<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_02_1557227</id>
	<title>The Essentials of RPG Design</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1246558800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.gamesetwatch.com/" rel="nofollow">simoniker</a> writes <i>"As the latest in his Game Design Essentials series for Gamasutra, writer John Harris examines 10 games from the Western computer RPG (CRPG) tradition and 10 from the Japanese console RPG (JRPG) tradition, to <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4066/game\_design\_essentials\_20\_rpgs.php?print=1">figure out what exactly makes them tick</a>. From the entry on <em>Nethack</em>: 'Gaining experience is supposed to carry the risk of harm and failure. Without that risk, gaining power becomes a foregone conclusion. It has reached the point where the mere act of spending time playing [most RPGs] appears to give players the right to have their characters become more powerful. The obstacles that provide experience become simply an arbitrary wall to scale before more power is granted; this, in a nutshell, is the type of play that has brought us grind, where the journey is simple and boring and the destination is something to be raced to. <em>Nethack</em> and many other roguelikes do feature experience gain, but it doesn't feel like grind. It doesn't because much of the time the player is gaining experience, he is in danger of sudden, catastrophic failure. When you're frequently a heartbeat away from death, it's difficult to become bored.' Harris' Game Design series has previously spanned subjects from <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3485/game\_design\_essentials\_20\_.php">mysterious games</a> to <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/1902/game\_design\_essentials\_20\_open\_.php">open world games</a>, <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/2844/game\_design\_essentials\_20\_unusual\_.php">unusual control schemes</a> and <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/1640/game\_design\_essentials\_20\_.php">difficult games</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>simoniker writes " As the latest in his Game Design Essentials series for Gamasutra , writer John Harris examines 10 games from the Western computer RPG ( CRPG ) tradition and 10 from the Japanese console RPG ( JRPG ) tradition , to figure out what exactly makes them tick .
From the entry on Nethack : 'Gaining experience is supposed to carry the risk of harm and failure .
Without that risk , gaining power becomes a foregone conclusion .
It has reached the point where the mere act of spending time playing [ most RPGs ] appears to give players the right to have their characters become more powerful .
The obstacles that provide experience become simply an arbitrary wall to scale before more power is granted ; this , in a nutshell , is the type of play that has brought us grind , where the journey is simple and boring and the destination is something to be raced to .
Nethack and many other roguelikes do feature experience gain , but it does n't feel like grind .
It does n't because much of the time the player is gaining experience , he is in danger of sudden , catastrophic failure .
When you 're frequently a heartbeat away from death , it 's difficult to become bored .
' Harris ' Game Design series has previously spanned subjects from mysterious games to open world games , unusual control schemes and difficult games .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>simoniker writes "As the latest in his Game Design Essentials series for Gamasutra, writer John Harris examines 10 games from the Western computer RPG (CRPG) tradition and 10 from the Japanese console RPG (JRPG) tradition, to figure out what exactly makes them tick.
From the entry on Nethack: 'Gaining experience is supposed to carry the risk of harm and failure.
Without that risk, gaining power becomes a foregone conclusion.
It has reached the point where the mere act of spending time playing [most RPGs] appears to give players the right to have their characters become more powerful.
The obstacles that provide experience become simply an arbitrary wall to scale before more power is granted; this, in a nutshell, is the type of play that has brought us grind, where the journey is simple and boring and the destination is something to be raced to.
Nethack and many other roguelikes do feature experience gain, but it doesn't feel like grind.
It doesn't because much of the time the player is gaining experience, he is in danger of sudden, catastrophic failure.
When you're frequently a heartbeat away from death, it's difficult to become bored.
' Harris' Game Design series has previously spanned subjects from mysterious games to open world games, unusual control schemes and difficult games.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562519</id>
	<title>Re:worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>Knave75</author>
	<datestamp>1246566120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game. When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play, all immersion is ruined.</p></div><p>
That is certainly your preference when it comes to games.  However, as a counterexample, I love the fiddly numbers in most games.  In Starcraft, I had memorized the cooldown times, range, damage, etc. of every single unit.  I could have run simulation battles on pen and paper... and I sometimes did.  In Kingdom of Loathing (an MMORPG) I was part of a group that spent time working out the exact stats of every monster and the hit/miss percentages.

<br> <br>To me, numbers are fun, to you they are not.  Yeah, you can make everything loot-based, but by having things being loot AND stats based, it makes more good numbers for me to crunch, which for me equals fun.

<br> <br>As a sidepoint, making everything loot-based would probably ruin the game due to twinking (giving new players super dooper loot)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game .
When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play , all immersion is ruined .
That is certainly your preference when it comes to games .
However , as a counterexample , I love the fiddly numbers in most games .
In Starcraft , I had memorized the cooldown times , range , damage , etc .
of every single unit .
I could have run simulation battles on pen and paper... and I sometimes did .
In Kingdom of Loathing ( an MMORPG ) I was part of a group that spent time working out the exact stats of every monster and the hit/miss percentages .
To me , numbers are fun , to you they are not .
Yeah , you can make everything loot-based , but by having things being loot AND stats based , it makes more good numbers for me to crunch , which for me equals fun .
As a sidepoint , making everything loot-based would probably ruin the game due to twinking ( giving new players super dooper loot )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game.
When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play, all immersion is ruined.
That is certainly your preference when it comes to games.
However, as a counterexample, I love the fiddly numbers in most games.
In Starcraft, I had memorized the cooldown times, range, damage, etc.
of every single unit.
I could have run simulation battles on pen and paper... and I sometimes did.
In Kingdom of Loathing (an MMORPG) I was part of a group that spent time working out the exact stats of every monster and the hit/miss percentages.
To me, numbers are fun, to you they are not.
Yeah, you can make everything loot-based, but by having things being loot AND stats based, it makes more good numbers for me to crunch, which for me equals fun.
As a sidepoint, making everything loot-based would probably ruin the game due to twinking (giving new players super dooper loot)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566921</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>The\_mad\_linguist</author>
	<datestamp>1246543200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have this thing about disliking games with time limits.</p><p>It's like playing one of those stupid autoscrolling platformer levels.  Let me play at my own pace, darnit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have this thing about disliking games with time limits.It 's like playing one of those stupid autoscrolling platformer levels .
Let me play at my own pace , darnit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have this thing about disliking games with time limits.It's like playing one of those stupid autoscrolling platformer levels.
Let me play at my own pace, darnit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562043</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>rpillala</author>
	<datestamp>1246564680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is interesting in that your friend apparently views the game differently from you.  That is, WOW is a social venue with a game attached that gives you something to do with your friends.  The friends are more important than the game.  Blizz has taken pains to ensure accessibility for a large number of people.  The system requirements are low, the interface is responsive, and the game itself is extremely easy.  All this improves the network effect of the game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is interesting in that your friend apparently views the game differently from you .
That is , WOW is a social venue with a game attached that gives you something to do with your friends .
The friends are more important than the game .
Blizz has taken pains to ensure accessibility for a large number of people .
The system requirements are low , the interface is responsive , and the game itself is extremely easy .
All this improves the network effect of the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is interesting in that your friend apparently views the game differently from you.
That is, WOW is a social venue with a game attached that gives you something to do with your friends.
The friends are more important than the game.
Blizz has taken pains to ensure accessibility for a large number of people.
The system requirements are low, the interface is responsive, and the game itself is extremely easy.
All this improves the network effect of the game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563049</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>bishiraver</author>
	<datestamp>1246567620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True enough!</p><p>I wonder if there are any articles out there describing key aspects of different dice systems and why some are popular and others are not. For example, despite the statistical shittiness of d20, it's extremely popular. The epic-feel roll-and-keep of 7th Sea (and L5R) are less so.</p><p>What are key things to keep in mind when designing a homebrew pen and paper system?</p><p>Inquiring minds want to know...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True enough ! I wonder if there are any articles out there describing key aspects of different dice systems and why some are popular and others are not .
For example , despite the statistical shittiness of d20 , it 's extremely popular .
The epic-feel roll-and-keep of 7th Sea ( and L5R ) are less so.What are key things to keep in mind when designing a homebrew pen and paper system ? Inquiring minds want to know.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True enough!I wonder if there are any articles out there describing key aspects of different dice systems and why some are popular and others are not.
For example, despite the statistical shittiness of d20, it's extremely popular.
The epic-feel roll-and-keep of 7th Sea (and L5R) are less so.What are key things to keep in mind when designing a homebrew pen and paper system?Inquiring minds want to know...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28567869</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>Abrisene</author>
	<datestamp>1246551540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OR, if you're planning on making more than one game in a series from the start, make it so that the first game ends with a reasonably competent character, but not one that is overpowered. This would allow for a greater breadth of character development over the series, as opposed to ending game 1 as a god. The often mentioned Baldur's Gate series did this well, and it wasn't until the expansion to the sequel where the players reached godlike status.
I'm curious to see how this works in Mass Effect 2, because while the character is a member of an elite order, all of the skills were relatively mundane (i.e. you get better at shooting , hacking, magic, etc) and left a lot of room for expansion.

Really, though, I'm not a fan of the whole idea of 'levels.' I thought White Wolf's D10 system was a better alternative to D&amp;D, and liked how it de-emphasized the vertical scale of power that level based systems seem to revel in. Of course there were still vertical power dynamics, but you couldn't really think in terms of "Oh no! That monster is 5 levels above me, there's no way I can beat it!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>OR , if you 're planning on making more than one game in a series from the start , make it so that the first game ends with a reasonably competent character , but not one that is overpowered .
This would allow for a greater breadth of character development over the series , as opposed to ending game 1 as a god .
The often mentioned Baldur 's Gate series did this well , and it was n't until the expansion to the sequel where the players reached godlike status .
I 'm curious to see how this works in Mass Effect 2 , because while the character is a member of an elite order , all of the skills were relatively mundane ( i.e .
you get better at shooting , hacking , magic , etc ) and left a lot of room for expansion .
Really , though , I 'm not a fan of the whole idea of 'levels .
' I thought White Wolf 's D10 system was a better alternative to D&amp;D , and liked how it de-emphasized the vertical scale of power that level based systems seem to revel in .
Of course there were still vertical power dynamics , but you could n't really think in terms of " Oh no !
That monster is 5 levels above me , there 's no way I can beat it !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OR, if you're planning on making more than one game in a series from the start, make it so that the first game ends with a reasonably competent character, but not one that is overpowered.
This would allow for a greater breadth of character development over the series, as opposed to ending game 1 as a god.
The often mentioned Baldur's Gate series did this well, and it wasn't until the expansion to the sequel where the players reached godlike status.
I'm curious to see how this works in Mass Effect 2, because while the character is a member of an elite order, all of the skills were relatively mundane (i.e.
you get better at shooting , hacking, magic, etc) and left a lot of room for expansion.
Really, though, I'm not a fan of the whole idea of 'levels.
' I thought White Wolf's D10 system was a better alternative to D&amp;D, and liked how it de-emphasized the vertical scale of power that level based systems seem to revel in.
Of course there were still vertical power dynamics, but you couldn't really think in terms of "Oh no!
That monster is 5 levels above me, there's no way I can beat it!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561507</id>
	<title>Not just RPGs</title>
	<author>Nakor BlueRider</author>
	<datestamp>1246562760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is pretty true of gaming in general these days.  Many old games had the threat of failure (take a look at the list of challenging NES games), and you'd have to start over.  Some old greats simply got harder until they beat you&#226;"like Tetris for example.  Now of course it's a foregone conclusion that the end user will eventually win simply by persisting long enough.</p><p>It's not nearly on the same scale as Nethack versus modern RPGs of course, but the drop in difficulty is certainly not limited to the RPG genre.</p><p>I have to wonder if the shift toward online multiplayer (such as in the FPS genre) is at least in some small part due to people wanting to find the difficulty and challenge that no longer exists in most single-player games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is pretty true of gaming in general these days .
Many old games had the threat of failure ( take a look at the list of challenging NES games ) , and you 'd have to start over .
Some old greats simply got harder until they beat you   " like Tetris for example .
Now of course it 's a foregone conclusion that the end user will eventually win simply by persisting long enough.It 's not nearly on the same scale as Nethack versus modern RPGs of course , but the drop in difficulty is certainly not limited to the RPG genre.I have to wonder if the shift toward online multiplayer ( such as in the FPS genre ) is at least in some small part due to people wanting to find the difficulty and challenge that no longer exists in most single-player games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is pretty true of gaming in general these days.
Many old games had the threat of failure (take a look at the list of challenging NES games), and you'd have to start over.
Some old greats simply got harder until they beat youâ"like Tetris for example.
Now of course it's a foregone conclusion that the end user will eventually win simply by persisting long enough.It's not nearly on the same scale as Nethack versus modern RPGs of course, but the drop in difficulty is certainly not limited to the RPG genre.I have to wonder if the shift toward online multiplayer (such as in the FPS genre) is at least in some small part due to people wanting to find the difficulty and challenge that no longer exists in most single-player games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561995</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1246564500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree with your disagreement.  The key characteristic of grind is tedium.  Even when you're playing conservatively, there are lots of options no how to proceed.  It takes thought, you're not just doing the same thing over and over the way you would in Phantasy Star. The only time I ever felt like I was grinding in Nethack was when I just needed one or two pieces to complete my ascension kit, and had to find the right monster to drop the right items.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree with your disagreement .
The key characteristic of grind is tedium .
Even when you 're playing conservatively , there are lots of options no how to proceed .
It takes thought , you 're not just doing the same thing over and over the way you would in Phantasy Star .
The only time I ever felt like I was grinding in Nethack was when I just needed one or two pieces to complete my ascension kit , and had to find the right monster to drop the right items .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree with your disagreement.
The key characteristic of grind is tedium.
Even when you're playing conservatively, there are lots of options no how to proceed.
It takes thought, you're not just doing the same thing over and over the way you would in Phantasy Star.
The only time I ever felt like I was grinding in Nethack was when I just needed one or two pieces to complete my ascension kit, and had to find the right monster to drop the right items.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562933</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>pthisis</author>
	<datestamp>1246567260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If you ever find yourself in a situation where death is close, you are playing wrong, in order to succeed in Nethack (or any roguelike for that matter), you have to play conservatively, beating up on things that pose no threat to you while escaping anything that might pose a challenge. Even if you can beat a challenging monster 95\% of the time, eventually that 5\% will catch up to you and all of your progress will be erased by a small handful of bad rolls. This is why only obsessives play Nethack, nobody else has the patience to grind their way up to the godlike levels required to survive the games final challenges.</i></p><p>I don't agree.  Players going for their first ascension often grind out incessantly, altar camping forever and making sure they have a whole exact set of items before starting the ascension run.  But you don't \_have\_ to do that, and there are plenty of players who can ascend 60\% or so of their games while moving through quickly (20,000 turns per game).  Even the ultra-high percentage guys like marvin don't do much grinding and usually finish in a quarter the time most newbies take.</p><p>My best streak was 6 consecutive ascensions (with different roles in each), and they were all fairly quick without any altar camping or other grinding behavior.  You learn to use your "outs" so that you can move quickly but still have plenty of tools to evade anything that presents a serious threat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you ever find yourself in a situation where death is close , you are playing wrong , in order to succeed in Nethack ( or any roguelike for that matter ) , you have to play conservatively , beating up on things that pose no threat to you while escaping anything that might pose a challenge .
Even if you can beat a challenging monster 95 \ % of the time , eventually that 5 \ % will catch up to you and all of your progress will be erased by a small handful of bad rolls .
This is why only obsessives play Nethack , nobody else has the patience to grind their way up to the godlike levels required to survive the games final challenges.I do n't agree .
Players going for their first ascension often grind out incessantly , altar camping forever and making sure they have a whole exact set of items before starting the ascension run .
But you do n't \ _have \ _ to do that , and there are plenty of players who can ascend 60 \ % or so of their games while moving through quickly ( 20,000 turns per game ) .
Even the ultra-high percentage guys like marvin do n't do much grinding and usually finish in a quarter the time most newbies take.My best streak was 6 consecutive ascensions ( with different roles in each ) , and they were all fairly quick without any altar camping or other grinding behavior .
You learn to use your " outs " so that you can move quickly but still have plenty of tools to evade anything that presents a serious threat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you ever find yourself in a situation where death is close, you are playing wrong, in order to succeed in Nethack (or any roguelike for that matter), you have to play conservatively, beating up on things that pose no threat to you while escaping anything that might pose a challenge.
Even if you can beat a challenging monster 95\% of the time, eventually that 5\% will catch up to you and all of your progress will be erased by a small handful of bad rolls.
This is why only obsessives play Nethack, nobody else has the patience to grind their way up to the godlike levels required to survive the games final challenges.I don't agree.
Players going for their first ascension often grind out incessantly, altar camping forever and making sure they have a whole exact set of items before starting the ascension run.
But you don't \_have\_ to do that, and there are plenty of players who can ascend 60\% or so of their games while moving through quickly (20,000 turns per game).
Even the ultra-high percentage guys like marvin don't do much grinding and usually finish in a quarter the time most newbies take.My best streak was 6 consecutive ascensions (with different roles in each), and they were all fairly quick without any altar camping or other grinding behavior.
You learn to use your "outs" so that you can move quickly but still have plenty of tools to evade anything that presents a serious threat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563137</id>
	<title>Durn.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246567920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly disappointed in the deception here.  Got me all excited thingking I could learn how to make Rocket Propelled Grenades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly disappointed in the deception here .
Got me all excited thingking I could learn how to make Rocket Propelled Grenades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly disappointed in the deception here.
Got me all excited thingking I could learn how to make Rocket Propelled Grenades.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564595</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>mqduck</author>
	<datestamp>1246530180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Until we come up with sentient, human-like AIs, computer "role playing games" and pen-and-paper "role playing games" will be completely different genres.</p><p>To me, the defining characteristic of pen-and-paper RPGs has always been the "anything's possibly because it's a game of human imagination", given structure by agreed-upon rules where necessary, part. And since that's precisely what computer "RPGs" don't have... I don't know. To me, equating the two has always seemed like one of the most ludicrous commonly-accepted ideas (outside of politics, of course) out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Until we come up with sentient , human-like AIs , computer " role playing games " and pen-and-paper " role playing games " will be completely different genres.To me , the defining characteristic of pen-and-paper RPGs has always been the " anything 's possibly because it 's a game of human imagination " , given structure by agreed-upon rules where necessary , part .
And since that 's precisely what computer " RPGs " do n't have... I do n't know .
To me , equating the two has always seemed like one of the most ludicrous commonly-accepted ideas ( outside of politics , of course ) out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until we come up with sentient, human-like AIs, computer "role playing games" and pen-and-paper "role playing games" will be completely different genres.To me, the defining characteristic of pen-and-paper RPGs has always been the "anything's possibly because it's a game of human imagination", given structure by agreed-upon rules where necessary, part.
And since that's precisely what computer "RPGs" don't have... I don't know.
To me, equating the two has always seemed like one of the most ludicrous commonly-accepted ideas (outside of politics, of course) out there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566027</id>
	<title>Re:Games are too easy now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246537440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Mario for NES was hard and took work.</p></div><p>Why is it so ridiculous to consider playing for fun rather than playing "to win"? Do you have some sort of need to prove yourself to a computer game?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mario for NES was hard and took work.Why is it so ridiculous to consider playing for fun rather than playing " to win " ?
Do you have some sort of need to prove yourself to a computer game ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mario for NES was hard and took work.Why is it so ridiculous to consider playing for fun rather than playing "to win"?
Do you have some sort of need to prove yourself to a computer game?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561753</id>
	<title>Nethack is more exception than rule</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246563600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NetHack still has more game awesomeness than any other game I've ever played. Not only are you potentially one cockatrice away from death, but the levels are randomly built and stocked (never the same game twice) and there are a lot of them. The game has many levels that are fixed (castle, town, etc.) but even there what you will encounter is a total crap shoot; the game even takes into consideration the phases of the moon and adjusts your "luck" accordingly (sacrifices don't give you anything, etc.). It has something of a story arc; you are definitely not the same character by the time you've "ascended" and the puzzles and challenges fit accordingly to where you are in the story. Throw in an amazingly deep set of game rules, more items than you know what to do with (though you'll want to cache them on some levels 'cause you're gonna need them coming back up), more characters and monsters than in the D&amp;D MM, and the ability to play it on every computer/operating system in existence.</p><p>In short, if you don't mind that it doesn't have multiplayer or graphics that require OpenGL or DirectX, it's the perfect RPG. But as a college freshman who discovered it on a VT100 in the library, I can easily say it's the game I've played the most over the years, bar none. And I've never played the same game twice. And, to my eternal frustration, I've never ascended (got as far as the plain of water, though!).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NetHack still has more game awesomeness than any other game I 've ever played .
Not only are you potentially one cockatrice away from death , but the levels are randomly built and stocked ( never the same game twice ) and there are a lot of them .
The game has many levels that are fixed ( castle , town , etc .
) but even there what you will encounter is a total crap shoot ; the game even takes into consideration the phases of the moon and adjusts your " luck " accordingly ( sacrifices do n't give you anything , etc. ) .
It has something of a story arc ; you are definitely not the same character by the time you 've " ascended " and the puzzles and challenges fit accordingly to where you are in the story .
Throw in an amazingly deep set of game rules , more items than you know what to do with ( though you 'll want to cache them on some levels 'cause you 're gon na need them coming back up ) , more characters and monsters than in the D&amp;D MM , and the ability to play it on every computer/operating system in existence.In short , if you do n't mind that it does n't have multiplayer or graphics that require OpenGL or DirectX , it 's the perfect RPG .
But as a college freshman who discovered it on a VT100 in the library , I can easily say it 's the game I 've played the most over the years , bar none .
And I 've never played the same game twice .
And , to my eternal frustration , I 've never ascended ( got as far as the plain of water , though !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NetHack still has more game awesomeness than any other game I've ever played.
Not only are you potentially one cockatrice away from death, but the levels are randomly built and stocked (never the same game twice) and there are a lot of them.
The game has many levels that are fixed (castle, town, etc.
) but even there what you will encounter is a total crap shoot; the game even takes into consideration the phases of the moon and adjusts your "luck" accordingly (sacrifices don't give you anything, etc.).
It has something of a story arc; you are definitely not the same character by the time you've "ascended" and the puzzles and challenges fit accordingly to where you are in the story.
Throw in an amazingly deep set of game rules, more items than you know what to do with (though you'll want to cache them on some levels 'cause you're gonna need them coming back up), more characters and monsters than in the D&amp;D MM, and the ability to play it on every computer/operating system in existence.In short, if you don't mind that it doesn't have multiplayer or graphics that require OpenGL or DirectX, it's the perfect RPG.
But as a college freshman who discovered it on a VT100 in the library, I can easily say it's the game I've played the most over the years, bar none.
And I've never played the same game twice.
And, to my eternal frustration, I've never ascended (got as far as the plain of water, though!
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561739</id>
	<title>Stanley William Moore II</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246563540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Diablo II comes to mind.  Hardcore was twice as fun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Diablo II comes to mind .
Hardcore was twice as fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Diablo II comes to mind.
Hardcore was twice as fun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563619</id>
	<title>Essential Mechanics? With regards to JRPGS?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246526220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Three things are essential:<br>-Angsty protagonist and possibly an angsty antagonist as well.<br>-Grinding, grinding, grinding.<br>-Cutesy anime girl sidekicks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Three things are essential : -Angsty protagonist and possibly an angsty antagonist as well.-Grinding , grinding , grinding.-Cutesy anime girl sidekicks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Three things are essential:-Angsty protagonist and possibly an angsty antagonist as well.-Grinding, grinding, grinding.-Cutesy anime girl sidekicks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566521</id>
	<title>Wow, that brings back memories.</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1246540260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was Hero's Quest and Might and Magic III that I was addicted to. They are actually the reason I got back into programming after dropping it as an interest for a while -- my life probably would have turned out completely different without those games. My first real forays into C programming were savegame-editor programs for those two games.</p><p>Being a teen, with no real experience, I was limited in what I could do. But I was able to alter the strings shown in Hero's Quest (of course, I changed them to obscenities) as well as hack a few of the statistics. With MMIII, I actually managed to decode almost all of the save game format, painstakingly writing down (on PAPER!) hundreds of flags, enum values, offsets. I decoded every possible item type in the game, along with their modifier flags, the offsets of the various statistics, the field where the current "time of day" was stored, etc.</p><p>These days people seem to frown on that kind of reverse engineering and hacking, preferring to call it "cracking" instead. Poo on that. My career started with that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was Hero 's Quest and Might and Magic III that I was addicted to .
They are actually the reason I got back into programming after dropping it as an interest for a while -- my life probably would have turned out completely different without those games .
My first real forays into C programming were savegame-editor programs for those two games.Being a teen , with no real experience , I was limited in what I could do .
But I was able to alter the strings shown in Hero 's Quest ( of course , I changed them to obscenities ) as well as hack a few of the statistics .
With MMIII , I actually managed to decode almost all of the save game format , painstakingly writing down ( on PAPER !
) hundreds of flags , enum values , offsets .
I decoded every possible item type in the game , along with their modifier flags , the offsets of the various statistics , the field where the current " time of day " was stored , etc.These days people seem to frown on that kind of reverse engineering and hacking , preferring to call it " cracking " instead .
Poo on that .
My career started with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was Hero's Quest and Might and Magic III that I was addicted to.
They are actually the reason I got back into programming after dropping it as an interest for a while -- my life probably would have turned out completely different without those games.
My first real forays into C programming were savegame-editor programs for those two games.Being a teen, with no real experience, I was limited in what I could do.
But I was able to alter the strings shown in Hero's Quest (of course, I changed them to obscenities) as well as hack a few of the statistics.
With MMIII, I actually managed to decode almost all of the save game format, painstakingly writing down (on PAPER!
) hundreds of flags, enum values, offsets.
I decoded every possible item type in the game, along with their modifier flags, the offsets of the various statistics, the field where the current "time of day" was stored, etc.These days people seem to frown on that kind of reverse engineering and hacking, preferring to call it "cracking" instead.
Poo on that.
My career started with that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561893</id>
	<title>What makes Japanese games tick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246564080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Plot</p><p>1) A young naive protagonist who is resourceful and scrappy but not particularly strong.<br>2) gets caught up in a fight against an evil (organization, company, religion, empire, conspiracy)<br>3) requiring him to leave his small village<br>4) and gradually explore parts of the world on a linear path<br>5) until he eventually gets free roaming of the entire world<br>6) and eventually goes to visit outer space or time shift<br>7) on the way to fight the proto enemy, who turns out not be the real enemy<br>8) and eventually reaches the real, final enemy</p><p>And they all contain a job system, an elemental weakness system (fire, thunder, water, ice, earth, holy), a super move, time consuming optional side quests, etc.</p><p>That seems to cover most of the modern 3d Japanese RPGs including Final Fantasy VII-XII, Chrono Cross, Skies of Arcadia, Grandia series, as well as some of the 2d ones (like Legend of Zelda).  RPGS within a series have a number of other common elements including chocobos, tonberry and a character named Cid.</p><p>And even though they are largely similar, I still love to play them. The structure is the same, but the quality of the implementation makes it worth playing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Plot1 ) A young naive protagonist who is resourceful and scrappy but not particularly strong.2 ) gets caught up in a fight against an evil ( organization , company , religion , empire , conspiracy ) 3 ) requiring him to leave his small village4 ) and gradually explore parts of the world on a linear path5 ) until he eventually gets free roaming of the entire world6 ) and eventually goes to visit outer space or time shift7 ) on the way to fight the proto enemy , who turns out not be the real enemy8 ) and eventually reaches the real , final enemyAnd they all contain a job system , an elemental weakness system ( fire , thunder , water , ice , earth , holy ) , a super move , time consuming optional side quests , etc.That seems to cover most of the modern 3d Japanese RPGs including Final Fantasy VII-XII , Chrono Cross , Skies of Arcadia , Grandia series , as well as some of the 2d ones ( like Legend of Zelda ) .
RPGS within a series have a number of other common elements including chocobos , tonberry and a character named Cid.And even though they are largely similar , I still love to play them .
The structure is the same , but the quality of the implementation makes it worth playing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Plot1) A young naive protagonist who is resourceful and scrappy but not particularly strong.2) gets caught up in a fight against an evil (organization, company, religion, empire, conspiracy)3) requiring him to leave his small village4) and gradually explore parts of the world on a linear path5) until he eventually gets free roaming of the entire world6) and eventually goes to visit outer space or time shift7) on the way to fight the proto enemy, who turns out not be the real enemy8) and eventually reaches the real, final enemyAnd they all contain a job system, an elemental weakness system (fire, thunder, water, ice, earth, holy), a super move, time consuming optional side quests, etc.That seems to cover most of the modern 3d Japanese RPGs including Final Fantasy VII-XII, Chrono Cross, Skies of Arcadia, Grandia series, as well as some of the 2d ones (like Legend of Zelda).
RPGS within a series have a number of other common elements including chocobos, tonberry and a character named Cid.And even though they are largely similar, I still love to play them.
The structure is the same, but the quality of the implementation makes it worth playing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569579</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>ultranova</author>
	<datestamp>1246616040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Gorack: Yes! I'm hammered. I'm gonna feel up the tavern wench! Can I roll to see if I squeeze boob or butt?!?</p></div> </blockquote><p>The sad thing is that there really is a rulebook for this. Several, in fact, both commercial and free. And the saddest thing is that I've read them all, despite not even playing RPGs<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(.</p><p> <em>Complete Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge</em> and <em>Nymphology: Blue Magic</em> are classics and should be stocked by every library.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gorack : Yes !
I 'm hammered .
I 'm gon na feel up the tavern wench !
Can I roll to see if I squeeze boob or butt ? ! ?
The sad thing is that there really is a rulebook for this .
Several , in fact , both commercial and free .
And the saddest thing is that I 've read them all , despite not even playing RPGs : ( .
Complete Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge and Nymphology : Blue Magic are classics and should be stocked by every library .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gorack: Yes!
I'm hammered.
I'm gonna feel up the tavern wench!
Can I roll to see if I squeeze boob or butt?!?
The sad thing is that there really is a rulebook for this.
Several, in fact, both commercial and free.
And the saddest thing is that I've read them all, despite not even playing RPGs :(.
Complete Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge and Nymphology: Blue Magic are classics and should be stocked by every library.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561647</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564975</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>xouumalperxe</author>
	<datestamp>1246531740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or, perhaps, do what the oh-so-clever people at SSI did, don't give players god-like powers, and pick up where the game left off. Unthinkable, huh?</p><p>Dungeons and Dragons, played "by the book", doesn't really give you enough XP to get to level 20 in the course of the typical CRPG. Given the extension of Neverwinter Nights, you'd probably be like level 10 at the end, tops. So what they did with the Gold Box games is that the first game in the series is the low level adventure that leaves you at like level 5-6, the second game picks up at about that level (and the plot hook itself explains why you were stripped of all your cool gear) and takes you to low-mid levels. The third game picks up <i>there</i> and takes you to mid-high levels, and the final game, with a truly epic plot (not necessarily <i>good</i>, but decidedly epic, with gods, major demons etc involved), takes you all the way to the highest levels. At no point before the final game were you really "god-like" in power.</p><p>Part of what makes this possible is the fact that the games are single player but party-based. A party of 5 at level 5 isn't very strong, but you had 20 level ups along the way to incrementally power them all up a fair bit, rather than 20 "micro-levels" for one single character.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , perhaps , do what the oh-so-clever people at SSI did , do n't give players god-like powers , and pick up where the game left off .
Unthinkable , huh ? Dungeons and Dragons , played " by the book " , does n't really give you enough XP to get to level 20 in the course of the typical CRPG .
Given the extension of Neverwinter Nights , you 'd probably be like level 10 at the end , tops .
So what they did with the Gold Box games is that the first game in the series is the low level adventure that leaves you at like level 5-6 , the second game picks up at about that level ( and the plot hook itself explains why you were stripped of all your cool gear ) and takes you to low-mid levels .
The third game picks up there and takes you to mid-high levels , and the final game , with a truly epic plot ( not necessarily good , but decidedly epic , with gods , major demons etc involved ) , takes you all the way to the highest levels .
At no point before the final game were you really " god-like " in power.Part of what makes this possible is the fact that the games are single player but party-based .
A party of 5 at level 5 is n't very strong , but you had 20 level ups along the way to incrementally power them all up a fair bit , rather than 20 " micro-levels " for one single character .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, perhaps, do what the oh-so-clever people at SSI did, don't give players god-like powers, and pick up where the game left off.
Unthinkable, huh?Dungeons and Dragons, played "by the book", doesn't really give you enough XP to get to level 20 in the course of the typical CRPG.
Given the extension of Neverwinter Nights, you'd probably be like level 10 at the end, tops.
So what they did with the Gold Box games is that the first game in the series is the low level adventure that leaves you at like level 5-6, the second game picks up at about that level (and the plot hook itself explains why you were stripped of all your cool gear) and takes you to low-mid levels.
The third game picks up there and takes you to mid-high levels, and the final game, with a truly epic plot (not necessarily good, but decidedly epic, with gods, major demons etc involved), takes you all the way to the highest levels.
At no point before the final game were you really "god-like" in power.Part of what makes this possible is the fact that the games are single player but party-based.
A party of 5 at level 5 isn't very strong, but you had 20 level ups along the way to incrementally power them all up a fair bit, rather than 20 "micro-levels" for one single character.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569121</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246653240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>k, maybe you can help me then...</p><p>I'd like to play adom, but there is no way to rest to get to full hp, so i pray twice and die after that...</p><p>how do i rest or refresh hp ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>k , maybe you can help me then...I 'd like to play adom , but there is no way to rest to get to full hp , so i pray twice and die after that...how do i rest or refresh hp ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>k, maybe you can help me then...I'd like to play adom, but there is no way to rest to get to full hp, so i pray twice and die after that...how do i rest or refresh hp ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565643</id>
	<title>Re:Nethack is more exception than rule</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246535280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>NetHack still has more game awesomeness than any other game I've ever played. Not only are you potentially one cockatrice away from death</p></div><p>Not once you get an amulet of life saving.  I once absent-mindedly stepped into the same pit wielding the same cockatrice two or three times in a row.  It didn't matter because by that point I had already stocked up a whole bunch of "oLS, and the first action I took after each crumbled was to put on the next.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>But as a college freshman who discovered it on a VT100 in the library, I can easily say it's the game I've played the most over the years, bar none. And I've never played the same game twice. And, to my eternal frustration, I've never ascended (got as far as the plain of water, though!).</p></div><p>I guess you didn't read spoilers, then?  I kind of envy you.  I played it for a while without spoilers, got down only a few levels, and got tired of that, so I spoiled myself and ascended a few months later, without spending <em>too</em> much time playing.  Now I occasionally go back and play again, and manage to ascend every couple of games.

</p><p>If you're fully spoiled, NetHack isn't very hard as long as you're cautious enough, barring bad luck.  Especially not if you ask in #nethack on FreeNode if you're unsure.  I do feel wistful about the lost opportunity of being able to discover the game: it was really fun to learn what everything did by trial and error, taking notes.  (Probably not very smart notes!  "If you start with a ring of conflict, it makes your pet kill you, do not wear."  Only after spoiling did I learn that conflict is one of the best rings in the game, used properly.  I probably never would have thought to try it again by myself, I'd just have lumped it in with rings of -1 gain strength and so on.)

</p><p>But I just don't have the time or patience to learn everything by trial and error.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NetHack still has more game awesomeness than any other game I 've ever played .
Not only are you potentially one cockatrice away from deathNot once you get an amulet of life saving .
I once absent-mindedly stepped into the same pit wielding the same cockatrice two or three times in a row .
It did n't matter because by that point I had already stocked up a whole bunch of " oLS , and the first action I took after each crumbled was to put on the next.But as a college freshman who discovered it on a VT100 in the library , I can easily say it 's the game I 've played the most over the years , bar none .
And I 've never played the same game twice .
And , to my eternal frustration , I 've never ascended ( got as far as the plain of water , though !
) .I guess you did n't read spoilers , then ?
I kind of envy you .
I played it for a while without spoilers , got down only a few levels , and got tired of that , so I spoiled myself and ascended a few months later , without spending too much time playing .
Now I occasionally go back and play again , and manage to ascend every couple of games .
If you 're fully spoiled , NetHack is n't very hard as long as you 're cautious enough , barring bad luck .
Especially not if you ask in # nethack on FreeNode if you 're unsure .
I do feel wistful about the lost opportunity of being able to discover the game : it was really fun to learn what everything did by trial and error , taking notes .
( Probably not very smart notes !
" If you start with a ring of conflict , it makes your pet kill you , do not wear .
" Only after spoiling did I learn that conflict is one of the best rings in the game , used properly .
I probably never would have thought to try it again by myself , I 'd just have lumped it in with rings of -1 gain strength and so on .
) But I just do n't have the time or patience to learn everything by trial and error .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NetHack still has more game awesomeness than any other game I've ever played.
Not only are you potentially one cockatrice away from deathNot once you get an amulet of life saving.
I once absent-mindedly stepped into the same pit wielding the same cockatrice two or three times in a row.
It didn't matter because by that point I had already stocked up a whole bunch of "oLS, and the first action I took after each crumbled was to put on the next.But as a college freshman who discovered it on a VT100 in the library, I can easily say it's the game I've played the most over the years, bar none.
And I've never played the same game twice.
And, to my eternal frustration, I've never ascended (got as far as the plain of water, though!
).I guess you didn't read spoilers, then?
I kind of envy you.
I played it for a while without spoilers, got down only a few levels, and got tired of that, so I spoiled myself and ascended a few months later, without spending too much time playing.
Now I occasionally go back and play again, and manage to ascend every couple of games.
If you're fully spoiled, NetHack isn't very hard as long as you're cautious enough, barring bad luck.
Especially not if you ask in #nethack on FreeNode if you're unsure.
I do feel wistful about the lost opportunity of being able to discover the game: it was really fun to learn what everything did by trial and error, taking notes.
(Probably not very smart notes!
"If you start with a ring of conflict, it makes your pet kill you, do not wear.
"  Only after spoiling did I learn that conflict is one of the best rings in the game, used properly.
I probably never would have thought to try it again by myself, I'd just have lumped it in with rings of -1 gain strength and so on.
)

But I just don't have the time or patience to learn everything by trial and error.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28573911</id>
	<title>I dont remember any of these features</title>
	<author>Oloryn</author>
	<datestamp>1246649700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>back when I was programming in RPG.  Next thing you'll be telling me that they've eliminated the fixed-column format.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>back when I was programming in RPG .
Next thing you 'll be telling me that they 've eliminated the fixed-column format .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>back when I was programming in RPG.
Next thing you'll be telling me that they've eliminated the fixed-column format.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564097</id>
	<title>I just replayed Chrono Trigger</title>
	<author>jeffliott</author>
	<datestamp>1246528080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I recently completed Chrono Trigger on the Nintendo DS, which I haven't done since it's SNES days. I didn't read the article, so I don't know how this game was classified. I realized on my second play through how perfect this game is. At no point do you really need to grind to succeed, equipment went a long way but was never really critical, and the story still knocked my socks off the second time through. After completing it, I realized I had just experienced pure fun. IMHO, if an RPG doesn't have all the aforementioned qualities, it isn't worth playing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I recently completed Chrono Trigger on the Nintendo DS , which I have n't done since it 's SNES days .
I did n't read the article , so I do n't know how this game was classified .
I realized on my second play through how perfect this game is .
At no point do you really need to grind to succeed , equipment went a long way but was never really critical , and the story still knocked my socks off the second time through .
After completing it , I realized I had just experienced pure fun .
IMHO , if an RPG does n't have all the aforementioned qualities , it is n't worth playing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recently completed Chrono Trigger on the Nintendo DS, which I haven't done since it's SNES days.
I didn't read the article, so I don't know how this game was classified.
I realized on my second play through how perfect this game is.
At no point do you really need to grind to succeed, equipment went a long way but was never really critical, and the story still knocked my socks off the second time through.
After completing it, I realized I had just experienced pure fun.
IMHO, if an RPG doesn't have all the aforementioned qualities, it isn't worth playing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562807</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>StickansT</author>
	<datestamp>1246566900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>isnt most Online PC RPGs just pen and paper with a GUI?</htmltext>
<tokenext>isnt most Online PC RPGs just pen and paper with a GUI ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>isnt most Online PC RPGs just pen and paper with a GUI?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>kingmundi</author>
	<datestamp>1246563120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got into a discussion last week with an old friend about how World of Warcraft replaced Dungeons and Dragons for him.  I, being a curmudgeon, pointed out that MMO's seem wholly lacking in placing the player as the sole hero of the world.  And the mechanics of the game, just lead to number crunching, and acquiring loot.  Even in those instances where World of Warcraft tries to thrust you into a story mode of defeating some world destroying foe, it is diminished by the fact you can do it over and over again.  And millions of other people can do the same heroic world saving.  Computers still have a long way to go in making up a story.  Bree Yark!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got into a discussion last week with an old friend about how World of Warcraft replaced Dungeons and Dragons for him .
I , being a curmudgeon , pointed out that MMO 's seem wholly lacking in placing the player as the sole hero of the world .
And the mechanics of the game , just lead to number crunching , and acquiring loot .
Even in those instances where World of Warcraft tries to thrust you into a story mode of defeating some world destroying foe , it is diminished by the fact you can do it over and over again .
And millions of other people can do the same heroic world saving .
Computers still have a long way to go in making up a story .
Bree Yark !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got into a discussion last week with an old friend about how World of Warcraft replaced Dungeons and Dragons for him.
I, being a curmudgeon, pointed out that MMO's seem wholly lacking in placing the player as the sole hero of the world.
And the mechanics of the game, just lead to number crunching, and acquiring loot.
Even in those instances where World of Warcraft tries to thrust you into a story mode of defeating some world destroying foe, it is diminished by the fact you can do it over and over again.
And millions of other people can do the same heroic world saving.
Computers still have a long way to go in making up a story.
Bree Yark!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561845</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>Razalhague</author>
	<datestamp>1246563900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you ever find yourself in a situation where death is close, you are playing wrong</p></div><p>Perhaps it's you who is playing wrong. Sure I die a lot in rogue-like games, but at least I'm having fun while doing it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you ever find yourself in a situation where death is close , you are playing wrongPerhaps it 's you who is playing wrong .
Sure I die a lot in rogue-like games , but at least I 'm having fun while doing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you ever find yourself in a situation where death is close, you are playing wrongPerhaps it's you who is playing wrong.
Sure I die a lot in rogue-like games, but at least I'm having fun while doing it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569425</id>
	<title>Preparation is key</title>
	<author>J-1000</author>
	<datestamp>1246614420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The key to any good RPG is the ability to prepare your character to meet new challenges; to ponder ahead of time what goals you have in mind for your character development, and then to go about accomplishing these feats. Sometimes this looks like grinding for hours on end to increase your level, other times it involves using clever combinations of items and abilities to suit the task at hand. RPGs that are too easy, and RPGs that allow the grinding to become repetitive both suffer from the same flaw: you're not being asked to use your brain. Grinding is good when there is a steady and evolving challenge, but too often it's just mindless repetition.</p><p>Other things are important too of course. Some light tactics, and a light story, for instance. I prefer RPG stories light because the heavier they are the more apparent it becomes how lame they are. Better to let my imagination fill in the blanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The key to any good RPG is the ability to prepare your character to meet new challenges ; to ponder ahead of time what goals you have in mind for your character development , and then to go about accomplishing these feats .
Sometimes this looks like grinding for hours on end to increase your level , other times it involves using clever combinations of items and abilities to suit the task at hand .
RPGs that are too easy , and RPGs that allow the grinding to become repetitive both suffer from the same flaw : you 're not being asked to use your brain .
Grinding is good when there is a steady and evolving challenge , but too often it 's just mindless repetition.Other things are important too of course .
Some light tactics , and a light story , for instance .
I prefer RPG stories light because the heavier they are the more apparent it becomes how lame they are .
Better to let my imagination fill in the blanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The key to any good RPG is the ability to prepare your character to meet new challenges; to ponder ahead of time what goals you have in mind for your character development, and then to go about accomplishing these feats.
Sometimes this looks like grinding for hours on end to increase your level, other times it involves using clever combinations of items and abilities to suit the task at hand.
RPGs that are too easy, and RPGs that allow the grinding to become repetitive both suffer from the same flaw: you're not being asked to use your brain.
Grinding is good when there is a steady and evolving challenge, but too often it's just mindless repetition.Other things are important too of course.
Some light tactics, and a light story, for instance.
I prefer RPG stories light because the heavier they are the more apparent it becomes how lame they are.
Better to let my imagination fill in the blanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217</id>
	<title>Games are too easy now...</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1246568160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the difference being mentioned between nethack and 'grinding' is probably that (and nethack excluded) most games are simply too damn easy nowadays.</p><p>I know by being a gamer since 88' or so I must have a lot more developed skills and such --- but -- really... I put games on the hardest levels and almost never die or 'restart' or whatever the form of LOSS is that happens in games.</p><p>Games are just too damn easy.  Mario for NES was hard and took work.  Anyone remember Abadox?  Or Battletoads?   Most games were much harder.</p><p>But at present, games have all these things to tell you exactly where to go, a million places to save (if not at any damn point), and a hundred other incentives to basically always keep you going.  And then, without the challenge, people are just not as excited by games and in this case, the work of the game in many RPGs has simply been reduced to a 'grind'.</p><p>On the new Prince of Persia, you can't make the mistake of falling off a cliff... some magic chick comes and pulls you up EVERY SINGLE TIME.  YOU CAN"T LOSE!  To me, that's boring.</p><p>I'm guessing somewhere in the business/marketing/sales department, richer gaming companies have figured out that permitting noobs to continually succeed generates more sales...  Who knows... That has basically been my assumption as I've seen game sales climb while the net difficulty dropping significantly...</p><p>I guess my point is that easiness/laziness seems to sell more games, and even if it gets boring, it probably outsells equivalent games that carry challenge and accomplishment.  Hell, much of the reason of the MMORPG is to fulfill the lack of accomplishment in our mediocre reality by becoming doctors and architects with only a week's worth of effort...   We grind through university, quickly forgetting why we took ethics and US History --- and all the important material we were required to learn.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.................</p><p>Anyway.. Games are too damn easy now.  I just read some article where nintendo is setting up to actually put the game on auto-pilot and have it play FOR you.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/   (no comment). It would be nice to be challenged/pushed.  Many of us are begging for it, but multiplayer competition is pretty much the only place where we can find it.  Game Dev's themselves are pandering to the weak for quick cash -- no wonder the real work is being generated in competition communities.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the difference being mentioned between nethack and 'grinding ' is probably that ( and nethack excluded ) most games are simply too damn easy nowadays.I know by being a gamer since 88 ' or so I must have a lot more developed skills and such --- but -- really... I put games on the hardest levels and almost never die or 'restart ' or whatever the form of LOSS is that happens in games.Games are just too damn easy .
Mario for NES was hard and took work .
Anyone remember Abadox ?
Or Battletoads ?
Most games were much harder.But at present , games have all these things to tell you exactly where to go , a million places to save ( if not at any damn point ) , and a hundred other incentives to basically always keep you going .
And then , without the challenge , people are just not as excited by games and in this case , the work of the game in many RPGs has simply been reduced to a 'grind'.On the new Prince of Persia , you ca n't make the mistake of falling off a cliff... some magic chick comes and pulls you up EVERY SINGLE TIME .
YOU CAN " T LOSE !
To me , that 's boring.I 'm guessing somewhere in the business/marketing/sales department , richer gaming companies have figured out that permitting noobs to continually succeed generates more sales... Who knows... That has basically been my assumption as I 've seen game sales climb while the net difficulty dropping significantly...I guess my point is that easiness/laziness seems to sell more games , and even if it gets boring , it probably outsells equivalent games that carry challenge and accomplishment .
Hell , much of the reason of the MMORPG is to fulfill the lack of accomplishment in our mediocre reality by becoming doctors and architects with only a week 's worth of effort... We grind through university , quickly forgetting why we took ethics and US History --- and all the important material we were required to learn .
.................Anyway.. Games are too damn easy now .
I just read some article where nintendo is setting up to actually put the game on auto-pilot and have it play FOR you .
.... : / ( no comment ) .
It would be nice to be challenged/pushed .
Many of us are begging for it , but multiplayer competition is pretty much the only place where we can find it .
Game Dev 's themselves are pandering to the weak for quick cash -- no wonder the real work is being generated in competition communities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the difference being mentioned between nethack and 'grinding' is probably that (and nethack excluded) most games are simply too damn easy nowadays.I know by being a gamer since 88' or so I must have a lot more developed skills and such --- but -- really... I put games on the hardest levels and almost never die or 'restart' or whatever the form of LOSS is that happens in games.Games are just too damn easy.
Mario for NES was hard and took work.
Anyone remember Abadox?
Or Battletoads?
Most games were much harder.But at present, games have all these things to tell you exactly where to go, a million places to save (if not at any damn point), and a hundred other incentives to basically always keep you going.
And then, without the challenge, people are just not as excited by games and in this case, the work of the game in many RPGs has simply been reduced to a 'grind'.On the new Prince of Persia, you can't make the mistake of falling off a cliff... some magic chick comes and pulls you up EVERY SINGLE TIME.
YOU CAN"T LOSE!
To me, that's boring.I'm guessing somewhere in the business/marketing/sales department, richer gaming companies have figured out that permitting noobs to continually succeed generates more sales...  Who knows... That has basically been my assumption as I've seen game sales climb while the net difficulty dropping significantly...I guess my point is that easiness/laziness seems to sell more games, and even if it gets boring, it probably outsells equivalent games that carry challenge and accomplishment.
Hell, much of the reason of the MMORPG is to fulfill the lack of accomplishment in our mediocre reality by becoming doctors and architects with only a week's worth of effort...   We grind through university, quickly forgetting why we took ethics and US History --- and all the important material we were required to learn.
.................Anyway.. Games are too damn easy now.
I just read some article where nintendo is setting up to actually put the game on auto-pilot and have it play FOR you.
.... :/   (no comment).
It would be nice to be challenged/pushed.
Many of us are begging for it, but multiplayer competition is pretty much the only place where we can find it.
Game Dev's themselves are pandering to the weak for quick cash -- no wonder the real work is being generated in competition communities.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564203</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>retchdog</author>
	<datestamp>1246528560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except then they just added (N-1)*100 to the requisite for each skill task. By QFG4, you couldn't climb a ragged stone wall without 350+ Climbing, and apparently gravity was multiplied by 3.</p><p>And the mechanics of each game varied enough to completely change the effective of spells vs. long-range vs. melee. For example in QFG3 (only) you could throw almost a hundred rocks at a creature before it crossed a skareen-length, and spells were basically worthless. Then in QFG4, the "charged up" versions of spells in arcade mode over-rode enemy projectiles and completely dominated in combat.</p><p>It's a fun series, but the sense of progress was only there in storyline, not mechanics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except then they just added ( N-1 ) * 100 to the requisite for each skill task .
By QFG4 , you could n't climb a ragged stone wall without 350 + Climbing , and apparently gravity was multiplied by 3.And the mechanics of each game varied enough to completely change the effective of spells vs. long-range vs. melee. For example in QFG3 ( only ) you could throw almost a hundred rocks at a creature before it crossed a skareen-length , and spells were basically worthless .
Then in QFG4 , the " charged up " versions of spells in arcade mode over-rode enemy projectiles and completely dominated in combat.It 's a fun series , but the sense of progress was only there in storyline , not mechanics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except then they just added (N-1)*100 to the requisite for each skill task.
By QFG4, you couldn't climb a ragged stone wall without 350+ Climbing, and apparently gravity was multiplied by 3.And the mechanics of each game varied enough to completely change the effective of spells vs. long-range vs. melee. For example in QFG3 (only) you could throw almost a hundred rocks at a creature before it crossed a skareen-length, and spells were basically worthless.
Then in QFG4, the "charged up" versions of spells in arcade mode over-rode enemy projectiles and completely dominated in combat.It's a fun series, but the sense of progress was only there in storyline, not mechanics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28579693</id>
	<title>Re:What makes Japanese games tick</title>
	<author>LordVader717</author>
	<datestamp>1246718340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From your statements I can conclude that you haven't really played very many games outside the ones you mention. And as others have pointed out, certain themes are true for almost any mythical story, from ancient myths to acclaimed literature and almost every computer game, including "western RPGs"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From your statements I can conclude that you have n't really played very many games outside the ones you mention .
And as others have pointed out , certain themes are true for almost any mythical story , from ancient myths to acclaimed literature and almost every computer game , including " western RPGs "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From your statements I can conclude that you haven't really played very many games outside the ones you mention.
And as others have pointed out, certain themes are true for almost any mythical story, from ancient myths to acclaimed literature and almost every computer game, including "western RPGs"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561893</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564475</id>
	<title>Nethack</title>
	<author>mqduck</author>
	<datestamp>1246529700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This seems like a good an opportunity as any to ask this question (prepares a curse on those who would mod me 'Offtopic')...</p><p>So, I've never played Nethack (I know, I know, negative a million geek points). So let's say I want to give it a try, to at least experience it. And let's say I don't care about nostalgia and am entirely open to pretty graphics and ease-of-use. What manifestation of Nethack would you recommend (for a computer running GNU/Linux)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This seems like a good an opportunity as any to ask this question ( prepares a curse on those who would mod me 'Offtopic ' ) ...So , I 've never played Nethack ( I know , I know , negative a million geek points ) .
So let 's say I want to give it a try , to at least experience it .
And let 's say I do n't care about nostalgia and am entirely open to pretty graphics and ease-of-use .
What manifestation of Nethack would you recommend ( for a computer running GNU/Linux ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This seems like a good an opportunity as any to ask this question (prepares a curse on those who would mod me 'Offtopic')...So, I've never played Nethack (I know, I know, negative a million geek points).
So let's say I want to give it a try, to at least experience it.
And let's say I don't care about nostalgia and am entirely open to pretty graphics and ease-of-use.
What manifestation of Nethack would you recommend (for a computer running GNU/Linux)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562785</id>
	<title>In with first anti-Mother post</title>
	<author>sarysa</author>
	<datestamp>1246566780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>(sort of anyway...)<br> <br>But the article reaked of bias when it got to the Mother (aka Earthbound) series. It elevated a controversial cult game to same level of the works of Chopin, who happens to be on my mind as I'm playing through Eternal Sonata. Earthbound in particular had some great features, but it also had some nasty downsides. I couldn't play with sound on after 30 minutes because the soundtrack literally induced headaches. There were many gross-out parts to the game that are best compared to fart humor. The esoteric references in the game typically are received two ways, with cheers from those who catch them and in-one-ear-out-the-other from those who don't.<br> <br>An article purporting to be the "essentials of RPG design" needs to acknowledge when a game gets a lot of hate, and why.</htmltext>
<tokenext>( sort of anyway... ) But the article reaked of bias when it got to the Mother ( aka Earthbound ) series .
It elevated a controversial cult game to same level of the works of Chopin , who happens to be on my mind as I 'm playing through Eternal Sonata .
Earthbound in particular had some great features , but it also had some nasty downsides .
I could n't play with sound on after 30 minutes because the soundtrack literally induced headaches .
There were many gross-out parts to the game that are best compared to fart humor .
The esoteric references in the game typically are received two ways , with cheers from those who catch them and in-one-ear-out-the-other from those who do n't .
An article purporting to be the " essentials of RPG design " needs to acknowledge when a game gets a lot of hate , and why .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(sort of anyway...) But the article reaked of bias when it got to the Mother (aka Earthbound) series.
It elevated a controversial cult game to same level of the works of Chopin, who happens to be on my mind as I'm playing through Eternal Sonata.
Earthbound in particular had some great features, but it also had some nasty downsides.
I couldn't play with sound on after 30 minutes because the soundtrack literally induced headaches.
There were many gross-out parts to the game that are best compared to fart humor.
The esoteric references in the game typically are received two ways, with cheers from those who catch them and in-one-ear-out-the-other from those who don't.
An article purporting to be the "essentials of RPG design" needs to acknowledge when a game gets a lot of hate, and why.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28571821</id>
	<title>Re:What makes Japanese games tick</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1246636680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about...I don't know...some NEW IDEAS instead of rehashing the same crap again and again?  Just a thought.<p>Yeah, I just got crazy there for a second.  Please continue recycling!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about...I do n't know...some NEW IDEAS instead of rehashing the same crap again and again ?
Just a thought.Yeah , I just got crazy there for a second .
Please continue recycling !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about...I don't know...some NEW IDEAS instead of rehashing the same crap again and again?
Just a thought.Yeah, I just got crazy there for a second.
Please continue recycling!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564037</id>
	<title>Re:Games are too easy now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246527840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True, difficulty is what makes a game fun, but you don't want to get completely stuck on a certain area. I've been stuck on C&amp;C for years because I couldn't do the damn Orca mission. I would have given anything to get past that level, but because I couldn't, it took all the fun out. An "autopilot" would be great.</p><p>One suggestion that I think works great, is what Freespace (2) did. You fail a mission 3 or 5 times, it asks if you want to skip to the next one.</p><p>I'm a huge fan of difficult games, where fighting "against all odds" actually does mean fighting against a superior opponent and superior numbers on a field totally stacked against you. However, if you keep screwing up that fight, having the option be saying "Screw this" and tossing it on shelf doesn't exactly appeal to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True , difficulty is what makes a game fun , but you do n't want to get completely stuck on a certain area .
I 've been stuck on C&amp;C for years because I could n't do the damn Orca mission .
I would have given anything to get past that level , but because I could n't , it took all the fun out .
An " autopilot " would be great.One suggestion that I think works great , is what Freespace ( 2 ) did .
You fail a mission 3 or 5 times , it asks if you want to skip to the next one.I 'm a huge fan of difficult games , where fighting " against all odds " actually does mean fighting against a superior opponent and superior numbers on a field totally stacked against you .
However , if you keep screwing up that fight , having the option be saying " Screw this " and tossing it on shelf does n't exactly appeal to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, difficulty is what makes a game fun, but you don't want to get completely stuck on a certain area.
I've been stuck on C&amp;C for years because I couldn't do the damn Orca mission.
I would have given anything to get past that level, but because I couldn't, it took all the fun out.
An "autopilot" would be great.One suggestion that I think works great, is what Freespace (2) did.
You fail a mission 3 or 5 times, it asks if you want to skip to the next one.I'm a huge fan of difficult games, where fighting "against all odds" actually does mean fighting against a superior opponent and superior numbers on a field totally stacked against you.
However, if you keep screwing up that fight, having the option be saying "Screw this" and tossing it on shelf doesn't exactly appeal to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562979</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246567380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not necessarily true... the one franchise that sticks out for me is the Jedi Knight series from the late 90's... they invented a couple of different scenarios where the main protagonist had forgotten his Jedi powers (demigod-like abilities, here), and had to regain them as he went.  Or there's Neverwinter Nights, where expansion packs EXPECT that you start at level 20, and scale the difficulty accordingly (and they even handle the issue of backstory with an infinite number of possibilities of how you completed the original episode) You probably couldn't generalize this across genres, but the point is that if the story-telling is good enough, you can reboot characters across episodes of a franchise.  KOTOR2 would have been FANTASTIC if they'd picked up the story with Revan; their inability to do so isn't because of gameplay, but because the storytelling wasn't sufficiently clever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not necessarily true... the one franchise that sticks out for me is the Jedi Knight series from the late 90 's... they invented a couple of different scenarios where the main protagonist had forgotten his Jedi powers ( demigod-like abilities , here ) , and had to regain them as he went .
Or there 's Neverwinter Nights , where expansion packs EXPECT that you start at level 20 , and scale the difficulty accordingly ( and they even handle the issue of backstory with an infinite number of possibilities of how you completed the original episode ) You probably could n't generalize this across genres , but the point is that if the story-telling is good enough , you can reboot characters across episodes of a franchise .
KOTOR2 would have been FANTASTIC if they 'd picked up the story with Revan ; their inability to do so is n't because of gameplay , but because the storytelling was n't sufficiently clever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not necessarily true... the one franchise that sticks out for me is the Jedi Knight series from the late 90's... they invented a couple of different scenarios where the main protagonist had forgotten his Jedi powers (demigod-like abilities, here), and had to regain them as he went.
Or there's Neverwinter Nights, where expansion packs EXPECT that you start at level 20, and scale the difficulty accordingly (and they even handle the issue of backstory with an infinite number of possibilities of how you completed the original episode) You probably couldn't generalize this across genres, but the point is that if the story-telling is good enough, you can reboot characters across episodes of a franchise.
KOTOR2 would have been FANTASTIC if they'd picked up the story with Revan; their inability to do so isn't because of gameplay, but because the storytelling wasn't sufficiently clever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28568779</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>crossmr</author>
	<datestamp>1246561620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then you never played the gold box series. The reason it worked there was because they were made to be continued by characters. If you didn't have them, you could create them fresh, but they'd start out at a higher level than 1.<br>Curse of the azure bonds would let you import characters from pools of radiance. When you finished pools of radiance you would be around level 5. Any new character created in CAB if you didn't have import characters would be level 5. Baldur's Gate 2 also continued the game at a much higher level.</p><p>in fact several high profile RPGs did this..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then you never played the gold box series .
The reason it worked there was because they were made to be continued by characters .
If you did n't have them , you could create them fresh , but they 'd start out at a higher level than 1.Curse of the azure bonds would let you import characters from pools of radiance .
When you finished pools of radiance you would be around level 5 .
Any new character created in CAB if you did n't have import characters would be level 5 .
Baldur 's Gate 2 also continued the game at a much higher level.in fact several high profile RPGs did this. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then you never played the gold box series.
The reason it worked there was because they were made to be continued by characters.
If you didn't have them, you could create them fresh, but they'd start out at a higher level than 1.Curse of the azure bonds would let you import characters from pools of radiance.
When you finished pools of radiance you would be around level 5.
Any new character created in CAB if you didn't have import characters would be level 5.
Baldur's Gate 2 also continued the game at a much higher level.in fact several high profile RPGs did this..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28573625</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>slashdotjunker</author>
	<datestamp>1246647900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nethack is not about grinding! You really don't understand Nethack if you think it requires grinding.
<br> <br>
Nethack is brilliant because you can win by using your brains. You can also win by mindlessly grinding. The choice is yours.
<br> <br>
To those who think Nethack requires grinding:
<br> <br>
1. Killing monsters doesn't get you any closer to ascending.
<br>
2. It's possible to ascend in less than 18,000 turns. Give it a try.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nethack is not about grinding !
You really do n't understand Nethack if you think it requires grinding .
Nethack is brilliant because you can win by using your brains .
You can also win by mindlessly grinding .
The choice is yours .
To those who think Nethack requires grinding : 1 .
Killing monsters does n't get you any closer to ascending .
2. It 's possible to ascend in less than 18,000 turns .
Give it a try .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nethack is not about grinding!
You really don't understand Nethack if you think it requires grinding.
Nethack is brilliant because you can win by using your brains.
You can also win by mindlessly grinding.
The choice is yours.
To those who think Nethack requires grinding:
 
1.
Killing monsters doesn't get you any closer to ascending.
2. It's possible to ascend in less than 18,000 turns.
Give it a try.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562185</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1246565100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's really a shame that after our party completed that really fun adventure module that all copies of it in existence spontaneously combusted and all electronic copies deleted themselves so that no one else could ever be the ones to save that village.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's really a shame that after our party completed that really fun adventure module that all copies of it in existence spontaneously combusted and all electronic copies deleted themselves so that no one else could ever be the ones to save that village .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's really a shame that after our party completed that really fun adventure module that all copies of it in existence spontaneously combusted and all electronic copies deleted themselves so that no one else could ever be the ones to save that village.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566323</id>
	<title>JRPGs are narrativist RPGs</title>
	<author>Valdrax</author>
	<datestamp>1246539180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Japanese RPGs focus on telling an interactive story (and placing game &amp; combat mechanics on top).  This is radically different from the western RPG model of simulating a character in an environment (and placing game &amp; combat mechanics on top), but it's no less role-playing.  Look up GNS Theory and The Big Model, sometime.</p><p>If your main interest is exploring a world, play Western RPGs.  If your main interest is getting a cohesive narrative, play JRPGs.  Either way, don't fall into the "No True Scotsman!" fallacy and declare everything that it's your favored style of play "not actually RPGs."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Japanese RPGs focus on telling an interactive story ( and placing game &amp; combat mechanics on top ) .
This is radically different from the western RPG model of simulating a character in an environment ( and placing game &amp; combat mechanics on top ) , but it 's no less role-playing .
Look up GNS Theory and The Big Model , sometime.If your main interest is exploring a world , play Western RPGs .
If your main interest is getting a cohesive narrative , play JRPGs .
Either way , do n't fall into the " No True Scotsman !
" fallacy and declare everything that it 's your favored style of play " not actually RPGs .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Japanese RPGs focus on telling an interactive story (and placing game &amp; combat mechanics on top).
This is radically different from the western RPG model of simulating a character in an environment (and placing game &amp; combat mechanics on top), but it's no less role-playing.
Look up GNS Theory and The Big Model, sometime.If your main interest is exploring a world, play Western RPGs.
If your main interest is getting a cohesive narrative, play JRPGs.
Either way, don't fall into the "No True Scotsman!
" fallacy and declare everything that it's your favored style of play "not actually RPGs.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562275</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>The Snowman</author>
	<datestamp>1246565460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Real men role play with pencil and paper, or nothing at all.</p></div></blockquote><p>With a name like "sexconker" you should know that real men role play after a trip to the "adult" store. RAWR Catwoman, I am Batman! I'm going to grab you while you're on the litterbox... crap, I mean, nevermind.</p><p>Anyway, role playing is about spicing up the ol' bedroom, not pretending you are grabbing your robe and wizard hat.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Real men role play with pencil and paper , or nothing at all.With a name like " sexconker " you should know that real men role play after a trip to the " adult " store .
RAWR Catwoman , I am Batman !
I 'm going to grab you while you 're on the litterbox... crap , I mean , nevermind.Anyway , role playing is about spicing up the ol ' bedroom , not pretending you are grabbing your robe and wizard hat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Real men role play with pencil and paper, or nothing at all.With a name like "sexconker" you should know that real men role play after a trip to the "adult" store.
RAWR Catwoman, I am Batman!
I'm going to grab you while you're on the litterbox... crap, I mean, nevermind.Anyway, role playing is about spicing up the ol' bedroom, not pretending you are grabbing your robe and wizard hat.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561965</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1246564380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Play ADOM.<br> <br>Grinding too long will kill you via corruption.  It's advance in the game or have no chance at success.  There are also level limits on some of the quests that, while not mandatory, are pretty much necessary for the special endings (and for certain classes, very much necessary for a regular ascension).<br> <br>There is also the fact that the more time you spend on a level, the more likely it is for an out-of-depth monster to come and kick your ass.<br> <br>In short... try ADOM.  It's definitely a roguelike, but is different enough from a lot of other roguelikes that the gameplay is, IMO, much better.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Play ADOM .
Grinding too long will kill you via corruption .
It 's advance in the game or have no chance at success .
There are also level limits on some of the quests that , while not mandatory , are pretty much necessary for the special endings ( and for certain classes , very much necessary for a regular ascension ) .
There is also the fact that the more time you spend on a level , the more likely it is for an out-of-depth monster to come and kick your ass .
In short... try ADOM .
It 's definitely a roguelike , but is different enough from a lot of other roguelikes that the gameplay is , IMO , much better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Play ADOM.
Grinding too long will kill you via corruption.
It's advance in the game or have no chance at success.
There are also level limits on some of the quests that, while not mandatory, are pretty much necessary for the special endings (and for certain classes, very much necessary for a regular ascension).
There is also the fact that the more time you spend on a level, the more likely it is for an out-of-depth monster to come and kick your ass.
In short... try ADOM.
It's definitely a roguelike, but is different enough from a lot of other roguelikes that the gameplay is, IMO, much better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561685</id>
	<title>"Casual" mechanics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246563360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not exactly revolutionary but this is a great description of the game mechanics involved in playing to the casual audience.  Like it or not any game that wants widespread adoption will not be targeting the hardcore players more willing to reroll when they fail.  It's too bad really since those games were far more entertaining than end-game World of Warcraft is today.</p><p>Another good reason for games to reward players for their time is that it requires far less testing.  if your Cow kills my level 99 Amazon because of a glitch then I may uninstall rather than rerolling.  If I only lose the time it takes to run from the graveyard then I don't care as much about how well tuned the encounters are.  Perhaps the article mentions this but I'm too lazy to read it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not exactly revolutionary but this is a great description of the game mechanics involved in playing to the casual audience .
Like it or not any game that wants widespread adoption will not be targeting the hardcore players more willing to reroll when they fail .
It 's too bad really since those games were far more entertaining than end-game World of Warcraft is today.Another good reason for games to reward players for their time is that it requires far less testing .
if your Cow kills my level 99 Amazon because of a glitch then I may uninstall rather than rerolling .
If I only lose the time it takes to run from the graveyard then I do n't care as much about how well tuned the encounters are .
Perhaps the article mentions this but I 'm too lazy to read it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not exactly revolutionary but this is a great description of the game mechanics involved in playing to the casual audience.
Like it or not any game that wants widespread adoption will not be targeting the hardcore players more willing to reroll when they fail.
It's too bad really since those games were far more entertaining than end-game World of Warcraft is today.Another good reason for games to reward players for their time is that it requires far less testing.
if your Cow kills my level 99 Amazon because of a glitch then I may uninstall rather than rerolling.
If I only lose the time it takes to run from the graveyard then I don't care as much about how well tuned the encounters are.
Perhaps the article mentions this but I'm too lazy to read it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562969</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>StickansT</author>
	<datestamp>1246567380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You ever try playing WoW? i was what they call a Pre-BC raider, or I started playing the First WoW game before the 2 expansions came out. When i hit 60 and got my "God like powers" it was fun. then the first expansion came out. I was lvl 60 and had to hit 70. My "God like powers" only helped me out so much. I still felt pretty helpless with it came to fighting new monsters that were my level or above. So all in all Blizzard did a nice job of making me feel like i needed to hit 70 inorder to gain my "God like powers" back. Same with the newest expansion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You ever try playing WoW ?
i was what they call a Pre-BC raider , or I started playing the First WoW game before the 2 expansions came out .
When i hit 60 and got my " God like powers " it was fun .
then the first expansion came out .
I was lvl 60 and had to hit 70 .
My " God like powers " only helped me out so much .
I still felt pretty helpless with it came to fighting new monsters that were my level or above .
So all in all Blizzard did a nice job of making me feel like i needed to hit 70 inorder to gain my " God like powers " back .
Same with the newest expansion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You ever try playing WoW?
i was what they call a Pre-BC raider, or I started playing the First WoW game before the 2 expansions came out.
When i hit 60 and got my "God like powers" it was fun.
then the first expansion came out.
I was lvl 60 and had to hit 70.
My "God like powers" only helped me out so much.
I still felt pretty helpless with it came to fighting new monsters that were my level or above.
So all in all Blizzard did a nice job of making me feel like i needed to hit 70 inorder to gain my "God like powers" back.
Same with the newest expansion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562451</id>
	<title>Re:JRPGs are not actually RPGs though</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246565940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Trying to drawn the line between east and west fails. If there's no multiplayer, there's no roleplaying of any significance.  There's more roleplaying on Slashdot than in any of the article's games except WoW, strangely enough.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Trying to drawn the line between east and west fails .
If there 's no multiplayer , there 's no roleplaying of any significance .
There 's more roleplaying on Slashdot than in any of the article 's games except WoW , strangely enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trying to drawn the line between east and west fails.
If there's no multiplayer, there's no roleplaying of any significance.
There's more roleplaying on Slashdot than in any of the article's games except WoW, strangely enough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>wjousts</author>
	<datestamp>1246564740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that, as others have pointed out, at the end of most CRPG's your character has God-like abilities. So there are several options to make importing your character into the sequel work, none of which are particularly good:</p><ol>
<li>Make the sequel insanely hard so that either your God-like character from the first game has a hard time. This obviously ruins the game for people who didn't play the prequel</li><li>Gimp you imported character (take away all their money, items and at least some stats) so they are about as weak as a new character. In this case, what was the point of importing your character in the first place?</li><li>Keep the game at normal difficult, don't gimp your imported character and have your character cruise through the entire game in a couple of hours without ever hitting any serious difficulties.</li></ol></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that , as others have pointed out , at the end of most CRPG 's your character has God-like abilities .
So there are several options to make importing your character into the sequel work , none of which are particularly good : Make the sequel insanely hard so that either your God-like character from the first game has a hard time .
This obviously ruins the game for people who did n't play the prequelGimp you imported character ( take away all their money , items and at least some stats ) so they are about as weak as a new character .
In this case , what was the point of importing your character in the first place ? Keep the game at normal difficult , do n't gimp your imported character and have your character cruise through the entire game in a couple of hours without ever hitting any serious difficulties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that, as others have pointed out, at the end of most CRPG's your character has God-like abilities.
So there are several options to make importing your character into the sequel work, none of which are particularly good:
Make the sequel insanely hard so that either your God-like character from the first game has a hard time.
This obviously ruins the game for people who didn't play the prequelGimp you imported character (take away all their money, items and at least some stats) so they are about as weak as a new character.
In this case, what was the point of importing your character in the first place?Keep the game at normal difficult, don't gimp your imported character and have your character cruise through the entire game in a couple of hours without ever hitting any serious difficulties.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</id>
	<title>Role Playing</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1246562580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Real men role play with pencil and paper, or nothing at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Real men role play with pencil and paper , or nothing at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Real men role play with pencil and paper, or nothing at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561941</id>
	<title>Re:Not just RPGs</title>
	<author>vux984</author>
	<datestamp>1246564260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I have to wonder if the shift toward online multiplayer (such as in the FPS genre) is at least in some small part due to people wanting to find the difficulty and challenge that no longer exists in most single-player games.</i></p><p>Maybe. But they aren't finding it. FPS Multiplayer games aren't hard. They are short, simple, incredibly repetitive, and there are no real consequences.</p><p>MMORPG competitive multiplayer for the most part isn't any better. The consequences are minimal with a few notable exceptions.</p><p>And even one of those games that is an exception... that has consequences... such as eve. Its not challenging personally; its only challenging at the massive group level.</p><p>In Eve, like a soldier in a war, the VAST MAJORITY of individuals are just there forming part of the mass, and don't meaningfully contribute to the overall success or loss.</p><p>You login and find your corporation captured a station while you were sleeping.</p><p>An hour later you fight a heroic battle absolutely maximizing every element of combat perfectly, and are still pod killed in nothing flat because because their reinforcements arrived before yours did.</p><p>Six hours later your corporation suffers a serious blow because the leadership defected to a rival corp taking a bunch of assets with them.</p><p>There are lots of 'challenges' in something like Eve, but many of them are far beyond the control or even influence of the individual player that it ceases to be fun on that level at all.</p><p>It can still be 'fun' but not really the same way defeating a single player game is, where everything is always centered on you and what you are doing. Where victory or defeat hinge on how well you play the game.</p><p>In Eve winning or losing a conflict is more often decided by which side you are on rather than anything to do with what you actually do during the conflict.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to wonder if the shift toward online multiplayer ( such as in the FPS genre ) is at least in some small part due to people wanting to find the difficulty and challenge that no longer exists in most single-player games.Maybe .
But they are n't finding it .
FPS Multiplayer games are n't hard .
They are short , simple , incredibly repetitive , and there are no real consequences.MMORPG competitive multiplayer for the most part is n't any better .
The consequences are minimal with a few notable exceptions.And even one of those games that is an exception... that has consequences... such as eve .
Its not challenging personally ; its only challenging at the massive group level.In Eve , like a soldier in a war , the VAST MAJORITY of individuals are just there forming part of the mass , and do n't meaningfully contribute to the overall success or loss.You login and find your corporation captured a station while you were sleeping.An hour later you fight a heroic battle absolutely maximizing every element of combat perfectly , and are still pod killed in nothing flat because because their reinforcements arrived before yours did.Six hours later your corporation suffers a serious blow because the leadership defected to a rival corp taking a bunch of assets with them.There are lots of 'challenges ' in something like Eve , but many of them are far beyond the control or even influence of the individual player that it ceases to be fun on that level at all.It can still be 'fun ' but not really the same way defeating a single player game is , where everything is always centered on you and what you are doing .
Where victory or defeat hinge on how well you play the game.In Eve winning or losing a conflict is more often decided by which side you are on rather than anything to do with what you actually do during the conflict .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to wonder if the shift toward online multiplayer (such as in the FPS genre) is at least in some small part due to people wanting to find the difficulty and challenge that no longer exists in most single-player games.Maybe.
But they aren't finding it.
FPS Multiplayer games aren't hard.
They are short, simple, incredibly repetitive, and there are no real consequences.MMORPG competitive multiplayer for the most part isn't any better.
The consequences are minimal with a few notable exceptions.And even one of those games that is an exception... that has consequences... such as eve.
Its not challenging personally; its only challenging at the massive group level.In Eve, like a soldier in a war, the VAST MAJORITY of individuals are just there forming part of the mass, and don't meaningfully contribute to the overall success or loss.You login and find your corporation captured a station while you were sleeping.An hour later you fight a heroic battle absolutely maximizing every element of combat perfectly, and are still pod killed in nothing flat because because their reinforcements arrived before yours did.Six hours later your corporation suffers a serious blow because the leadership defected to a rival corp taking a bunch of assets with them.There are lots of 'challenges' in something like Eve, but many of them are far beyond the control or even influence of the individual player that it ceases to be fun on that level at all.It can still be 'fun' but not really the same way defeating a single player game is, where everything is always centered on you and what you are doing.
Where victory or defeat hinge on how well you play the game.In Eve winning or losing a conflict is more often decided by which side you are on rather than anything to do with what you actually do during the conflict.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561507</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569813</id>
	<title>Oh, you meant Role Playing Games!</title>
	<author>berpi</author>
	<datestamp>1246619160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, Role Playing Games!  I thought you meant "Rocket-Propelled Granades". Please stand by while the FBI knocks your door down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , Role Playing Games !
I thought you meant " Rocket-Propelled Granades " .
Please stand by while the FBI knocks your door down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, Role Playing Games!
I thought you meant "Rocket-Propelled Granades".
Please stand by while the FBI knocks your door down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28609409</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1246986360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also don't forget to apply first aid when you've been injured.  It will greatly reduce the time spent healing up (if you're successful...) when you've been injured.<br> <br>Also, advance your healing skill.<br> <br>Finally, if you're new to ADOM, try playing a dwarven cleric.  High HP + healing spells == longer time to figure out how to survive without them.  If you create a character with a spell other than Cure Light Wounds or Cure Medium Wounds, reroll until you get one who has CLW or CMW (should only take a few tries).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also do n't forget to apply first aid when you 've been injured .
It will greatly reduce the time spent healing up ( if you 're successful... ) when you 've been injured .
Also , advance your healing skill .
Finally , if you 're new to ADOM , try playing a dwarven cleric .
High HP + healing spells = = longer time to figure out how to survive without them .
If you create a character with a spell other than Cure Light Wounds or Cure Medium Wounds , reroll until you get one who has CLW or CMW ( should only take a few tries ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also don't forget to apply first aid when you've been injured.
It will greatly reduce the time spent healing up (if you're successful...) when you've been injured.
Also, advance your healing skill.
Finally, if you're new to ADOM, try playing a dwarven cleric.
High HP + healing spells == longer time to figure out how to survive without them.
If you create a character with a spell other than Cure Light Wounds or Cure Medium Wounds, reroll until you get one who has CLW or CMW (should only take a few tries).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569121</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565649</id>
	<title>Report Program Generator</title>
	<author>PigIronBob</author>
	<datestamp>1246535280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Total Time Calculations<br>
Total Time Output<br>
Detail Time Calculations<br>
Detail Time Output<br> <br>
<a href="http://www.jaymoseley.com/hercules/rpgtutor/rpg003.htm" title="jaymoseley.com" rel="nofollow">RPG Cycle explained</a> [jaymoseley.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Total Time Calculations Total Time Output Detail Time Calculations Detail Time Output RPG Cycle explained [ jaymoseley.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Total Time Calculations
Total Time Output
Detail Time Calculations
Detail Time Output 
RPG Cycle explained [jaymoseley.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562245</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>Dustie</author>
	<datestamp>1246565340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you are thinking about "boys" not men<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you are thinking about " boys " not men : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you are thinking about "boys" not men :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563383</id>
	<title>Re:worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>\_xeno\_</author>
	<datestamp>1246525500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment, then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff. You use melee weapons a lot, your melee skill grows. You use the bow, that grows. But if you don't use staff weapons, then that stat never progresses.</p></div><p>They tried that in Final Fantasy II. (I don't need to add the "J" any more, do I? Everyone knows FFII as the NES game by now, not the US release of FFIV, right?) It sucked.</p><p>The problem is that it takes mindless grinding from "grinding to raise every stat" to "grinding to raise a single stat." So in that game you'd find yourself wandering around getting attacked, ignoring the enemies, and then fighting amongst yourself to boost HP and weapon skills to the point where the enemies in the next area wouldn't kill you. It also meant that you could easily gain useless equipment. (Great, I've got the Staff of Pwning, and everyone is Level 1 Staves.)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The whole bit about having numerical stats and assigning points is a holdover from pencil and paper gaming.</p></div><p>(There's no rule about responding in order, is there? Er, anyway...) I disagree. The numerical stats and assigning points are done in computer RPGs because the run on computers. A computer is good at handling numbers. When you get right down to it, every computer game has these numerical stats. For example, in an FPS, each weapon has a different damage stat and enemies have different health and armor stats. The player might not see the stats, but ultimately, every computer simulation basically handles things using numerical stats.</p><p>What I would agree with is having "large jumps" in power levels is a hold over from pen and pencil days. There's a reason that the level cap in WoW is 80 and the level cap in D&amp;D is 20. (I think?) In WoW, the computer can easily handle the larger range in values, where a human with pencil and paper would easily get bogged down if they had to keep track of everything.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I think they should just ditch the idea of leveling. If you just make it equipment-based, you start out with crappy loot and get better loot the further you go. Better loot means you can take on bigger tasks.</p></div><p>The problem with that comes when combined with:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game.</p></div><p>Leveling allows a player to adjust difficulty within the game. If you absolutely suck at the game, you can grind until you get higher stats and reduce the challenges to the point where you can handle them.</p><p>If you tie advancement to equipment, if the player sucks at the game, they're either SOL because they can never gain more power until they overcome the current challenge, or they have to look into a guidebook to discover which pixel the Staff of Pwning is hidden under.</p><p>Otherwise, I agree - you shouldn't need a guidebook to be able to generally play the game. The game mechanics should be easy enough that you don't need to worry about permanently screwing up your character. Good PC applications have an "Undo" button for a reason - the user/player should not be punished for experimenting. ("Save repeatedly" isn't acceptable for a PC application, it shouldn't be for a game, either.)</p><p>But computer games are always going to have stats, and allowing grinding to advance turns out to make the games more accessible to a wider range of skill levels. The best players can blaze through at low levels, while the worst can slowly slog along.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment , then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff .
You use melee weapons a lot , your melee skill grows .
You use the bow , that grows .
But if you do n't use staff weapons , then that stat never progresses.They tried that in Final Fantasy II .
( I do n't need to add the " J " any more , do I ?
Everyone knows FFII as the NES game by now , not the US release of FFIV , right ?
) It sucked.The problem is that it takes mindless grinding from " grinding to raise every stat " to " grinding to raise a single stat .
" So in that game you 'd find yourself wandering around getting attacked , ignoring the enemies , and then fighting amongst yourself to boost HP and weapon skills to the point where the enemies in the next area would n't kill you .
It also meant that you could easily gain useless equipment .
( Great , I 've got the Staff of Pwning , and everyone is Level 1 Staves .
) The whole bit about having numerical stats and assigning points is a holdover from pencil and paper gaming .
( There 's no rule about responding in order , is there ?
Er , anyway... ) I disagree .
The numerical stats and assigning points are done in computer RPGs because the run on computers .
A computer is good at handling numbers .
When you get right down to it , every computer game has these numerical stats .
For example , in an FPS , each weapon has a different damage stat and enemies have different health and armor stats .
The player might not see the stats , but ultimately , every computer simulation basically handles things using numerical stats.What I would agree with is having " large jumps " in power levels is a hold over from pen and pencil days .
There 's a reason that the level cap in WoW is 80 and the level cap in D&amp;D is 20 .
( I think ?
) In WoW , the computer can easily handle the larger range in values , where a human with pencil and paper would easily get bogged down if they had to keep track of everything.I think they should just ditch the idea of leveling .
If you just make it equipment-based , you start out with crappy loot and get better loot the further you go .
Better loot means you can take on bigger tasks.The problem with that comes when combined with : What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game.Leveling allows a player to adjust difficulty within the game .
If you absolutely suck at the game , you can grind until you get higher stats and reduce the challenges to the point where you can handle them.If you tie advancement to equipment , if the player sucks at the game , they 're either SOL because they can never gain more power until they overcome the current challenge , or they have to look into a guidebook to discover which pixel the Staff of Pwning is hidden under.Otherwise , I agree - you should n't need a guidebook to be able to generally play the game .
The game mechanics should be easy enough that you do n't need to worry about permanently screwing up your character .
Good PC applications have an " Undo " button for a reason - the user/player should not be punished for experimenting .
( " Save repeatedly " is n't acceptable for a PC application , it should n't be for a game , either .
) But computer games are always going to have stats , and allowing grinding to advance turns out to make the games more accessible to a wider range of skill levels .
The best players can blaze through at low levels , while the worst can slowly slog along .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment, then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff.
You use melee weapons a lot, your melee skill grows.
You use the bow, that grows.
But if you don't use staff weapons, then that stat never progresses.They tried that in Final Fantasy II.
(I don't need to add the "J" any more, do I?
Everyone knows FFII as the NES game by now, not the US release of FFIV, right?
) It sucked.The problem is that it takes mindless grinding from "grinding to raise every stat" to "grinding to raise a single stat.
" So in that game you'd find yourself wandering around getting attacked, ignoring the enemies, and then fighting amongst yourself to boost HP and weapon skills to the point where the enemies in the next area wouldn't kill you.
It also meant that you could easily gain useless equipment.
(Great, I've got the Staff of Pwning, and everyone is Level 1 Staves.
)The whole bit about having numerical stats and assigning points is a holdover from pencil and paper gaming.
(There's no rule about responding in order, is there?
Er, anyway...) I disagree.
The numerical stats and assigning points are done in computer RPGs because the run on computers.
A computer is good at handling numbers.
When you get right down to it, every computer game has these numerical stats.
For example, in an FPS, each weapon has a different damage stat and enemies have different health and armor stats.
The player might not see the stats, but ultimately, every computer simulation basically handles things using numerical stats.What I would agree with is having "large jumps" in power levels is a hold over from pen and pencil days.
There's a reason that the level cap in WoW is 80 and the level cap in D&amp;D is 20.
(I think?
) In WoW, the computer can easily handle the larger range in values, where a human with pencil and paper would easily get bogged down if they had to keep track of everything.I think they should just ditch the idea of leveling.
If you just make it equipment-based, you start out with crappy loot and get better loot the further you go.
Better loot means you can take on bigger tasks.The problem with that comes when combined with:What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game.Leveling allows a player to adjust difficulty within the game.
If you absolutely suck at the game, you can grind until you get higher stats and reduce the challenges to the point where you can handle them.If you tie advancement to equipment, if the player sucks at the game, they're either SOL because they can never gain more power until they overcome the current challenge, or they have to look into a guidebook to discover which pixel the Staff of Pwning is hidden under.Otherwise, I agree - you shouldn't need a guidebook to be able to generally play the game.
The game mechanics should be easy enough that you don't need to worry about permanently screwing up your character.
Good PC applications have an "Undo" button for a reason - the user/player should not be punished for experimenting.
("Save repeatedly" isn't acceptable for a PC application, it shouldn't be for a game, either.
)But computer games are always going to have stats, and allowing grinding to advance turns out to make the games more accessible to a wider range of skill levels.
The best players can blaze through at low levels, while the worst can slowly slog along.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561585</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246563060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Real men role play with pencil and paper, or nothing at all.</p></div><p>Can't ague with that but the computer RPG games do have the advantage that you don't have to muck about with the mechanics and dice.  Plus part of the fun of computer RPGs is the building up of the character to accomplish a goal, gain power and over come enemies.  Tabletop is more about the story and the socializing making the computer based ones merely shallow experiences in comparison.  (Kind of like physics with out calculus, or for the more socially inclined, sex without a partner.)  Personally I think we should call the computer ones something besides RPGs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Real men role play with pencil and paper , or nothing at all.Ca n't ague with that but the computer RPG games do have the advantage that you do n't have to muck about with the mechanics and dice .
Plus part of the fun of computer RPGs is the building up of the character to accomplish a goal , gain power and over come enemies .
Tabletop is more about the story and the socializing making the computer based ones merely shallow experiences in comparison .
( Kind of like physics with out calculus , or for the more socially inclined , sex without a partner .
) Personally I think we should call the computer ones something besides RPGs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Real men role play with pencil and paper, or nothing at all.Can't ague with that but the computer RPG games do have the advantage that you don't have to muck about with the mechanics and dice.
Plus part of the fun of computer RPGs is the building up of the character to accomplish a goal, gain power and over come enemies.
Tabletop is more about the story and the socializing making the computer based ones merely shallow experiences in comparison.
(Kind of like physics with out calculus, or for the more socially inclined, sex without a partner.
)  Personally I think we should call the computer ones something besides RPGs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564143</id>
	<title>Fix it.</title>
	<author>PeanutButterBreath</author>
	<datestamp>1246528260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe you need to take on something more challenging than gaming, like creating a game that will be a challenge to experts and still sell enough copies to justify the effort.  Or is that <em>to much</em> challenge?</p><p>20 years ago the "challenge" that most games offered was basically rote learning.  BS tricks like insta-kills that you could never possibly anticipate the first time you saw them.  Oh and forcing you to start from square one over and over again.</p><p>I'm glad that game designers have mostly abandoned that crap. But if you feel differently, there is nothing stopping you from hitting the reset button when you fall off a cliff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe you need to take on something more challenging than gaming , like creating a game that will be a challenge to experts and still sell enough copies to justify the effort .
Or is that to much challenge ? 20 years ago the " challenge " that most games offered was basically rote learning .
BS tricks like insta-kills that you could never possibly anticipate the first time you saw them .
Oh and forcing you to start from square one over and over again.I 'm glad that game designers have mostly abandoned that crap .
But if you feel differently , there is nothing stopping you from hitting the reset button when you fall off a cliff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe you need to take on something more challenging than gaming, like creating a game that will be a challenge to experts and still sell enough copies to justify the effort.
Or is that to much challenge?20 years ago the "challenge" that most games offered was basically rote learning.
BS tricks like insta-kills that you could never possibly anticipate the first time you saw them.
Oh and forcing you to start from square one over and over again.I'm glad that game designers have mostly abandoned that crap.
But if you feel differently, there is nothing stopping you from hitting the reset button when you fall off a cliff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561553</id>
	<title>One size does not fit all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246562940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is your RPG designed around the destination or about the journey? (JRPGs vs Western / Narrativist vs Simulation)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is your RPG designed around the destination or about the journey ?
( JRPGs vs Western / Narrativist vs Simulation )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is your RPG designed around the destination or about the journey?
(JRPGs vs Western / Narrativist vs Simulation)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28580099</id>
	<title>Re:Games are too easy now...</title>
	<author>LordVader717</author>
	<datestamp>1246722420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When playing a hard game you get a sense of accomplishment, that much is true. But if that's all your game relies upon, it doesn't stand up to the experience offered by more recent games.<br>There are more ways to reward a player than simply not making him start all over again.</p><p>Having said that, I personally do like a medium level of difficulty if it adds to the experience. It's all about perfecting the balance though. Saving and reloading before every battle can make the experience a little shallow, but make me replay hours of the game and I'll just be pissed off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When playing a hard game you get a sense of accomplishment , that much is true .
But if that 's all your game relies upon , it does n't stand up to the experience offered by more recent games.There are more ways to reward a player than simply not making him start all over again.Having said that , I personally do like a medium level of difficulty if it adds to the experience .
It 's all about perfecting the balance though .
Saving and reloading before every battle can make the experience a little shallow , but make me replay hours of the game and I 'll just be pissed off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When playing a hard game you get a sense of accomplishment, that much is true.
But if that's all your game relies upon, it doesn't stand up to the experience offered by more recent games.There are more ways to reward a player than simply not making him start all over again.Having said that, I personally do like a medium level of difficulty if it adds to the experience.
It's all about perfecting the balance though.
Saving and reloading before every battle can make the experience a little shallow, but make me replay hours of the game and I'll just be pissed off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566517</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1246540260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And they've got an ogre-slaying knife.  It has a +9 against ogres!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And they 've got an ogre-slaying knife .
It has a + 9 against ogres !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And they've got an ogre-slaying knife.
It has a +9 against ogres!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563405</id>
	<title>Re:worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246525560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>similar to leveling in the Fable series then, in that game you get general XP and XP based on the attack you used to kill enemies (magic, melee, ranged).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>similar to leveling in the Fable series then , in that game you get general XP and XP based on the attack you used to kill enemies ( magic , melee , ranged ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>similar to leveling in the Fable series then, in that game you get general XP and XP based on the attack you used to kill enemies (magic, melee, ranged).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561441</id>
	<title>YOU FORGOT THE MAGIC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246562580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FP</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FP</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FP</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563507</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1246525860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In every RPG I've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless, and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod.  Starting the next game out with god like powers is going to ruin a lot of the game.</p><p>The only RPG I've really found character importation to be nice on was the Quest for Glory series.  It helped that that series was mostly a point in click adventure game though, and being all powerful doesn't get you through the game alone.</p></div><p>It seemed to work pretty well in the original dot hack series, but that was because in each game, a new server would open up, with more powerful enemies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In every RPG I 've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless , and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod .
Starting the next game out with god like powers is going to ruin a lot of the game.The only RPG I 've really found character importation to be nice on was the Quest for Glory series .
It helped that that series was mostly a point in click adventure game though , and being all powerful does n't get you through the game alone.It seemed to work pretty well in the original dot hack series , but that was because in each game , a new server would open up , with more powerful enemies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In every RPG I've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless, and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod.
Starting the next game out with god like powers is going to ruin a lot of the game.The only RPG I've really found character importation to be nice on was the Quest for Glory series.
It helped that that series was mostly a point in click adventure game though, and being all powerful doesn't get you through the game alone.It seemed to work pretty well in the original dot hack series, but that was because in each game, a new server would open up, with more powerful enemies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561691</id>
	<title>how about...</title>
	<author>greymond</author>
	<datestamp>1246563360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>we just give up on mmo's and micro transaction based flash games and go back to some good old Tabletop Gaming with friends that uses our brains and some funny looking dice - if you really need a computer, there are excel characters sheets and virtual dice that will run on any platform?</p><p><a href="http://www.rpgnow.com/" title="rpgnow.com">http://www.rpgnow.com/</a> [rpgnow.com]</p><p><a href="http://www.yourgamesnow.com/" title="yourgamesnow.com">http://www.yourgamesnow.com/</a> [yourgamesnow.com]</p><p><a href="http://www.paizo.com/" title="paizo.com">http://www.paizo.com/</a> [paizo.com]</p><p><a href="http://e23.sjgames.com/" title="sjgames.com">http://e23.sjgames.com/</a> [sjgames.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we just give up on mmo 's and micro transaction based flash games and go back to some good old Tabletop Gaming with friends that uses our brains and some funny looking dice - if you really need a computer , there are excel characters sheets and virtual dice that will run on any platform ? http : //www.rpgnow.com/ [ rpgnow.com ] http : //www.yourgamesnow.com/ [ yourgamesnow.com ] http : //www.paizo.com/ [ paizo.com ] http : //e23.sjgames.com/ [ sjgames.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we just give up on mmo's and micro transaction based flash games and go back to some good old Tabletop Gaming with friends that uses our brains and some funny looking dice - if you really need a computer, there are excel characters sheets and virtual dice that will run on any platform?http://www.rpgnow.com/ [rpgnow.com]http://www.yourgamesnow.com/ [yourgamesnow.com]http://www.paizo.com/ [paizo.com]http://e23.sjgames.com/ [sjgames.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561647</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246563240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah...they do.</p><p>DM:  You stand before the gates of Yoren.</p><p>Gorack the Half-troll:  I'm gonna roll to see if I can get hammered drunk at the tavern.</p><p>DM:  What?  fine.  Roll to see if you get drunk.</p><p>Trantor the Barbarian:  I'm gonna attack the gate guards!</p><p>DM:  Oh for fu....ok, fine.  Roll to see your damage.</p><p>Gorack:  Yes!  I'm hammered.  I'm gonna feel up the tavern wench!  Can I roll to see if I squeeze boob or butt?!?</p><p>Spatula the Mage:  I'm with Gorack!</p><p>DM:  *snaps* ROLL IT, THEN MORANS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah...they do.DM : You stand before the gates of Yoren.Gorack the Half-troll : I 'm gon na roll to see if I can get hammered drunk at the tavern.DM : What ?
fine. Roll to see if you get drunk.Trantor the Barbarian : I 'm gon na attack the gate guards ! DM : Oh for fu....ok , fine .
Roll to see your damage.Gorack : Yes !
I 'm hammered .
I 'm gon na feel up the tavern wench !
Can I roll to see if I squeeze boob or butt ? !
? Spatula the Mage : I 'm with Gorack ! DM : * snaps * ROLL IT , THEN MORANS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah...they do.DM:  You stand before the gates of Yoren.Gorack the Half-troll:  I'm gonna roll to see if I can get hammered drunk at the tavern.DM:  What?
fine.  Roll to see if you get drunk.Trantor the Barbarian:  I'm gonna attack the gate guards!DM:  Oh for fu....ok, fine.
Roll to see your damage.Gorack:  Yes!
I'm hammered.
I'm gonna feel up the tavern wench!
Can I roll to see if I squeeze boob or butt?!
?Spatula the Mage:  I'm with Gorack!DM:  *snaps* ROLL IT, THEN MORANS!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569969</id>
	<title>Anyone for some MUD?</title>
	<author>RivenAleem</author>
	<datestamp>1246621500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interesting how I havn't seen any comments relating to MUDs. There were some games all about grinding until you got your skills maxxed and then you went on to die repeatedly until perma death (the number of times you could die varied greatly between MUDS) and then started over again.

And each death could mean the instant loss of all your belongings if te player who killed you decided to bury, or pillage, your corpse (and act frowned upon, but still occuring on occasion) or your corpse might disappear after time if you couldn't find someone to ressurect you in time.

This has been removed from most mainstream games, WoW only has a gold loss for damage armour on death and a short corpse run (if no ressurect available). The main reason for this is due to subscriptions. It is largely okay for people to suffer massive setbacks on death if the game is already paid for such a setback only affects yourself. A simmilar effect in a MMOPRG would mean that progress would be held up constantly as people reroll after a permadeath, or regear if their equipment was lost (look what happened to players who were hacked in WoW before they were able to restore people's belongings).

It would not only affect the player it happened to, but also all who play with them. Also, the game itself would have to become alot easier if anyone, as a team, were to have a chance at achieving anything.

The way these games are now is possibly the only way thay can be in a MMO environment. Punishment for death has to be near negligable and content must be oriented about team play, and not the Hero's Story, which many single players games are based on.

I myself have played WoW extensively, but I've seen in all the MMO's I've tried over the years, that they, from the early stages of the game, focus on the team, the faction, the race, the corperation and how you fit in the greater orginisational structure, and try to steer away from the loner, the solo adventurer so as to promote an online society, culture.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting how I hav n't seen any comments relating to MUDs .
There were some games all about grinding until you got your skills maxxed and then you went on to die repeatedly until perma death ( the number of times you could die varied greatly between MUDS ) and then started over again .
And each death could mean the instant loss of all your belongings if te player who killed you decided to bury , or pillage , your corpse ( and act frowned upon , but still occuring on occasion ) or your corpse might disappear after time if you could n't find someone to ressurect you in time .
This has been removed from most mainstream games , WoW only has a gold loss for damage armour on death and a short corpse run ( if no ressurect available ) .
The main reason for this is due to subscriptions .
It is largely okay for people to suffer massive setbacks on death if the game is already paid for such a setback only affects yourself .
A simmilar effect in a MMOPRG would mean that progress would be held up constantly as people reroll after a permadeath , or regear if their equipment was lost ( look what happened to players who were hacked in WoW before they were able to restore people 's belongings ) .
It would not only affect the player it happened to , but also all who play with them .
Also , the game itself would have to become alot easier if anyone , as a team , were to have a chance at achieving anything .
The way these games are now is possibly the only way thay can be in a MMO environment .
Punishment for death has to be near negligable and content must be oriented about team play , and not the Hero 's Story , which many single players games are based on .
I myself have played WoW extensively , but I 've seen in all the MMO 's I 've tried over the years , that they , from the early stages of the game , focus on the team , the faction , the race , the corperation and how you fit in the greater orginisational structure , and try to steer away from the loner , the solo adventurer so as to promote an online society , culture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting how I havn't seen any comments relating to MUDs.
There were some games all about grinding until you got your skills maxxed and then you went on to die repeatedly until perma death (the number of times you could die varied greatly between MUDS) and then started over again.
And each death could mean the instant loss of all your belongings if te player who killed you decided to bury, or pillage, your corpse (and act frowned upon, but still occuring on occasion) or your corpse might disappear after time if you couldn't find someone to ressurect you in time.
This has been removed from most mainstream games, WoW only has a gold loss for damage armour on death and a short corpse run (if no ressurect available).
The main reason for this is due to subscriptions.
It is largely okay for people to suffer massive setbacks on death if the game is already paid for such a setback only affects yourself.
A simmilar effect in a MMOPRG would mean that progress would be held up constantly as people reroll after a permadeath, or regear if their equipment was lost (look what happened to players who were hacked in WoW before they were able to restore people's belongings).
It would not only affect the player it happened to, but also all who play with them.
Also, the game itself would have to become alot easier if anyone, as a team, were to have a chance at achieving anything.
The way these games are now is possibly the only way thay can be in a MMO environment.
Punishment for death has to be near negligable and content must be oriented about team play, and not the Hero's Story, which many single players games are based on.
I myself have played WoW extensively, but I've seen in all the MMO's I've tried over the years, that they, from the early stages of the game, focus on the team, the faction, the race, the corperation and how you fit in the greater orginisational structure, and try to steer away from the loner, the solo adventurer so as to promote an online society, culture.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569835</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246619340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man, I feel old now. I actually know what "Bree Yark" means and from where it originated<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>Eorlin the Mage</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , I feel old now .
I actually know what " Bree Yark " means and from where it originated : - ) Eorlin the Mage</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, I feel old now.
I actually know what "Bree Yark" means and from where it originated :-)Eorlin the Mage</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28568123</id>
	<title>Re:JRPGs are not actually RPGs though</title>
	<author>Petrushka</author>
	<datestamp>1246553640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Games like Diablo and Dungeon Siege aren't RPGs either, but that's not going to stop many people using the term. (Though my own game library sharply distinguishes "RPG" and "hack-n-slash".) I think you're fighting a losing battle there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Games like Diablo and Dungeon Siege are n't RPGs either , but that 's not going to stop many people using the term .
( Though my own game library sharply distinguishes " RPG " and " hack-n-slash " .
) I think you 're fighting a losing battle there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games like Diablo and Dungeon Siege aren't RPGs either, but that's not going to stop many people using the term.
(Though my own game library sharply distinguishes "RPG" and "hack-n-slash".
) I think you're fighting a losing battle there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561745</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246563600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>real men role-play with handcuffs, ball-gags and women in schoolgirl uniforms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>real men role-play with handcuffs , ball-gags and women in schoolgirl uniforms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>real men role-play with handcuffs, ball-gags and women in schoolgirl uniforms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563811</id>
	<title>Re:worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>StellarFury</author>
	<datestamp>1246526940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In his (and my) defense, "pushing the envelope" is in the hand of the mailer.</p><p>JRPGs and Western RPGs are not the same games, and they're largely incomparable. Sure, they both have characters, levels, advancement, and worlds. But the similarities really end there. Contrary to what TFA does, lumping the two together in an attempt to produce a "grand theory of RPG design" is not really productive. They're different games for different people, and trying to claim one genre is better than the other is just childish and annoying. You might as well try to claim that science fiction is better than fantasy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In his ( and my ) defense , " pushing the envelope " is in the hand of the mailer.JRPGs and Western RPGs are not the same games , and they 're largely incomparable .
Sure , they both have characters , levels , advancement , and worlds .
But the similarities really end there .
Contrary to what TFA does , lumping the two together in an attempt to produce a " grand theory of RPG design " is not really productive .
They 're different games for different people , and trying to claim one genre is better than the other is just childish and annoying .
You might as well try to claim that science fiction is better than fantasy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In his (and my) defense, "pushing the envelope" is in the hand of the mailer.JRPGs and Western RPGs are not the same games, and they're largely incomparable.
Sure, they both have characters, levels, advancement, and worlds.
But the similarities really end there.
Contrary to what TFA does, lumping the two together in an attempt to produce a "grand theory of RPG design" is not really productive.
They're different games for different people, and trying to claim one genre is better than the other is just childish and annoying.
You might as well try to claim that science fiction is better than fantasy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563105</id>
	<title>Re:worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246567800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment, then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff. You use melee weapons a lot, your melee skill grows. You use the bow, that grows. But if you don't use staff weapons, then that stat never progresses.</p></div><p>You do realize that you just described the basic leveling mechanism in <i>Oblivion</i>, right?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment , then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff .
You use melee weapons a lot , your melee skill grows .
You use the bow , that grows .
But if you do n't use staff weapons , then that stat never progresses.You do realize that you just described the basic leveling mechanism in Oblivion , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment, then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff.
You use melee weapons a lot, your melee skill grows.
You use the bow, that grows.
But if you don't use staff weapons, then that stat never progresses.You do realize that you just described the basic leveling mechanism in Oblivion, right?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564333</id>
	<title>Re:Games are too easy now...</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1246529040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finish Devil May Cry 4, or better yet 3, then come back to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finish Devil May Cry 4 , or better yet 3 , then come back to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finish Devil May Cry 4, or better yet 3, then come back to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564287</id>
	<title>Ninja Gaiden 1 and 2???</title>
	<author>relguj9</author>
	<datestamp>1246528860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you can beat either of those 2 games on the hardest difficulty on the first play through without dying repeatedly, I'll suck your dick.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can beat either of those 2 games on the hardest difficulty on the first play through without dying repeatedly , I 'll suck your dick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can beat either of those 2 games on the hardest difficulty on the first play through without dying repeatedly, I'll suck your dick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566635</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>cyberfunkr</author>
	<datestamp>1246540920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In every RPG I've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless, and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod.  Starting the next game out with god like powers is going to ruin a lot of the game.</p></div><p>Then you change the rules of power:</p><p>* The source of power you use has become bankrupt. All "spells" stop working.</p><p>* The more powerful metals experience an effect similar to rust. Suddenly than bronze sword and steel plate become more powerful than mythril.</p><p>* You suffer a curse because your might hurt the wrong person. Now the more strength you use to accomplish something the weaker you become. Sure you have 25 strength, but try an break that door and you lose HP.</p><p>* The big baddie you fought last time was just a mere drone. Feeble compared to the mighty armada that is about to descend upon you and your world.</p><p>* You died. Now your offspring must take up the mantle. Sure they inherit your +5 Battle Axe of Butt Kicking, but they aren't powerful enough to wield it yet.</p><p>There are tons of way to make people weak again. Just play around with these concepts; make what they have useless, make what they have unusable, make the foe resistant to their power, make the foe more powerful.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In every RPG I 've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless , and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod .
Starting the next game out with god like powers is going to ruin a lot of the game.Then you change the rules of power : * The source of power you use has become bankrupt .
All " spells " stop working .
* The more powerful metals experience an effect similar to rust .
Suddenly than bronze sword and steel plate become more powerful than mythril .
* You suffer a curse because your might hurt the wrong person .
Now the more strength you use to accomplish something the weaker you become .
Sure you have 25 strength , but try an break that door and you lose HP .
* The big baddie you fought last time was just a mere drone .
Feeble compared to the mighty armada that is about to descend upon you and your world .
* You died .
Now your offspring must take up the mantle .
Sure they inherit your + 5 Battle Axe of Butt Kicking , but they are n't powerful enough to wield it yet.There are tons of way to make people weak again .
Just play around with these concepts ; make what they have useless , make what they have unusable , make the foe resistant to their power , make the foe more powerful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In every RPG I've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless, and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod.
Starting the next game out with god like powers is going to ruin a lot of the game.Then you change the rules of power:* The source of power you use has become bankrupt.
All "spells" stop working.
* The more powerful metals experience an effect similar to rust.
Suddenly than bronze sword and steel plate become more powerful than mythril.
* You suffer a curse because your might hurt the wrong person.
Now the more strength you use to accomplish something the weaker you become.
Sure you have 25 strength, but try an break that door and you lose HP.
* The big baddie you fought last time was just a mere drone.
Feeble compared to the mighty armada that is about to descend upon you and your world.
* You died.
Now your offspring must take up the mantle.
Sure they inherit your +5 Battle Axe of Butt Kicking, but they aren't powerful enough to wield it yet.There are tons of way to make people weak again.
Just play around with these concepts; make what they have useless, make what they have unusable, make the foe resistant to their power, make the foe more powerful.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566221</id>
	<title>Mod parent up!</title>
	<author>Valdrax</author>
	<datestamp>1246538580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is what a lot of "JRPGs suck" or "Western RPGs" people are missing.</p><p>The two types of games have radically different gameplay goals.  They should no more be considered the game genre than turn-based strategy and real-time strategy or FPS's and 3D platformers.  The interactive storytelling model of JRPGs and the "character living in a setting" focus of Western RPGs are apples and oranges.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what a lot of " JRPGs suck " or " Western RPGs " people are missing.The two types of games have radically different gameplay goals .
They should no more be considered the game genre than turn-based strategy and real-time strategy or FPS 's and 3D platformers .
The interactive storytelling model of JRPGs and the " character living in a setting " focus of Western RPGs are apples and oranges .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what a lot of "JRPGs suck" or "Western RPGs" people are missing.The two types of games have radically different gameplay goals.
They should no more be considered the game genre than turn-based strategy and real-time strategy or FPS's and 3D platformers.
The interactive storytelling model of JRPGs and the "character living in a setting" focus of Western RPGs are apples and oranges.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561553</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564835</id>
	<title>Bad article?</title>
	<author>loufoque</author>
	<datestamp>1246531140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article seems to have quite a bias towards "western" computer role-playing games (even the naming, CRPG vs JRPG, makes this obvious).<br>The quality of the comments for JPRGs is much poorer, and it really feels like the WRPGs are more noble in the eyes of the author, even though these days it's a real struggle finding a decent WRPG while there are very good JRPGs everywhere (which are actually challenging and well-balanced, unlike most western ones, and contain much more content), which have also much more titles, are more popular, sell more, etc.</p><p>Why the hell he even tries to compare everything back to D&amp;D as the True Source of Origin is beyond me.</p><p>It was said the legacy of Tales was poor, even though Star Ocean is a rather big one IMO.<br>Putting Zelda while discussing Tales is also nothing more but a joke.</p><p>It also lacks mention of quite of few other important JRPGs (and a few western ones as well) while too many similar games are mentioned.<br>Furthermore, it puts too much credit on Pok&#195;&#169;mon which is nothing more than a copy/paste of classics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article seems to have quite a bias towards " western " computer role-playing games ( even the naming , CRPG vs JRPG , makes this obvious ) .The quality of the comments for JPRGs is much poorer , and it really feels like the WRPGs are more noble in the eyes of the author , even though these days it 's a real struggle finding a decent WRPG while there are very good JRPGs everywhere ( which are actually challenging and well-balanced , unlike most western ones , and contain much more content ) , which have also much more titles , are more popular , sell more , etc.Why the hell he even tries to compare everything back to D&amp;D as the True Source of Origin is beyond me.It was said the legacy of Tales was poor , even though Star Ocean is a rather big one IMO.Putting Zelda while discussing Tales is also nothing more but a joke.It also lacks mention of quite of few other important JRPGs ( and a few western ones as well ) while too many similar games are mentioned.Furthermore , it puts too much credit on Pok     mon which is nothing more than a copy/paste of classics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article seems to have quite a bias towards "western" computer role-playing games (even the naming, CRPG vs JRPG, makes this obvious).The quality of the comments for JPRGs is much poorer, and it really feels like the WRPGs are more noble in the eyes of the author, even though these days it's a real struggle finding a decent WRPG while there are very good JRPGs everywhere (which are actually challenging and well-balanced, unlike most western ones, and contain much more content), which have also much more titles, are more popular, sell more, etc.Why the hell he even tries to compare everything back to D&amp;D as the True Source of Origin is beyond me.It was said the legacy of Tales was poor, even though Star Ocean is a rather big one IMO.Putting Zelda while discussing Tales is also nothing more but a joke.It also lacks mention of quite of few other important JRPGs (and a few western ones as well) while too many similar games are mentioned.Furthermore, it puts too much credit on PokÃ©mon which is nothing more than a copy/paste of classics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563881</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>Buelldozer</author>
	<datestamp>1246527300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One way around this is with proper design, If your "powers" are dependent on something besides time to recharge then you can limit the availability of that substance in the sequel. For instance if it takes 300 jubu rocks to cast the "death to everyone within 5.5 miles" spell then simply limit the number of jubu rocks. The new powers, that you must learn because jubu rocks are suddenly so scarce, are based on turdo rocks which are far more common.</p><p>You can do the same thing with weapons by limiting the ammunition. Character stats are trivial, simply "up" the level of the baddies and allow anyone creating a NEW character (not an imported one) to have starting powers commensurate with this version of the game.</p><p>Done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One way around this is with proper design , If your " powers " are dependent on something besides time to recharge then you can limit the availability of that substance in the sequel .
For instance if it takes 300 jubu rocks to cast the " death to everyone within 5.5 miles " spell then simply limit the number of jubu rocks .
The new powers , that you must learn because jubu rocks are suddenly so scarce , are based on turdo rocks which are far more common.You can do the same thing with weapons by limiting the ammunition .
Character stats are trivial , simply " up " the level of the baddies and allow anyone creating a NEW character ( not an imported one ) to have starting powers commensurate with this version of the game.Done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One way around this is with proper design, If your "powers" are dependent on something besides time to recharge then you can limit the availability of that substance in the sequel.
For instance if it takes 300 jubu rocks to cast the "death to everyone within 5.5 miles" spell then simply limit the number of jubu rocks.
The new powers, that you must learn because jubu rocks are suddenly so scarce, are based on turdo rocks which are far more common.You can do the same thing with weapons by limiting the ammunition.
Character stats are trivial, simply "up" the level of the baddies and allow anyone creating a NEW character (not an imported one) to have starting powers commensurate with this version of the game.Done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733</id>
	<title>worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1246563540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of the rpg's I've played in recent years, the ones that were the most tedious were the ones lacking in good stories. It makes the entire play experience feel like a chore.</p><p>If bad storytelling is the first sin, then the second has to be needless complication. Oblivion is the prettiest rpg I have ever seen but the leveling mechanics were atrocious.</p><p>The whole bit about having numerical stats and assigning points is a holdover from pencil and paper gaming. I think they should just ditch the idea of leveling. If you just make it equipment-based, you start out with crappy loot and get better loot the further you go. Better loot means you can take on bigger tasks. If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment, then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff. You use melee weapons a lot, your melee skill grows. You use the bow, that grows. But if you don't use staff weapons, then that stat never progresses.</p><p>What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game. When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play, all immersion is ruined.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of the rpg 's I 've played in recent years , the ones that were the most tedious were the ones lacking in good stories .
It makes the entire play experience feel like a chore.If bad storytelling is the first sin , then the second has to be needless complication .
Oblivion is the prettiest rpg I have ever seen but the leveling mechanics were atrocious.The whole bit about having numerical stats and assigning points is a holdover from pencil and paper gaming .
I think they should just ditch the idea of leveling .
If you just make it equipment-based , you start out with crappy loot and get better loot the further you go .
Better loot means you can take on bigger tasks .
If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment , then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff .
You use melee weapons a lot , your melee skill grows .
You use the bow , that grows .
But if you do n't use staff weapons , then that stat never progresses.What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game .
When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play , all immersion is ruined .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of the rpg's I've played in recent years, the ones that were the most tedious were the ones lacking in good stories.
It makes the entire play experience feel like a chore.If bad storytelling is the first sin, then the second has to be needless complication.
Oblivion is the prettiest rpg I have ever seen but the leveling mechanics were atrocious.The whole bit about having numerical stats and assigning points is a holdover from pencil and paper gaming.
I think they should just ditch the idea of leveling.
If you just make it equipment-based, you start out with crappy loot and get better loot the further you go.
Better loot means you can take on bigger tasks.
If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment, then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff.
You use melee weapons a lot, your melee skill grows.
You use the bow, that grows.
But if you don't use staff weapons, then that stat never progresses.What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game.
When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play, all immersion is ruined.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562863</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>Nathrael</author>
	<datestamp>1246567080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No. *Real* men role play in bed.<br> <br>Joking aside,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/signed. That does not mean CRPGs aren't enjoyable though - especially considering that your P&amp;P group might not be available all the time<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) .</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
* Real * men role play in bed .
Joking aside , /signed .
That does not mean CRPGs are n't enjoyable though - especially considering that your P&amp;P group might not be available all the time ; ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
*Real* men role play in bed.
Joking aside, /signed.
That does not mean CRPGs aren't enjoyable though - especially considering that your P&amp;P group might not be available all the time ;) .</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562191</id>
	<title>Nethack is a winner</title>
	<author>us7892</author>
	<datestamp>1246565160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>You must be under 25.  Nethack requires an imagination.  Check out this description of Nethack, and a story of one persons ascention with the Amulet,  <a href="http://garote.bdmonkeys.net/nethack/index.html" title="bdmonkeys.net">http://garote.bdmonkeys.net/nethack/index.html</a> [bdmonkeys.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>You must be under 25 .
Nethack requires an imagination .
Check out this description of Nethack , and a story of one persons ascention with the Amulet , http : //garote.bdmonkeys.net/nethack/index.html [ bdmonkeys.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must be under 25.
Nethack requires an imagination.
Check out this description of Nethack, and a story of one persons ascention with the Amulet,  http://garote.bdmonkeys.net/nethack/index.html [bdmonkeys.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566175</id>
	<title>How is that an improvement?</title>
	<author>Valdrax</author>
	<datestamp>1246538340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Grinding too long will kill you via corruption. It's advance in the game or have no chance at success.</p></div><p>In other words, it's a game where if you work hard to avoid the a Rogue-like's traditional punishment of "you just wasted all that time, start over," it punishes you for it.</p><p>YOU'LL TAKE YOUR LUMPS AND LIKE IT.</p><p>In tabletop gaming, this is known as "railroading," and it's universally hated for a reason.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Grinding too long will kill you via corruption .
It 's advance in the game or have no chance at success.In other words , it 's a game where if you work hard to avoid the a Rogue-like 's traditional punishment of " you just wasted all that time , start over , " it punishes you for it.YOU 'LL TAKE YOUR LUMPS AND LIKE IT.In tabletop gaming , this is known as " railroading , " and it 's universally hated for a reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Grinding too long will kill you via corruption.
It's advance in the game or have no chance at success.In other words, it's a game where if you work hard to avoid the a Rogue-like's traditional punishment of "you just wasted all that time, start over," it punishes you for it.YOU'LL TAKE YOUR LUMPS AND LIKE IT.In tabletop gaming, this is known as "railroading," and it's universally hated for a reason.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561813</id>
	<title>Game Designers Need to Strike a Balance</title>
	<author>Calithulu</author>
	<datestamp>1246563780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What it really boils down to is that game designers need to strike a balance between "Oh my God I'm going to die" and ease of game play.</p><p>Games like City of Heroes have this done right (we won't discuss the Architect missions). People that want more challenge can go and set their instance difficulty higher, earning more rewards (and more experience) for their troubles. More casual players can set the difficulty lower. Seems to be win-win.</p><p>Unfortunately, where games require that players share a broad world at all times this doesn't work out. It may be that outside of non-combat areas each difficulty level should be its own instance, and players go to the difficulty they want when they travel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What it really boils down to is that game designers need to strike a balance between " Oh my God I 'm going to die " and ease of game play.Games like City of Heroes have this done right ( we wo n't discuss the Architect missions ) .
People that want more challenge can go and set their instance difficulty higher , earning more rewards ( and more experience ) for their troubles .
More casual players can set the difficulty lower .
Seems to be win-win.Unfortunately , where games require that players share a broad world at all times this does n't work out .
It may be that outside of non-combat areas each difficulty level should be its own instance , and players go to the difficulty they want when they travel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What it really boils down to is that game designers need to strike a balance between "Oh my God I'm going to die" and ease of game play.Games like City of Heroes have this done right (we won't discuss the Architect missions).
People that want more challenge can go and set their instance difficulty higher, earning more rewards (and more experience) for their troubles.
More casual players can set the difficulty lower.
Seems to be win-win.Unfortunately, where games require that players share a broad world at all times this doesn't work out.
It may be that outside of non-combat areas each difficulty level should be its own instance, and players go to the difficulty they want when they travel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28571519</id>
	<title>Re:Games are too easy now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246635120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree. What makes the game a 'grind' is that you have to do the same blasted thing over and over again.</p><p>If leveling up consists of walking up two screens, over one screen and slaughtering everything on that screen for an hour before I have to go back to town, refuel and do it all over again, I'm gonna be bored.</p><p>BUT, if leveling consisted of entering a cave where the layout, monsters and treasure were more random, it wouldn't feel like grinding. There would always be something more to discover, with the random chance of getting something *really* good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
What makes the game a 'grind ' is that you have to do the same blasted thing over and over again.If leveling up consists of walking up two screens , over one screen and slaughtering everything on that screen for an hour before I have to go back to town , refuel and do it all over again , I 'm gon na be bored.BUT , if leveling consisted of entering a cave where the layout , monsters and treasure were more random , it would n't feel like grinding .
There would always be something more to discover , with the random chance of getting something * really * good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
What makes the game a 'grind' is that you have to do the same blasted thing over and over again.If leveling up consists of walking up two screens, over one screen and slaughtering everything on that screen for an hour before I have to go back to town, refuel and do it all over again, I'm gonna be bored.BUT, if leveling consisted of entering a cave where the layout, monsters and treasure were more random, it wouldn't feel like grinding.
There would always be something more to discover, with the random chance of getting something *really* good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562719</id>
	<title>Like all video games</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1246566600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The easier something is, the more people enjoy it.<br>And the harder something is, the more gamers enjoy it.</p><p>The only decision is, who are you going to market to? Stealing from VGcats:<br>Why make great when good sells better?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The easier something is , the more people enjoy it.And the harder something is , the more gamers enjoy it.The only decision is , who are you going to market to ?
Stealing from VGcats : Why make great when good sells better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The easier something is, the more people enjoy it.And the harder something is, the more gamers enjoy it.The only decision is, who are you going to market to?
Stealing from VGcats:Why make great when good sells better?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562525</id>
	<title>Re:worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246566180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You would absolutely hate any classical-styled roguelike like Angband, ADOM, Nethack, Powder, Shiren the Wanderer, or Etrian Odyssey then, huh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>&gt;most tedious were the ones lacking in good stories<br>&gt;the second has to be needless complication<br>&gt;has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game<br>&gt;When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play</p><p>Wait<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... wait just a moment!</p><p>&gt;When you have to think</p><p>Oh, I think that's your problem right there.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  Go on and please enjoy your hand-holding Final Fantasy 29.  I'll be over here playing my ancient AND the new roguelikes that continue to push the envelope<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You would absolutely hate any classical-styled roguelike like Angband , ADOM , Nethack , Powder , Shiren the Wanderer , or Etrian Odyssey then , huh ... &gt; most tedious were the ones lacking in good stories &gt; the second has to be needless complication &gt; has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game &gt; When you have to think about how to play rather than simply playWait ... wait just a moment ! &gt; When you have to thinkOh , I think that 's your problem right there .
: ) Go on and please enjoy your hand-holding Final Fantasy 29 .
I 'll be over here playing my ancient AND the new roguelikes that continue to push the envelope .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You would absolutely hate any classical-styled roguelike like Angband, ADOM, Nethack, Powder, Shiren the Wanderer, or Etrian Odyssey then, huh ...&gt;most tedious were the ones lacking in good stories&gt;the second has to be needless complication&gt;has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game&gt;When you have to think about how to play rather than simply playWait ... wait just a moment!&gt;When you have to thinkOh, I think that's your problem right there.
:)  Go on and please enjoy your hand-holding Final Fantasy 29.
I'll be over here playing my ancient AND the new roguelikes that continue to push the envelope ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28582819</id>
	<title>Re:JRPGs are not actually RPGs though</title>
	<author>mcvos</author>
	<datestamp>1246704780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not just JRPGs that aren't really RPGs, it's all CRPGs. You don't have a GM, you can't improvise, and most of all, you don't play a role. Either the protagonist is a faceless bunch of stats and irrelevant to the story, or he really is the protagonist of the story but his role in the story is entirely played by the scripted plot rather than the player.</p><p>The only CRPG that comes close is Planescape: Torment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not just JRPGs that are n't really RPGs , it 's all CRPGs .
You do n't have a GM , you ca n't improvise , and most of all , you do n't play a role .
Either the protagonist is a faceless bunch of stats and irrelevant to the story , or he really is the protagonist of the story but his role in the story is entirely played by the scripted plot rather than the player.The only CRPG that comes close is Planescape : Torment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not just JRPGs that aren't really RPGs, it's all CRPGs.
You don't have a GM, you can't improvise, and most of all, you don't play a role.
Either the protagonist is a faceless bunch of stats and irrelevant to the story, or he really is the protagonist of the story but his role in the story is entirely played by the scripted plot rather than the player.The only CRPG that comes close is Planescape: Torment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28573683</id>
	<title>The undoing of Ultima Online</title>
	<author>Ouizardus</author>
	<datestamp>1246648260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm surprised no one has mentioned Ultima Online. From my understanding, it never took off because players were *always* under constant threat of being attacked and killed by more powerful players. The only "safe zones" were the banks. So players would be constantly under threat regardless of what they did in the game. It wasn't fun because it was little more than an exercise in stress-management and frustration.</p><p>MMORPGs are mostly about the social aspects of RPing, and less about creating powerful characters. Anyone who focuses on the latter is basically ignoring the MMO in MMORPG.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised no one has mentioned Ultima Online .
From my understanding , it never took off because players were * always * under constant threat of being attacked and killed by more powerful players .
The only " safe zones " were the banks .
So players would be constantly under threat regardless of what they did in the game .
It was n't fun because it was little more than an exercise in stress-management and frustration.MMORPGs are mostly about the social aspects of RPing , and less about creating powerful characters .
Anyone who focuses on the latter is basically ignoring the MMO in MMORPG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised no one has mentioned Ultima Online.
From my understanding, it never took off because players were *always* under constant threat of being attacked and killed by more powerful players.
The only "safe zones" were the banks.
So players would be constantly under threat regardless of what they did in the game.
It wasn't fun because it was little more than an exercise in stress-management and frustration.MMORPGs are mostly about the social aspects of RPing, and less about creating powerful characters.
Anyone who focuses on the latter is basically ignoring the MMO in MMORPG.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28568383</id>
	<title>Re:worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>sowth</author>
	<datestamp>1246556460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game. When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play, all immersion is ruined.</p></div></blockquote><p>This seems a strange thing to say, since in real life one has to learn how to do things (of which reading a book is helpful), and supposedly "immersion" is how closely the game resembles real life / "fools" you into thinking the game is real.

</p><p>An example which really worked for me: the game Dungeon Master uses a magic system where you have to learn special symbols, and to cast spells you use these symbols to specify which spell you want. I think the spells were listed on scrolls you found in the dungeon. I had to memorize the symbols from the manual to even cast spells reliably.

</p><p>I admit I haven't played a huge number of RPGs, but I think an even greater possible system would be to require the player to "write" or gesture spells with the mouse for spell casting. Do it in a methon which requires the player to learn gesturing and how to cast spells in a dynamic way, so spell casting would be based upon a <b>player's</b> skill instead of their avatars stats. It may be a crazy idea, but I think it would work...

</p><p>But perhaps you are talking about something strange with the interface? So strange it confuses you enough you need the manual to figure it out. I see your point there. Then again, you could just be like the countless Microsoft OS(tm) users who insist every interface be like the one they are used to. If that is the case, please be tolerant of other people.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game .
When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play , all immersion is ruined.This seems a strange thing to say , since in real life one has to learn how to do things ( of which reading a book is helpful ) , and supposedly " immersion " is how closely the game resembles real life / " fools " you into thinking the game is real .
An example which really worked for me : the game Dungeon Master uses a magic system where you have to learn special symbols , and to cast spells you use these symbols to specify which spell you want .
I think the spells were listed on scrolls you found in the dungeon .
I had to memorize the symbols from the manual to even cast spells reliably .
I admit I have n't played a huge number of RPGs , but I think an even greater possible system would be to require the player to " write " or gesture spells with the mouse for spell casting .
Do it in a methon which requires the player to learn gesturing and how to cast spells in a dynamic way , so spell casting would be based upon a player 's skill instead of their avatars stats .
It may be a crazy idea , but I think it would work.. . But perhaps you are talking about something strange with the interface ?
So strange it confuses you enough you need the manual to figure it out .
I see your point there .
Then again , you could just be like the countless Microsoft OS ( tm ) users who insist every interface be like the one they are used to .
If that is the case , please be tolerant of other people .
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What absolutely must be avoided at all cost is making the player feel like he has to consult a guidebook on how to play the game.
When you have to think about how to play rather than simply play, all immersion is ruined.This seems a strange thing to say, since in real life one has to learn how to do things (of which reading a book is helpful), and supposedly "immersion" is how closely the game resembles real life / "fools" you into thinking the game is real.
An example which really worked for me: the game Dungeon Master uses a magic system where you have to learn special symbols, and to cast spells you use these symbols to specify which spell you want.
I think the spells were listed on scrolls you found in the dungeon.
I had to memorize the symbols from the manual to even cast spells reliably.
I admit I haven't played a huge number of RPGs, but I think an even greater possible system would be to require the player to "write" or gesture spells with the mouse for spell casting.
Do it in a methon which requires the player to learn gesturing and how to cast spells in a dynamic way, so spell casting would be based upon a player's skill instead of their avatars stats.
It may be a crazy idea, but I think it would work...

But perhaps you are talking about something strange with the interface?
So strange it confuses you enough you need the manual to figure it out.
I see your point there.
Then again, you could just be like the countless Microsoft OS(tm) users who insist every interface be like the one they are used to.
If that is the case, please be tolerant of other people.
;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565875</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>johno.ie</author>
	<datestamp>1246536540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry but I completely disagree with you. And I slightly resent being told that I'm playing Nethack the wrong way. I've been playing since it was called Hack and I needed to use 2x5.25" floppies get in running on a HDD-less machine. I still haven't ascended, but I have got the AoY several times, and most importantly of all, I've had uncountable hours of fun. For me the best buzz is when I find myself in an apparently fatal situation but somehow I still manage to pull through. Sometimes this requires luck to be on my side, but life can be like that too. I've fallen through trapdoors into zoo rooms where I was certain I was toast but sometimes I somehow managed to escape. It's the richness of detail in the game that keeps me coming back, the engraving, the dipping, the praying, the polymorphing, the sacrificing, the taming, the stealing, the corpse eating, the attributes, the random maps, the unidentified objects, all those easter eggs, and lets not forget the tombstone. It's a different game every time.</p><p>To take your way of playing to an extreme, I could just record a macro of "left arrow, right arrow", find a suitable corridor on level 1 and run the macro for a month until I'm level eleventyfive. That sounds like more fun than sitting in front of the PC for a week playing conservatively.</p><p>I've tried a lot of modern MMOJOBs and I always get bored with them within a couple of months. But I know plenty of people that are happy to play the same raids, with the same groups, on the same night each week, over and over and over again. To each their own, but I'd like to suggest that if you don't appreciate Nethack, you are the one who is playing it wrong. Life is a journey, not a destination.</p><p>Now if you'll excuse me, I have some gridbugs to squash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry but I completely disagree with you .
And I slightly resent being told that I 'm playing Nethack the wrong way .
I 've been playing since it was called Hack and I needed to use 2x5.25 " floppies get in running on a HDD-less machine .
I still have n't ascended , but I have got the AoY several times , and most importantly of all , I 've had uncountable hours of fun .
For me the best buzz is when I find myself in an apparently fatal situation but somehow I still manage to pull through .
Sometimes this requires luck to be on my side , but life can be like that too .
I 've fallen through trapdoors into zoo rooms where I was certain I was toast but sometimes I somehow managed to escape .
It 's the richness of detail in the game that keeps me coming back , the engraving , the dipping , the praying , the polymorphing , the sacrificing , the taming , the stealing , the corpse eating , the attributes , the random maps , the unidentified objects , all those easter eggs , and lets not forget the tombstone .
It 's a different game every time.To take your way of playing to an extreme , I could just record a macro of " left arrow , right arrow " , find a suitable corridor on level 1 and run the macro for a month until I 'm level eleventyfive .
That sounds like more fun than sitting in front of the PC for a week playing conservatively.I 've tried a lot of modern MMOJOBs and I always get bored with them within a couple of months .
But I know plenty of people that are happy to play the same raids , with the same groups , on the same night each week , over and over and over again .
To each their own , but I 'd like to suggest that if you do n't appreciate Nethack , you are the one who is playing it wrong .
Life is a journey , not a destination.Now if you 'll excuse me , I have some gridbugs to squash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry but I completely disagree with you.
And I slightly resent being told that I'm playing Nethack the wrong way.
I've been playing since it was called Hack and I needed to use 2x5.25" floppies get in running on a HDD-less machine.
I still haven't ascended, but I have got the AoY several times, and most importantly of all, I've had uncountable hours of fun.
For me the best buzz is when I find myself in an apparently fatal situation but somehow I still manage to pull through.
Sometimes this requires luck to be on my side, but life can be like that too.
I've fallen through trapdoors into zoo rooms where I was certain I was toast but sometimes I somehow managed to escape.
It's the richness of detail in the game that keeps me coming back, the engraving, the dipping, the praying, the polymorphing, the sacrificing, the taming, the stealing, the corpse eating, the attributes, the random maps, the unidentified objects, all those easter eggs, and lets not forget the tombstone.
It's a different game every time.To take your way of playing to an extreme, I could just record a macro of "left arrow, right arrow", find a suitable corridor on level 1 and run the macro for a month until I'm level eleventyfive.
That sounds like more fun than sitting in front of the PC for a week playing conservatively.I've tried a lot of modern MMOJOBs and I always get bored with them within a couple of months.
But I know plenty of people that are happy to play the same raids, with the same groups, on the same night each week, over and over and over again.
To each their own, but I'd like to suggest that if you don't appreciate Nethack, you are the one who is playing it wrong.
Life is a journey, not a destination.Now if you'll excuse me, I have some gridbugs to squash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1246563960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In every RPG I've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless, and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod.  Starting the next game out with god like powers is going to ruin a lot of the game.</p><p>The only RPG I've really found character importation to be nice on was the Quest for Glory series.  It helped that that series was mostly a point in click adventure game though, and being all powerful doesn't get you through the game alone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In every RPG I 've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless , and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod .
Starting the next game out with god like powers is going to ruin a lot of the game.The only RPG I 've really found character importation to be nice on was the Quest for Glory series .
It helped that that series was mostly a point in click adventure game though , and being all powerful does n't get you through the game alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In every RPG I've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless, and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod.
Starting the next game out with god like powers is going to ruin a lot of the game.The only RPG I've really found character importation to be nice on was the Quest for Glory series.
It helped that that series was mostly a point in click adventure game though, and being all powerful doesn't get you through the game alone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565141</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>Anonymous Brave Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1246532460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In every RPG I've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless, and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod.</p></div><p>But the power is relative. For example, if you start at level 1 in a D&amp;D style game, sure, your one magic missile or leather armour sucks compared to what you get by the end of the game. But then just because you've got area effect spells and magically enhanced weapons by the end, that doesn't mean the sequel can't have bigger, badder bad guys who are tougher and/or in some way resistant to those attacks, such that you have to develop still more powerful tricks to beat them.</p><p>The Baldur's Gate series made this jump pretty well, twice. Of course your powers by the end of the series would annihilate an entire city full of the bad guys you fought hard against back at the start without breaking a sweat, but by the end of the series you're not fighting against a room full of 3' tall, 20HP monsters with basic shortbows any more.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In every RPG I 've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless , and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod.But the power is relative .
For example , if you start at level 1 in a D&amp;D style game , sure , your one magic missile or leather armour sucks compared to what you get by the end of the game .
But then just because you 've got area effect spells and magically enhanced weapons by the end , that does n't mean the sequel ca n't have bigger , badder bad guys who are tougher and/or in some way resistant to those attacks , such that you have to develop still more powerful tricks to beat them.The Baldur 's Gate series made this jump pretty well , twice .
Of course your powers by the end of the series would annihilate an entire city full of the bad guys you fought hard against back at the start without breaking a sweat , but by the end of the series you 're not fighting against a room full of 3 ' tall , 20HP monsters with basic shortbows any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In every RPG I've ever played you start out pretty weak and helpless, and work your way up to being an unstoppable demigod.But the power is relative.
For example, if you start at level 1 in a D&amp;D style game, sure, your one magic missile or leather armour sucks compared to what you get by the end of the game.
But then just because you've got area effect spells and magically enhanced weapons by the end, that doesn't mean the sequel can't have bigger, badder bad guys who are tougher and/or in some way resistant to those attacks, such that you have to develop still more powerful tricks to beat them.The Baldur's Gate series made this jump pretty well, twice.
Of course your powers by the end of the series would annihilate an entire city full of the bad guys you fought hard against back at the start without breaking a sweat, but by the end of the series you're not fighting against a room full of 3' tall, 20HP monsters with basic shortbows any more.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564129</id>
	<title>Re:how about...</title>
	<author>rujholla</author>
	<datestamp>1246528260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I gave up on tabletop gaming because the mechanics of it are annoying to me.   The endless tables and dice rolls to randomize everything.   Granted the story in online games can't hold a candle to it but it doesn't take hours to lay out the screens and dice and figurines and hex maps to get ready to play.

I think the big point is to each his own. If you prefer tabletop fine, I'll not denigrate that.   But don't expect all people to prefer what you do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I gave up on tabletop gaming because the mechanics of it are annoying to me .
The endless tables and dice rolls to randomize everything .
Granted the story in online games ca n't hold a candle to it but it does n't take hours to lay out the screens and dice and figurines and hex maps to get ready to play .
I think the big point is to each his own .
If you prefer tabletop fine , I 'll not denigrate that .
But do n't expect all people to prefer what you do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I gave up on tabletop gaming because the mechanics of it are annoying to me.
The endless tables and dice rolls to randomize everything.
Granted the story in online games can't hold a candle to it but it doesn't take hours to lay out the screens and dice and figurines and hex maps to get ready to play.
I think the big point is to each his own.
If you prefer tabletop fine, I'll not denigrate that.
But don't expect all people to prefer what you do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566527</id>
	<title>Re:Not just RPGs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246540260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In Eve winning or losing a conflict is more often decided by which side you are on rather than anything to do with what you actually do during the conflict.</p></div><p>pft, sounds like loser talk. there's plenty of ways to make a difference.</p><p>however, yes, in massive battles the contribution of a single individual is often diminished (duh).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Eve winning or losing a conflict is more often decided by which side you are on rather than anything to do with what you actually do during the conflict.pft , sounds like loser talk .
there 's plenty of ways to make a difference.however , yes , in massive battles the contribution of a single individual is often diminished ( duh ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Eve winning or losing a conflict is more often decided by which side you are on rather than anything to do with what you actually do during the conflict.pft, sounds like loser talk.
there's plenty of ways to make a difference.however, yes, in massive battles the contribution of a single individual is often diminished (duh).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561941</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28594031</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246892580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice "Keep on the Borderlands" reference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice " Keep on the Borderlands " reference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice "Keep on the Borderlands" reference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561617</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246563120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the major pitfalls of importing characters is such:</p><p>Oh look, I just beat the game. I have the planet killing weapon. I know levels one, two, and three of every spell. I've got ninety nine's for every item in my inventory. My Gold/Gald/Gil/GP/Etc is maxed out too. I stopped the evil force that was about to (destroy the earth with a meteor)(end mankind and consume time)(open a gate to an evil artificial intelligence to end life)(resurrect an even more scary monster from beyond the grave).</p><p>Let me import my character for the sequel. Aaaaaaannnd, it's all gone. Somehow all of my gear disappeared, I've got to start from the beginning and kill giant spiders, rats, and thugs. My muscles have atrophied, my aim has gone to zero. I've got base vigor (what the fuck is the vigor stat supposed to do, anyways?!), and someone jacked all of my cash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the major pitfalls of importing characters is such : Oh look , I just beat the game .
I have the planet killing weapon .
I know levels one , two , and three of every spell .
I 've got ninety nine 's for every item in my inventory .
My Gold/Gald/Gil/GP/Etc is maxed out too .
I stopped the evil force that was about to ( destroy the earth with a meteor ) ( end mankind and consume time ) ( open a gate to an evil artificial intelligence to end life ) ( resurrect an even more scary monster from beyond the grave ) .Let me import my character for the sequel .
Aaaaaaannnd , it 's all gone .
Somehow all of my gear disappeared , I 've got to start from the beginning and kill giant spiders , rats , and thugs .
My muscles have atrophied , my aim has gone to zero .
I 've got base vigor ( what the fuck is the vigor stat supposed to do , anyways ? !
) , and someone jacked all of my cash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the major pitfalls of importing characters is such:Oh look, I just beat the game.
I have the planet killing weapon.
I know levels one, two, and three of every spell.
I've got ninety nine's for every item in my inventory.
My Gold/Gald/Gil/GP/Etc is maxed out too.
I stopped the evil force that was about to (destroy the earth with a meteor)(end mankind and consume time)(open a gate to an evil artificial intelligence to end life)(resurrect an even more scary monster from beyond the grave).Let me import my character for the sequel.
Aaaaaaannnd, it's all gone.
Somehow all of my gear disappeared, I've got to start from the beginning and kill giant spiders, rats, and thugs.
My muscles have atrophied, my aim has gone to zero.
I've got base vigor (what the fuck is the vigor stat supposed to do, anyways?!
), and someone jacked all of my cash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28567143</id>
	<title>Re:JRPGs are not actually RPGs though</title>
	<author>idlemachine</author>
	<datestamp>1246544760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And your reasoning behind this claim is...?</htmltext>
<tokenext>And your reasoning behind this claim is... ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And your reasoning behind this claim is...?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28570475</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246628100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, all the contrary of Bioshock and their Vital Chambers. I just run into monsters and so, not carrying about ammo or some mana so low I can't use my fireball anymore: who cares, I'll resurrect. That's the dumbest thing ever.</p><p>Sight, I almost</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , all the contrary of Bioshock and their Vital Chambers .
I just run into monsters and so , not carrying about ammo or some mana so low I ca n't use my fireball anymore : who cares , I 'll resurrect .
That 's the dumbest thing ever.Sight , I almost</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, all the contrary of Bioshock and their Vital Chambers.
I just run into monsters and so, not carrying about ammo or some mana so low I can't use my fireball anymore: who cares, I'll resurrect.
That's the dumbest thing ever.Sight, I almost</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562557</id>
	<title>Incomming!!</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1246566240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wait till Homeland Security finds out about this Rocket Propelled Grenade manual.</p><p>You can expect a knock on the door, and Slash dot is going to to FISA court.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait till Homeland Security finds out about this Rocket Propelled Grenade manual.You can expect a knock on the door , and Slash dot is going to to FISA court .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait till Homeland Security finds out about this Rocket Propelled Grenade manual.You can expect a knock on the door, and Slash dot is going to to FISA court.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565935</id>
	<title>Re:Games are too easy now...</title>
	<author>Talgrath</author>
	<datestamp>1246536900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe not everyone wants to spend two hours getting past one level, or having to restart the entire game if you die once; or dying, not because you made some sort of tactical mistake or miscalculation, but because the game randomly threw an impossible task at you.  It's also worth mentioning at the same time that game controls have gotten more responsive and agile comapred to the old days; so maybe part of it (at least with reflex-based games) is that we are working with better equipment.  I know that I played through various old-school Sega games on my PS2 when a collection of them came out and found (most of them) much easier.  I like to be challenged, but I don't want to lose multiple hours of gameplay because I didn't do everything exactly perfect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe not everyone wants to spend two hours getting past one level , or having to restart the entire game if you die once ; or dying , not because you made some sort of tactical mistake or miscalculation , but because the game randomly threw an impossible task at you .
It 's also worth mentioning at the same time that game controls have gotten more responsive and agile comapred to the old days ; so maybe part of it ( at least with reflex-based games ) is that we are working with better equipment .
I know that I played through various old-school Sega games on my PS2 when a collection of them came out and found ( most of them ) much easier .
I like to be challenged , but I do n't want to lose multiple hours of gameplay because I did n't do everything exactly perfect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe not everyone wants to spend two hours getting past one level, or having to restart the entire game if you die once; or dying, not because you made some sort of tactical mistake or miscalculation, but because the game randomly threw an impossible task at you.
It's also worth mentioning at the same time that game controls have gotten more responsive and agile comapred to the old days; so maybe part of it (at least with reflex-based games) is that we are working with better equipment.
I know that I played through various old-school Sega games on my PS2 when a collection of them came out and found (most of them) much easier.
I like to be challenged, but I don't want to lose multiple hours of gameplay because I didn't do everything exactly perfect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983</id>
	<title>JRPGs are not actually RPGs though</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246564440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a misunderstanding that developed somewhere along the way, and I doubt it's ever going to be rectified. I suppose they must be called JRPGs for lack of a better term, but just because they're called that way doesn't mean they actually are RPGs. So they shouldn't be part of this article.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a misunderstanding that developed somewhere along the way , and I doubt it 's ever going to be rectified .
I suppose they must be called JRPGs for lack of a better term , but just because they 're called that way does n't mean they actually are RPGs .
So they should n't be part of this article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a misunderstanding that developed somewhere along the way, and I doubt it's ever going to be rectified.
I suppose they must be called JRPGs for lack of a better term, but just because they're called that way doesn't mean they actually are RPGs.
So they shouldn't be part of this article.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563563</id>
	<title>Hm.</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1246526100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>...this, in a nutshell, is the type of play that has brought us grind, where the journey is simple and boring and the destination is something to be raced to. Nethack and many other roguelikes do feature experience gain, but it doesn't feel like grind.</i> <br> <br>

Sounds like an attempt to prove "the game I like is OBJECTIVELY BETTER than the game you like."  The other RPGs must be doing SOMETHING right, since they are far more popular with a much wider audience.  Nethack is great, but it is not the sole pinnacle of RPG design.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...this , in a nutshell , is the type of play that has brought us grind , where the journey is simple and boring and the destination is something to be raced to .
Nethack and many other roguelikes do feature experience gain , but it does n't feel like grind .
Sounds like an attempt to prove " the game I like is OBJECTIVELY BETTER than the game you like .
" The other RPGs must be doing SOMETHING right , since they are far more popular with a much wider audience .
Nethack is great , but it is not the sole pinnacle of RPG design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...this, in a nutshell, is the type of play that has brought us grind, where the journey is simple and boring and the destination is something to be raced to.
Nethack and many other roguelikes do feature experience gain, but it doesn't feel like grind.
Sounds like an attempt to prove "the game I like is OBJECTIVELY BETTER than the game you like.
"  The other RPGs must be doing SOMETHING right, since they are far more popular with a much wider audience.
Nethack is great, but it is not the sole pinnacle of RPG design.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565239</id>
	<title>Re:worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246532880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>. If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment, then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff. You use melee weapons a lot, your melee skill grows. You use the bow, that grows. But if you don't use staff weapons, then that stat never progresses.</p></div><p>Nothing against your suggestion, but it's been tried and hasn't always worked out for the best. Final Fantasy II (in the Japanese numbering) is a prime example. Implementation probably has something to do with it too, but in my experience, that kind of system doesn't work out.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final\_Fantasy\_II" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final\_Fantasy\_II</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>.
If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment , then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff .
You use melee weapons a lot , your melee skill grows .
You use the bow , that grows .
But if you do n't use staff weapons , then that stat never progresses.Nothing against your suggestion , but it 's been tried and has n't always worked out for the best .
Final Fantasy II ( in the Japanese numbering ) is a prime example .
Implementation probably has something to do with it too , but in my experience , that kind of system does n't work out.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final \ _Fantasy \ _II [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.
If you insist on having personal stats that advance independently of the equipment, then just make it be a linear progression based on the amount of time spent doing stuff.
You use melee weapons a lot, your melee skill grows.
You use the bow, that grows.
But if you don't use staff weapons, then that stat never progresses.Nothing against your suggestion, but it's been tried and hasn't always worked out for the best.
Final Fantasy II (in the Japanese numbering) is a prime example.
Implementation probably has something to do with it too, but in my experience, that kind of system doesn't work out.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final\_Fantasy\_II [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455</id>
	<title>Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1246562580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a long time player of RPG's like the Gold Box series, I really miss the ability to to import characters from earlier games into later installments (mentioned several times in this article). I know there was some talk about Mass Effect 2 or some other RPG's maybe bringing this back. I wish they would. I hate having to recreate a new character in every sequel, when I really just want to play as my original character. Knights of the Old Republic 2 is a great example of a RPG that would have been so much better if you could have simply continued playing as the original Revan instead of some faceless new douchebag.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a long time player of RPG 's like the Gold Box series , I really miss the ability to to import characters from earlier games into later installments ( mentioned several times in this article ) .
I know there was some talk about Mass Effect 2 or some other RPG 's maybe bringing this back .
I wish they would .
I hate having to recreate a new character in every sequel , when I really just want to play as my original character .
Knights of the Old Republic 2 is a great example of a RPG that would have been so much better if you could have simply continued playing as the original Revan instead of some faceless new douchebag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a long time player of RPG's like the Gold Box series, I really miss the ability to to import characters from earlier games into later installments (mentioned several times in this article).
I know there was some talk about Mass Effect 2 or some other RPG's maybe bringing this back.
I wish they would.
I hate having to recreate a new character in every sequel, when I really just want to play as my original character.
Knights of the Old Republic 2 is a great example of a RPG that would have been so much better if you could have simply continued playing as the original Revan instead of some faceless new douchebag.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</id>
	<title>Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246562760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I disagree about nethack not having grind because it has permadeath.  Permadeath in Nethack is the primary reason the game is almost entirely grind.  If you ever find yourself in a situation where death is close, you are playing wrong, in order to succeed in Nethack (or any roguelike for that matter), you have to play conservatively, beating up on things that pose no threat to you while escaping anything that might pose a challenge.  Even if you can beat a challenging monster 95\% of the time, eventually that 5\% will catch up to you and all of your progress will be erased by a small handful of bad rolls.  This is why only obsessives play Nethack, nobody else has the patience to grind their way up to the godlike levels required to survive the games final challenges.<br>
<br>
From the writeup, it sounds like the author is one of the players who never makes it past the mid teens, because he constantly takes risks with his character and will inevitably lose.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree about nethack not having grind because it has permadeath .
Permadeath in Nethack is the primary reason the game is almost entirely grind .
If you ever find yourself in a situation where death is close , you are playing wrong , in order to succeed in Nethack ( or any roguelike for that matter ) , you have to play conservatively , beating up on things that pose no threat to you while escaping anything that might pose a challenge .
Even if you can beat a challenging monster 95 \ % of the time , eventually that 5 \ % will catch up to you and all of your progress will be erased by a small handful of bad rolls .
This is why only obsessives play Nethack , nobody else has the patience to grind their way up to the godlike levels required to survive the games final challenges .
From the writeup , it sounds like the author is one of the players who never makes it past the mid teens , because he constantly takes risks with his character and will inevitably lose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree about nethack not having grind because it has permadeath.
Permadeath in Nethack is the primary reason the game is almost entirely grind.
If you ever find yourself in a situation where death is close, you are playing wrong, in order to succeed in Nethack (or any roguelike for that matter), you have to play conservatively, beating up on things that pose no threat to you while escaping anything that might pose a challenge.
Even if you can beat a challenging monster 95\% of the time, eventually that 5\% will catch up to you and all of your progress will be erased by a small handful of bad rolls.
This is why only obsessives play Nethack, nobody else has the patience to grind their way up to the godlike levels required to survive the games final challenges.
From the writeup, it sounds like the author is one of the players who never makes it past the mid teens, because he constantly takes risks with his character and will inevitably lose.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564883</id>
	<title>Re:worst shortcomings are usually crappy stories</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246531320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like how they did it in the old games "Legacy of the Ancients" and "Legend of Blacksilver".  In those games, leveling up was tied to main quests.  That is, you would only get a level up when you completed one of the main plot quests.  It wouldn't matter whether you slew 0 baddies or 1,000,000; you'd still get the level.</p><p>This was a nice system both for the player and the game designer, largely for the same reason:  Whatever level you were, you were a high enough level to beat the current quest.  That doesn't mean winning was a "foregone conclusion," though--you could still get hopelessly lost, or get stuck on a puzzle, or screw up and die, or simply not know what to do next.</p><p>Put another way, those two games still offered the pellet of a character advancement, they just didn't make the player press the same lever 1000 times to get it.</p><p>They also had the "advancement through equipment" mechanic you describe, although that, too, was largely tied to completing main quests.</p><p>(You could improve your character outside of the main quest through various mini-games of skill.  Those avoided being grinds because the improvement was absolute, not incremental.  That is, if you got 60\% of the way through a mini-game, your total improvement for some stat would be 60\% of the maximum improvement that mini-game could give you.  Repeatedly getting 60\% of the way through the mini-game would not accumulate improvements.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like how they did it in the old games " Legacy of the Ancients " and " Legend of Blacksilver " .
In those games , leveling up was tied to main quests .
That is , you would only get a level up when you completed one of the main plot quests .
It would n't matter whether you slew 0 baddies or 1,000,000 ; you 'd still get the level.This was a nice system both for the player and the game designer , largely for the same reason : Whatever level you were , you were a high enough level to beat the current quest .
That does n't mean winning was a " foregone conclusion , " though--you could still get hopelessly lost , or get stuck on a puzzle , or screw up and die , or simply not know what to do next.Put another way , those two games still offered the pellet of a character advancement , they just did n't make the player press the same lever 1000 times to get it.They also had the " advancement through equipment " mechanic you describe , although that , too , was largely tied to completing main quests .
( You could improve your character outside of the main quest through various mini-games of skill .
Those avoided being grinds because the improvement was absolute , not incremental .
That is , if you got 60 \ % of the way through a mini-game , your total improvement for some stat would be 60 \ % of the maximum improvement that mini-game could give you .
Repeatedly getting 60 \ % of the way through the mini-game would not accumulate improvements .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like how they did it in the old games "Legacy of the Ancients" and "Legend of Blacksilver".
In those games, leveling up was tied to main quests.
That is, you would only get a level up when you completed one of the main plot quests.
It wouldn't matter whether you slew 0 baddies or 1,000,000; you'd still get the level.This was a nice system both for the player and the game designer, largely for the same reason:  Whatever level you were, you were a high enough level to beat the current quest.
That doesn't mean winning was a "foregone conclusion," though--you could still get hopelessly lost, or get stuck on a puzzle, or screw up and die, or simply not know what to do next.Put another way, those two games still offered the pellet of a character advancement, they just didn't make the player press the same lever 1000 times to get it.They also had the "advancement through equipment" mechanic you describe, although that, too, was largely tied to completing main quests.
(You could improve your character outside of the main quest through various mini-games of skill.
Those avoided being grinds because the improvement was absolute, not incremental.
That is, if you got 60\% of the way through a mini-game, your total improvement for some stat would be 60\% of the maximum improvement that mini-game could give you.
Repeatedly getting 60\% of the way through the mini-game would not accumulate improvements.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562911</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>Nathrael</author>
	<datestamp>1246567260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Baldur's Gate 2 did it fairly well. You either imported your high-level char from BG1, or you started out with a lot of EXP when creating a new char.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Baldur 's Gate 2 did it fairly well .
You either imported your high-level char from BG1 , or you started out with a lot of EXP when creating a new char .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Baldur's Gate 2 did it fairly well.
You either imported your high-level char from BG1, or you started out with a lot of EXP when creating a new char.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562485</id>
	<title>Re:What makes Japanese games tick</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1246566060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>1) A young naive protagonist who is resourceful and scrappy but not particularly strong.<br>2) gets caught up in a fight against an evil (organization, company, religion, empire, conspiracy)<br>3) requiring him to leave his small village<br>4) and gradually explore parts of the world on a linear path<br>5) until he eventually gets free roaming of the entire world<br>6) and eventually goes to visit outer space or time shift<br>7) on the way to fight the proto enemy, who turns out not be the real enemy<br>8) and eventually reaches the real, final enemy</i></p><p>What you just described there is referred to by mythologists as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth" title="wikipedia.org">the Hero's Journey</a> [wikipedia.org] and can be found in everything from Gilgamesh to Star Wars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) A young naive protagonist who is resourceful and scrappy but not particularly strong.2 ) gets caught up in a fight against an evil ( organization , company , religion , empire , conspiracy ) 3 ) requiring him to leave his small village4 ) and gradually explore parts of the world on a linear path5 ) until he eventually gets free roaming of the entire world6 ) and eventually goes to visit outer space or time shift7 ) on the way to fight the proto enemy , who turns out not be the real enemy8 ) and eventually reaches the real , final enemyWhat you just described there is referred to by mythologists as the Hero 's Journey [ wikipedia.org ] and can be found in everything from Gilgamesh to Star Wars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) A young naive protagonist who is resourceful and scrappy but not particularly strong.2) gets caught up in a fight against an evil (organization, company, religion, empire, conspiracy)3) requiring him to leave his small village4) and gradually explore parts of the world on a linear path5) until he eventually gets free roaming of the entire world6) and eventually goes to visit outer space or time shift7) on the way to fight the proto enemy, who turns out not be the real enemy8) and eventually reaches the real, final enemyWhat you just described there is referred to by mythologists as the Hero's Journey [wikipedia.org] and can be found in everything from Gilgamesh to Star Wars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561893</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564541</id>
	<title>I have an idea. . .</title>
	<author>JSBiff</author>
	<datestamp>1246530000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's an idea - not sure if anyone's tried it out (it's sort of a hybrid approach). . .</p><p>1) Have your imported character gimped a little bit (say drop from level X to level X/2 or something - still pretty powerful though). You could explain this as a result of any number of things - from simple inactivity (not been any crises for a few years, so the character got out of shape), or an illness, accident, or some other trauma, or perhaps a result of a magical curse from an enemy or angry god.</p><p>Coupled with:</p><p>2) Allow the character to be imported, but not played until later on in the game. For example, maybe your PC from the previous game acts as an NPC during the beginning of the new game - training your new PC, giving him a quest, etc. Later on, when the new character has progressed to a point where they would be closer to the level of the imported char, the import joins your party or something along those lines. That way, you don't gimp the character all the way back to level 1.</p><p>3) You could then allow the imported character to eventually become more powerful than before the import (raised level cap, etc).</p><p>The question then becomes what to do for players who don't have a character to import? Maybe provide a couple pre-fab import characters to fill that role.</p><p>I dunno, it's a thought, anyhow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's an idea - not sure if anyone 's tried it out ( it 's sort of a hybrid approach ) .
. .1 ) Have your imported character gimped a little bit ( say drop from level X to level X/2 or something - still pretty powerful though ) .
You could explain this as a result of any number of things - from simple inactivity ( not been any crises for a few years , so the character got out of shape ) , or an illness , accident , or some other trauma , or perhaps a result of a magical curse from an enemy or angry god.Coupled with : 2 ) Allow the character to be imported , but not played until later on in the game .
For example , maybe your PC from the previous game acts as an NPC during the beginning of the new game - training your new PC , giving him a quest , etc .
Later on , when the new character has progressed to a point where they would be closer to the level of the imported char , the import joins your party or something along those lines .
That way , you do n't gimp the character all the way back to level 1.3 ) You could then allow the imported character to eventually become more powerful than before the import ( raised level cap , etc ) .The question then becomes what to do for players who do n't have a character to import ?
Maybe provide a couple pre-fab import characters to fill that role.I dunno , it 's a thought , anyhow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's an idea - not sure if anyone's tried it out (it's sort of a hybrid approach).
. .1) Have your imported character gimped a little bit (say drop from level X to level X/2 or something - still pretty powerful though).
You could explain this as a result of any number of things - from simple inactivity (not been any crises for a few years, so the character got out of shape), or an illness, accident, or some other trauma, or perhaps a result of a magical curse from an enemy or angry god.Coupled with:2) Allow the character to be imported, but not played until later on in the game.
For example, maybe your PC from the previous game acts as an NPC during the beginning of the new game - training your new PC, giving him a quest, etc.
Later on, when the new character has progressed to a point where they would be closer to the level of the imported char, the import joins your party or something along those lines.
That way, you don't gimp the character all the way back to level 1.3) You could then allow the imported character to eventually become more powerful than before the import (raised level cap, etc).The question then becomes what to do for players who don't have a character to import?
Maybe provide a couple pre-fab import characters to fill that role.I dunno, it's a thought, anyhow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28567871</id>
	<title>Re:What makes Japanese games tick</title>
	<author>gr4nf</author>
	<datestamp>1246551540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gilgamesh went to outer space? Now I'm regretting just using spark notes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gilgamesh went to outer space ?
Now I 'm regretting just using spark notes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gilgamesh went to outer space?
Now I'm regretting just using spark notes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565691</id>
	<title>Death &amp; Boredom</title>
	<author>Nekomusume</author>
	<datestamp>1246535580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"When you're frequently a heartbeat away from death, it's difficult to become bored."</p><p>Actually, thats one of the main things that made the rogue-like games so boring to me. It never seemed much fun to play a game where every action, no matter how trivial, seemed to come with a decent chance of spontaneous unavoidable death. Some people really get into the challenge, but a lot of people find the constant stream of trivial deaths fairly boring.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" When you 're frequently a heartbeat away from death , it 's difficult to become bored .
" Actually , thats one of the main things that made the rogue-like games so boring to me .
It never seemed much fun to play a game where every action , no matter how trivial , seemed to come with a decent chance of spontaneous unavoidable death .
Some people really get into the challenge , but a lot of people find the constant stream of trivial deaths fairly boring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"When you're frequently a heartbeat away from death, it's difficult to become bored.
"Actually, thats one of the main things that made the rogue-like games so boring to me.
It never seemed much fun to play a game where every action, no matter how trivial, seemed to come with a decent chance of spontaneous unavoidable death.
Some people really get into the challenge, but a lot of people find the constant stream of trivial deaths fairly boring.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569273</id>
	<title>Re:Disagree strongly</title>
	<author>Kreeben</author>
	<datestamp>1246611960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...you have to play conservatively, beating up on things that pose no threat to you...</p></div><p>Kinda like how a successful poker strategy would look like. Always sit at a table where you could loose your whole stack and still not be bothered. In other words, play only opponents that suck, compared to your own abilities. It's not fun, but it keeps you alive. And who said playing games should be fun?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...you have to play conservatively , beating up on things that pose no threat to you...Kinda like how a successful poker strategy would look like .
Always sit at a table where you could loose your whole stack and still not be bothered .
In other words , play only opponents that suck , compared to your own abilities .
It 's not fun , but it keeps you alive .
And who said playing games should be fun ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...you have to play conservatively, beating up on things that pose no threat to you...Kinda like how a successful poker strategy would look like.
Always sit at a table where you could loose your whole stack and still not be bothered.
In other words, play only opponents that suck, compared to your own abilities.
It's not fun, but it keeps you alive.
And who said playing games should be fun?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561871</id>
	<title>Yes, if you only look at the big popular MMOs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246564020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're only looking at EQ/WoW/LoR/etc. then this is all true.<br>They are made to have very limited pvp and limited chance of death or failure.</p><p>But there is an entire genre of MMORPGs devoted to PvP and getting that adrenaline rush from the risk of "sudden catastrophic failure".</p><p>For examples, check out www.darkfallonline.com, www.moralonline.com, and www.pker.org for more info.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're only looking at EQ/WoW/LoR/etc .
then this is all true.They are made to have very limited pvp and limited chance of death or failure.But there is an entire genre of MMORPGs devoted to PvP and getting that adrenaline rush from the risk of " sudden catastrophic failure " .For examples , check out www.darkfallonline.com , www.moralonline.com , and www.pker.org for more info .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're only looking at EQ/WoW/LoR/etc.
then this is all true.They are made to have very limited pvp and limited chance of death or failure.But there is an entire genre of MMORPGs devoted to PvP and getting that adrenaline rush from the risk of "sudden catastrophic failure".For examples, check out www.darkfallonline.com, www.moralonline.com, and www.pker.org for more info.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564003</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246527720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Wizardry series allowed for this. 1-3 was the New Game Has More Powerful Stuff model that we see in MMO's with expansions today.  6-8, however, would reduce your characters levels when imported x\%, with the explanation being that your "experience" in the new setting was only applicable for x\%. Pretty clever, imo. You got to keep your gear, a lot of which could not be obtained if you simply started a new character instead of importing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Wizardry series allowed for this .
1-3 was the New Game Has More Powerful Stuff model that we see in MMO 's with expansions today .
6-8 , however , would reduce your characters levels when imported x \ % , with the explanation being that your " experience " in the new setting was only applicable for x \ % .
Pretty clever , imo .
You got to keep your gear , a lot of which could not be obtained if you simply started a new character instead of importing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Wizardry series allowed for this.
1-3 was the New Game Has More Powerful Stuff model that we see in MMO's with expansions today.
6-8, however, would reduce your characters levels when imported x\%, with the explanation being that your "experience" in the new setting was only applicable for x\%.
Pretty clever, imo.
You got to keep your gear, a lot of which could not be obtained if you simply started a new character instead of importing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563391</id>
	<title>Re:Importing characters from earlier games</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1246525500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, IIRC, many of the old games that used to allow it did it like this:
</p><p>4. Allow you to keep your level 30, super badass character and scale up the games with new (much tougher) enemies, new spells/skills to acquire, etc. This is similar to #1, but to allow newbie to come in, it allows a new player to create a new character who is the equivalent of a level 30 badass from the first game.
</p><p>
That way, whether you're a veteran who wants to keep his old character or a newbie to the franchise, you can both get to enjoy it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , IIRC , many of the old games that used to allow it did it like this : 4 .
Allow you to keep your level 30 , super badass character and scale up the games with new ( much tougher ) enemies , new spells/skills to acquire , etc .
This is similar to # 1 , but to allow newbie to come in , it allows a new player to create a new character who is the equivalent of a level 30 badass from the first game .
That way , whether you 're a veteran who wants to keep his old character or a newbie to the franchise , you can both get to enjoy it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, IIRC, many of the old games that used to allow it did it like this:
4.
Allow you to keep your level 30, super badass character and scale up the games with new (much tougher) enemies, new spells/skills to acquire, etc.
This is similar to #1, but to allow newbie to come in, it allows a new player to create a new character who is the equivalent of a level 30 badass from the first game.
That way, whether you're a veteran who wants to keep his old character or a newbie to the franchise, you can both get to enjoy it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562265</id>
	<title>No NWN?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246565400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean, what? And no, it's not "a Baldur's Gate sequel". It's a unique game, driven mainly by user content, "firefox of RPGs" if you like it.</p><p>Wait, I cannot find Fallout, too. Is this a joke?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , what ?
And no , it 's not " a Baldur 's Gate sequel " .
It 's a unique game , driven mainly by user content , " firefox of RPGs " if you like it.Wait , I can not find Fallout , too .
Is this a joke ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, what?
And no, it's not "a Baldur's Gate sequel".
It's a unique game, driven mainly by user content, "firefox of RPGs" if you like it.Wait, I cannot find Fallout, too.
Is this a joke?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562823</id>
	<title>Re:Role Playing</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1246566960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>... and doubtless they're so proud of being real men that they proclaim this openly, right anonymous coward?</htmltext>
<tokenext>... and doubtless they 're so proud of being real men that they proclaim this openly , right anonymous coward ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and doubtless they're so proud of being real men that they proclaim this openly, right anonymous coward?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561745</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564203
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28568779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565875
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569273
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566027
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28571519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28580099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28594031
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562043
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28568383
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562245
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28571821
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562863
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28568123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563383
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561617
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562969
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564975
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563105
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28567871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566323
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565935
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28567143
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566221
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566517
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563507
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564003
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561507
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566527
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566921
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28579693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564333
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564287
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28570475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28573625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28609409
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566635
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28582819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28567869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564143
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_1557227_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563881
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564475
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561507
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561941
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566527
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561685
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561983
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28568123
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28582819
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28567143
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566323
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562525
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563383
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28568383
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563105
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565239
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561617
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562063
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564975
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562911
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28567869
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563881
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564541
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563391
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561859
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566635
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564203
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564003
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562979
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565141
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563507
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28568779
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562969
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561871
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564333
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564143
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566027
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28580099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564287
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28571519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565935
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561739
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28570475
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565875
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561995
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28573625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561965
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566175
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566921
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569121
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28609409
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561845
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562933
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562265
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564835
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564129
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561437
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561613
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562043
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562185
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28564595
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28594031
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561745
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566517
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28563049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562245
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562275
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561647
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28569579
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561441
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28579693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28562485
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28567871
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28571821
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28565643
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_1557227.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28561553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_1557227.28566221
</commentlist>
</conversation>
