC " when they really mean " Windows-only " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really wish press-releases would stop using "PC" when they really mean "Windows-only".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31497518</id>
	<title>Re:Why can't I play with my buddy on the couch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268761140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sacred II has online and local co-op (no split-screen on local, you both share the same screen) and if I'm not mistaken you can combine them, 2 players on local and more joining online. Isn't that exactly what you are asking for?</p><p>Huge sprawling maps, plenty of skills and powers, thousands of equipment and item options. It'd perfect if the bugs were ironed out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sacred II has online and local co-op ( no split-screen on local , you both share the same screen ) and if I 'm not mistaken you can combine them , 2 players on local and more joining online .
Is n't that exactly what you are asking for ? Huge sprawling maps , plenty of skills and powers , thousands of equipment and item options .
It 'd perfect if the bugs were ironed out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sacred II has online and local co-op (no split-screen on local, you both share the same screen) and if I'm not mistaken you can combine them, 2 players on local and more joining online.
Isn't that exactly what you are asking for?Huge sprawling maps, plenty of skills and powers, thousands of equipment and item options.
It'd perfect if the bugs were ironed out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31495846</id>
	<title>Re:Bethesda Games</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1268755200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Morrowind was great at first. But it doesn't take long into the game before you're basically a god who no one can even touch in combat--then it becomes boring. A lot of people complained about Oblivion scaling enemies, but at least that kept it kind of interesting.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Morrowind was great at first .
But it does n't take long into the game before you 're basically a god who no one can even touch in combat--then it becomes boring .
A lot of people complained about Oblivion scaling enemies , but at least that kept it kind of interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Morrowind was great at first.
But it doesn't take long into the game before you're basically a god who no one can even touch in combat--then it becomes boring.
A lot of people complained about Oblivion scaling enemies, but at least that kept it kind of interesting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31498070</id>
	<title>Re:Can't quite pinpoint...</title>
	<author>CaseM</author>
	<datestamp>1268763180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Also, logging in to play with a friend and having some ass hole join your game to kill you because he needs the black "karma" isn't fun.</i></p><p>Sorry about that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:\</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , logging in to play with a friend and having some ass hole join your game to kill you because he needs the black " karma " is n't fun.Sorry about that : \</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, logging in to play with a friend and having some ass hole join your game to kill you because he needs the black "karma" isn't fun.Sorry about that :\</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489042</id>
	<title>Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268653560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Those shelves won't stack themselves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Those shelves wo n't stack themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those shelves won't stack themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31488970</id>
	<title>Another Diablo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268653200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Always welcome in by book!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Always welcome in by book !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Always welcome in by book!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31493370</id>
	<title>Re:So...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268740680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Soo..... Gauntlet Legends?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Soo..... Gauntlet Legends ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soo..... Gauntlet Legends?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492592</id>
	<title>Re:Bethesda Games</title>
	<author>tirefire</author>
	<datestamp>1268771760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Poor combat is only one of many problems with Bethesda's recent schlock.  I found a <a href="http://sites.google.com/site/damicat/" title="google.com">site</a> [google.com] the other day that explores the deepest problems with Oblivion (as well as Fallout 3, seeing how that's basically just a mod for Oblivion).</p><p>I'm not much of an RPG fan.  I mainly like twitch combat games; shooters.  The only RPGs I've enjoyed playing are Fallout 1 and 2.  However, these two games are easily in my top 5 favorite games of all time.  I've played them each at least 15 times, way more than any shooter.</p><p>When I got Oblivion a few years ago, I liked it at first.  I thought the graphics were very impressive and I was excited that there were so many different quests to complete and areas to explore.  Then, after about 20 or 40 hours of gameplay, I quickly lost all interest.  I couldn't put my finger on it, but the game just wasn't satisfying to play.  After reading the aforementioned protest site, I figured out why.</p><p>The biggest problem I noticed was that everything was scaled to my character level.  This caught me totally off-guard because this is the complete opposite of my idea of what role-playing is.  As in real-life, I expect a role-playing game to allow me to develop my abilities as I complete more and more challenging tasks and interact with more varied people the longer I "live".  Oblivion (and Fallout 3, in sharp contrast with 1 and 2) does not do this.  It is a single-player MMO where everything is insta-scaled to your level.  You will *never* encounter a task that is so difficult you need to work hard to master it.  Similarly, you will *never* encounter a task that is so easy it makes you proud of your well-developed character's abilities.  You will *never* stumble upon a sudden cache of awesome weapons/armor/treasure, because all the monsters are at your level, and all the shopkeepers sell the exact same equipment.  There is no incentive to struggle to defeat a really tough monster, or solve a difficult quest, because even if these things did exist in Oblivion, you wouldn't be rewarded with any more experience, money or equipment than normal.</p><p>The level-scaling disappointed me, but I kept playing a little longer in the hopes that the game's emphasis was on exploring new and varied areas, not grinding.  Meh.  There are a lot of quests, but they're all errands; you tick off items on a checklist and collect your reward.  Quests are completed the same way regardless of whether you specialize in magic, physical combat, or social skills.  There are a lot of NPCs, each with 3 humdrum dialog options.  And since Bethesda blew all their voice acting budget on hiring Patrick Stewart and Sean Bean, there are about 3 voices in the entire game.  There are a lot of different cities, but they're so bland and same-y that you'd only know that from looking at their names on your map.  And all the dungeons are just dark holes in the ground.</p><p>To me, Oblivion is a lavish nine-course meal that's been run through a food processor on its way to your plate.  There's a lot of it, and it's really well-produced, but it's the same homogenized crap from beginning to end.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Poor combat is only one of many problems with Bethesda 's recent schlock .
I found a site [ google.com ] the other day that explores the deepest problems with Oblivion ( as well as Fallout 3 , seeing how that 's basically just a mod for Oblivion ) .I 'm not much of an RPG fan .
I mainly like twitch combat games ; shooters .
The only RPGs I 've enjoyed playing are Fallout 1 and 2 .
However , these two games are easily in my top 5 favorite games of all time .
I 've played them each at least 15 times , way more than any shooter.When I got Oblivion a few years ago , I liked it at first .
I thought the graphics were very impressive and I was excited that there were so many different quests to complete and areas to explore .
Then , after about 20 or 40 hours of gameplay , I quickly lost all interest .
I could n't put my finger on it , but the game just was n't satisfying to play .
After reading the aforementioned protest site , I figured out why.The biggest problem I noticed was that everything was scaled to my character level .
This caught me totally off-guard because this is the complete opposite of my idea of what role-playing is .
As in real-life , I expect a role-playing game to allow me to develop my abilities as I complete more and more challenging tasks and interact with more varied people the longer I " live " .
Oblivion ( and Fallout 3 , in sharp contrast with 1 and 2 ) does not do this .
It is a single-player MMO where everything is insta-scaled to your level .
You will * never * encounter a task that is so difficult you need to work hard to master it .
Similarly , you will * never * encounter a task that is so easy it makes you proud of your well-developed character 's abilities .
You will * never * stumble upon a sudden cache of awesome weapons/armor/treasure , because all the monsters are at your level , and all the shopkeepers sell the exact same equipment .
There is no incentive to struggle to defeat a really tough monster , or solve a difficult quest , because even if these things did exist in Oblivion , you would n't be rewarded with any more experience , money or equipment than normal.The level-scaling disappointed me , but I kept playing a little longer in the hopes that the game 's emphasis was on exploring new and varied areas , not grinding .
Meh. There are a lot of quests , but they 're all errands ; you tick off items on a checklist and collect your reward .
Quests are completed the same way regardless of whether you specialize in magic , physical combat , or social skills .
There are a lot of NPCs , each with 3 humdrum dialog options .
And since Bethesda blew all their voice acting budget on hiring Patrick Stewart and Sean Bean , there are about 3 voices in the entire game .
There are a lot of different cities , but they 're so bland and same-y that you 'd only know that from looking at their names on your map .
And all the dungeons are just dark holes in the ground.To me , Oblivion is a lavish nine-course meal that 's been run through a food processor on its way to your plate .
There 's a lot of it , and it 's really well-produced , but it 's the same homogenized crap from beginning to end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Poor combat is only one of many problems with Bethesda's recent schlock.
I found a site [google.com] the other day that explores the deepest problems with Oblivion (as well as Fallout 3, seeing how that's basically just a mod for Oblivion).I'm not much of an RPG fan.
I mainly like twitch combat games; shooters.
The only RPGs I've enjoyed playing are Fallout 1 and 2.
However, these two games are easily in my top 5 favorite games of all time.
I've played them each at least 15 times, way more than any shooter.When I got Oblivion a few years ago, I liked it at first.
I thought the graphics were very impressive and I was excited that there were so many different quests to complete and areas to explore.
Then, after about 20 or 40 hours of gameplay, I quickly lost all interest.
I couldn't put my finger on it, but the game just wasn't satisfying to play.
After reading the aforementioned protest site, I figured out why.The biggest problem I noticed was that everything was scaled to my character level.
This caught me totally off-guard because this is the complete opposite of my idea of what role-playing is.
As in real-life, I expect a role-playing game to allow me to develop my abilities as I complete more and more challenging tasks and interact with more varied people the longer I "live".
Oblivion (and Fallout 3, in sharp contrast with 1 and 2) does not do this.
It is a single-player MMO where everything is insta-scaled to your level.
You will *never* encounter a task that is so difficult you need to work hard to master it.
Similarly, you will *never* encounter a task that is so easy it makes you proud of your well-developed character's abilities.
You will *never* stumble upon a sudden cache of awesome weapons/armor/treasure, because all the monsters are at your level, and all the shopkeepers sell the exact same equipment.
There is no incentive to struggle to defeat a really tough monster, or solve a difficult quest, because even if these things did exist in Oblivion, you wouldn't be rewarded with any more experience, money or equipment than normal.The level-scaling disappointed me, but I kept playing a little longer in the hopes that the game's emphasis was on exploring new and varied areas, not grinding.
Meh.  There are a lot of quests, but they're all errands; you tick off items on a checklist and collect your reward.
Quests are completed the same way regardless of whether you specialize in magic, physical combat, or social skills.
There are a lot of NPCs, each with 3 humdrum dialog options.
And since Bethesda blew all their voice acting budget on hiring Patrick Stewart and Sean Bean, there are about 3 voices in the entire game.
There are a lot of different cities, but they're so bland and same-y that you'd only know that from looking at their names on your map.
And all the dungeons are just dark holes in the ground.To me, Oblivion is a lavish nine-course meal that's been run through a food processor on its way to your plate.
There's a lot of it, and it's really well-produced, but it's the same homogenized crap from beginning to end.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490264</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489570</id>
	<title>Re:No Split Screen?</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1268656800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I count myself one of the lucky geeks with a wife who loves video games and one of our favorite types has been the split-screen dungeon crawl like Baldur's Gate.</i></p><p>Uh, assuming you're actually talking about Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, then it's not split-screen.</p><p>(Baldur's Gate is a 1-person-per-computer game, and a full-on RPG, not just a dungeon crawl.)</p><p><i>We won't be buying another TV and another PS3 to play games on, though, so I guess this is a game we won't be buying.</i></p><p><i>Dear Game Developers: Please bring back split-screen play as a standard. While Borderlands is great, we won't be playing it forever.</i></p><p>You're going to confuse the bejeesus out of these mysterious game developers reading Slashdot if you tell them, "make the game split-screen," and "make the game like Dark Alliance" at the same time. Their heads will explode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I count myself one of the lucky geeks with a wife who loves video games and one of our favorite types has been the split-screen dungeon crawl like Baldur 's Gate.Uh , assuming you 're actually talking about Baldur 's Gate : Dark Alliance , then it 's not split-screen .
( Baldur 's Gate is a 1-person-per-computer game , and a full-on RPG , not just a dungeon crawl .
) We wo n't be buying another TV and another PS3 to play games on , though , so I guess this is a game we wo n't be buying.Dear Game Developers : Please bring back split-screen play as a standard .
While Borderlands is great , we wo n't be playing it forever.You 're going to confuse the bejeesus out of these mysterious game developers reading Slashdot if you tell them , " make the game split-screen , " and " make the game like Dark Alliance " at the same time .
Their heads will explode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I count myself one of the lucky geeks with a wife who loves video games and one of our favorite types has been the split-screen dungeon crawl like Baldur's Gate.Uh, assuming you're actually talking about Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, then it's not split-screen.
(Baldur's Gate is a 1-person-per-computer game, and a full-on RPG, not just a dungeon crawl.
)We won't be buying another TV and another PS3 to play games on, though, so I guess this is a game we won't be buying.Dear Game Developers: Please bring back split-screen play as a standard.
While Borderlands is great, we won't be playing it forever.You're going to confuse the bejeesus out of these mysterious game developers reading Slashdot if you tell them, "make the game split-screen," and "make the game like Dark Alliance" at the same time.
Their heads will explode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489720</id>
	<title>Re:Lol neckbeards</title>
	<author>armareum</author>
	<datestamp>1268657460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://pics.blameitonthevoices.com/042009/neck\_beard.jpg" title="blameitonthevoices.com" rel="nofollow">A Neckbeard</a> [blameitonthevoices.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>A Neckbeard [ blameitonthevoices.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A Neckbeard [blameitonthevoices.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31488996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491114</id>
	<title>Re:Oooh, shiny!</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1268666520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given how "well" Borderland's multiplayer worked for PCs (at least if you weren't willing to let your pants down completely in front of the internet), it could well be with <i>more</i> multiplayer...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given how " well " Borderland 's multiplayer worked for PCs ( at least if you were n't willing to let your pants down completely in front of the internet ) , it could well be with more multiplayer.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given how "well" Borderland's multiplayer worked for PCs (at least if you weren't willing to let your pants down completely in front of the internet), it could well be with more multiplayer...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490522</id>
	<title>Screw you, Bethesda</title>
	<author>Pherlin</author>
	<datestamp>1268662200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bethesda lost me as a customer after completely screwing over me and everyone else who bought Star Trek Legacy for the PC.

If they treat this as well as they treat other third party titles, you'll be in for a great time of necessary patches that never come.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bethesda lost me as a customer after completely screwing over me and everyone else who bought Star Trek Legacy for the PC .
If they treat this as well as they treat other third party titles , you 'll be in for a great time of necessary patches that never come .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bethesda lost me as a customer after completely screwing over me and everyone else who bought Star Trek Legacy for the PC.
If they treat this as well as they treat other third party titles, you'll be in for a great time of necessary patches that never come.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489116</id>
	<title>So...</title>
	<author>Megane</author>
	<datestamp>1268654040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like Gauntlet, only with RPG stats and more power-ups?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like Gauntlet , only with RPG stats and more power-ups ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like Gauntlet, only with RPG stats and more power-ups?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489514</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Gaygirlie</author>
	<datestamp>1268656440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I don't see a single thing that wasn't in Diablo over a decade ago"</p><p>Modern 3D graphics. That wasn't in Diablo<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>I personally welcome this game. I love playing games together with my gf but so VERY VERY FEW games nowadays do support co-op; it's always deathmatch or something like that. Too bad though that it's made by Bethesda, we won't be seeing Wirt's leg make a comeback :</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I do n't see a single thing that was n't in Diablo over a decade ago " Modern 3D graphics .
That was n't in Diablo : ) I personally welcome this game .
I love playing games together with my gf but so VERY VERY FEW games nowadays do support co-op ; it 's always deathmatch or something like that .
Too bad though that it 's made by Bethesda , we wo n't be seeing Wirt 's leg make a comeback :</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I don't see a single thing that wasn't in Diablo over a decade ago"Modern 3D graphics.
That wasn't in Diablo :)I personally welcome this game.
I love playing games together with my gf but so VERY VERY FEW games nowadays do support co-op; it's always deathmatch or something like that.
Too bad though that it's made by Bethesda, we won't be seeing Wirt's leg make a comeback :</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489674</id>
	<title>Re:Lol neckbeards</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268657280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because it reminds them of their dwarven heritage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because it reminds them of their dwarven heritage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because it reminds them of their dwarven heritage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31488996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492700</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268730720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>"Diablo clone"? The proper term is "roguelike".</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>I disagree.</p><p>Nethack is a merciless turn-based strategy game with incredibly complex ways of interacting with one's environment and inventory. Diablo is a simple, forgiving, fast-paced action game. These two games do not belong to the same conceptual category ("roguelike"). Nethack is roguelike; Diablo is not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Diablo clone " ?
The proper term is " roguelike " .
I disagree.Nethack is a merciless turn-based strategy game with incredibly complex ways of interacting with one 's environment and inventory .
Diablo is a simple , forgiving , fast-paced action game .
These two games do not belong to the same conceptual category ( " roguelike " ) .
Nethack is roguelike ; Diablo is not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "Diablo clone"?
The proper term is "roguelike".
I disagree.Nethack is a merciless turn-based strategy game with incredibly complex ways of interacting with one's environment and inventory.
Diablo is a simple, forgiving, fast-paced action game.
These two games do not belong to the same conceptual category ("roguelike").
Nethack is roguelike; Diablo is not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492900</id>
	<title>Re:Why can't I play with my buddy on the couch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268733360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The obvious answer, as someone else pointed out, is that split screen would be more demanding on the machine and more difficult to code. What's too bad is that developers don't seem to be willing to grab hold of some of the opportunities that online only might present. What I'm talking about is giving each player a different, incomplete part of the total information, encouraging a sort of communicative, true-co-operative experience we rarely see. For example: Our warrior and our archer encounter a group of doppelgangers- identical monsters, but only one of them is the true foe. Now, one character (the archer, say.) is incapacitated somehow, but he can still see the fight. As it happens, our archer has the preternatural ability to spot the main foe (it appears in a different color on his screen). If he can successfully direct the warrior to that foe, the fight will be over quickly and our characters can progress. If not, the battle will be incredibly difficult. In splitscreen, the warrior would only have to glance at the archer's play window, but with online-only, communication becomes an essential feature. <br>Another example: Written instructions could be presented for safely navigating a trap-filled chamber. Problem is, the instructions are in two different in-game languages. Each player can only read a different half of the instructions, with the other half appearing as gibberish. Only through trust and patient discussion could the characters progress.
<br>I think there's a lot of room for developers to translate what is essentially a limitation into unique puzzles and situations which help a player to feel like he's really co-operating with someone, even if that someone isn't in the room.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The obvious answer , as someone else pointed out , is that split screen would be more demanding on the machine and more difficult to code .
What 's too bad is that developers do n't seem to be willing to grab hold of some of the opportunities that online only might present .
What I 'm talking about is giving each player a different , incomplete part of the total information , encouraging a sort of communicative , true-co-operative experience we rarely see .
For example : Our warrior and our archer encounter a group of doppelgangers- identical monsters , but only one of them is the true foe .
Now , one character ( the archer , say .
) is incapacitated somehow , but he can still see the fight .
As it happens , our archer has the preternatural ability to spot the main foe ( it appears in a different color on his screen ) .
If he can successfully direct the warrior to that foe , the fight will be over quickly and our characters can progress .
If not , the battle will be incredibly difficult .
In splitscreen , the warrior would only have to glance at the archer 's play window , but with online-only , communication becomes an essential feature .
Another example : Written instructions could be presented for safely navigating a trap-filled chamber .
Problem is , the instructions are in two different in-game languages .
Each player can only read a different half of the instructions , with the other half appearing as gibberish .
Only through trust and patient discussion could the characters progress .
I think there 's a lot of room for developers to translate what is essentially a limitation into unique puzzles and situations which help a player to feel like he 's really co-operating with someone , even if that someone is n't in the room .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The obvious answer, as someone else pointed out, is that split screen would be more demanding on the machine and more difficult to code.
What's too bad is that developers don't seem to be willing to grab hold of some of the opportunities that online only might present.
What I'm talking about is giving each player a different, incomplete part of the total information, encouraging a sort of communicative, true-co-operative experience we rarely see.
For example: Our warrior and our archer encounter a group of doppelgangers- identical monsters, but only one of them is the true foe.
Now, one character (the archer, say.
) is incapacitated somehow, but he can still see the fight.
As it happens, our archer has the preternatural ability to spot the main foe (it appears in a different color on his screen).
If he can successfully direct the warrior to that foe, the fight will be over quickly and our characters can progress.
If not, the battle will be incredibly difficult.
In splitscreen, the warrior would only have to glance at the archer's play window, but with online-only, communication becomes an essential feature.
Another example: Written instructions could be presented for safely navigating a trap-filled chamber.
Problem is, the instructions are in two different in-game languages.
Each player can only read a different half of the instructions, with the other half appearing as gibberish.
Only through trust and patient discussion could the characters progress.
I think there's a lot of room for developers to translate what is essentially a limitation into unique puzzles and situations which help a player to feel like he's really co-operating with someone, even if that someone isn't in the room.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489408</id>
	<title>How many games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268655840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>do you really play after 5 years?</htmltext>
<tokenext>do you really play after 5 years ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>do you really play after 5 years?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492772</id>
	<title>Re:Are you kidding?</title>
	<author>headLITE</author>
	<datestamp>1268732100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I played all Diablo and Sacred episodes. The one thing that Diablo II had and Sacred lacked was online games with the character stored on the server and gameplay running on the server. People figured out how to predict gambled items and such, but apart from that, provided that you played on closed battle.net, Diablo II was cheat-free back in the day. Sacred on the other hand was so buggy that Sacred Plus was released for free, and there were all kinds of cheats based on manipulating the game state in memory. I did enjoy both games, but D2 was more fun when played online, while Sacred was really only playable solo and its ladders etc. were meaningless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I played all Diablo and Sacred episodes .
The one thing that Diablo II had and Sacred lacked was online games with the character stored on the server and gameplay running on the server .
People figured out how to predict gambled items and such , but apart from that , provided that you played on closed battle.net , Diablo II was cheat-free back in the day .
Sacred on the other hand was so buggy that Sacred Plus was released for free , and there were all kinds of cheats based on manipulating the game state in memory .
I did enjoy both games , but D2 was more fun when played online , while Sacred was really only playable solo and its ladders etc .
were meaningless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I played all Diablo and Sacred episodes.
The one thing that Diablo II had and Sacred lacked was online games with the character stored on the server and gameplay running on the server.
People figured out how to predict gambled items and such, but apart from that, provided that you played on closed battle.net, Diablo II was cheat-free back in the day.
Sacred on the other hand was so buggy that Sacred Plus was released for free, and there were all kinds of cheats based on manipulating the game state in memory.
I did enjoy both games, but D2 was more fun when played online, while Sacred was really only playable solo and its ladders etc.
were meaningless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492816</id>
	<title>more co-op</title>
	<author>Tom</author>
	<datestamp>1268732460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally!</p><p>Cooperative multiplayer has been ignored for too long by the games industry. There's one reason I played Borderlands at all, and that's cooperative multiplayer done well. I'm <b>so</b> glad Bethesda is finally going that direction. I've always wanted cooperative Oblivion. Well, one can hope... maybe Eldar Scrolls V... please?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally ! Cooperative multiplayer has been ignored for too long by the games industry .
There 's one reason I played Borderlands at all , and that 's cooperative multiplayer done well .
I 'm so glad Bethesda is finally going that direction .
I 've always wanted cooperative Oblivion .
Well , one can hope... maybe Eldar Scrolls V... please ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally!Cooperative multiplayer has been ignored for too long by the games industry.
There's one reason I played Borderlands at all, and that's cooperative multiplayer done well.
I'm so glad Bethesda is finally going that direction.
I've always wanted cooperative Oblivion.
Well, one can hope... maybe Eldar Scrolls V... please?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176</id>
	<title>No Split Screen?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268654400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too bad they've decided to do away with split screen. I count myself one of the lucky geeks with a wife who loves video games and one of our favorite types has been the split-screen dungeon crawl like Baldur's Gate. We won't be buying another TV and another PS3 to play games on, though, so I guess this is a game we won't be buying.
<br> <br>
Dear Game Developers: Please bring back split-screen play as a standard. While Borderlands is great, we won't be playing it forever.
<br> <br>
-----<br>
<i>My wife and I play on the couch; video games, too.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad they 've decided to do away with split screen .
I count myself one of the lucky geeks with a wife who loves video games and one of our favorite types has been the split-screen dungeon crawl like Baldur 's Gate .
We wo n't be buying another TV and another PS3 to play games on , though , so I guess this is a game we wo n't be buying .
Dear Game Developers : Please bring back split-screen play as a standard .
While Borderlands is great , we wo n't be playing it forever .
----- My wife and I play on the couch ; video games , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad they've decided to do away with split screen.
I count myself one of the lucky geeks with a wife who loves video games and one of our favorite types has been the split-screen dungeon crawl like Baldur's Gate.
We won't be buying another TV and another PS3 to play games on, though, so I guess this is a game we won't be buying.
Dear Game Developers: Please bring back split-screen play as a standard.
While Borderlands is great, we won't be playing it forever.
-----
My wife and I play on the couch; video games, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491540</id>
	<title>Torchlight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268670240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want a solid single player dungeon crawler look no further than Torchlight. It is made by the same crew that made Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 (they were immediately fired from Blizzard after making D2). They even got Matt Uelmen to do it's music. Their next project is an MMO but details are lacking as usual.</p><p>I fully support these guys. They do roguelikes VERY well as we've seen in the past with D1 &amp; D2, and now they have total creative control over their game. Torchlight is a good bit "happier" than either of the Diablo's but it's story line has nothing to do with the Three Brothers walking the Earth. My only complaint about the the game is that it looks cartoony but that's an artifact of using advanced engines and needing the game to play on every PC out there. It even plays on a netbook.</p><p>I just hope the Torchlight MMO doesn't tank like Hellgate London did (wow that was a boat of fail..). Supposedly it will be free-to-play and will survive on microtransactions. I would gladly buy a potion of experience booster, but I wouldn't pay for anything else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want a solid single player dungeon crawler look no further than Torchlight .
It is made by the same crew that made Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 ( they were immediately fired from Blizzard after making D2 ) .
They even got Matt Uelmen to do it 's music .
Their next project is an MMO but details are lacking as usual.I fully support these guys .
They do roguelikes VERY well as we 've seen in the past with D1 &amp; D2 , and now they have total creative control over their game .
Torchlight is a good bit " happier " than either of the Diablo 's but it 's story line has nothing to do with the Three Brothers walking the Earth .
My only complaint about the the game is that it looks cartoony but that 's an artifact of using advanced engines and needing the game to play on every PC out there .
It even plays on a netbook.I just hope the Torchlight MMO does n't tank like Hellgate London did ( wow that was a boat of fail.. ) .
Supposedly it will be free-to-play and will survive on microtransactions .
I would gladly buy a potion of experience booster , but I would n't pay for anything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want a solid single player dungeon crawler look no further than Torchlight.
It is made by the same crew that made Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 (they were immediately fired from Blizzard after making D2).
They even got Matt Uelmen to do it's music.
Their next project is an MMO but details are lacking as usual.I fully support these guys.
They do roguelikes VERY well as we've seen in the past with D1 &amp; D2, and now they have total creative control over their game.
Torchlight is a good bit "happier" than either of the Diablo's but it's story line has nothing to do with the Three Brothers walking the Earth.
My only complaint about the the game is that it looks cartoony but that's an artifact of using advanced engines and needing the game to play on every PC out there.
It even plays on a netbook.I just hope the Torchlight MMO doesn't tank like Hellgate London did (wow that was a boat of fail..).
Supposedly it will be free-to-play and will survive on microtransactions.
I would gladly buy a potion of experience booster, but I wouldn't pay for anything else.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31494900</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>sarahbau</author>
	<datestamp>1268751840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This has been bothering me ever since the PS3 came out. There are so many games that only offer multiplayer online, with no option to play with someone sitting next to you. It might offer what they consider a "better" experience, with no split screen, or being confined to the same screen as with other dungeon crawlers, but they're basically saying that if you want to play it with a family member or room mate, you'll need to buy another console, TV and second copy of the game. That's just stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This has been bothering me ever since the PS3 came out .
There are so many games that only offer multiplayer online , with no option to play with someone sitting next to you .
It might offer what they consider a " better " experience , with no split screen , or being confined to the same screen as with other dungeon crawlers , but they 're basically saying that if you want to play it with a family member or room mate , you 'll need to buy another console , TV and second copy of the game .
That 's just stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has been bothering me ever since the PS3 came out.
There are so many games that only offer multiplayer online, with no option to play with someone sitting next to you.
It might offer what they consider a "better" experience, with no split screen, or being confined to the same screen as with other dungeon crawlers, but they're basically saying that if you want to play it with a family member or room mate, you'll need to buy another console, TV and second copy of the game.
That's just stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489322</id>
	<title>Re:No Split Screen?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268655180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Baldur's gate was same screen, wasn't it?  The only thing split was the inventory if I remember right.</p><p>I do agree though, I want more local coop games.  I'd kill to get a sequel to Champions of Norrath as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Baldur 's gate was same screen , was n't it ?
The only thing split was the inventory if I remember right.I do agree though , I want more local coop games .
I 'd kill to get a sequel to Champions of Norrath as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Baldur's gate was same screen, wasn't it?
The only thing split was the inventory if I remember right.I do agree though, I want more local coop games.
I'd kill to get a sequel to Champions of Norrath as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490060</id>
	<title>Re:Can't quite pinpoint...</title>
	<author>santiago</author>
	<datestamp>1268659500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How are they going to top DS's brutality and innovate features?</p></div><p>Maybe by making it less difficult than smashing down a brick wall with your forehead?  That way, us filthy casuals with lives that keep us from enjoying the subtle nuances of replaying game sections ad nauseam can enjoy it</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How are they going to top DS 's brutality and innovate features ? Maybe by making it less difficult than smashing down a brick wall with your forehead ?
That way , us filthy casuals with lives that keep us from enjoying the subtle nuances of replaying game sections ad nauseam can enjoy it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How are they going to top DS's brutality and innovate features?Maybe by making it less difficult than smashing down a brick wall with your forehead?
That way, us filthy casuals with lives that keep us from enjoying the subtle nuances of replaying game sections ad nauseam can enjoy it
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489180</id>
	<title>Re:Oooh, shiny!</title>
	<author>biryokumaru</author>
	<datestamp>1268654400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think anyone compared the four-person Borderlands to an MMO, though... clearly this has more players, right? Anything with more than one person counts as massive, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think anyone compared the four-person Borderlands to an MMO , though... clearly this has more players , right ?
Anything with more than one person counts as massive , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think anyone compared the four-person Borderlands to an MMO, though... clearly this has more players, right?
Anything with more than one person counts as massive, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31519558</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268853420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>EXACTLY!!!</p><p>If this game had expansions it would still be played today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>EXACTLY ! !
! If this game had expansions it would still be played today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EXACTLY!!
!If this game had expansions it would still be played today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489474</id>
	<title>Bethesda just now learning about Darkstone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268656260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What an amazingly new and ass-kicking concept!  Oh wait, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darkstone" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">it's been done before</a> [wikipedia.org].  I'm only familiar with the PC version as well.</p><p>I think I'll stick with Darkstone; chances are it'll run fine and won't makes my graphics card sound like a jet engine while playing.</p><p>And besides/more importantly, given Bethesda's "we don't give a fuck about fixing bugs in our games" stance (I'm referring to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark\_Corners\_of\_the\_Earth#Reception" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth</a> [wikipedia.org]), I'm not sure I WANT to play anything they release.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What an amazingly new and ass-kicking concept !
Oh wait , it 's been done before [ wikipedia.org ] .
I 'm only familiar with the PC version as well.I think I 'll stick with Darkstone ; chances are it 'll run fine and wo n't makes my graphics card sound like a jet engine while playing.And besides/more importantly , given Bethesda 's " we do n't give a fuck about fixing bugs in our games " stance ( I 'm referring to Call of Cthulhu : Dark Corners of the Earth [ wikipedia.org ] ) , I 'm not sure I WANT to play anything they release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What an amazingly new and ass-kicking concept!
Oh wait, it's been done before [wikipedia.org].
I'm only familiar with the PC version as well.I think I'll stick with Darkstone; chances are it'll run fine and won't makes my graphics card sound like a jet engine while playing.And besides/more importantly, given Bethesda's "we don't give a fuck about fixing bugs in our games" stance (I'm referring to Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth [wikipedia.org]), I'm not sure I WANT to play anything they release.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31497626</id>
	<title>Re:No Split Screen?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268761440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know... the problem right now with classic split screen is only the direction.  It sort of would suck to have only half the vertical space on a widescreen TV.</p><p>If They could allow it to split on the vertical axis, giving each player (if you have a widescreen anyway), half the screen's length, well, that would be the way to go for this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know... the problem right now with classic split screen is only the direction .
It sort of would suck to have only half the vertical space on a widescreen TV.If They could allow it to split on the vertical axis , giving each player ( if you have a widescreen anyway ) , half the screen 's length , well , that would be the way to go for this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know... the problem right now with classic split screen is only the direction.
It sort of would suck to have only half the vertical space on a widescreen TV.If They could allow it to split on the vertical axis, giving each player (if you have a widescreen anyway), half the screen's length, well, that would be the way to go for this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31493082</id>
	<title>Why online?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268736000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does absolutely everything these days match the pattern blablabla-online. A cooperative game just begs to be played with a family member or room mate sitting next to you. This means it needs LAN support above all. Sure online functionality is nice, but I don't want to be dependant on matchmaking just to play a game over my local network. I like to bring my games with me on vacation so I have something fun to do wherever I am, this includes areas without internet access.</p><p>I'm willing to bet that this game will sadly do what all other recent games have done recently, namely forced matchmaking, making offline multiplayer impossible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does absolutely everything these days match the pattern blablabla-online .
A cooperative game just begs to be played with a family member or room mate sitting next to you .
This means it needs LAN support above all .
Sure online functionality is nice , but I do n't want to be dependant on matchmaking just to play a game over my local network .
I like to bring my games with me on vacation so I have something fun to do wherever I am , this includes areas without internet access.I 'm willing to bet that this game will sadly do what all other recent games have done recently , namely forced matchmaking , making offline multiplayer impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does absolutely everything these days match the pattern blablabla-online.
A cooperative game just begs to be played with a family member or room mate sitting next to you.
This means it needs LAN support above all.
Sure online functionality is nice, but I don't want to be dependant on matchmaking just to play a game over my local network.
I like to bring my games with me on vacation so I have something fun to do wherever I am, this includes areas without internet access.I'm willing to bet that this game will sadly do what all other recent games have done recently, namely forced matchmaking, making offline multiplayer impossible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489740</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>gravos</author>
	<datestamp>1268657580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The advantage of Diablo was how long Blizz supported it with patches. What are the odds Bethesda will fix any balance issues discovered 6 months after release?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The advantage of Diablo was how long Blizz supported it with patches .
What are the odds Bethesda will fix any balance issues discovered 6 months after release ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The advantage of Diablo was how long Blizz supported it with patches.
What are the odds Bethesda will fix any balance issues discovered 6 months after release?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492828</id>
	<title>Original Demon's Forge</title>
	<author>tangent3</author>
	<datestamp>1268732640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...was a game almost impossible to complete without a hint book.</p><p><a href="http://www.mobygames.com/game/demons-forge" title="mobygames.com">http://www.mobygames.com/game/demons-forge</a> [mobygames.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...was a game almost impossible to complete without a hint book.http : //www.mobygames.com/game/demons-forge [ mobygames.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...was a game almost impossible to complete without a hint book.http://www.mobygames.com/game/demons-forge [mobygames.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136</id>
	<title>Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Reason58</author>
	<datestamp>1268654100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTA:<p><div class="quote"><p>The skill system and weapon upgrades bring in the character development side from a role playing game. And the co-op design with its warrior and archer dynamic introduces the reward of playing together like an MMO.</p></div><p>It is another Diablo clone. Oh, and having two people play together makes it like a massively multiplayer online game? Right.</p><p>I don't see a single thing that wasn't in Diablo over a decade ago, let alone something innovative.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA : The skill system and weapon upgrades bring in the character development side from a role playing game .
And the co-op design with its warrior and archer dynamic introduces the reward of playing together like an MMO.It is another Diablo clone .
Oh , and having two people play together makes it like a massively multiplayer online game ?
Right.I do n't see a single thing that was n't in Diablo over a decade ago , let alone something innovative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA:The skill system and weapon upgrades bring in the character development side from a role playing game.
And the co-op design with its warrior and archer dynamic introduces the reward of playing together like an MMO.It is another Diablo clone.
Oh, and having two people play together makes it like a massively multiplayer online game?
Right.I don't see a single thing that wasn't in Diablo over a decade ago, let alone something innovative.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31495806</id>
	<title>Elderscrolls V delayed again?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268755140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So that's whats been slowing down the release date of Elderscrolls V. Thanks alot Bethesda, don't forget what your best selling product has been all these years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So that 's whats been slowing down the release date of Elderscrolls V. Thanks alot Bethesda , do n't forget what your best selling product has been all these years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So that's whats been slowing down the release date of Elderscrolls V. Thanks alot Bethesda, don't forget what your best selling product has been all these years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490264</id>
	<title>Bethesda Games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268660640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Their games have gone downhill since Morrowind, IMHO.  Oblivion was pretty, but it was no Morrowind.

My main gripe with both Morrowind and Oblivion and to some extent Fallout 3 has been that Bethesda is very unimaginative when it comes to combat.  The melee moves are very limited and the special effects for magic/spells is just supremely unimpressive.  They should take note from Final Fantasy's style when it comes to the spell effects and from Demon's Souls style when it comes to melee and character movement.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Their games have gone downhill since Morrowind , IMHO .
Oblivion was pretty , but it was no Morrowind .
My main gripe with both Morrowind and Oblivion and to some extent Fallout 3 has been that Bethesda is very unimaginative when it comes to combat .
The melee moves are very limited and the special effects for magic/spells is just supremely unimpressive .
They should take note from Final Fantasy 's style when it comes to the spell effects and from Demon 's Souls style when it comes to melee and character movement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their games have gone downhill since Morrowind, IMHO.
Oblivion was pretty, but it was no Morrowind.
My main gripe with both Morrowind and Oblivion and to some extent Fallout 3 has been that Bethesda is very unimaginative when it comes to combat.
The melee moves are very limited and the special effects for magic/spells is just supremely unimpressive.
They should take note from Final Fantasy's style when it comes to the spell effects and from Demon's Souls style when it comes to melee and character movement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31493620</id>
	<title>Re:Why can't I play with my buddy on the couch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268743860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen!  I married a gamer girl, and when we fight over who gets the controller in a one-player game guess who wins?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)  (Hint: The winner lacks a Y chromosome.)  Because of that, if there are several good games out then the ones with local co-op jump to the top of my list.  We are so not going to have two of each console and two TVs in our home theater just so that we can play together.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen !
I married a gamer girl , and when we fight over who gets the controller in a one-player game guess who wins ?
; ) ( Hint : The winner lacks a Y chromosome .
) Because of that , if there are several good games out then the ones with local co-op jump to the top of my list .
We are so not going to have two of each console and two TVs in our home theater just so that we can play together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen!
I married a gamer girl, and when we fight over who gets the controller in a one-player game guess who wins?
;)  (Hint: The winner lacks a Y chromosome.
)  Because of that, if there are several good games out then the ones with local co-op jump to the top of my list.
We are so not going to have two of each console and two TVs in our home theater just so that we can play together.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489310</id>
	<title>Are you kidding?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268655060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>2. To me, the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Demon's Souls.</p></div><p>I'd say that the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is <b>Diablo II</b>.  Nothing else released in the past 10 years has even come close.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>2 .
To me , the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Demon 's Souls.I 'd say that the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Diablo II .
Nothing else released in the past 10 years has even come close .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2.
To me, the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Demon's Souls.I'd say that the current gold standard for a dungeon crawl is Diablo II.
Nothing else released in the past 10 years has even come close.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31496110</id>
	<title>Old mistakes</title>
	<author>Mathness</author>
	<datestamp>1268756220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope they have learned how to do this properly since they made Battlespire. One "interesting" feature happened when you traded between players as the results were rather random, a good pair of boots could turn into a sword.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope they have learned how to do this properly since they made Battlespire .
One " interesting " feature happened when you traded between players as the results were rather random , a good pair of boots could turn into a sword .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope they have learned how to do this properly since they made Battlespire.
One "interesting" feature happened when you traded between players as the results were rather random, a good pair of boots could turn into a sword.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490458</id>
	<title>Two player</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268661840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And all you'll need to do to play with your flatmate in the next room is connect to our proprietary authentication servers in Asscrapistan. Network outages my occur but are part of normal operational parameters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And all you 'll need to do to play with your flatmate in the next room is connect to our proprietary authentication servers in Asscrapistan .
Network outages my occur but are part of normal operational parameters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And all you'll need to do to play with your flatmate in the next room is connect to our proprietary authentication servers in Asscrapistan.
Network outages my occur but are part of normal operational parameters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31497890</id>
	<title>Diablo 2 vs. rogue likes</title>
	<author>manekineko2</author>
	<datestamp>1268762460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While Diablo 2 has a lot of its spiritual roots in the rogue-likes, it's quite different in some ways as well.</p><p>For example, a lot of the time-based spells or abilities simply can't be modeled by a rogue-like which necessarily is turn based. For example, I've never played a rogue-like where dodging enemy attacks is a significant part, whereas I recall that was rather important in Diablo. Even if dodging were a part of a rogue-like, it'd be pretty awkward in a turn-based game. Diablo's real-time nature introduces an action element that is wholly different from rogue-likes, though whether that's a good or bad thing is a matter of personal taste.</p><p>Also, a lot of rogue-likes (like the Anonymous Coward alluded to) equate depth with memorization grinding of experimentation (or more realistically reading the source). Results are often unforeseeable prior to occurring, which I always found a bit frustrating (of course kicking sinks is a great way to find rings!).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While Diablo 2 has a lot of its spiritual roots in the rogue-likes , it 's quite different in some ways as well.For example , a lot of the time-based spells or abilities simply ca n't be modeled by a rogue-like which necessarily is turn based .
For example , I 've never played a rogue-like where dodging enemy attacks is a significant part , whereas I recall that was rather important in Diablo .
Even if dodging were a part of a rogue-like , it 'd be pretty awkward in a turn-based game .
Diablo 's real-time nature introduces an action element that is wholly different from rogue-likes , though whether that 's a good or bad thing is a matter of personal taste.Also , a lot of rogue-likes ( like the Anonymous Coward alluded to ) equate depth with memorization grinding of experimentation ( or more realistically reading the source ) .
Results are often unforeseeable prior to occurring , which I always found a bit frustrating ( of course kicking sinks is a great way to find rings !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While Diablo 2 has a lot of its spiritual roots in the rogue-likes, it's quite different in some ways as well.For example, a lot of the time-based spells or abilities simply can't be modeled by a rogue-like which necessarily is turn based.
For example, I've never played a rogue-like where dodging enemy attacks is a significant part, whereas I recall that was rather important in Diablo.
Even if dodging were a part of a rogue-like, it'd be pretty awkward in a turn-based game.
Diablo's real-time nature introduces an action element that is wholly different from rogue-likes, though whether that's a good or bad thing is a matter of personal taste.Also, a lot of rogue-likes (like the Anonymous Coward alluded to) equate depth with memorization grinding of experimentation (or more realistically reading the source).
Results are often unforeseeable prior to occurring, which I always found a bit frustrating (of course kicking sinks is a great way to find rings!
).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31507320</id>
	<title>Re:Bethesda Games</title>
	<author>Jedi Alec</author>
	<datestamp>1268835120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Fallout 2 it's the other way around. If you happen to run into some sort of uber-weapon early on (Lincoln's repeater, the plasma rifle you get from the android in Rivet City, etc.), you can spend quite a few levels running around one-shotting anything remotely humanoid.</p><p>Actually in Fallout 3 you don't want to go *anywhere* as a level 1 character, since you level up the moment you leave the vault<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-) And at that point with the equipment you have most critters out there will tear you to tiny pieces...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Fallout 2 it 's the other way around .
If you happen to run into some sort of uber-weapon early on ( Lincoln 's repeater , the plasma rifle you get from the android in Rivet City , etc .
) , you can spend quite a few levels running around one-shotting anything remotely humanoid.Actually in Fallout 3 you do n't want to go * anywhere * as a level 1 character , since you level up the moment you leave the vault ; - ) And at that point with the equipment you have most critters out there will tear you to tiny pieces.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Fallout 2 it's the other way around.
If you happen to run into some sort of uber-weapon early on (Lincoln's repeater, the plasma rifle you get from the android in Rivet City, etc.
), you can spend quite a few levels running around one-shotting anything remotely humanoid.Actually in Fallout 3 you don't want to go *anywhere* as a level 1 character, since you level up the moment you leave the vault ;-) And at that point with the equipment you have most critters out there will tear you to tiny pieces...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31494474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489586</id>
	<title>Re:Can't quite pinpoint...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268656800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>hahahaha if by gold standard you mean shit boring</htmltext>
<tokenext>hahahaha if by gold standard you mean shit boring</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hahahaha if by gold standard you mean shit boring</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490434</id>
	<title>Re:Are you kidding?</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1268661660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well I would say <a href="http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/sacred\_gold" title="gog.com">Sacred</a> [gog.com] was pretty good, with lots of quests, tons of items, and plenty of replay. A really huge gameworld too, which was nice. For me I preferred Sacred over Diablo II. There was just more to do, more ways to customize my character, etc.</p><p>

But even if you think Diablo is the end all of dungeon crawlers, if you haven't picked up Sacred you really can't beat $10 for the original plus the expansion pack. And when you put the two together that is a really really REALLY long game, which if you like hunting for new weapons and getting new powers for your character is a real plus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I would say Sacred [ gog.com ] was pretty good , with lots of quests , tons of items , and plenty of replay .
A really huge gameworld too , which was nice .
For me I preferred Sacred over Diablo II .
There was just more to do , more ways to customize my character , etc .
But even if you think Diablo is the end all of dungeon crawlers , if you have n't picked up Sacred you really ca n't beat $ 10 for the original plus the expansion pack .
And when you put the two together that is a really really REALLY long game , which if you like hunting for new weapons and getting new powers for your character is a real plus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I would say Sacred [gog.com] was pretty good, with lots of quests, tons of items, and plenty of replay.
A really huge gameworld too, which was nice.
For me I preferred Sacred over Diablo II.
There was just more to do, more ways to customize my character, etc.
But even if you think Diablo is the end all of dungeon crawlers, if you haven't picked up Sacred you really can't beat $10 for the original plus the expansion pack.
And when you put the two together that is a really really REALLY long game, which if you like hunting for new weapons and getting new powers for your character is a real plus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489860</id>
	<title>Re:Oooh, shiny!</title>
	<author>catd77</author>
	<datestamp>1268658420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Borderlands was a 4 player co-op FPS, not a 3rd person co-op game.  Anyways, I'm excited too, I enjoyed Oblivion and can't wait to see what Bethesda can do to this tired genre.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Borderlands was a 4 player co-op FPS , not a 3rd person co-op game .
Anyways , I 'm excited too , I enjoyed Oblivion and ca n't wait to see what Bethesda can do to this tired genre .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Borderlands was a 4 player co-op FPS, not a 3rd person co-op game.
Anyways, I'm excited too, I enjoyed Oblivion and can't wait to see what Bethesda can do to this tired genre.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489660</id>
	<title>Re:Why can't I play with my buddy on the couch</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1268657220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're making assumptions.</p><p>You can play Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance with two players without split-screen. It just moves the camera to keep both of them in view.</p><p>Nowhere does it say, "there's no split screen, SO THEREFORE YOU NEED TO SHELL-OUT FOR A SECOND CONSOLE YOU SUCKER!! SUCKER!!!!!" which seems to be what you're reading there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're making assumptions.You can play Baldur 's Gate : Dark Alliance with two players without split-screen .
It just moves the camera to keep both of them in view.Nowhere does it say , " there 's no split screen , SO THEREFORE YOU NEED TO SHELL-OUT FOR A SECOND CONSOLE YOU SUCKER ! !
SUCKER ! ! ! ! ! " which seems to be what you 're reading there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're making assumptions.You can play Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance with two players without split-screen.
It just moves the camera to keep both of them in view.Nowhere does it say, "there's no split screen, SO THEREFORE YOU NEED TO SHELL-OUT FOR A SECOND CONSOLE YOU SUCKER!!
SUCKER!!!!!" which seems to be what you're reading there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492868</id>
	<title>Re:No Split Screen?</title>
	<author>headLITE</author>
	<datestamp>1268733000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know, there are many multiplayer games that work without split screen. If a Mario title can do it then a dungeon crawler should be able to do it too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know , there are many multiplayer games that work without split screen .
If a Mario title can do it then a dungeon crawler should be able to do it too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know, there are many multiplayer games that work without split screen.
If a Mario title can do it then a dungeon crawler should be able to do it too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489216</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268654580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And the co-op design with its warrior and archer dynamic introduces the reward of playing together <b>like</b> an MMO.</p></div></blockquote><blockquote><div><p>Oh, and having two people play together makes it like a massively multiplayer online game? Right.</p></div></blockquote><p>This claim was not made.  Either you didn't read the passage you quoted, or you straight-up lied about what it says.  Which is it?  There is no third option.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And the co-op design with its warrior and archer dynamic introduces the reward of playing together like an MMO.Oh , and having two people play together makes it like a massively multiplayer online game ?
Right.This claim was not made .
Either you did n't read the passage you quoted , or you straight-up lied about what it says .
Which is it ?
There is no third option .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the co-op design with its warrior and archer dynamic introduces the reward of playing together like an MMO.Oh, and having two people play together makes it like a massively multiplayer online game?
Right.This claim was not made.
Either you didn't read the passage you quoted, or you straight-up lied about what it says.
Which is it?
There is no third option.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489252</id>
	<title>Re:Bad idea for the future</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268654760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So is there no single player mode? Neither article was clear on this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So is there no single player mode ?
Neither article was clear on this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So is there no single player mode?
Neither article was clear on this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490530</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268662320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I want to know is why not more than 2 characters.  Even Champions of Norrath on the PS2 supported 4 in both local same screen and online.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I want to know is why not more than 2 characters .
Even Champions of Norrath on the PS2 supported 4 in both local same screen and online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I want to know is why not more than 2 characters.
Even Champions of Norrath on the PS2 supported 4 in both local same screen and online.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31498038</id>
	<title>Anarchy Online comes close</title>
	<author>Well-Fed Troll</author>
	<datestamp>1268763120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The modern MMOs like Anarchy Online have most of the things I've wanted from dungeon crawlers.  Here's what I want in a dungeon crawler:
Class, equipment and skill asymmetry &amp; synergism, complex crafting, interesting trade-able loot with enough space to store everything I loot (WoW is all nodrop nowadays from what I hear), and enough variety in the fighting to require use of different skill sets. <br>I refuse to pay blizzard any more money after D2 because they deleted my set of 10 D2 accounts.... 3 times.
<br>
<br> ps. Intrusive "we own your machine" DRM games need not apply.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The modern MMOs like Anarchy Online have most of the things I 've wanted from dungeon crawlers .
Here 's what I want in a dungeon crawler : Class , equipment and skill asymmetry &amp; synergism , complex crafting , interesting trade-able loot with enough space to store everything I loot ( WoW is all nodrop nowadays from what I hear ) , and enough variety in the fighting to require use of different skill sets .
I refuse to pay blizzard any more money after D2 because they deleted my set of 10 D2 accounts.... 3 times .
ps. Intrusive " we own your machine " DRM games need not apply .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The modern MMOs like Anarchy Online have most of the things I've wanted from dungeon crawlers.
Here's what I want in a dungeon crawler:
Class, equipment and skill asymmetry &amp; synergism, complex crafting, interesting trade-able loot with enough space to store everything I loot (WoW is all nodrop nowadays from what I hear), and enough variety in the fighting to require use of different skill sets.
I refuse to pay blizzard any more money after D2 because they deleted my set of 10 D2 accounts.... 3 times.
ps. Intrusive "we own your machine" DRM games need not apply.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490866</id>
	<title>Re:Diablo Clone</title>
	<author>ivan256</author>
	<datestamp>1268664600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The advantage of Diablo was how long Blizz supported it with patches. What are the odds Bethesda will fix any [...] issues [...] after release?</p></div><p>None. Fixed that for you too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The advantage of Diablo was how long Blizz supported it with patches .
What are the odds Bethesda will fix any [ ... ] issues [ ... ] after release ? None .
Fixed that for you too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The advantage of Diablo was how long Blizz supported it with patches.
What are the odds Bethesda will fix any [...] issues [...] after release?None.
Fixed that for you too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489018</id>
	<title>Oooh, shiny!</title>
	<author>pseudofengshui</author>
	<datestamp>1268653380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, kinda like Borderlands except not as multiplayer?

I'm excited anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , kinda like Borderlands except not as multiplayer ?
I 'm excited anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, kinda like Borderlands except not as multiplayer?
I'm excited anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31493620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31497626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31497890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31498070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31497518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31503078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31488996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31495846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31488996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31493370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31498038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31494900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31519558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31507320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31494474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_15_218259_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31488996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489674
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489720
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491540
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489408
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489252
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31495846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492592
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31503078
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31494474
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31507320
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31497626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489180
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489362
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31498070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489310
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490434
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492772
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490508
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31497890
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31498038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491068
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31493370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31497518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489660
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31493620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490530
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31519558
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31494900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489740
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490866
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31490946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31489272
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492700
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492800
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31491232
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31488970
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31495806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_15_218259.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_15_218259.31492816
</commentlist>
</conversation>
