<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_21_0718239</id>
	<title>A Look At How Far PC Gaming Has Come</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1256120700000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Bit-tech is running a feature examining <a href="http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2009/10/19/how-far-has-pc-gaming-come/1">the progress PC games have made over the past couple decades</a>. The article highlights aspects of modern games we often take for granted or nitpick, and compares them to earlier games in which such features were implemented poorly or not at all. Quoting:
<i>"<em>Doom's</em> legacy is still being felt today in fact and it's a fair bet that you can take any shooter off a shelf, from <em>America&rsquo;s Army</em> to <em>Zeno Clash</em>, examine it, and list a dozen things that those games owe to <em>Doom</em>. Things like the wobble of the guns and the on-screen feedback that tells you which direction you are being shot from &mdash; these were things that id Software invented. On the other hand, from a story perspective, <em>Doom</em> was absolutely rubbish. You start in a room, no idea what&rsquo;s going on and you are surrounded by demons. You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all &mdash; something modern games would get heavily slated for doing. Yet the idea that plot was optional caught on and the same flaw was replicated in other games of the era, such as <em>Quake</em> and (to a lesser extent) <em>Duke Nukem 3D</em>. There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bit-tech is running a feature examining the progress PC games have made over the past couple decades .
The article highlights aspects of modern games we often take for granted or nitpick , and compares them to earlier games in which such features were implemented poorly or not at all .
Quoting : " Doom 's legacy is still being felt today in fact and it 's a fair bet that you can take any shooter off a shelf , from America    s Army to Zeno Clash , examine it , and list a dozen things that those games owe to Doom .
Things like the wobble of the guns and the on-screen feedback that tells you which direction you are being shot from    these were things that id Software invented .
On the other hand , from a story perspective , Doom was absolutely rubbish .
You start in a room , no idea what    s going on and you are surrounded by demons .
You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all    something modern games would get heavily slated for doing .
Yet the idea that plot was optional caught on and the same flaw was replicated in other games of the era , such as Quake and ( to a lesser extent ) Duke Nukem 3D .
There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bit-tech is running a feature examining the progress PC games have made over the past couple decades.
The article highlights aspects of modern games we often take for granted or nitpick, and compares them to earlier games in which such features were implemented poorly or not at all.
Quoting:
"Doom's legacy is still being felt today in fact and it's a fair bet that you can take any shooter off a shelf, from America’s Army to Zeno Clash, examine it, and list a dozen things that those games owe to Doom.
Things like the wobble of the guns and the on-screen feedback that tells you which direction you are being shot from — these were things that id Software invented.
On the other hand, from a story perspective, Doom was absolutely rubbish.
You start in a room, no idea what’s going on and you are surrounded by demons.
You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all — something modern games would get heavily slated for doing.
Yet the idea that plot was optional caught on and the same flaw was replicated in other games of the era, such as Quake and (to a lesser extent) Duke Nukem 3D.
There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821429</id>
	<title>play operation flashpoint 2</title>
	<author>spyder-implee</author>
	<datestamp>1256127600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and you will realise it's actually gone backwards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>and you will realise it 's actually gone backwards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and you will realise it's actually gone backwards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823813</id>
	<title>Re:Doom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256141940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's no exclamation mark, you fucking idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no exclamation mark , you fucking idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no exclamation mark, you fucking idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821683</id>
	<title>Good Old Marathon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256129940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first FPS that had a good story, and consequently great co-op play, was the Marathon Trilogy--the first of which was released about the same time as Doom II.  It also had an amazing level and physics editor, as well as water, flight, tracking missiles, beautiful graphics (so long as you didn't get too close to anything), power-ups, interesting baddies with great sounds and even some good AI, and a real 3d environment--elevators and all--radar, great gore, etc.  There really was no other game comparable to it, especially for creative, intelligent types who enjoyed FPS--unlike any other FPS at the time, you could play it tactically.  Strangely, the one thing it did lack was the ability to jump.

By the time it was ported Windows, there wasn't much interest.

And then Microsoft bought Bungie...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first FPS that had a good story , and consequently great co-op play , was the Marathon Trilogy--the first of which was released about the same time as Doom II .
It also had an amazing level and physics editor , as well as water , flight , tracking missiles , beautiful graphics ( so long as you did n't get too close to anything ) , power-ups , interesting baddies with great sounds and even some good AI , and a real 3d environment--elevators and all--radar , great gore , etc .
There really was no other game comparable to it , especially for creative , intelligent types who enjoyed FPS--unlike any other FPS at the time , you could play it tactically .
Strangely , the one thing it did lack was the ability to jump .
By the time it was ported Windows , there was n't much interest .
And then Microsoft bought Bungie.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first FPS that had a good story, and consequently great co-op play, was the Marathon Trilogy--the first of which was released about the same time as Doom II.
It also had an amazing level and physics editor, as well as water, flight, tracking missiles, beautiful graphics (so long as you didn't get too close to anything), power-ups, interesting baddies with great sounds and even some good AI, and a real 3d environment--elevators and all--radar, great gore, etc.
There really was no other game comparable to it, especially for creative, intelligent types who enjoyed FPS--unlike any other FPS at the time, you could play it tactically.
Strangely, the one thing it did lack was the ability to jump.
By the time it was ported Windows, there wasn't much interest.
And then Microsoft bought Bungie...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29831543</id>
	<title>Re:Totally disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256141760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you like mindless action in an FPS, try Serious Sam and Serious Sam Second Encounter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you like mindless action in an FPS , try Serious Sam and Serious Sam Second Encounter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you like mindless action in an FPS, try Serious Sam and Serious Sam Second Encounter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821251</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821519</id>
	<title>Re:Doom3</title>
	<author>beelsebob</author>
	<datestamp>1256128500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're right about Doom3, except for being the first, the first with true black-on-black rendering was Gears of War.  Nothing like Black guys with black guns wearing black clothes shooting black aliens in a black city that's so covered by black smoke that all you can see is pure pitch black to set the "atmosphere" going.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right about Doom3 , except for being the first , the first with true black-on-black rendering was Gears of War .
Nothing like Black guys with black guns wearing black clothes shooting black aliens in a black city that 's so covered by black smoke that all you can see is pure pitch black to set the " atmosphere " going .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right about Doom3, except for being the first, the first with true black-on-black rendering was Gears of War.
Nothing like Black guys with black guns wearing black clothes shooting black aliens in a black city that's so covered by black smoke that all you can see is pure pitch black to set the "atmosphere" going.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821151</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821209</id>
	<title>Look how far gaming hasn't gone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256125740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a pet peeve of mine, but one thing that barely changed in 20 years is AI. I have played many many RTS and FPS games during the last 20 years and while they're getting nicer graphics and effects, the AI is still the same. As a matter of fact, recent FPS games have dumber AIs than half-life's marines. Nowadays I only play online games because of this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a pet peeve of mine , but one thing that barely changed in 20 years is AI .
I have played many many RTS and FPS games during the last 20 years and while they 're getting nicer graphics and effects , the AI is still the same .
As a matter of fact , recent FPS games have dumber AIs than half-life 's marines .
Nowadays I only play online games because of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a pet peeve of mine, but one thing that barely changed in 20 years is AI.
I have played many many RTS and FPS games during the last 20 years and while they're getting nicer graphics and effects, the AI is still the same.
As a matter of fact, recent FPS games have dumber AIs than half-life's marines.
Nowadays I only play online games because of this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822971</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>coolmoose25</author>
	<datestamp>1256137560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.</p></div></blockquote><p>
This is SO true... I used to play Wolf and then Doom and then Duke Nukem at work at lunch... We'd have 6-8 guys playing on a server and I got pretty good at it.  The ability to strafe sideways while aiming precisely with the mouse was a huge plus...  Eventually I sold out and moved up to management and couldn't play anymore.<br> <br>
I gave up the FPS games after that until recently.  We now have an Xbox 360 and play a lot of 4 player CoD.  I suck.  And it's because of the controller.  There just isn't enough precision in the joysticks on the controller and no way to customize them.<br> <br>
Some will say that I just suck and it isn't really the controller.  But I wanted to find out.  I have about 4-5 PC's in my house and decided to installed the freeware Wolf game.  Graphics are clearly inferior to the CoD game on the Xbox.  But I had my trusty keyboard and mouse available to me again.  So we all started playing it when the Xbox was gone.  ( we were borrowing it at the time).  I rocked.  Nobody could beat me.  The same people that fragged me to no end on CoD were just meat to me.<br> <br>'
Maybe I'm just controller ethnocentristic.  And maybe my opponents are too.  But I'll take a mouse and keyboard any day over the Xbox controller.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller .
This is SO true... I used to play Wolf and then Doom and then Duke Nukem at work at lunch... We 'd have 6-8 guys playing on a server and I got pretty good at it .
The ability to strafe sideways while aiming precisely with the mouse was a huge plus... Eventually I sold out and moved up to management and could n't play anymore .
I gave up the FPS games after that until recently .
We now have an Xbox 360 and play a lot of 4 player CoD .
I suck .
And it 's because of the controller .
There just is n't enough precision in the joysticks on the controller and no way to customize them .
Some will say that I just suck and it is n't really the controller .
But I wanted to find out .
I have about 4-5 PC 's in my house and decided to installed the freeware Wolf game .
Graphics are clearly inferior to the CoD game on the Xbox .
But I had my trusty keyboard and mouse available to me again .
So we all started playing it when the Xbox was gone .
( we were borrowing it at the time ) .
I rocked .
Nobody could beat me .
The same people that fragged me to no end on CoD were just meat to me .
' Maybe I 'm just controller ethnocentristic .
And maybe my opponents are too .
But I 'll take a mouse and keyboard any day over the Xbox controller .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.
This is SO true... I used to play Wolf and then Doom and then Duke Nukem at work at lunch... We'd have 6-8 guys playing on a server and I got pretty good at it.
The ability to strafe sideways while aiming precisely with the mouse was a huge plus...  Eventually I sold out and moved up to management and couldn't play anymore.
I gave up the FPS games after that until recently.
We now have an Xbox 360 and play a lot of 4 player CoD.
I suck.
And it's because of the controller.
There just isn't enough precision in the joysticks on the controller and no way to customize them.
Some will say that I just suck and it isn't really the controller.
But I wanted to find out.
I have about 4-5 PC's in my house and decided to installed the freeware Wolf game.
Graphics are clearly inferior to the CoD game on the Xbox.
But I had my trusty keyboard and mouse available to me again.
So we all started playing it when the Xbox was gone.
( we were borrowing it at the time).
I rocked.
Nobody could beat me.
The same people that fragged me to no end on CoD were just meat to me.
'
Maybe I'm just controller ethnocentristic.
And maybe my opponents are too.
But I'll take a mouse and keyboard any day over the Xbox controller.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824739</id>
	<title>What I've learned.</title>
	<author>Nekomusume</author>
	<datestamp>1256146380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apparently FPS games are the only real computer games. Because there's no way anyone grew up on RPGs, strategy games, adventure games, sports games, driving games or what have you. Nope. Doom is the mother of all games, and it's derrivatives are representative of the entire gaming industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently FPS games are the only real computer games .
Because there 's no way anyone grew up on RPGs , strategy games , adventure games , sports games , driving games or what have you .
Nope. Doom is the mother of all games , and it 's derrivatives are representative of the entire gaming industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently FPS games are the only real computer games.
Because there's no way anyone grew up on RPGs, strategy games, adventure games, sports games, driving games or what have you.
Nope. Doom is the mother of all games, and it's derrivatives are representative of the entire gaming industry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823469</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1256140260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>11.5 Million WOW players may disagree at the very least. That is ONE game.</p><p>Proportionally you may be right with the percentage of PC VS Console changing... That is the ratio, however the actual numbers should be increasing with increased penetration marginal that it may be compared to consoles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>11.5 Million WOW players may disagree at the very least .
That is ONE game.Proportionally you may be right with the percentage of PC VS Console changing... That is the ratio , however the actual numbers should be increasing with increased penetration marginal that it may be compared to consoles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>11.5 Million WOW players may disagree at the very least.
That is ONE game.Proportionally you may be right with the percentage of PC VS Console changing... That is the ratio, however the actual numbers should be increasing with increased penetration marginal that it may be compared to consoles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821497</id>
	<title>An earlier article...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256128260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Chess's legacy is still being felt today in fact and it's a fair bet that you can take any board game off a shelf, from Cluedo to Monopoly, examine it, and list a dozen things that those games owe to Chess. Things like the wobble of the pieces on the flimsy base board and the cheap plastic moulding in the box that doesn't quite hold the pieces right -- these were things that Chess invented. On the other hand, from a story perspective, Chess was absolutely rubbish. You start at your end of the board, no idea what's going on and you are surrounded by pawns. You have to read the manual and maybe the Wikipedia page to get a grip on it all -- something modern board games would get heavily slated for doing. Yet the idea that plot was optional caught on and the same flaw was replicated in other games of the era, such as Chequers and (to a lesser extent) Backgammon. There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many kinds of pieces capable of making as many totally arbitrary different kinds of moves as possible.</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chess 's legacy is still being felt today in fact and it 's a fair bet that you can take any board game off a shelf , from Cluedo to Monopoly , examine it , and list a dozen things that those games owe to Chess .
Things like the wobble of the pieces on the flimsy base board and the cheap plastic moulding in the box that does n't quite hold the pieces right -- these were things that Chess invented .
On the other hand , from a story perspective , Chess was absolutely rubbish .
You start at your end of the board , no idea what 's going on and you are surrounded by pawns .
You have to read the manual and maybe the Wikipedia page to get a grip on it all -- something modern board games would get heavily slated for doing .
Yet the idea that plot was optional caught on and the same flaw was replicated in other games of the era , such as Chequers and ( to a lesser extent ) Backgammon .
There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many kinds of pieces capable of making as many totally arbitrary different kinds of moves as possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chess's legacy is still being felt today in fact and it's a fair bet that you can take any board game off a shelf, from Cluedo to Monopoly, examine it, and list a dozen things that those games owe to Chess.
Things like the wobble of the pieces on the flimsy base board and the cheap plastic moulding in the box that doesn't quite hold the pieces right -- these were things that Chess invented.
On the other hand, from a story perspective, Chess was absolutely rubbish.
You start at your end of the board, no idea what's going on and you are surrounded by pawns.
You have to read the manual and maybe the Wikipedia page to get a grip on it all -- something modern board games would get heavily slated for doing.
Yet the idea that plot was optional caught on and the same flaw was replicated in other games of the era, such as Chequers and (to a lesser extent) Backgammon.
There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many kinds of pieces capable of making as many totally arbitrary different kinds of moves as possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822627</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>ookaze</author>
	<datestamp>1256136000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And, of course, PC gaming is dying...</p><p>The reason is quite simple : consoles games sell a lot more copies.  Game publishers have no choice but to make a game for console with maybe a PC port.  Especially for AAA titles that need huge teams of artists and programmers to develop the graphics and game engine.</p></div><p>I don't think the reason PC gaming is dying is because console games sell a lot more copies.<br>It's rather because consoles are associated with games, while PC are associated with work.<br>Few people will seek a PC for games when their favorite genre is available on consoles.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Why do console games sell more copies?  One big reason is reduced piracy due to vastly better DRM with a console.  The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC.  Just $300, and any game works immediately without hassle.  The majority of the gamers in the world don't have the patience or knowledge to screw around with the many, many incompatibilities and bugs associated with PC hardware and software.</p></div><p>This boils down to consoles being far more accessible than PC for gaming. Which is the point of videogame consoles.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This wasn't always the case, PC gaming was huge in the 1990s.  However, consoles have 'caught up' to the point that while any given generation of consoles quickly falls behind PCs, the graphics can render to an HDTV which at least approaches the quality of a good PC monitor.  Also, current consoles fully support online gaming about as well as PCs ever did.</p></div><p>This is nonsense. Videogame consoles started taking away the market since the NES in the 1990s, when lots of gaming companies died, EA nearly died because they refused to support consoles and were all on PC, which already had far better graphics.<br>Graphics is not what sells games, history should have taught that to many people in the gaming industry. The NES proved it and now the Wii proved it again. People don't care that it renders with high fidelity or high definition.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.</p></div><p>No, the PC has no edge. Keyboards and mouse are not as accessible as gamepads and wiimotes.<br>Or rather they have an edge for a niche of people. Keyboard and mouse may be better for some game genres, but people are only interested in good enough, not in "the best". And as soon as every genre on PC can have its controls be replaced by a more accessible device on consoles, they will all die. Fortunately that's not the case yet.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes, PC graphics cards are better than current consoles, but that only applies to a small fraction of the available PCs.</p><p>Of course, console's new reign of domination is only going to last until cloud gaming takes off, which should be over the next few years.</p></div><p>LOL no. Consoles always dominated since the NES, and graphics are not the most important thing for games. I wonder how people can still say that while Nintendo DS is cleaning up and people constantly talk about iPhone games.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And , of course , PC gaming is dying...The reason is quite simple : consoles games sell a lot more copies .
Game publishers have no choice but to make a game for console with maybe a PC port .
Especially for AAA titles that need huge teams of artists and programmers to develop the graphics and game engine.I do n't think the reason PC gaming is dying is because console games sell a lot more copies.It 's rather because consoles are associated with games , while PC are associated with work.Few people will seek a PC for games when their favorite genre is available on consoles.Why do console games sell more copies ?
One big reason is reduced piracy due to vastly better DRM with a console .
The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC .
Just $ 300 , and any game works immediately without hassle .
The majority of the gamers in the world do n't have the patience or knowledge to screw around with the many , many incompatibilities and bugs associated with PC hardware and software.This boils down to consoles being far more accessible than PC for gaming .
Which is the point of videogame consoles.This was n't always the case , PC gaming was huge in the 1990s .
However , consoles have 'caught up ' to the point that while any given generation of consoles quickly falls behind PCs , the graphics can render to an HDTV which at least approaches the quality of a good PC monitor .
Also , current consoles fully support online gaming about as well as PCs ever did.This is nonsense .
Videogame consoles started taking away the market since the NES in the 1990s , when lots of gaming companies died , EA nearly died because they refused to support consoles and were all on PC , which already had far better graphics.Graphics is not what sells games , history should have taught that to many people in the gaming industry .
The NES proved it and now the Wii proved it again .
People do n't care that it renders with high fidelity or high definition.The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.No , the PC has no edge .
Keyboards and mouse are not as accessible as gamepads and wiimotes.Or rather they have an edge for a niche of people .
Keyboard and mouse may be better for some game genres , but people are only interested in good enough , not in " the best " .
And as soon as every genre on PC can have its controls be replaced by a more accessible device on consoles , they will all die .
Fortunately that 's not the case yet.Yes , PC graphics cards are better than current consoles , but that only applies to a small fraction of the available PCs.Of course , console 's new reign of domination is only going to last until cloud gaming takes off , which should be over the next few years.LOL no .
Consoles always dominated since the NES , and graphics are not the most important thing for games .
I wonder how people can still say that while Nintendo DS is cleaning up and people constantly talk about iPhone games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And, of course, PC gaming is dying...The reason is quite simple : consoles games sell a lot more copies.
Game publishers have no choice but to make a game for console with maybe a PC port.
Especially for AAA titles that need huge teams of artists and programmers to develop the graphics and game engine.I don't think the reason PC gaming is dying is because console games sell a lot more copies.It's rather because consoles are associated with games, while PC are associated with work.Few people will seek a PC for games when their favorite genre is available on consoles.Why do console games sell more copies?
One big reason is reduced piracy due to vastly better DRM with a console.
The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC.
Just $300, and any game works immediately without hassle.
The majority of the gamers in the world don't have the patience or knowledge to screw around with the many, many incompatibilities and bugs associated with PC hardware and software.This boils down to consoles being far more accessible than PC for gaming.
Which is the point of videogame consoles.This wasn't always the case, PC gaming was huge in the 1990s.
However, consoles have 'caught up' to the point that while any given generation of consoles quickly falls behind PCs, the graphics can render to an HDTV which at least approaches the quality of a good PC monitor.
Also, current consoles fully support online gaming about as well as PCs ever did.This is nonsense.
Videogame consoles started taking away the market since the NES in the 1990s, when lots of gaming companies died, EA nearly died because they refused to support consoles and were all on PC, which already had far better graphics.Graphics is not what sells games, history should have taught that to many people in the gaming industry.
The NES proved it and now the Wii proved it again.
People don't care that it renders with high fidelity or high definition.The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.No, the PC has no edge.
Keyboards and mouse are not as accessible as gamepads and wiimotes.Or rather they have an edge for a niche of people.
Keyboard and mouse may be better for some game genres, but people are only interested in good enough, not in "the best".
And as soon as every genre on PC can have its controls be replaced by a more accessible device on consoles, they will all die.
Fortunately that's not the case yet.Yes, PC graphics cards are better than current consoles, but that only applies to a small fraction of the available PCs.Of course, console's new reign of domination is only going to last until cloud gaming takes off, which should be over the next few years.LOL no.
Consoles always dominated since the NES, and graphics are not the most important thing for games.
I wonder how people can still say that while Nintendo DS is cleaning up and people constantly talk about iPhone games.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822895</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>Dripdry</author>
	<datestamp>1256137260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No new types of gameplay? What about building games like World of Goo? Word games like Thomas and the Magic Words?<br>There have been trippy, weird tries at games that are 4 or 8 bit, too. How about Tower Defense games?</p><p>Small, Independent publishers are as healthy as ever, IMO. They release games for $15 or $20 and see if they can make it.<br>I'd say we're actually in the second Golden Age of Gaming, even. We have new adventure games ("Ben There, Dan That" and others), shooters like Rrootage, and other weird stuff on Kongregate (not the pinnacle of gaming, but still good for small publishers)</p><p>There's been progress, but it needs to be sought out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No new types of gameplay ?
What about building games like World of Goo ?
Word games like Thomas and the Magic Words ? There have been trippy , weird tries at games that are 4 or 8 bit , too .
How about Tower Defense games ? Small , Independent publishers are as healthy as ever , IMO .
They release games for $ 15 or $ 20 and see if they can make it.I 'd say we 're actually in the second Golden Age of Gaming , even .
We have new adventure games ( " Ben There , Dan That " and others ) , shooters like Rrootage , and other weird stuff on Kongregate ( not the pinnacle of gaming , but still good for small publishers ) There 's been progress , but it needs to be sought out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No new types of gameplay?
What about building games like World of Goo?
Word games like Thomas and the Magic Words?There have been trippy, weird tries at games that are 4 or 8 bit, too.
How about Tower Defense games?Small, Independent publishers are as healthy as ever, IMO.
They release games for $15 or $20 and see if they can make it.I'd say we're actually in the second Golden Age of Gaming, even.
We have new adventure games ("Ben There, Dan That" and others), shooters like Rrootage, and other weird stuff on Kongregate (not the pinnacle of gaming, but still good for small publishers)There's been progress, but it needs to be sought out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823841</id>
	<title>Re:Only starts at Doom?</title>
	<author>Stupid McStupidson</author>
	<datestamp>1256142180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext> Yes, I remember my brother and I badgering our dad to get a soundcard put into the PC so we could hear Wing Commander. Oh, glorious day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I remember my brother and I badgering our dad to get a soundcard put into the PC so we could hear Wing Commander .
Oh , glorious day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Yes, I remember my brother and I badgering our dad to get a soundcard put into the PC so we could hear Wing Commander.
Oh, glorious day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821435</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826413</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take a look at egosoft's X series: http://www.egosoft.com/games/x3tc/info\_en.php<br>While it is quite complicated at first, it definitely pays homage to older exploratory space games like Elite.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take a look at egosoft 's X series : http : //www.egosoft.com/games/x3tc/info \ _en.phpWhile it is quite complicated at first , it definitely pays homage to older exploratory space games like Elite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take a look at egosoft's X series: http://www.egosoft.com/games/x3tc/info\_en.phpWhile it is quite complicated at first, it definitely pays homage to older exploratory space games like Elite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826273</id>
	<title>Re:They still have far to go</title>
	<author>Bat Country</author>
	<datestamp>1256152380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For PC head-to-head back in the day I favored the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spy\_vs.\_Spy\_(computer\_game)" title="wikipedia.org">Spy vs. Spy games</a> [wikipedia.org], Worms, Battle Chess, Archon Ultra, Star Control, Scorched Earth and a few nice short-play hotseat games like Stunts.  Later on in the years, we'd play You Don't Know Jack or Trackmania alongside those old classics.</p><p>Of course, we'd also hook up the Atari 2600 for games like Frogs &amp; Flies, Warlords and Combat. As the years went by, we'd hook up the SNES for Mario Kart, N64 for Goldeneye, Playstation for Bushido Blade, Dreamcast for Powerstone, and now we pretty much play Burnout Paradise, Ragdoll Kung Fu, PAIN, LittleBigPlanet, a few splitscreen co-op shooters and some decent arcade remakes on the PS3.</p><p>The problem with head-to-head gaming on the PC is that there's little point these days - most people don't own a mediacenter PC right now, you're limited on most systems to a single keyboard and a single mouse (in that you cannot expect anybody to have any others) and people don't want to pile around a single little monitor in somebody's den or bedroom when there's a perfectly good TV that they can use with a relatively cheap device with wireless controllers while lounging around the house, or pacing the living room or whatever.</p><p>Hotseat and head-to-head gaming is far from dead, it's just that the PC is not quite as relevant as a gaming system as it used to be - the kinds of games we used to only get on PCs are now coming out on consoles as well, or not at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For PC head-to-head back in the day I favored the Spy vs. Spy games [ wikipedia.org ] , Worms , Battle Chess , Archon Ultra , Star Control , Scorched Earth and a few nice short-play hotseat games like Stunts .
Later on in the years , we 'd play You Do n't Know Jack or Trackmania alongside those old classics.Of course , we 'd also hook up the Atari 2600 for games like Frogs &amp; Flies , Warlords and Combat .
As the years went by , we 'd hook up the SNES for Mario Kart , N64 for Goldeneye , Playstation for Bushido Blade , Dreamcast for Powerstone , and now we pretty much play Burnout Paradise , Ragdoll Kung Fu , PAIN , LittleBigPlanet , a few splitscreen co-op shooters and some decent arcade remakes on the PS3.The problem with head-to-head gaming on the PC is that there 's little point these days - most people do n't own a mediacenter PC right now , you 're limited on most systems to a single keyboard and a single mouse ( in that you can not expect anybody to have any others ) and people do n't want to pile around a single little monitor in somebody 's den or bedroom when there 's a perfectly good TV that they can use with a relatively cheap device with wireless controllers while lounging around the house , or pacing the living room or whatever.Hotseat and head-to-head gaming is far from dead , it 's just that the PC is not quite as relevant as a gaming system as it used to be - the kinds of games we used to only get on PCs are now coming out on consoles as well , or not at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For PC head-to-head back in the day I favored the Spy vs. Spy games [wikipedia.org], Worms, Battle Chess, Archon Ultra, Star Control, Scorched Earth and a few nice short-play hotseat games like Stunts.
Later on in the years, we'd play You Don't Know Jack or Trackmania alongside those old classics.Of course, we'd also hook up the Atari 2600 for games like Frogs &amp; Flies, Warlords and Combat.
As the years went by, we'd hook up the SNES for Mario Kart, N64 for Goldeneye, Playstation for Bushido Blade, Dreamcast for Powerstone, and now we pretty much play Burnout Paradise, Ragdoll Kung Fu, PAIN, LittleBigPlanet, a few splitscreen co-op shooters and some decent arcade remakes on the PS3.The problem with head-to-head gaming on the PC is that there's little point these days - most people don't own a mediacenter PC right now, you're limited on most systems to a single keyboard and a single mouse (in that you cannot expect anybody to have any others) and people don't want to pile around a single little monitor in somebody's den or bedroom when there's a perfectly good TV that they can use with a relatively cheap device with wireless controllers while lounging around the house, or pacing the living room or whatever.Hotseat and head-to-head gaming is far from dead, it's just that the PC is not quite as relevant as a gaming system as it used to be - the kinds of games we used to only get on PCs are now coming out on consoles as well, or not at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821287</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219</id>
	<title>same as life</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256125800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; You start in a room, no idea what's going on [...] You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all</p><p>looks like my own life</p><p>born in room<br>no idea what's going on<br>need to read holy book (manual) to get a grip on it all<br>ans life seems laking sense if I don't follow the book</p><p>at least a game is WYSIWYG<br>which is not the case with life</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; You start in a room , no idea what 's going on [ ... ] You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it alllooks like my own lifeborn in roomno idea what 's going onneed to read holy book ( manual ) to get a grip on it allans life seems laking sense if I do n't follow the bookat least a game is WYSIWYGwhich is not the case with life</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; You start in a room, no idea what's going on [...] You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it alllooks like my own lifeborn in roomno idea what's going onneed to read holy book (manual) to get a grip on it allans life seems laking sense if I don't follow the bookat least a game is WYSIWYGwhich is not the case with life</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823225</id>
	<title>Who needs a story?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256138880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes all the story you need is "The President has been kidnapped by ninjas.  Are you a bad enough dude to rescue the president?"</p><p>Then you just walk to the right and kick some ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes all the story you need is " The President has been kidnapped by ninjas .
Are you a bad enough dude to rescue the president ?
" Then you just walk to the right and kick some ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes all the story you need is "The President has been kidnapped by ninjas.
Are you a bad enough dude to rescue the president?
"Then you just walk to the right and kick some ass.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821937</id>
	<title>Re:same as life</title>
	<author>sharkey</author>
	<datestamp>1256131800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>You start in a room, no idea what's going on [...] You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all</em> </p><p>

Damn straight!  What kind of game would start with such a vague premise?</p><blockquote><div><p>Welcome to Zork.<br>
West of House.<br>
You are in an open field west of a big white house<br>
with a boarded front door.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You start in a room , no idea what 's going on [ ... ] You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all Damn straight !
What kind of game would start with such a vague premise ? Welcome to Zork .
West of House .
You are in an open field west of a big white house with a boarded front door .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> You start in a room, no idea what's going on [...] You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all 

Damn straight!
What kind of game would start with such a vague premise?Welcome to Zork.
West of House.
You are in an open field west of a big white house
with a boarded front door.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823885</id>
	<title>Early Puzzle games and graphics</title>
	<author>realsilly</author>
	<datestamp>1256142420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many of the early puzzle games had decent graphics, they were pretty darn nice for their day.  Take a look at "Think Cross", simple but elegant.  Dave 2 was rudimentary graphics with a simple plot to get through the haunted house, but so what, it was fun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many of the early puzzle games had decent graphics , they were pretty darn nice for their day .
Take a look at " Think Cross " , simple but elegant .
Dave 2 was rudimentary graphics with a simple plot to get through the haunted house , but so what , it was fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many of the early puzzle games had decent graphics, they were pretty darn nice for their day.
Take a look at "Think Cross", simple but elegant.
Dave 2 was rudimentary graphics with a simple plot to get through the haunted house, but so what, it was fun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826885</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1256154660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your problem is that you're only thinking of large, AAA titles like Modern Warfare 2 or Diablo 3. Take a look at devs such as Tripwire and you'll see that the cost/benefit ratio isn't so clear-cut for all devs.</p><p>And then you have the niche titles, of the kind that'd never sell enough copies on console to pay for the development fees, let alone generate a profit: hardcore strategy/political simulations like Hearts of Iron 3, hardcore driving simulations like Live for Speed, hardcore flight simulators like X-Plane, games that in general cater to an older, mature crowd that likely already owns a good PC by virtue of their work and only need a $50 GPU to play and is unwilling, either by its expense or stigma, to purchase a console regardless.</p><p>Sure, in the long term we may lose all the kid-oriented style-over-substance titles like Crysis, but who cares? I don't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your problem is that you 're only thinking of large , AAA titles like Modern Warfare 2 or Diablo 3 .
Take a look at devs such as Tripwire and you 'll see that the cost/benefit ratio is n't so clear-cut for all devs.And then you have the niche titles , of the kind that 'd never sell enough copies on console to pay for the development fees , let alone generate a profit : hardcore strategy/political simulations like Hearts of Iron 3 , hardcore driving simulations like Live for Speed , hardcore flight simulators like X-Plane , games that in general cater to an older , mature crowd that likely already owns a good PC by virtue of their work and only need a $ 50 GPU to play and is unwilling , either by its expense or stigma , to purchase a console regardless.Sure , in the long term we may lose all the kid-oriented style-over-substance titles like Crysis , but who cares ?
I do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your problem is that you're only thinking of large, AAA titles like Modern Warfare 2 or Diablo 3.
Take a look at devs such as Tripwire and you'll see that the cost/benefit ratio isn't so clear-cut for all devs.And then you have the niche titles, of the kind that'd never sell enough copies on console to pay for the development fees, let alone generate a profit: hardcore strategy/political simulations like Hearts of Iron 3, hardcore driving simulations like Live for Speed, hardcore flight simulators like X-Plane, games that in general cater to an older, mature crowd that likely already owns a good PC by virtue of their work and only need a $50 GPU to play and is unwilling, either by its expense or stigma, to purchase a console regardless.Sure, in the long term we may lose all the kid-oriented style-over-substance titles like Crysis, but who cares?
I don't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29829715</id>
	<title>story?</title>
	<author>pbjones</author>
	<datestamp>1256124900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's a game, part of the game was finding out what was going on and getting to an end. It (they) didn't need some intro/story to get you in the mood. BAH!! I think of DOOM as something that HAD been ported to almost every hardware platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's a game , part of the game was finding out what was going on and getting to an end .
It ( they ) did n't need some intro/story to get you in the mood .
BAH ! ! I think of DOOM as something that HAD been ported to almost every hardware platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's a game, part of the game was finding out what was going on and getting to an end.
It (they) didn't need some intro/story to get you in the mood.
BAH!! I think of DOOM as something that HAD been ported to almost every hardware platform.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825867</id>
	<title>Re:Doom</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1256150820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Prior to DOOM!, most decent PC games were available for Amiga / Atari ST, with better sound and graphics. Wolfenstein looked like a poor Amiga game.</i></p><p>I dunno, looking at Wolf3d (1992) on the PC and Robocop 3 (1992) on the Amiga, I'll take Wolf3d.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Prior to DOOM ! , most decent PC games were available for Amiga / Atari ST , with better sound and graphics .
Wolfenstein looked like a poor Amiga game.I dunno , looking at Wolf3d ( 1992 ) on the PC and Robocop 3 ( 1992 ) on the Amiga , I 'll take Wolf3d .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prior to DOOM!, most decent PC games were available for Amiga / Atari ST, with better sound and graphics.
Wolfenstein looked like a poor Amiga game.I dunno, looking at Wolf3d (1992) on the PC and Robocop 3 (1992) on the Amiga, I'll take Wolf3d.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821461</id>
	<title>Who needs a story line?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256127900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PONG didn't have a story line either, and what's good enough for PONG is good enough for me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PONG did n't have a story line either , and what 's good enough for PONG is good enough for me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PONG didn't have a story line either, and what's good enough for PONG is good enough for me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832235</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1256151660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And, of course, PC gaming is dying...</p></div></blockquote><p>

and, Civilisation is on consoles? PC gaming is not dying so long as 16 million copies of the SIMs are sold and there are 11 million subscribers to WOW or the greats like Starcraft and Half Life are being produced. Look at the stats for L4D, most players are on PC because the PC is a better platform for that kind of game. PC gaming has a long history, I can play games from the DOS era on my newest gaming PC (thanks GOG).<br> <br>

PC games are more profitable per unit, so much so they sell for A$10 less then their console cousins here in Australia. So even with decreased development costs the licensing costs on consoles are so high (because console hardware is sold at a loss and made up for by licensing fees) and the profit margin is down. 2K made more with Civ IV on PC then MS did with Halo 3 on Xbox despite Halo 3 having almost twice the sales. What the development costs never take into account is the licensing costs, the SDK's for DirectX are free, the dev tools are considerably less and you do not have to pay a fee per unit produced. This is another case of games are easier to code for Xbox but easier to produce for PC.<br> <br>

Also there are several genre's that will never be playable on a console such as RTS, FPS (Admit it), TBS and dedicated simulators (Flight, Rail, anything that requires more then 4 buttons). These are quite profitable markets for small developers like Stardock, JoWood and so on. The independent games industry just doesnt exist on consoles and this is mainly due to the high cost of entry.<br> <br>

There is also the direction in which consoles are going to consider, the clear winner of the 7th generation of consoles was the least powerful and cheapest console crappiest graphics. Not that I'm complaining but as a dedicated PC gamer even I have a Wii, they are just too much fun with friends around. Whilst the top selling Xbox 360 game sold 8 million the top 5 selling Wii games sold more. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_best-selling\_video\_games" title="wikipedia.org">See for your self</a> [wikipedia.org]. The PS3 has barely managed a paltry 3.8 million copies for its best game, we can safely say that the PS3 is the loser out of this round and re-releasing the hardware wont help.<br> <br>

MS has taken note of the Wii's unbridled success and the next Xbox will be a cheaper, less powerful Wii clone (the Xii? if MS is a master of anything it's copying) built for the casual market. This is what is with things like Natal. Sony I think will stick it out with their "hardcore" fans for the PS4 and there probably wont be much of a PS5 to speak of. Real dedicated gaming will go back to the PC's as consoles rediscover what they were always about, simple fun casual games.<br> <br>

So rumours of the Gaming PC's death are greatly exaggerated.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And , of course , PC gaming is dying.. . and , Civilisation is on consoles ?
PC gaming is not dying so long as 16 million copies of the SIMs are sold and there are 11 million subscribers to WOW or the greats like Starcraft and Half Life are being produced .
Look at the stats for L4D , most players are on PC because the PC is a better platform for that kind of game .
PC gaming has a long history , I can play games from the DOS era on my newest gaming PC ( thanks GOG ) .
PC games are more profitable per unit , so much so they sell for A $ 10 less then their console cousins here in Australia .
So even with decreased development costs the licensing costs on consoles are so high ( because console hardware is sold at a loss and made up for by licensing fees ) and the profit margin is down .
2K made more with Civ IV on PC then MS did with Halo 3 on Xbox despite Halo 3 having almost twice the sales .
What the development costs never take into account is the licensing costs , the SDK 's for DirectX are free , the dev tools are considerably less and you do not have to pay a fee per unit produced .
This is another case of games are easier to code for Xbox but easier to produce for PC .
Also there are several genre 's that will never be playable on a console such as RTS , FPS ( Admit it ) , TBS and dedicated simulators ( Flight , Rail , anything that requires more then 4 buttons ) .
These are quite profitable markets for small developers like Stardock , JoWood and so on .
The independent games industry just doesnt exist on consoles and this is mainly due to the high cost of entry .
There is also the direction in which consoles are going to consider , the clear winner of the 7th generation of consoles was the least powerful and cheapest console crappiest graphics .
Not that I 'm complaining but as a dedicated PC gamer even I have a Wii , they are just too much fun with friends around .
Whilst the top selling Xbox 360 game sold 8 million the top 5 selling Wii games sold more .
See for your self [ wikipedia.org ] .
The PS3 has barely managed a paltry 3.8 million copies for its best game , we can safely say that the PS3 is the loser out of this round and re-releasing the hardware wont help .
MS has taken note of the Wii 's unbridled success and the next Xbox will be a cheaper , less powerful Wii clone ( the Xii ?
if MS is a master of anything it 's copying ) built for the casual market .
This is what is with things like Natal .
Sony I think will stick it out with their " hardcore " fans for the PS4 and there probably wont be much of a PS5 to speak of .
Real dedicated gaming will go back to the PC 's as consoles rediscover what they were always about , simple fun casual games .
So rumours of the Gaming PC 's death are greatly exaggerated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And, of course, PC gaming is dying...

and, Civilisation is on consoles?
PC gaming is not dying so long as 16 million copies of the SIMs are sold and there are 11 million subscribers to WOW or the greats like Starcraft and Half Life are being produced.
Look at the stats for L4D, most players are on PC because the PC is a better platform for that kind of game.
PC gaming has a long history, I can play games from the DOS era on my newest gaming PC (thanks GOG).
PC games are more profitable per unit, so much so they sell for A$10 less then their console cousins here in Australia.
So even with decreased development costs the licensing costs on consoles are so high (because console hardware is sold at a loss and made up for by licensing fees) and the profit margin is down.
2K made more with Civ IV on PC then MS did with Halo 3 on Xbox despite Halo 3 having almost twice the sales.
What the development costs never take into account is the licensing costs, the SDK's for DirectX are free, the dev tools are considerably less and you do not have to pay a fee per unit produced.
This is another case of games are easier to code for Xbox but easier to produce for PC.
Also there are several genre's that will never be playable on a console such as RTS, FPS (Admit it), TBS and dedicated simulators (Flight, Rail, anything that requires more then 4 buttons).
These are quite profitable markets for small developers like Stardock, JoWood and so on.
The independent games industry just doesnt exist on consoles and this is mainly due to the high cost of entry.
There is also the direction in which consoles are going to consider, the clear winner of the 7th generation of consoles was the least powerful and cheapest console crappiest graphics.
Not that I'm complaining but as a dedicated PC gamer even I have a Wii, they are just too much fun with friends around.
Whilst the top selling Xbox 360 game sold 8 million the top 5 selling Wii games sold more.
See for your self [wikipedia.org].
The PS3 has barely managed a paltry 3.8 million copies for its best game, we can safely say that the PS3 is the loser out of this round and re-releasing the hardware wont help.
MS has taken note of the Wii's unbridled success and the next Xbox will be a cheaper, less powerful Wii clone (the Xii?
if MS is a master of anything it's copying) built for the casual market.
This is what is with things like Natal.
Sony I think will stick it out with their "hardcore" fans for the PS4 and there probably wont be much of a PS5 to speak of.
Real dedicated gaming will go back to the PC's as consoles rediscover what they were always about, simple fun casual games.
So rumours of the Gaming PC's death are greatly exaggerated.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824165</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256143620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry got to clarify that statement,</p><p>My pc cost less than a ps3 WHEN I BROUGHT IT, i see now they are quite reasonable in price (175&pound;)</p><p>I ordered the parts on the same day as the slashdot story about the 4770 (is a sub 100$ graphics card all you need) which is what prompted me to upgrade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry got to clarify that statement,My pc cost less than a ps3 WHEN I BROUGHT IT , i see now they are quite reasonable in price ( 175   ) I ordered the parts on the same day as the slashdot story about the 4770 ( is a sub 100 $ graphics card all you need ) which is what prompted me to upgrade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry got to clarify that statement,My pc cost less than a ps3 WHEN I BROUGHT IT, i see now they are quite reasonable in price (175£)I ordered the parts on the same day as the slashdot story about the 4770 (is a sub 100$ graphics card all you need) which is what prompted me to upgrade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525</id>
	<title>Re:Doom</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1256128560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dunno. You're absolutely right, and yet... I think DOOM! was probably the first time I perceived a PC as a proper gaming machine.</p><p>I mean, Wolfenstein was impressive, and in retrospect (I didn't play it much) a great game -- but it was very much a matter of "well, we've got this PC for business apps, I can make it play this game". At that time, if you had games in mind when you bought a computer, you got an Amiga. Or a console.</p><p>Prior to DOOM!, most decent PC games were available for Amiga / Atari ST, with better sound and graphics. Wolfenstein looked like a poor Amiga game.</p><p>DOOM! though, came out just as VGA was becoming mainstream, and sound cards were becoming available and affordable. Most PCs didn't have a sound card, and you'd add one as an afterthought, often to improve your DOOM! experience. It looked *amazing* in comparison to an Amiga game, and that was a first.</p><p>OTOH the article's author should still consider the 25 years of non-PC videogaming heritage leading up to DOOM!.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dunno .
You 're absolutely right , and yet... I think DOOM !
was probably the first time I perceived a PC as a proper gaming machine.I mean , Wolfenstein was impressive , and in retrospect ( I did n't play it much ) a great game -- but it was very much a matter of " well , we 've got this PC for business apps , I can make it play this game " .
At that time , if you had games in mind when you bought a computer , you got an Amiga .
Or a console.Prior to DOOM ! , most decent PC games were available for Amiga / Atari ST , with better sound and graphics .
Wolfenstein looked like a poor Amiga game.DOOM !
though , came out just as VGA was becoming mainstream , and sound cards were becoming available and affordable .
Most PCs did n't have a sound card , and you 'd add one as an afterthought , often to improve your DOOM !
experience. It looked * amazing * in comparison to an Amiga game , and that was a first.OTOH the article 's author should still consider the 25 years of non-PC videogaming heritage leading up to DOOM ! .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dunno.
You're absolutely right, and yet... I think DOOM!
was probably the first time I perceived a PC as a proper gaming machine.I mean, Wolfenstein was impressive, and in retrospect (I didn't play it much) a great game -- but it was very much a matter of "well, we've got this PC for business apps, I can make it play this game".
At that time, if you had games in mind when you bought a computer, you got an Amiga.
Or a console.Prior to DOOM!, most decent PC games were available for Amiga / Atari ST, with better sound and graphics.
Wolfenstein looked like a poor Amiga game.DOOM!
though, came out just as VGA was becoming mainstream, and sound cards were becoming available and affordable.
Most PCs didn't have a sound card, and you'd add one as an afterthought, often to improve your DOOM!
experience. It looked *amazing* in comparison to an Amiga game, and that was a first.OTOH the article's author should still consider the 25 years of non-PC videogaming heritage leading up to DOOM!.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822133</id>
	<title>I disagree</title>
	<author>amn108</author>
	<datestamp>1256133180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What an idiotic quote from the article. First of all it is not "inventing" the gun wobbling, sooner or later any sensible developer and/or artist who wants a reality like feel to him game would have done that. Granted, id software were much more visionary than what was normal back in Dooms days.</p><p>Also, it is equally stupid to slash id for not providing a story. To me that was what was great about Doom, it just threw you into that world, without explaining it all that much. That is another side of the "reality simulation" bandwagon which id created - they wanted to get away from all the explaining and mimicking and come closer to the real thing. Of course, in retrospekt, we can see that Doom is not much of a "real thing", but when I was 14 and saw it running on a 15" screen of a 486DX machine, it looked as real as Crysis trailer did two years ago. The article author has probably gone soft from all the manuals and storybooks he has read, now he cannot even understand the point of not supplying one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What an idiotic quote from the article .
First of all it is not " inventing " the gun wobbling , sooner or later any sensible developer and/or artist who wants a reality like feel to him game would have done that .
Granted , id software were much more visionary than what was normal back in Dooms days.Also , it is equally stupid to slash id for not providing a story .
To me that was what was great about Doom , it just threw you into that world , without explaining it all that much .
That is another side of the " reality simulation " bandwagon which id created - they wanted to get away from all the explaining and mimicking and come closer to the real thing .
Of course , in retrospekt , we can see that Doom is not much of a " real thing " , but when I was 14 and saw it running on a 15 " screen of a 486DX machine , it looked as real as Crysis trailer did two years ago .
The article author has probably gone soft from all the manuals and storybooks he has read , now he can not even understand the point of not supplying one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What an idiotic quote from the article.
First of all it is not "inventing" the gun wobbling, sooner or later any sensible developer and/or artist who wants a reality like feel to him game would have done that.
Granted, id software were much more visionary than what was normal back in Dooms days.Also, it is equally stupid to slash id for not providing a story.
To me that was what was great about Doom, it just threw you into that world, without explaining it all that much.
That is another side of the "reality simulation" bandwagon which id created - they wanted to get away from all the explaining and mimicking and come closer to the real thing.
Of course, in retrospekt, we can see that Doom is not much of a "real thing", but when I was 14 and saw it running on a 15" screen of a 486DX machine, it looked as real as Crysis trailer did two years ago.
The article author has probably gone soft from all the manuals and storybooks he has read, now he cannot even understand the point of not supplying one.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824701</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256146200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>did you check out Vega Strike? It's on <a href="http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/</a> [sourceforge.net] and it runs many OS including Linux. There was even a Privateer mod, so you can do the same missions etc.</p><p>AC</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>did you check out Vega Strike ?
It 's on http : //vegastrike.sourceforge.net/ [ sourceforge.net ] and it runs many OS including Linux .
There was even a Privateer mod , so you can do the same missions etc.AC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>did you check out Vega Strike?
It's on http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net] and it runs many OS including Linux.
There was even a Privateer mod, so you can do the same missions etc.AC</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833369</id>
	<title>Very little new about a Doom</title>
	<author>ScaledLizard</author>
	<datestamp>1256211780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doom (1993) was just a stripped-down version of hack-and-slay dungeon games. Examples of such games are Eye of the Beholder (1990), which had limited 3D rendering, but tile-based movement. Ultima Underworld (1992) had 3D graphics and you were able run around freely. Doom just replaced the swords with guns and left out the story, which didn't appeal to me, and wasn't new to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Doom ( 1993 ) was just a stripped-down version of hack-and-slay dungeon games .
Examples of such games are Eye of the Beholder ( 1990 ) , which had limited 3D rendering , but tile-based movement .
Ultima Underworld ( 1992 ) had 3D graphics and you were able run around freely .
Doom just replaced the swords with guns and left out the story , which did n't appeal to me , and was n't new to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doom (1993) was just a stripped-down version of hack-and-slay dungeon games.
Examples of such games are Eye of the Beholder (1990), which had limited 3D rendering, but tile-based movement.
Ultima Underworld (1992) had 3D graphics and you were able run around freely.
Doom just replaced the swords with guns and left out the story, which didn't appeal to me, and wasn't new to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821541</id>
	<title>Sadly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256128680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly, iD hasn't seemed to have progressed one iota.</p><p>They conceptualized an entire genre of gaming, yet they can't seem to get out of the basic 'you walk down the hallway and *poof* the lights go out and a monster jumps at you' box.</p><p>Sure, every game is technologically magnificent but you'd think for their millions and millions of dollars, they could afford someone who could breathe a little life into the games.</p><p>Where's Rage, by the way?  It could just be selective memory, but it seems like it's been a loooong time since D3, and I don't even see Rage on the hypemeter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly , iD has n't seemed to have progressed one iota.They conceptualized an entire genre of gaming , yet they ca n't seem to get out of the basic 'you walk down the hallway and * poof * the lights go out and a monster jumps at you ' box.Sure , every game is technologically magnificent but you 'd think for their millions and millions of dollars , they could afford someone who could breathe a little life into the games.Where 's Rage , by the way ?
It could just be selective memory , but it seems like it 's been a loooong time since D3 , and I do n't even see Rage on the hypemeter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly, iD hasn't seemed to have progressed one iota.They conceptualized an entire genre of gaming, yet they can't seem to get out of the basic 'you walk down the hallway and *poof* the lights go out and a monster jumps at you' box.Sure, every game is technologically magnificent but you'd think for their millions and millions of dollars, they could afford someone who could breathe a little life into the games.Where's Rage, by the way?
It could just be selective memory, but it seems like it's been a loooong time since D3, and I don't even see Rage on the hypemeter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821647</id>
	<title>Yep!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256129580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all &mdash; something modern games would get heavily slated for doing."</p><p>There in lies the problem! Like almost anything in this instant world, if you can't understand it in less than 0.3 secs, most people will simply turn off and find something they can get a handle on quicker. Very sad statement on our times.</p><p>I have got into retro gaming lately, if you're gonna a play a rehashed idea, might as well play the original arcade and 8-bit versions!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all    something modern games would get heavily slated for doing .
" There in lies the problem !
Like almost anything in this instant world , if you ca n't understand it in less than 0.3 secs , most people will simply turn off and find something they can get a handle on quicker .
Very sad statement on our times.I have got into retro gaming lately , if you 're gon na a play a rehashed idea , might as well play the original arcade and 8-bit versions !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all — something modern games would get heavily slated for doing.
"There in lies the problem!
Like almost anything in this instant world, if you can't understand it in less than 0.3 secs, most people will simply turn off and find something they can get a handle on quicker.
Very sad statement on our times.I have got into retro gaming lately, if you're gonna a play a rehashed idea, might as well play the original arcade and 8-bit versions!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822625</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Rising Ape</author>
	<datestamp>1256136000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The price thing is rather misleading. You can turn a ordinary PC into an acceptable gaming machine with a fairly low end graphics card, nowhere near the $300 you mention. How many people have a PS3 or Xbox 360 and don't have a PC?</p><p>I don't see the point in duplicating the CPU, motherboard, hard drive, etc. of my PC just so I can run one more type of application.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The price thing is rather misleading .
You can turn a ordinary PC into an acceptable gaming machine with a fairly low end graphics card , nowhere near the $ 300 you mention .
How many people have a PS3 or Xbox 360 and do n't have a PC ? I do n't see the point in duplicating the CPU , motherboard , hard drive , etc .
of my PC just so I can run one more type of application .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The price thing is rather misleading.
You can turn a ordinary PC into an acceptable gaming machine with a fairly low end graphics card, nowhere near the $300 you mention.
How many people have a PS3 or Xbox 360 and don't have a PC?I don't see the point in duplicating the CPU, motherboard, hard drive, etc.
of my PC just so I can run one more type of application.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821435</id>
	<title>Only starts at Doom?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256127600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about California Games? Leisure Suit Larry? Wasteland?<br>Yes, there were graphical games in the 80s. They were CGA, EGA,<br>and even VGA, but they existed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about California Games ?
Leisure Suit Larry ?
Wasteland ? Yes , there were graphical games in the 80s .
They were CGA , EGA,and even VGA , but they existed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about California Games?
Leisure Suit Larry?
Wasteland?Yes, there were graphical games in the 80s.
They were CGA, EGA,and even VGA, but they existed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</id>
	<title>Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256126700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And, of course, PC gaming is dying...</p><p>The reason is quite simple : consoles games sell a lot more copies.  Game publishers have no choice but to make a game for console with maybe a PC port.  Especially for AAA titles that need huge teams of artists and programmers to develop the graphics and game engine.</p><p>Why do console games sell more copies?  One big reason is reduced piracy due to vastly better DRM with a console.  The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC.  Just $300, and any game works immediately without hassle.  The majority of the gamers in the world don't have the patience or knowledge to screw around with the many, many incompatibilities and bugs associated with PC hardware and software.</p><p>This wasn't always the case, PC gaming was huge in the 1990s.  However, consoles have 'caught up' to the point that while any given generation of consoles quickly falls behind PCs, the graphics can render to an HDTV which at least approaches the quality of a good PC monitor.  Also, current consoles fully support online gaming about as well as PCs ever did.</p><p>The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.</p><p>Yes, PC graphics cards are better than current consoles, but that only applies to a small fraction of the available PCs.</p><p>Of course, console's new reign of domination is only going to last until cloud gaming takes off, which should be over the next few years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And , of course , PC gaming is dying...The reason is quite simple : consoles games sell a lot more copies .
Game publishers have no choice but to make a game for console with maybe a PC port .
Especially for AAA titles that need huge teams of artists and programmers to develop the graphics and game engine.Why do console games sell more copies ?
One big reason is reduced piracy due to vastly better DRM with a console .
The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC .
Just $ 300 , and any game works immediately without hassle .
The majority of the gamers in the world do n't have the patience or knowledge to screw around with the many , many incompatibilities and bugs associated with PC hardware and software.This was n't always the case , PC gaming was huge in the 1990s .
However , consoles have 'caught up ' to the point that while any given generation of consoles quickly falls behind PCs , the graphics can render to an HDTV which at least approaches the quality of a good PC monitor .
Also , current consoles fully support online gaming about as well as PCs ever did.The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.Yes , PC graphics cards are better than current consoles , but that only applies to a small fraction of the available PCs.Of course , console 's new reign of domination is only going to last until cloud gaming takes off , which should be over the next few years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And, of course, PC gaming is dying...The reason is quite simple : consoles games sell a lot more copies.
Game publishers have no choice but to make a game for console with maybe a PC port.
Especially for AAA titles that need huge teams of artists and programmers to develop the graphics and game engine.Why do console games sell more copies?
One big reason is reduced piracy due to vastly better DRM with a console.
The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC.
Just $300, and any game works immediately without hassle.
The majority of the gamers in the world don't have the patience or knowledge to screw around with the many, many incompatibilities and bugs associated with PC hardware and software.This wasn't always the case, PC gaming was huge in the 1990s.
However, consoles have 'caught up' to the point that while any given generation of consoles quickly falls behind PCs, the graphics can render to an HDTV which at least approaches the quality of a good PC monitor.
Also, current consoles fully support online gaming about as well as PCs ever did.The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.Yes, PC graphics cards are better than current consoles, but that only applies to a small fraction of the available PCs.Of course, console's new reign of domination is only going to last until cloud gaming takes off, which should be over the next few years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821251</id>
	<title>Totally disagree</title>
	<author>mccalli</author>
	<datestamp>1256126040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i> "There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible."</i>
<br> <br>
Nonsense. Doom wasn't supposed to be story-driven game, it was an action game. You grabbed your minigun, charged into a room you'd never seen before and blasted away. You even had a chance of surviving. There are no story lessons from Doom because there weren't supposed to me.
<br> <br>
It's exactly the lack of immediate mindless action that's put me off gaming for a long time after. I want gaming, not cinematic experiences. If you prefer cinema that's fine and there's room for both, but for me all the plot-driven stuff is a turn-off. I still want to grab a minigun and charge into a room blasting widly in a totally unrealistic fashion as strange creatures fall in front of me. Shortly before being overwhelmed by ridiculous odds, of course.
<br> <br>
When I do play acrade games, I tend to head MAMEwards. Plot-driven stuff just doesn't do it for me at all - if it does for you then that's fine and I'm certainly not criticising it, I'm just saying there's more than one type of gamer and Doom appealed to me in a way that almost none of the other FPS stuff has. That's precisely <i>because</i> it has little story or plot.
<br> <br>
Cheers,<br>
Ian</htmltext>
<tokenext>" There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible .
" Nonsense .
Doom was n't supposed to be story-driven game , it was an action game .
You grabbed your minigun , charged into a room you 'd never seen before and blasted away .
You even had a chance of surviving .
There are no story lessons from Doom because there were n't supposed to me .
It 's exactly the lack of immediate mindless action that 's put me off gaming for a long time after .
I want gaming , not cinematic experiences .
If you prefer cinema that 's fine and there 's room for both , but for me all the plot-driven stuff is a turn-off .
I still want to grab a minigun and charge into a room blasting widly in a totally unrealistic fashion as strange creatures fall in front of me .
Shortly before being overwhelmed by ridiculous odds , of course .
When I do play acrade games , I tend to head MAMEwards .
Plot-driven stuff just does n't do it for me at all - if it does for you then that 's fine and I 'm certainly not criticising it , I 'm just saying there 's more than one type of gamer and Doom appealed to me in a way that almost none of the other FPS stuff has .
That 's precisely because it has little story or plot .
Cheers , Ian</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible.
"
 
Nonsense.
Doom wasn't supposed to be story-driven game, it was an action game.
You grabbed your minigun, charged into a room you'd never seen before and blasted away.
You even had a chance of surviving.
There are no story lessons from Doom because there weren't supposed to me.
It's exactly the lack of immediate mindless action that's put me off gaming for a long time after.
I want gaming, not cinematic experiences.
If you prefer cinema that's fine and there's room for both, but for me all the plot-driven stuff is a turn-off.
I still want to grab a minigun and charge into a room blasting widly in a totally unrealistic fashion as strange creatures fall in front of me.
Shortly before being overwhelmed by ridiculous odds, of course.
When I do play acrade games, I tend to head MAMEwards.
Plot-driven stuff just doesn't do it for me at all - if it does for you then that's fine and I'm certainly not criticising it, I'm just saying there's more than one type of gamer and Doom appealed to me in a way that almost none of the other FPS stuff has.
That's precisely because it has little story or plot.
Cheers,
Ian</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821965</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>lhoguin</author>
	<datestamp>1256131980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't agree more. Let's take an example with Half Life 2. I don't mind the story, it's pretty cool especially if you have done the first, and I enjoyed my first play of it. And I really love the gameplay.</p><p>I started it again a few months later and immediately got stuck in hours of story elements right at the start. It became so boring I stopped playing. Waiting while various characters are talking just isn't fun. I already know the story, why should I have to go through it again? Now if I could just SKIP the story parts I would enjoy playing the game over and over. But I'm instead forced to watch pointless story events scattered throughout the game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't agree more .
Let 's take an example with Half Life 2 .
I do n't mind the story , it 's pretty cool especially if you have done the first , and I enjoyed my first play of it .
And I really love the gameplay.I started it again a few months later and immediately got stuck in hours of story elements right at the start .
It became so boring I stopped playing .
Waiting while various characters are talking just is n't fun .
I already know the story , why should I have to go through it again ?
Now if I could just SKIP the story parts I would enjoy playing the game over and over .
But I 'm instead forced to watch pointless story events scattered throughout the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't agree more.
Let's take an example with Half Life 2.
I don't mind the story, it's pretty cool especially if you have done the first, and I enjoyed my first play of it.
And I really love the gameplay.I started it again a few months later and immediately got stuck in hours of story elements right at the start.
It became so boring I stopped playing.
Waiting while various characters are talking just isn't fun.
I already know the story, why should I have to go through it again?
Now if I could just SKIP the story parts I would enjoy playing the game over and over.
But I'm instead forced to watch pointless story events scattered throughout the game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833279</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256210400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What you are talking about is called 'being old' (or 'growing up' if you want to sugar-coat it).</p><p>When you're a kid, it's much easier to get excited about a game because you have a more active imagination that fills in the gaps and glosses over the stupidities. Also, plots are much more original when you don't know that they have already been told seventeen trillion times before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What you are talking about is called 'being old ' ( or 'growing up ' if you want to sugar-coat it ) .When you 're a kid , it 's much easier to get excited about a game because you have a more active imagination that fills in the gaps and glosses over the stupidities .
Also , plots are much more original when you do n't know that they have already been told seventeen trillion times before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you are talking about is called 'being old' (or 'growing up' if you want to sugar-coat it).When you're a kid, it's much easier to get excited about a game because you have a more active imagination that fills in the gaps and glosses over the stupidities.
Also, plots are much more original when you don't know that they have already been told seventeen trillion times before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823913</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>The-Bus</author>
	<datestamp>1256142540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's interesting that console games are now more like PC games than ever: some need specific hardware configurations (<i>GTA IV</i> on the Xbox 360 requires a hard drive, IIRC) or lengthy installations (games on the PS3), many have a lot of software patches that repair broken games (<i>Fat Princess</i>'s online) or constantly improve the game experience (<i>Burnout Paradise</i>) and some are great principally based on their online connectivity (without human opponents or user-created content, they wouldn't be as good).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's interesting that console games are now more like PC games than ever : some need specific hardware configurations ( GTA IV on the Xbox 360 requires a hard drive , IIRC ) or lengthy installations ( games on the PS3 ) , many have a lot of software patches that repair broken games ( Fat Princess 's online ) or constantly improve the game experience ( Burnout Paradise ) and some are great principally based on their online connectivity ( without human opponents or user-created content , they would n't be as good ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's interesting that console games are now more like PC games than ever: some need specific hardware configurations (GTA IV on the Xbox 360 requires a hard drive, IIRC) or lengthy installations (games on the PS3), many have a lot of software patches that repair broken games (Fat Princess's online) or constantly improve the game experience (Burnout Paradise) and some are great principally based on their online connectivity (without human opponents or user-created content, they wouldn't be as good).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821501</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256128320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry but i can't agree, my pc costs less than a ps3 yet i can run all the latest games in ultra high graphics without sacraficing my framerate.  The trick is to buy decent parts and build it yourself, the pc i had before this one gave me 5 years good gaming (altho the last 2 years meant running games on average graphics setting as opposed to high).</p><p>The old pc gaming is dying article/comment comes along every couple of years and never has any frame of reference, it was dying in 2001 but still lives on?</p><p>
&nbsp; Also, current consoles fully support online gaming about as well as PCs ever did.</p><p>Wrong, just plain wrong, clan servers and community gaming works better on pcs and always has.  Maybe in the future consoles will allow dedicated servers but until then consoles will always come second in online gaming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry but i ca n't agree , my pc costs less than a ps3 yet i can run all the latest games in ultra high graphics without sacraficing my framerate .
The trick is to buy decent parts and build it yourself , the pc i had before this one gave me 5 years good gaming ( altho the last 2 years meant running games on average graphics setting as opposed to high ) .The old pc gaming is dying article/comment comes along every couple of years and never has any frame of reference , it was dying in 2001 but still lives on ?
  Also , current consoles fully support online gaming about as well as PCs ever did.Wrong , just plain wrong , clan servers and community gaming works better on pcs and always has .
Maybe in the future consoles will allow dedicated servers but until then consoles will always come second in online gaming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry but i can't agree, my pc costs less than a ps3 yet i can run all the latest games in ultra high graphics without sacraficing my framerate.
The trick is to buy decent parts and build it yourself, the pc i had before this one gave me 5 years good gaming (altho the last 2 years meant running games on average graphics setting as opposed to high).The old pc gaming is dying article/comment comes along every couple of years and never has any frame of reference, it was dying in 2001 but still lives on?
  Also, current consoles fully support online gaming about as well as PCs ever did.Wrong, just plain wrong, clan servers and community gaming works better on pcs and always has.
Maybe in the future consoles will allow dedicated servers but until then consoles will always come second in online gaming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823499</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>sgtrock</author>
	<datestamp>1256140380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.</p></div></blockquote><p>Actually, I would argue that the one edge that PCs will probably always have is player created content.  The console market is aimed at a much more casual experience.  Most console game companies have no desire to provide tools to allow players to create and release mods of any sort.</p><p>By contrast, some PC game companies have historically encouraged their fan base to create whatever they wanted.  When those companies released tools to let players create their own material, the results were nothing short of spectacular.  One of the most popular and enduring mods ever created, CounterStrike, was originally a player created mod.  Heck, there's hardly a shooter released these days that doesn't include CTF (originally released as Threewave CTF for Quake).  Another player created innovation is DoD's wave respawn cycle.  Then there's the oddities like Quess (a chess game based on Quake) and Quake Rally (racing game), player generated characters like Homer Simpson and Barney, etc.</p><p>Game companies who want to encourage their customers to experiment with the game engines will always do well.  (e.g., Bohemia Interactive, Battlefront.Com, id software, etc.)  It's just that they can't expect to have the next major blockbuster any more.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.Actually , I would argue that the one edge that PCs will probably always have is player created content .
The console market is aimed at a much more casual experience .
Most console game companies have no desire to provide tools to allow players to create and release mods of any sort.By contrast , some PC game companies have historically encouraged their fan base to create whatever they wanted .
When those companies released tools to let players create their own material , the results were nothing short of spectacular .
One of the most popular and enduring mods ever created , CounterStrike , was originally a player created mod .
Heck , there 's hardly a shooter released these days that does n't include CTF ( originally released as Threewave CTF for Quake ) .
Another player created innovation is DoD 's wave respawn cycle .
Then there 's the oddities like Quess ( a chess game based on Quake ) and Quake Rally ( racing game ) , player generated characters like Homer Simpson and Barney , etc.Game companies who want to encourage their customers to experiment with the game engines will always do well .
( e.g. , Bohemia Interactive , Battlefront.Com , id software , etc .
) It 's just that they ca n't expect to have the next major blockbuster any more .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only edge PCs still have is the keyboard and mouse as a controller.Actually, I would argue that the one edge that PCs will probably always have is player created content.
The console market is aimed at a much more casual experience.
Most console game companies have no desire to provide tools to allow players to create and release mods of any sort.By contrast, some PC game companies have historically encouraged their fan base to create whatever they wanted.
When those companies released tools to let players create their own material, the results were nothing short of spectacular.
One of the most popular and enduring mods ever created, CounterStrike, was originally a player created mod.
Heck, there's hardly a shooter released these days that doesn't include CTF (originally released as Threewave CTF for Quake).
Another player created innovation is DoD's wave respawn cycle.
Then there's the oddities like Quess (a chess game based on Quake) and Quake Rally (racing game), player generated characters like Homer Simpson and Barney, etc.Game companies who want to encourage their customers to experiment with the game engines will always do well.
(e.g., Bohemia Interactive, Battlefront.Com, id software, etc.
)  It's just that they can't expect to have the next major blockbuster any more.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29829161</id>
	<title>Re:ya.. they've come a looong ways..</title>
	<author>FloodSpectre</author>
	<datestamp>1256121660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I paid $70 for Chrono Trigger on the SNES in 1995.  Secret of Mana and FF6 cost at least 60 as well.  This is nothing new by any means.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I paid $ 70 for Chrono Trigger on the SNES in 1995 .
Secret of Mana and FF6 cost at least 60 as well .
This is nothing new by any means .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I paid $70 for Chrono Trigger on the SNES in 1995.
Secret of Mana and FF6 cost at least 60 as well.
This is nothing new by any means.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824855</id>
	<title>Fighting Games Need No Story</title>
	<author>SoVi3t</author>
	<datestamp>1256146860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have u seen some of the 'stories' in fighting games?  Dead or Alive 3 has two girls fight over a head of lettuce.  Street Fighter Alpha takes place before Street Fighter II, and Street Fighter III takes place after Street Fighter IV.  Many of the fans have even stated how they don't care that much about the storylines, as remaining canon just messes up a good thing.  Most street fighting games get their storylines in anime, comics, and books, AFTER the release of the game.  Imagination &gt; Storylines</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have u seen some of the 'stories ' in fighting games ?
Dead or Alive 3 has two girls fight over a head of lettuce .
Street Fighter Alpha takes place before Street Fighter II , and Street Fighter III takes place after Street Fighter IV .
Many of the fans have even stated how they do n't care that much about the storylines , as remaining canon just messes up a good thing .
Most street fighting games get their storylines in anime , comics , and books , AFTER the release of the game .
Imagination &gt; Storylines</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have u seen some of the 'stories' in fighting games?
Dead or Alive 3 has two girls fight over a head of lettuce.
Street Fighter Alpha takes place before Street Fighter II, and Street Fighter III takes place after Street Fighter IV.
Many of the fans have even stated how they don't care that much about the storylines, as remaining canon just messes up a good thing.
Most street fighting games get their storylines in anime, comics, and books, AFTER the release of the game.
Imagination &gt; Storylines</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821515</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256128500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the death of the small independent software house.</p></div><p>...and its resurrection as "indi"-scene.</p><p>P.S.: Stop playing Massively Marketed Repetitive Pubescent Grinding and try some interesting games.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the death of the small independent software house....and its resurrection as " indi " -scene.P.S .
: Stop playing Massively Marketed Repetitive Pubescent Grinding and try some interesting games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the death of the small independent software house....and its resurrection as "indi"-scene.P.S.
: Stop playing Massively Marketed Repetitive Pubescent Grinding and try some interesting games.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824253</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>apoc.famine</author>
	<datestamp>1256144040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I personally like the story behind Tetris. The social commentary about how you may turn yourself to fit into a group, but you can never change your true shape. And just when you find a good, solid group to fit in with, it disappears, leaving you turning in the wind again, trying to fit in somewhere else. <br>
&nbsp; <br>It's like a metaphor for being a teenager.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I personally like the story behind Tetris .
The social commentary about how you may turn yourself to fit into a group , but you can never change your true shape .
And just when you find a good , solid group to fit in with , it disappears , leaving you turning in the wind again , trying to fit in somewhere else .
  It 's like a metaphor for being a teenager .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I personally like the story behind Tetris.
The social commentary about how you may turn yourself to fit into a group, but you can never change your true shape.
And just when you find a good, solid group to fit in with, it disappears, leaving you turning in the wind again, trying to fit in somewhere else.
  It's like a metaphor for being a teenager.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29830233</id>
	<title>Game designers don't read enough books</title>
	<author>flip-flop</author>
	<datestamp>1256128680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My favourite passage from that article:</p><p><i>While there have been some massive steps forward in terms of what games can and are willing to do story-wise though, plot is actually the aspect of game design which has come on the least in the last twenty years.</i></p><p><i>Graham Linehan recently said on Charlie Brooker&rsquo;s <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00n1j8q" title="bbc.co.uk">GamesWipe</a> [bbc.co.uk] that he thinks a lot of that is because game designers don&rsquo;t read enough books and that modern games are made by people who watch more films than they read stories. He&rsquo;s probably onto something there, we reckon &ndash; especially when you consider the rambling nonsense which is the Metal Gear Solid series.</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My favourite passage from that article : While there have been some massive steps forward in terms of what games can and are willing to do story-wise though , plot is actually the aspect of game design which has come on the least in the last twenty years.Graham Linehan recently said on Charlie Brooker    s GamesWipe [ bbc.co.uk ] that he thinks a lot of that is because game designers don    t read enough books and that modern games are made by people who watch more films than they read stories .
He    s probably onto something there , we reckon    especially when you consider the rambling nonsense which is the Metal Gear Solid series .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My favourite passage from that article:While there have been some massive steps forward in terms of what games can and are willing to do story-wise though, plot is actually the aspect of game design which has come on the least in the last twenty years.Graham Linehan recently said on Charlie Brooker’s GamesWipe [bbc.co.uk] that he thinks a lot of that is because game designers don’t read enough books and that modern games are made by people who watch more films than they read stories.
He’s probably onto something there, we reckon – especially when you consider the rambling nonsense which is the Metal Gear Solid series.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</id>
	<title>Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256128620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and even later the Wing Commander series I am actually disappointed with many of today's games.  Haven't found a space game that makes me feel like the explorer that Starflight did and Wing Commander was simply amazing in both story and game play.</p><p>What do we have now?  Dozens of games with either space marines or commandos?  Yawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and even later the Wing Commander series I am actually disappointed with many of today 's games .
Have n't found a space game that makes me feel like the explorer that Starflight did and Wing Commander was simply amazing in both story and game play.What do we have now ?
Dozens of games with either space marines or commandos ?
Yawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and even later the Wing Commander series I am actually disappointed with many of today's games.
Haven't found a space game that makes me feel like the explorer that Starflight did and Wing Commander was simply amazing in both story and game play.What do we have now?
Dozens of games with either space marines or commandos?
Yawn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821563</id>
	<title>Hold on there, Tex</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1256128920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>On the other hand, from a story perspective, Doom was absolutely rubbish. You start in a room, no idea whats going on and you are surrounded by demons. You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all  something modern games would get heavily slated for doing. </i> <p>OK, he lost me there.  The entire idea of DOOM was that it was an incredibly technically advanced shoot-em-up.  Being able to run around in the levels and shoot realistic-acting guns was great.  All that you really had to know was to shoot the demons - the player has no other way to interact with the world other than shooting.  Who needs a plot?  That always baffled me about the old Japanese Nintendo games...they always had these incredibly convoluted unncessary plots that I read the first few lines of and then forgot it and went on to saving the kingdom or whatever.  And I was a manual-reading completist.  </p><p>When, exactly, did computer game snobs decide it was cool to call DOOM 'rubbish'?  What happened to computer game snobs being polygon and FPS guys?  What makes this guy look down his nose at something that he doesn't understand and apparently has no desire to understand?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , from a story perspective , Doom was absolutely rubbish .
You start in a room , no idea whats going on and you are surrounded by demons .
You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all something modern games would get heavily slated for doing .
OK , he lost me there .
The entire idea of DOOM was that it was an incredibly technically advanced shoot-em-up .
Being able to run around in the levels and shoot realistic-acting guns was great .
All that you really had to know was to shoot the demons - the player has no other way to interact with the world other than shooting .
Who needs a plot ?
That always baffled me about the old Japanese Nintendo games...they always had these incredibly convoluted unncessary plots that I read the first few lines of and then forgot it and went on to saving the kingdom or whatever .
And I was a manual-reading completist .
When , exactly , did computer game snobs decide it was cool to call DOOM 'rubbish ' ?
What happened to computer game snobs being polygon and FPS guys ?
What makes this guy look down his nose at something that he does n't understand and apparently has no desire to understand ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, from a story perspective, Doom was absolutely rubbish.
You start in a room, no idea whats going on and you are surrounded by demons.
You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all  something modern games would get heavily slated for doing.
OK, he lost me there.
The entire idea of DOOM was that it was an incredibly technically advanced shoot-em-up.
Being able to run around in the levels and shoot realistic-acting guns was great.
All that you really had to know was to shoot the demons - the player has no other way to interact with the world other than shooting.
Who needs a plot?
That always baffled me about the old Japanese Nintendo games...they always had these incredibly convoluted unncessary plots that I read the first few lines of and then forgot it and went on to saving the kingdom or whatever.
And I was a manual-reading completist.
When, exactly, did computer game snobs decide it was cool to call DOOM 'rubbish'?
What happened to computer game snobs being polygon and FPS guys?
What makes this guy look down his nose at something that he doesn't understand and apparently has no desire to understand?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822257</id>
	<title>Doom had a great story.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256134020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't you ever see the movie?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't you ever see the movie ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't you ever see the movie?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29837537</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs a story line?</title>
	<author>Novae D'Arx</author>
	<datestamp>1256236560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>PONG didn't have a story line either, and what's good enough for PONG is good enough for me!</p></div><p>Wait... You never got past the first level?!?  Jeez, what a noob.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>PONG did n't have a story line either , and what 's good enough for PONG is good enough for me ! Wait... You never got past the first level ? ! ?
Jeez , what a noob .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PONG didn't have a story line either, and what's good enough for PONG is good enough for me!Wait... You never got past the first level?!?
Jeez, what a noob.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29834551</id>
	<title>Re:same as life</title>
	<author>Nyder</author>
	<datestamp>1256222580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&gt; You start in a room, no idea what's going on [...] You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all</p><p>looks like my own life</p><p>born in room<br>no idea what's going on<br>need to read holy book (manual) to get a grip on it all<br>ans life seems laking sense if I don't follow the book</p><p>at least a game is WYSIWYG<br>which is not the case with life</p></div><p>that "manual" you have is fake.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; You start in a room , no idea what 's going on [ ... ] You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it alllooks like my own lifeborn in roomno idea what 's going onneed to read holy book ( manual ) to get a grip on it allans life seems laking sense if I do n't follow the bookat least a game is WYSIWYGwhich is not the case with lifethat " manual " you have is fake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; You start in a room, no idea what's going on [...] You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it alllooks like my own lifeborn in roomno idea what's going onneed to read holy book (manual) to get a grip on it allans life seems laking sense if I don't follow the bookat least a game is WYSIWYGwhich is not the case with lifethat "manual" you have is fake.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832041</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M525SyObios" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M525SyObios</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = M525SyObios [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M525SyObios [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29827655</id>
	<title>Re:Only starts at Doom?</title>
	<author>skiman1979</author>
	<datestamp>1256158200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>King's Quest, Space Quest, Police Quest to name a few more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>King 's Quest , Space Quest , Police Quest to name a few more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>King's Quest, Space Quest, Police Quest to name a few more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821435</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824611</id>
	<title>Re:Totally disagree</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1256145720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's also missing the point that some very early FPS games had excellent stories. Bungie's offerings, "Pathways Into Darkness" and the Marathon series, for example. I go as far as saying that Marathon's story was far superior to Half-Life. (It's obscure because it was released on an unpopular platform for games, the Macintosh, which is a shame.)</p><p>What's that? The author never played those games? Oh yeah, of course, because that would have required *research* and *giving a shit about his job*. This article is lousy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's also missing the point that some very early FPS games had excellent stories .
Bungie 's offerings , " Pathways Into Darkness " and the Marathon series , for example .
I go as far as saying that Marathon 's story was far superior to Half-Life .
( It 's obscure because it was released on an unpopular platform for games , the Macintosh , which is a shame .
) What 's that ?
The author never played those games ?
Oh yeah , of course , because that would have required * research * and * giving a shit about his job * .
This article is lousy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's also missing the point that some very early FPS games had excellent stories.
Bungie's offerings, "Pathways Into Darkness" and the Marathon series, for example.
I go as far as saying that Marathon's story was far superior to Half-Life.
(It's obscure because it was released on an unpopular platform for games, the Macintosh, which is a shame.
)What's that?
The author never played those games?
Oh yeah, of course, because that would have required *research* and *giving a shit about his job*.
This article is lousy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821251</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824079</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Dan667</author>
	<datestamp>1256143260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There was a huge push by vendors for consoles, but with the huge failure rates of consoles and string of vendor lock-in feature take-aways a lot of people are returning to the PC.  Also, many just like that the gaming experience on a PC is better.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There was a huge push by vendors for consoles , but with the huge failure rates of consoles and string of vendor lock-in feature take-aways a lot of people are returning to the PC .
Also , many just like that the gaming experience on a PC is better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was a huge push by vendors for consoles, but with the huge failure rates of consoles and string of vendor lock-in feature take-aways a lot of people are returning to the PC.
Also, many just like that the gaming experience on a PC is better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821907</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256131560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree about Gears of War 1 &amp; 2.  I started with 2 and now I've gotten around to part 1.  2 IMO is much more fleshed out and the story goes hand-in-hand with the gameplay.  I was very moved by the scene with Dom's wife and that got my mind even more into the world behind the game I was playing.  The story in GoW 2 gives me a goal to work for, much in the same way that Capture the Flag in Team Fortress 2 gives me a goal and makes an otherwise shallow deathmatch fun (and there is no real pretense of a "story" in TF2).<br>Gears of War Part 1, on the other hand, feels a little more "twitchy" in the controls (due to its Unreal Engine 3 heritage) and the story is a little more shallow in the cutscenes.  It feels more like going through the motions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree about Gears of War 1 &amp; 2 .
I started with 2 and now I 've gotten around to part 1 .
2 IMO is much more fleshed out and the story goes hand-in-hand with the gameplay .
I was very moved by the scene with Dom 's wife and that got my mind even more into the world behind the game I was playing .
The story in GoW 2 gives me a goal to work for , much in the same way that Capture the Flag in Team Fortress 2 gives me a goal and makes an otherwise shallow deathmatch fun ( and there is no real pretense of a " story " in TF2 ) .Gears of War Part 1 , on the other hand , feels a little more " twitchy " in the controls ( due to its Unreal Engine 3 heritage ) and the story is a little more shallow in the cutscenes .
It feels more like going through the motions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree about Gears of War 1 &amp; 2.
I started with 2 and now I've gotten around to part 1.
2 IMO is much more fleshed out and the story goes hand-in-hand with the gameplay.
I was very moved by the scene with Dom's wife and that got my mind even more into the world behind the game I was playing.
The story in GoW 2 gives me a goal to work for, much in the same way that Capture the Flag in Team Fortress 2 gives me a goal and makes an otherwise shallow deathmatch fun (and there is no real pretense of a "story" in TF2).Gears of War Part 1, on the other hand, feels a little more "twitchy" in the controls (due to its Unreal Engine 3 heritage) and the story is a little more shallow in the cutscenes.
It feels more like going through the motions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823069</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>Shanrak</author>
	<datestamp>1256138220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>try the X series (X3:TC in particular), I'm a big space fan myself and X3 has more than satisfied that need.  Still playing it after hundreds of hours in.  And if you don't look at the online guides/maps etc, there are tons to explore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>try the X series ( X3 : TC in particular ) , I 'm a big space fan myself and X3 has more than satisfied that need .
Still playing it after hundreds of hours in .
And if you do n't look at the online guides/maps etc , there are tons to explore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>try the X series (X3:TC in particular), I'm a big space fan myself and X3 has more than satisfied that need.
Still playing it after hundreds of hours in.
And if you don't look at the online guides/maps etc, there are tons to explore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825561</id>
	<title>Re:Doom3</title>
	<author>lahvak</author>
	<datestamp>1256149680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And then you get eaten by a grue...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And then you get eaten by a grue.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And then you get eaten by a grue...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821151</id>
	<title>Doom3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256124900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And ID software is credited for the first fully dynamic Black-On-Black rendering, overlayed with dynamic even blacker shadows, and then compensating with a shotgun that was so inaccurate that actually seeing things didn't matter anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And ID software is credited for the first fully dynamic Black-On-Black rendering , overlayed with dynamic even blacker shadows , and then compensating with a shotgun that was so inaccurate that actually seeing things did n't matter anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And ID software is credited for the first fully dynamic Black-On-Black rendering, overlayed with dynamic even blacker shadows, and then compensating with a shotgun that was so inaccurate that actually seeing things didn't matter anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821447</id>
	<title>Re:Totally disagree</title>
	<author>GravityStar</author>
	<datestamp>1256127780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"blasting widly in a totally unrealistic fashion as strange creatures fall in front of me. Shortly before being overwhelmed by ridiculous odds, of course."</p><p>So you saw the ending of Starship Troopers 2?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" blasting widly in a totally unrealistic fashion as strange creatures fall in front of me .
Shortly before being overwhelmed by ridiculous odds , of course .
" So you saw the ending of Starship Troopers 2 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"blasting widly in a totally unrealistic fashion as strange creatures fall in front of me.
Shortly before being overwhelmed by ridiculous odds, of course.
"So you saw the ending of Starship Troopers 2?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821251</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127</id>
	<title>Doom</title>
	<author>Burnhard</author>
	<datestamp>1256124600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>This guy goes all the way back to Doom.  It's almost as if he was, you know, in his mid-twenties!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This guy goes all the way back to Doom .
It 's almost as if he was , you know , in his mid-twenties !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This guy goes all the way back to Doom.
It's almost as if he was, you know, in his mid-twenties!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821287</id>
	<title>They still have far to go</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1256126520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Conspicuous from its absence from the article is multiplayer. So let me throw something out:
</p><p>
Even for as far as PC gaming has come, it still hasn't moved into one niche that consoles currently dominate. This niche is when you have friends over, and they're suddenly in the mood to play a video game. So you want a game that 1. is easy to learn and 2. doesn't need more PCs than you have available (because having to go back home to dismantle their PCs would kill the moment). Console "party" games fill this niche, such as <i>Mario Party</i> series and its imitators. With the rise of HDTVs that allow easy PC connections to the VGA or HDMI input, why hasn't someone outdone <i>Mario Party</i> on PC?
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Conspicuous from its absence from the article is multiplayer .
So let me throw something out : Even for as far as PC gaming has come , it still has n't moved into one niche that consoles currently dominate .
This niche is when you have friends over , and they 're suddenly in the mood to play a video game .
So you want a game that 1. is easy to learn and 2. does n't need more PCs than you have available ( because having to go back home to dismantle their PCs would kill the moment ) .
Console " party " games fill this niche , such as Mario Party series and its imitators .
With the rise of HDTVs that allow easy PC connections to the VGA or HDMI input , why has n't someone outdone Mario Party on PC ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Conspicuous from its absence from the article is multiplayer.
So let me throw something out:

Even for as far as PC gaming has come, it still hasn't moved into one niche that consoles currently dominate.
This niche is when you have friends over, and they're suddenly in the mood to play a video game.
So you want a game that 1. is easy to learn and 2. doesn't need more PCs than you have available (because having to go back home to dismantle their PCs would kill the moment).
Console "party" games fill this niche, such as Mario Party series and its imitators.
With the rise of HDTVs that allow easy PC connections to the VGA or HDMI input, why hasn't someone outdone Mario Party on PC?
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823845</id>
	<title>Bobbing camera navigation</title>
	<author>Fantastic Lad</author>
	<datestamp>1256142180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow.  Look at all the responses to your post!</p><p>As per usual, people are connecting their sense of self worth to their preferences in arbitrary things.  Movies are another big ego-hook.</p><p>"What?  Something I have chosen to like isn't universally popular?  DENY!  ATTACK!  REJECT!"</p><p>The Ego is such a silly burden.</p><p>That being said, where I actively have to resist the addictive call of (some) PC games, which I do very well, thank-you, console games seem astonishingly dull; they all appear to be variations on an identical theme; "Move a point of perspective around in a 3D environment with an awkward little control unit and manipulate objects."  Every game is essentially the same basic set of challenges dressed up with different wall papers.  If you've played one, you've played them all.  They were exciting when the concept was new, but honestly, the last time I enjoyed one of those 3D games was when the wall paper was Star Wars and I got to use a light saber.  Then the novelty wore off.  Story is the only thing which interests me now with such productions.  --Half Life, for instance, had a really neat story, but I only know that because I got fed up part way through the game and read a synopsis so that I could quit navigating a bobbing camera around for fifty hours while getting shot at.  That's what movies are for; the actors do all that annoying puzzle-solving crap for you.  I just wanted to know who that dude with the briefcase was!</p><p>The PC games I find attractive are those which have unique and far more dynamic problem solving tactical elements, preferably with lots of short cut keys.  Dodging bullets is fun only until you realize that the solution is obvious; shoot at the other guy until he stops shooting back.  Problem solved.  Works every time.  Now just apply that exact same solution thousands and thousands of times.  Isn't that fun?</p><p>But don't take any of that personally.  I enjoyed those games too when they were new.</p><p>-FL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
Look at all the responses to your post ! As per usual , people are connecting their sense of self worth to their preferences in arbitrary things .
Movies are another big ego-hook. " What ?
Something I have chosen to like is n't universally popular ?
DENY ! ATTACK !
REJECT ! " The Ego is such a silly burden.That being said , where I actively have to resist the addictive call of ( some ) PC games , which I do very well , thank-you , console games seem astonishingly dull ; they all appear to be variations on an identical theme ; " Move a point of perspective around in a 3D environment with an awkward little control unit and manipulate objects .
" Every game is essentially the same basic set of challenges dressed up with different wall papers .
If you 've played one , you 've played them all .
They were exciting when the concept was new , but honestly , the last time I enjoyed one of those 3D games was when the wall paper was Star Wars and I got to use a light saber .
Then the novelty wore off .
Story is the only thing which interests me now with such productions .
--Half Life , for instance , had a really neat story , but I only know that because I got fed up part way through the game and read a synopsis so that I could quit navigating a bobbing camera around for fifty hours while getting shot at .
That 's what movies are for ; the actors do all that annoying puzzle-solving crap for you .
I just wanted to know who that dude with the briefcase was ! The PC games I find attractive are those which have unique and far more dynamic problem solving tactical elements , preferably with lots of short cut keys .
Dodging bullets is fun only until you realize that the solution is obvious ; shoot at the other guy until he stops shooting back .
Problem solved .
Works every time .
Now just apply that exact same solution thousands and thousands of times .
Is n't that fun ? But do n't take any of that personally .
I enjoyed those games too when they were new.-FL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
Look at all the responses to your post!As per usual, people are connecting their sense of self worth to their preferences in arbitrary things.
Movies are another big ego-hook."What?
Something I have chosen to like isn't universally popular?
DENY!  ATTACK!
REJECT!"The Ego is such a silly burden.That being said, where I actively have to resist the addictive call of (some) PC games, which I do very well, thank-you, console games seem astonishingly dull; they all appear to be variations on an identical theme; "Move a point of perspective around in a 3D environment with an awkward little control unit and manipulate objects.
"  Every game is essentially the same basic set of challenges dressed up with different wall papers.
If you've played one, you've played them all.
They were exciting when the concept was new, but honestly, the last time I enjoyed one of those 3D games was when the wall paper was Star Wars and I got to use a light saber.
Then the novelty wore off.
Story is the only thing which interests me now with such productions.
--Half Life, for instance, had a really neat story, but I only know that because I got fed up part way through the game and read a synopsis so that I could quit navigating a bobbing camera around for fifty hours while getting shot at.
That's what movies are for; the actors do all that annoying puzzle-solving crap for you.
I just wanted to know who that dude with the briefcase was!The PC games I find attractive are those which have unique and far more dynamic problem solving tactical elements, preferably with lots of short cut keys.
Dodging bullets is fun only until you realize that the solution is obvious; shoot at the other guy until he stops shooting back.
Problem solved.
Works every time.
Now just apply that exact same solution thousands and thousands of times.
Isn't that fun?But don't take any of that personally.
I enjoyed those games too when they were new.-FL</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29829501</id>
	<title>I beg to differ ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256123460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> On the other hand, from a story perspective, Doom was absolutely rubbish. You start in a room, no idea what's going on and you are surrounded by demons. You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I'm sure most of the people who played Doom are going "There was a <b>manual</b>?!?
</p><p>
Everyone I know just started playing, died a few times, and figured it out.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , from a story perspective , Doom was absolutely rubbish .
You start in a room , no idea what 's going on and you are surrounded by demons .
You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all I 'm sure most of the people who played Doom are going " There was a manual ? ! ?
Everyone I know just started playing , died a few times , and figured it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> On the other hand, from a story perspective, Doom was absolutely rubbish.
You start in a room, no idea what's going on and you are surrounded by demons.
You have to read the manual and supporting media to get a grip on it all

I'm sure most of the people who played Doom are going "There was a manual?!?
Everyone I know just started playing, died a few times, and figured it out.

	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823375</id>
	<title>Re:They still have far to go</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1256139780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Even for as far as PC gaming has come, it still hasn't moved into one niche that consoles currently dominate. This niche is when you have friends over, and they're suddenly in the mood to play a video game. So you want a game that 1. is easy to learn and 2. doesn't need more PCs than you have available</p></div><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scorched\_Earth\_(computer\_game)" title="wikipedia.org">Scorched Earth</a> [wikipedia.org], <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RoboSport" title="wikipedia.org">RoboSport</a> [wikipedia.org], etc.  Tons of games in the pre-ubiquitous-internet days were made for local multiplayer (usually turn based).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even for as far as PC gaming has come , it still has n't moved into one niche that consoles currently dominate .
This niche is when you have friends over , and they 're suddenly in the mood to play a video game .
So you want a game that 1. is easy to learn and 2. does n't need more PCs than you have available Scorched Earth [ wikipedia.org ] , RoboSport [ wikipedia.org ] , etc .
Tons of games in the pre-ubiquitous-internet days were made for local multiplayer ( usually turn based ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even for as far as PC gaming has come, it still hasn't moved into one niche that consoles currently dominate.
This niche is when you have friends over, and they're suddenly in the mood to play a video game.
So you want a game that 1. is easy to learn and 2. doesn't need more PCs than you have available Scorched Earth [wikipedia.org], RoboSport [wikipedia.org], etc.
Tons of games in the pre-ubiquitous-internet days were made for local multiplayer (usually turn based).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821287</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821211</id>
	<title>Apples vs Oranges...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256125740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He says : "Doom (story in it) was absolutely rubbish"</p><p>Story in most games is incidental and most game stories are bad, a game with great gameplay can save a bad story, but a game with a good story can't save a bad game.</p><p>"There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible."</p><p>People care about how fun a game is ultimately, although I agree there are graphics whore games, but gameplay still is the core of any game.  Good graphics cannot ultimately save the crappyness of a game.   For instance Assasin's creed looked great but got boring and monotonous insanely fast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He says : " Doom ( story in it ) was absolutely rubbish " Story in most games is incidental and most game stories are bad , a game with great gameplay can save a bad story , but a game with a good story ca n't save a bad game .
" There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible .
" People care about how fun a game is ultimately , although I agree there are graphics whore games , but gameplay still is the core of any game .
Good graphics can not ultimately save the crappyness of a game .
For instance Assasin 's creed looked great but got boring and monotonous insanely fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He says : "Doom (story in it) was absolutely rubbish"Story in most games is incidental and most game stories are bad, a game with great gameplay can save a bad story, but a game with a good story can't save a bad game.
"There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible.
"People care about how fun a game is ultimately, although I agree there are graphics whore games, but gameplay still is the core of any game.
Good graphics cannot ultimately save the crappyness of a game.
For instance Assasin's creed looked great but got boring and monotonous insanely fast.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823273</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>rdwulfe</author>
	<datestamp>1256139120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I heartily agree with you, Shivetya.</p><p>Starflight was an incredible game, one of the first games I truly remember, and I still revisit it now and again when I get the urge for that old, full flavored gaming feel... I play Eve Online now, and it scratches the itch, but not quite in the same way. X2 and X3 are close, too, but... they almost try too hard, in some ways.</p><p>The Wing Commander franchise was incredible as well. Wonderful arcade feel to it, though I always wish they left it more open. Privateer had it right there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I heartily agree with you , Shivetya.Starflight was an incredible game , one of the first games I truly remember , and I still revisit it now and again when I get the urge for that old , full flavored gaming feel... I play Eve Online now , and it scratches the itch , but not quite in the same way .
X2 and X3 are close , too , but... they almost try too hard , in some ways.The Wing Commander franchise was incredible as well .
Wonderful arcade feel to it , though I always wish they left it more open .
Privateer had it right there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heartily agree with you, Shivetya.Starflight was an incredible game, one of the first games I truly remember, and I still revisit it now and again when I get the urge for that old, full flavored gaming feel... I play Eve Online now, and it scratches the itch, but not quite in the same way.
X2 and X3 are close, too, but... they almost try too hard, in some ways.The Wing Commander franchise was incredible as well.
Wonderful arcade feel to it, though I always wish they left it more open.
Privateer had it right there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821411</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>linzeal</author>
	<datestamp>1256127480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>MMORPGS came from MUDS in the 1980's which came from tabletop RPG which came from Sci-Fi writers like Paul Anderson's 'psychodrama' stories from the 1950's.  The idea being that grown ups act like they are something they are not and interact with each other through roleplaying.  That would be an interesting article to read, not some 20 some year old who can't bother to at least Google a bit further back than his comfort zone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MMORPGS came from MUDS in the 1980 's which came from tabletop RPG which came from Sci-Fi writers like Paul Anderson 's 'psychodrama ' stories from the 1950 's .
The idea being that grown ups act like they are something they are not and interact with each other through roleplaying .
That would be an interesting article to read , not some 20 some year old who ca n't bother to at least Google a bit further back than his comfort zone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MMORPGS came from MUDS in the 1980's which came from tabletop RPG which came from Sci-Fi writers like Paul Anderson's 'psychodrama' stories from the 1950's.
The idea being that grown ups act like they are something they are not and interact with each other through roleplaying.
That would be an interesting article to read, not some 20 some year old who can't bother to at least Google a bit further back than his comfort zone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832063</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>nametaken</author>
	<datestamp>1256148780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The other grand "evolutions" have been the not releasing of demos anymore, the crazy DRM + phone home features, the rise of the "major game publisher" and the death of the small independent software house.</i></p><p>I have to say, I'm glad to see this changing.  There's a backlash happening right now against DRM'd games.  I'm also seeing <i>good</i> demos again.</p><p>Oddly enough, both of these are things seem to be coming from successful independents.  World of Goo and Machinarium are two good examples of games with good demos, and I know at least WoG is DRM free when purchased from 2dBoy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The other grand " evolutions " have been the not releasing of demos anymore , the crazy DRM + phone home features , the rise of the " major game publisher " and the death of the small independent software house.I have to say , I 'm glad to see this changing .
There 's a backlash happening right now against DRM 'd games .
I 'm also seeing good demos again.Oddly enough , both of these are things seem to be coming from successful independents .
World of Goo and Machinarium are two good examples of games with good demos , and I know at least WoG is DRM free when purchased from 2dBoy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The other grand "evolutions" have been the not releasing of demos anymore, the crazy DRM + phone home features, the rise of the "major game publisher" and the death of the small independent software house.I have to say, I'm glad to see this changing.
There's a backlash happening right now against DRM'd games.
I'm also seeing good demos again.Oddly enough, both of these are things seem to be coming from successful independents.
World of Goo and Machinarium are two good examples of games with good demos, and I know at least WoG is DRM free when purchased from 2dBoy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824391</id>
	<title>Defender of the Crown</title>
	<author>BoogieChile</author>
	<datestamp>1256144640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
On the Amiga.

From that day, I had to have one...</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the Amiga .
From that day , I had to have one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
On the Amiga.
From that day, I had to have one...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822447</id>
	<title>Re:Doom</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1256135100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know about that. Sure Doom  was nice, but it was the original Quake that had everybody I know crowded around a monitor going "oooh!". From the awesome graphics, to the soundtrack by NiN, to the fricking huge levels with lots of secrets to find, Quake was the one that had all my friends rushing out to buy PCs and Voodoo cards.</p><p>So while Doom got many folks to <em>try a PC</em> for the first time, in fact I got my first Intel PC from a guy who had last year's top o' the line P-100MHz and gave it to me for the $150 he owed me because it would only run Doom "stock" and gave him an excuse to get a tricked out gamer rig, It was Quake that had folks running out and shelling out what was serious money at the time for gaming PCs. Hell I would say that Quake and the Voodoo is what created the whole idea of gaming PCs, as a stock business rig just wouldn't give you the "oooh!" factor in that game.</p><p>

 And look at how far we progressed thanks to everyone wanting the "oooh!" factor. In a five year period I went from that P-100 to a P233Mhz, a PII-400MHz, a P3-650Mhz, a P3-733Mhz, to a P3-1100Mhz which I still keep around as a Nettop. Lets be honest-Windows and the office apps of the day certainly didn't use anywhere near that much juice, and even today that 1100Mhz with Win2K and MS Office 2K makes a good little Net appliance, but of course if you want to game it just don't cut it, hence the dual core AMD with 8Gb of RAM and another 1Gb on the GPU I have for gaming. And that can all be traced back to Quake, which even today is still damned fun to break out. While Doom may have implanted the <em>idea</em> of 3D gaming in the heads of the masses, I would argue that Quake drove that idea home with all the power of a nailgun and made it a "must have" for the masses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about that .
Sure Doom was nice , but it was the original Quake that had everybody I know crowded around a monitor going " oooh ! " .
From the awesome graphics , to the soundtrack by NiN , to the fricking huge levels with lots of secrets to find , Quake was the one that had all my friends rushing out to buy PCs and Voodoo cards.So while Doom got many folks to try a PC for the first time , in fact I got my first Intel PC from a guy who had last year 's top o ' the line P-100MHz and gave it to me for the $ 150 he owed me because it would only run Doom " stock " and gave him an excuse to get a tricked out gamer rig , It was Quake that had folks running out and shelling out what was serious money at the time for gaming PCs .
Hell I would say that Quake and the Voodoo is what created the whole idea of gaming PCs , as a stock business rig just would n't give you the " oooh !
" factor in that game .
And look at how far we progressed thanks to everyone wanting the " oooh !
" factor .
In a five year period I went from that P-100 to a P233Mhz , a PII-400MHz , a P3-650Mhz , a P3-733Mhz , to a P3-1100Mhz which I still keep around as a Nettop .
Lets be honest-Windows and the office apps of the day certainly did n't use anywhere near that much juice , and even today that 1100Mhz with Win2K and MS Office 2K makes a good little Net appliance , but of course if you want to game it just do n't cut it , hence the dual core AMD with 8Gb of RAM and another 1Gb on the GPU I have for gaming .
And that can all be traced back to Quake , which even today is still damned fun to break out .
While Doom may have implanted the idea of 3D gaming in the heads of the masses , I would argue that Quake drove that idea home with all the power of a nailgun and made it a " must have " for the masses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about that.
Sure Doom  was nice, but it was the original Quake that had everybody I know crowded around a monitor going "oooh!".
From the awesome graphics, to the soundtrack by NiN, to the fricking huge levels with lots of secrets to find, Quake was the one that had all my friends rushing out to buy PCs and Voodoo cards.So while Doom got many folks to try a PC for the first time, in fact I got my first Intel PC from a guy who had last year's top o' the line P-100MHz and gave it to me for the $150 he owed me because it would only run Doom "stock" and gave him an excuse to get a tricked out gamer rig, It was Quake that had folks running out and shelling out what was serious money at the time for gaming PCs.
Hell I would say that Quake and the Voodoo is what created the whole idea of gaming PCs, as a stock business rig just wouldn't give you the "oooh!
" factor in that game.
And look at how far we progressed thanks to everyone wanting the "oooh!
" factor.
In a five year period I went from that P-100 to a P233Mhz, a PII-400MHz, a P3-650Mhz, a P3-733Mhz, to a P3-1100Mhz which I still keep around as a Nettop.
Lets be honest-Windows and the office apps of the day certainly didn't use anywhere near that much juice, and even today that 1100Mhz with Win2K and MS Office 2K makes a good little Net appliance, but of course if you want to game it just don't cut it, hence the dual core AMD with 8Gb of RAM and another 1Gb on the GPU I have for gaming.
And that can all be traced back to Quake, which even today is still damned fun to break out.
While Doom may have implanted the idea of 3D gaming in the heads of the masses, I would argue that Quake drove that idea home with all the power of a nailgun and made it a "must have" for the masses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822669</id>
	<title>The TRUE winners of the Doom/Wolf 3D era</title>
	<author>yeehaomgyay</author>
	<datestamp>1256136300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Were
PATHWAYS INTO DARKNESS (Wolf 3D era)(Bungie)
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathways\_into\_Darkness" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathways\_into\_Darkness</a> [wikipedia.org]

and

MARATHON (Doom era)(Bungie)
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathon\_(video\_game)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathon\_(video\_game)</a> [wikipedia.org]

Both had outstanding plots, better mechanics than Wolf 3d or Doom, and generally explain why Bungie is now a world-class game company whereas Id is merely a world-class game-programming company that makes crappy games.

Suck iTTT, Carmack!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Were PATHWAYS INTO DARKNESS ( Wolf 3D era ) ( Bungie ) http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathways \ _into \ _Darkness [ wikipedia.org ] and MARATHON ( Doom era ) ( Bungie ) http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathon \ _ ( video \ _game ) [ wikipedia.org ] Both had outstanding plots , better mechanics than Wolf 3d or Doom , and generally explain why Bungie is now a world-class game company whereas Id is merely a world-class game-programming company that makes crappy games .
Suck iTTT , Carmack !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Were
PATHWAYS INTO DARKNESS (Wolf 3D era)(Bungie)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathways\_into\_Darkness [wikipedia.org]

and

MARATHON (Doom era)(Bungie)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathon\_(video\_game) [wikipedia.org]

Both had outstanding plots, better mechanics than Wolf 3d or Doom, and generally explain why Bungie is now a world-class game company whereas Id is merely a world-class game-programming company that makes crappy games.
Suck iTTT, Carmack!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822279</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256134140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There may be some good news for PC gamers: the longer development cycles for console hardware.  Several console manufacturers have mentioned that the next-gen console is further away than expected due to rising complexity and development cost.  In contrast, PC gaming hardware development is continuous and fast.
<br> <br>
Like it or not, a good part of gaming is still eye-candy.  Players like to go ohh and ahh over the latest games' visuals, while developers still like to show off their cutting-edge engines.  And the good news is: with most games these days, that cutting edge hardware is entirely optional: you can upgrade if you want the pretty colors, or leave you system as is to just play the game.  Most gamers do not mind spending a few hundred bucks every year on their system to keep up, which is enough to enjoy the latest gimmicks.  Perhaps this is enough to keep PC gaming alive.
<br> <br>
What worries me a lot more is the tendency to port games directly from consoles to PCs, without taking advantage of the edge PCs have over consoles.  That's not just more up-to-date video hardware, but also includes things like keyboard an mouse, multi-screen capability, etc.  There are already a few games out there with crappy menu's and crappy avatar control that appear to come straight from consoles.  And lets not forget the latest news that has gamers in a fit: the fact that the new COD title will not have a proper multiplayer server selections screen, but instead uses a craptastic console-style random matchmaker function for finding multiplayer games.  These are precisely the reasons I am still playing PC games, but if those games lose those extra features, I might as well turn to consoles and make do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There may be some good news for PC gamers : the longer development cycles for console hardware .
Several console manufacturers have mentioned that the next-gen console is further away than expected due to rising complexity and development cost .
In contrast , PC gaming hardware development is continuous and fast .
Like it or not , a good part of gaming is still eye-candy .
Players like to go ohh and ahh over the latest games ' visuals , while developers still like to show off their cutting-edge engines .
And the good news is : with most games these days , that cutting edge hardware is entirely optional : you can upgrade if you want the pretty colors , or leave you system as is to just play the game .
Most gamers do not mind spending a few hundred bucks every year on their system to keep up , which is enough to enjoy the latest gimmicks .
Perhaps this is enough to keep PC gaming alive .
What worries me a lot more is the tendency to port games directly from consoles to PCs , without taking advantage of the edge PCs have over consoles .
That 's not just more up-to-date video hardware , but also includes things like keyboard an mouse , multi-screen capability , etc .
There are already a few games out there with crappy menu 's and crappy avatar control that appear to come straight from consoles .
And lets not forget the latest news that has gamers in a fit : the fact that the new COD title will not have a proper multiplayer server selections screen , but instead uses a craptastic console-style random matchmaker function for finding multiplayer games .
These are precisely the reasons I am still playing PC games , but if those games lose those extra features , I might as well turn to consoles and make do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There may be some good news for PC gamers: the longer development cycles for console hardware.
Several console manufacturers have mentioned that the next-gen console is further away than expected due to rising complexity and development cost.
In contrast, PC gaming hardware development is continuous and fast.
Like it or not, a good part of gaming is still eye-candy.
Players like to go ohh and ahh over the latest games' visuals, while developers still like to show off their cutting-edge engines.
And the good news is: with most games these days, that cutting edge hardware is entirely optional: you can upgrade if you want the pretty colors, or leave you system as is to just play the game.
Most gamers do not mind spending a few hundred bucks every year on their system to keep up, which is enough to enjoy the latest gimmicks.
Perhaps this is enough to keep PC gaming alive.
What worries me a lot more is the tendency to port games directly from consoles to PCs, without taking advantage of the edge PCs have over consoles.
That's not just more up-to-date video hardware, but also includes things like keyboard an mouse, multi-screen capability, etc.
There are already a few games out there with crappy menu's and crappy avatar control that appear to come straight from consoles.
And lets not forget the latest news that has gamers in a fit: the fact that the new COD title will not have a proper multiplayer server selections screen, but instead uses a craptastic console-style random matchmaker function for finding multiplayer games.
These are precisely the reasons I am still playing PC games, but if those games lose those extra features, I might as well turn to consoles and make do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822955</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1256137560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree totally. Chess doesn't have a story. Nor does poker or bridge. A truly great game can stand on gameplay alone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree totally .
Chess does n't have a story .
Nor does poker or bridge .
A truly great game can stand on gameplay alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree totally.
Chess doesn't have a story.
Nor does poker or bridge.
A truly great game can stand on gameplay alone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822645</id>
	<title>Re:same as life</title>
	<author>bornyesterday</author>
	<datestamp>1256136180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hell, in Myst you didn't even get a manual</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell , in Myst you did n't even get a manual</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell, in Myst you didn't even get a manual</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29829485</id>
	<title>Re:same as life</title>
	<author>T.E.D.</author>
	<datestamp>1256123400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Mine's been more like a Last American Hero version of that:

</p><p>At the very beginning I lost the manual, so really I spend most of my time flying sidways into walls.

</p><p>The only people who ever watched were mostly looking to laugh at me, and after a while even they moved on to more entertaining fare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mine 's been more like a Last American Hero version of that : At the very beginning I lost the manual , so really I spend most of my time flying sidways into walls .
The only people who ever watched were mostly looking to laugh at me , and after a while even they moved on to more entertaining fare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Mine's been more like a Last American Hero version of that:

At the very beginning I lost the manual, so really I spend most of my time flying sidways into walls.
The only people who ever watched were mostly looking to laugh at me, and after a while even they moved on to more entertaining fare.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824491</id>
	<title>Ken's Labyrinth?</title>
	<author>FrozenFrog</author>
	<datestamp>1256145120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Ken's Labyrinth was released almost a year before DOOM.  So isn't it really the first?
<br> <br>
Ken's Labyrinth released Jan 1 1993<br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken's\_Labyrinth" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken\%27s\_Labyrinth</a> [wikipedia.org]
<br> <br>
Doom released Dec 10 1993<br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom\_(video\_game)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom\_\%28video\_game\%29</a> [wikipedia.org]
<br> <br>
Frog</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ken 's Labyrinth was released almost a year before DOOM .
So is n't it really the first ?
Ken 's Labyrinth released Jan 1 1993 http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken \ % 27s \ _Labyrinth [ wikipedia.org ] Doom released Dec 10 1993 http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom \ _ \ % 28video \ _game \ % 29 [ wikipedia.org ] Frog</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Ken's Labyrinth was released almost a year before DOOM.
So isn't it really the first?
Ken's Labyrinth released Jan 1 1993
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken\%27s\_Labyrinth [wikipedia.org]
 
Doom released Dec 10 1993
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom\_\%28video\_game\%29 [wikipedia.org]
 
Frog</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833305</id>
	<title>Re:Doom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256210820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's "Doom", not "DOOM!", btw.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's " Doom " , not " DOOM !
" , btw .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's "Doom", not "DOOM!
", btw.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822427</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256135040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC.  Just $300</p></div><p>Once you factor in the cost of the HDTV, the stereo receiver with the HDMI inputs, the cables, the surround sound speakers, the extra controller, etc and you are spending quite a bit more than $300.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC .
Just $ 300Once you factor in the cost of the HDTV , the stereo receiver with the HDMI inputs , the cables , the surround sound speakers , the extra controller , etc and you are spending quite a bit more than $ 300 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC.
Just $300Once you factor in the cost of the HDTV, the stereo receiver with the HDMI inputs, the cables, the surround sound speakers, the extra controller, etc and you are spending quite a bit more than $300.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29828875</id>
	<title>Consoles</title>
	<author>ucblockhead</author>
	<datestamp>1256120340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't help but notice that three of the five games they mention by name on the last page describing where things are now are also on consoles.  (Oblivion, Left 4 Dead and GTA IV)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't help but notice that three of the five games they mention by name on the last page describing where things are now are also on consoles .
( Oblivion , Left 4 Dead and GTA IV )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't help but notice that three of the five games they mention by name on the last page describing where things are now are also on consoles.
(Oblivion, Left 4 Dead and GTA IV)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821409</id>
	<title>ya.. they've come a looong ways..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256127480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... all the way up to $60+ for a farkin' game.. and that doesn't include pay-to-play games or the expansion-pack model (e.g. the sims) that can cost upwards of $200 or more by the time you've satisfied your kid (until the next version comes out).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... all the way up to $ 60 + for a farkin ' game.. and that does n't include pay-to-play games or the expansion-pack model ( e.g .
the sims ) that can cost upwards of $ 200 or more by the time you 've satisfied your kid ( until the next version comes out ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... all the way up to $60+ for a farkin' game.. and that doesn't include pay-to-play games or the expansion-pack model (e.g.
the sims) that can cost upwards of $200 or more by the time you've satisfied your kid (until the next version comes out).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821841</id>
	<title>Re:same as life</title>
	<author>Cryacin</author>
	<datestamp>1256131140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>need to read holy book (manual) to get a grip on it all</p></div><p>That'll learn ya to RTFM!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>need to read holy book ( manual ) to get a grip on it allThat 'll learn ya to RTFM !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>need to read holy book (manual) to get a grip on it allThat'll learn ya to RTFM!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821509</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1256128440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know about a movie without a plot... I'm not going to joke about films like Die Hard 4.0 or xXx etc... I wouldn't mind seeing a film about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobo\_(DC\_Comics)" title="wikipedia.org">Lobo</a> [wikipedia.org], for instance.<br> <br>Sometimes, entertainment doesn't need a purpose. It can just "be" entertaining!<br> <br>Apparently, Guy Ritchie is going to direct a film featuring Lobo. Seems I have all of the good ideas <b>just</b> a little too late...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about a movie without a plot... I 'm not going to joke about films like Die Hard 4.0 or xXx etc... I would n't mind seeing a film about Lobo [ wikipedia.org ] , for instance .
Sometimes , entertainment does n't need a purpose .
It can just " be " entertaining !
Apparently , Guy Ritchie is going to direct a film featuring Lobo .
Seems I have all of the good ideas just a little too late.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about a movie without a plot... I'm not going to joke about films like Die Hard 4.0 or xXx etc... I wouldn't mind seeing a film about Lobo [wikipedia.org], for instance.
Sometimes, entertainment doesn't need a purpose.
It can just "be" entertaining!
Apparently, Guy Ritchie is going to direct a film featuring Lobo.
Seems I have all of the good ideas just a little too late...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821631</id>
	<title>Not far</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256129520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>We still have linear storylines damnit (and NO, those stupid choices you get in games are gimmicks and add nothing to the story). We need real AI now that can interact with the player.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We still have linear storylines damnit ( and NO , those stupid choices you get in games are gimmicks and add nothing to the story ) .
We need real AI now that can interact with the player .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We still have linear storylines damnit (and NO, those stupid choices you get in games are gimmicks and add nothing to the story).
We need real AI now that can interact with the player.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822499</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256135280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;*I'm sure other games did [a zoomable tactical display] before... Rome: Total War?</p><p>Powermonger?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; * I 'm sure other games did [ a zoomable tactical display ] before... Rome : Total War ? Powermonger ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;*I'm sure other games did [a zoomable tactical display] before... Rome: Total War?Powermonger?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29827087</id>
	<title>Bad Splash Panel Art</title>
	<author>handy\_vandal</author>
	<datestamp>1256155680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bad Splash Panel Art was a commonplace in the DOS era.</p><p>As games grew in power, scope, ambition, and budget, I was surprised at how badly the art continued to suck -- especially the figure drawing. (Epic, I'm thinking of you -- Unreal Tournament at least as late UT2004 still looked like it was drawn by earnest geeks rather than trained or gifted artists.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bad Splash Panel Art was a commonplace in the DOS era.As games grew in power , scope , ambition , and budget , I was surprised at how badly the art continued to suck -- especially the figure drawing .
( Epic , I 'm thinking of you -- Unreal Tournament at least as late UT2004 still looked like it was drawn by earnest geeks rather than trained or gifted artists .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bad Splash Panel Art was a commonplace in the DOS era.As games grew in power, scope, ambition, and budget, I was surprised at how badly the art continued to suck -- especially the figure drawing.
(Epic, I'm thinking of you -- Unreal Tournament at least as late UT2004 still looked like it was drawn by earnest geeks rather than trained or gifted artists.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823323</id>
	<title>Re:Doom</title>
	<author>artemis67</author>
	<datestamp>1256139480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since the Atari 2600 and the Apple ][+ came out, it's always been a neck-and-neck race between PC's and consoles as to which was the better gaming platform.</p><p>The 2600 had a nice library of games, but the Apple ][+'s graphics and complexity blew it away. In fact, I would say that many of the pro's &amp; con's of PC vs console gaming from the early 1980's are largely intact to this day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the Atari 2600 and the Apple ] [ + came out , it 's always been a neck-and-neck race between PC 's and consoles as to which was the better gaming platform.The 2600 had a nice library of games , but the Apple ] [ + 's graphics and complexity blew it away .
In fact , I would say that many of the pro 's &amp; con 's of PC vs console gaming from the early 1980 's are largely intact to this day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the Atari 2600 and the Apple ][+ came out, it's always been a neck-and-neck race between PC's and consoles as to which was the better gaming platform.The 2600 had a nice library of games, but the Apple ][+'s graphics and complexity blew it away.
In fact, I would say that many of the pro's &amp; con's of PC vs console gaming from the early 1980's are largely intact to this day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823197</id>
	<title>X-Com</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256138760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No mention of X-Com in the history of PC gaming?  Now that's just silly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No mention of X-Com in the history of PC gaming ?
Now that 's just silly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No mention of X-Com in the history of PC gaming?
Now that's just silly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139</id>
	<title>Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>Lord Lode</author>
	<datestamp>1256124720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doom's gameplay is very fun, and there are only few modern games that are similar to it. The original Serious Sam games were similar. Games with good stories are good, but games like Doom are too. Does every game need to have a story? A movie or a fiction book without story, that is bad. But for a game it shouldn't be a negative criticism if it doesn't have one. Depending on the style and purpose of the game, just being fun is enough. Many modern games feel too heavy and slow paced to match the fun of fragging monsters seen in Doom.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Doom 's gameplay is very fun , and there are only few modern games that are similar to it .
The original Serious Sam games were similar .
Games with good stories are good , but games like Doom are too .
Does every game need to have a story ?
A movie or a fiction book without story , that is bad .
But for a game it should n't be a negative criticism if it does n't have one .
Depending on the style and purpose of the game , just being fun is enough .
Many modern games feel too heavy and slow paced to match the fun of fragging monsters seen in Doom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doom's gameplay is very fun, and there are only few modern games that are similar to it.
The original Serious Sam games were similar.
Games with good stories are good, but games like Doom are too.
Does every game need to have a story?
A movie or a fiction book without story, that is bad.
But for a game it shouldn't be a negative criticism if it doesn't have one.
Depending on the style and purpose of the game, just being fun is enough.
Many modern games feel too heavy and slow paced to match the fun of fragging monsters seen in Doom.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833297</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>borizz</author>
	<datestamp>1256210760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tachyon was great. Also great were Freelancer (if you could get around to the somewhat odd flying controls) and my personal favorite game ever is Freelancer2, which you can now get for free because it has been open sourced. Freelancer2 also has a lot of buttons, but the learning curve is pretty smooth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tachyon was great .
Also great were Freelancer ( if you could get around to the somewhat odd flying controls ) and my personal favorite game ever is Freelancer2 , which you can now get for free because it has been open sourced .
Freelancer2 also has a lot of buttons , but the learning curve is pretty smooth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tachyon was great.
Also great were Freelancer (if you could get around to the somewhat odd flying controls) and my personal favorite game ever is Freelancer2, which you can now get for free because it has been open sourced.
Freelancer2 also has a lot of buttons, but the learning curve is pretty smooth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29835009</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>namco</author>
	<datestamp>1256225700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try either <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X2\_The\_Threat" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">X2: The Threat</a> [wikipedia.org] or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X\%C2\%B3:\_Reunion" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">X3: Reunion</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try either X2 : The Threat [ wikipedia.org ] or X3 : Reunion [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try either X2: The Threat [wikipedia.org] or X3: Reunion [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822951</id>
	<title>Re:Doom3</title>
	<author>Fallingcow</author>
	<datestamp>1256137500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You're right about Doom3, except for being the first, the first with true black-on-black rendering was Gears of War.</p></div></blockquote><p>GAMING HISTORY FAIL.</p><p>Doom 3 release date: August 3, 2004<br>Gears of War release date: November 9, 2006</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right about Doom3 , except for being the first , the first with true black-on-black rendering was Gears of War.GAMING HISTORY FAIL.Doom 3 release date : August 3 , 2004Gears of War release date : November 9 , 2006</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right about Doom3, except for being the first, the first with true black-on-black rendering was Gears of War.GAMING HISTORY FAIL.Doom 3 release date: August 3, 2004Gears of War release date: November 9, 2006
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29842161</id>
	<title>So young but that doesn't mean Doom started this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256223180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I cant believe this guy only went back to Doom.  There were plenty of fun games for computers(apple II, commodore, atari st)</p><p>Here's a partial list:</p><p>- Gold Box D&amp;D (Pool of Radiance, Curse of the Azure Bonds, etc)<br>- Choplifter<br>- Wasteland<br>- Elevator Action<br>- Burgertime<br>- Ultima I<br>- Zork<br>- Bard's Tale<br>- Police Quest<br>- Wings of Fury</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I cant believe this guy only went back to Doom .
There were plenty of fun games for computers ( apple II , commodore , atari st ) Here 's a partial list : - Gold Box D&amp;D ( Pool of Radiance , Curse of the Azure Bonds , etc ) - Choplifter- Wasteland- Elevator Action- Burgertime- Ultima I- Zork- Bard 's Tale- Police Quest- Wings of Fury</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cant believe this guy only went back to Doom.
There were plenty of fun games for computers(apple II, commodore, atari st)Here's a partial list:- Gold Box D&amp;D (Pool of Radiance, Curse of the Azure Bonds, etc)- Choplifter- Wasteland- Elevator Action- Burgertime- Ultima I- Zork- Bard's Tale- Police Quest- Wings of Fury</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29828711</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>Nithendil</author>
	<datestamp>1256119620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you tried space rangers 2? It's not like wing commander but you essentially explore space, do quests, space combat, text adventures, and RTS into one package. Yah it doesn't do any one those perfectly but it is fun.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you tried space rangers 2 ?
It 's not like wing commander but you essentially explore space , do quests , space combat , text adventures , and RTS into one package .
Yah it does n't do any one those perfectly but it is fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you tried space rangers 2?
It's not like wing commander but you essentially explore space, do quests, space combat, text adventures, and RTS into one package.
Yah it doesn't do any one those perfectly but it is fun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821775</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256130660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Sorry but i can't agree, my pc costs less than a ps3 yet i can run all the latest games in ultra high graphics without sacraficing my framerate. The trick is to buy decent parts and build it yourself</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

What did you build it out of?

I breach &pound;300 with just a motherboard and processor.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry but i ca n't agree , my pc costs less than a ps3 yet i can run all the latest games in ultra high graphics without sacraficing my framerate .
The trick is to buy decent parts and build it yourself What did you build it out of ?
I breach   300 with just a motherboard and processor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry but i can't agree, my pc costs less than a ps3 yet i can run all the latest games in ultra high graphics without sacraficing my framerate.
The trick is to buy decent parts and build it yourself


What did you build it out of?
I breach £300 with just a motherboard and processor.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821423</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>AceJohnny</author>
	<datestamp>1256127600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"[This point was really hammered down for me when "Supreme Commander", highly hailed as innovative, came out and it turns out it's an almost 1-to-1 copy of the old "Total Annihilation" from 10 years ago only with better graphics]"</p></div></blockquote><p>And that's exactly as I and thousands of other fans wanted it. Most remakes are crap. SupCom isn't.</p><p>(actually, a 1:1 copy of the old with better graphics would better describe <a href="http://springrts.com/" title="springrts.com">TA: Spring</a> [springrts.com])</p><p>It did add a vital gameplay mechanic in the zoomable tactical display*. Starcraft II is going to hurt so much when I won't be able to do that.</p><p>*I'm sure other games did it before... Rome: Total War?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" [ This point was really hammered down for me when " Supreme Commander " , highly hailed as innovative , came out and it turns out it 's an almost 1-to-1 copy of the old " Total Annihilation " from 10 years ago only with better graphics ] " And that 's exactly as I and thousands of other fans wanted it .
Most remakes are crap .
SupCom is n't .
( actually , a 1 : 1 copy of the old with better graphics would better describe TA : Spring [ springrts.com ] ) It did add a vital gameplay mechanic in the zoomable tactical display * .
Starcraft II is going to hurt so much when I wo n't be able to do that .
* I 'm sure other games did it before... Rome : Total War ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"[This point was really hammered down for me when "Supreme Commander", highly hailed as innovative, came out and it turns out it's an almost 1-to-1 copy of the old "Total Annihilation" from 10 years ago only with better graphics]"And that's exactly as I and thousands of other fans wanted it.
Most remakes are crap.
SupCom isn't.
(actually, a 1:1 copy of the old with better graphics would better describe TA: Spring [springrts.com])It did add a vital gameplay mechanic in the zoomable tactical display*.
Starcraft II is going to hurt so much when I won't be able to do that.
*I'm sure other games did it before... Rome: Total War?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821337</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>rjames13</author>
	<datestamp>1256127000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Supreme Commander", highly hailed as innovative, came out and it turns out it's an almost 1-to-1 copy of the old "Total Annihilation"</p></div><p>Both games are by Chris Taylor. SC is the spiritual successor to TA. So it is similar because the gameplay in the original worked, and you don't fix what is not broken.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The other grand "evolutions" have been the not releasing of demos anymore, the crazy DRM + phone home features, the rise of the "major game publisher" and the death of the small independent software house.</p></div><p>DRM has been a problem but demos are still released for software. Crysis, Bioshock, Portal etc had a demo. The death of small independent software house is just ignoring the huge indy game scene.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Supreme Commander " , highly hailed as innovative , came out and it turns out it 's an almost 1-to-1 copy of the old " Total Annihilation " Both games are by Chris Taylor .
SC is the spiritual successor to TA .
So it is similar because the gameplay in the original worked , and you do n't fix what is not broken.The other grand " evolutions " have been the not releasing of demos anymore , the crazy DRM + phone home features , the rise of the " major game publisher " and the death of the small independent software house.DRM has been a problem but demos are still released for software .
Crysis , Bioshock , Portal etc had a demo .
The death of small independent software house is just ignoring the huge indy game scene .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Supreme Commander", highly hailed as innovative, came out and it turns out it's an almost 1-to-1 copy of the old "Total Annihilation"Both games are by Chris Taylor.
SC is the spiritual successor to TA.
So it is similar because the gameplay in the original worked, and you don't fix what is not broken.The other grand "evolutions" have been the not releasing of demos anymore, the crazy DRM + phone home features, the rise of the "major game publisher" and the death of the small independent software house.DRM has been a problem but demos are still released for software.
Crysis, Bioshock, Portal etc had a demo.
The death of small independent software house is just ignoring the huge indy game scene.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822043</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>ElectricTurtle</author>
	<datestamp>1256132580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>SupCom a 1:1 copy of TA? Have you <i>played</i> these games? Back in the day I was a rabid TA fanboy (this included trolling StarCraft forums, because they were the boorish enemy). I played TA regularly for years, messed with the thousands of 3rd party units, worked for TA community sites, and like most harbored the hope that some day Chris Taylor would make some kind of sequel. Naturally when SupCom was announced, I followed the development religiously, and it goes without saying that when it finally came out I really, <i>really</i> wanted to like it.<br> <br>
However the games were actually <i>too different</i> in style. SupCom had a lot of positive improvements, most significantly the strategic zoom, but also the formations, speed matching and coordination, path modification, etc. But IMO the super units, while fun, did kind of intrinsically unbalance the gameplay. In TA, turtling/porcing was a very valid play style, but just try doing it in SC. Without 3rd party units it isn't as easy and definitely not as fun. The lack of good 3rd party stuff for SC compared to TA also really surprised me.<br> <br>
Maybe I'm just a weaksauce n00b, but I also find SC to be too big and too fast. The resource curve seems a little too steep, and eventually I'm just not able to utilize it efficiently. SC is built for really dynamic and dramatic conflicts on a scale that makes TA look like a backyard snowball fight.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SupCom a 1 : 1 copy of TA ?
Have you played these games ?
Back in the day I was a rabid TA fanboy ( this included trolling StarCraft forums , because they were the boorish enemy ) .
I played TA regularly for years , messed with the thousands of 3rd party units , worked for TA community sites , and like most harbored the hope that some day Chris Taylor would make some kind of sequel .
Naturally when SupCom was announced , I followed the development religiously , and it goes without saying that when it finally came out I really , really wanted to like it .
However the games were actually too different in style .
SupCom had a lot of positive improvements , most significantly the strategic zoom , but also the formations , speed matching and coordination , path modification , etc .
But IMO the super units , while fun , did kind of intrinsically unbalance the gameplay .
In TA , turtling/porcing was a very valid play style , but just try doing it in SC .
Without 3rd party units it is n't as easy and definitely not as fun .
The lack of good 3rd party stuff for SC compared to TA also really surprised me .
Maybe I 'm just a weaksauce n00b , but I also find SC to be too big and too fast .
The resource curve seems a little too steep , and eventually I 'm just not able to utilize it efficiently .
SC is built for really dynamic and dramatic conflicts on a scale that makes TA look like a backyard snowball fight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SupCom a 1:1 copy of TA?
Have you played these games?
Back in the day I was a rabid TA fanboy (this included trolling StarCraft forums, because they were the boorish enemy).
I played TA regularly for years, messed with the thousands of 3rd party units, worked for TA community sites, and like most harbored the hope that some day Chris Taylor would make some kind of sequel.
Naturally when SupCom was announced, I followed the development religiously, and it goes without saying that when it finally came out I really, really wanted to like it.
However the games were actually too different in style.
SupCom had a lot of positive improvements, most significantly the strategic zoom, but also the formations, speed matching and coordination, path modification, etc.
But IMO the super units, while fun, did kind of intrinsically unbalance the gameplay.
In TA, turtling/porcing was a very valid play style, but just try doing it in SC.
Without 3rd party units it isn't as easy and definitely not as fun.
The lack of good 3rd party stuff for SC compared to TA also really surprised me.
Maybe I'm just a weaksauce n00b, but I also find SC to be too big and too fast.
The resource curve seems a little too steep, and eventually I'm just not able to utilize it efficiently.
SC is built for really dynamic and dramatic conflicts on a scale that makes TA look like a backyard snowball fight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29837737</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>sowth</author>
	<datestamp>1256237280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Like it or not, a good part of gaming is still eye-candy.</p></div></blockquote><p>When Hollywood took over the gaming industry, they made it about eye-candy. Most gamers cared about game play, but there are not many good game play based offerings anymore, so they don't pay much attention to mainstream games.

</p><p>Really the current generation of games only concentrate on the visual aspect of the game. Apparently, the game developers don't focus much attention to game mechanics at all, or even debugging the mechanics they do have. For an example, <a href="http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1412277&amp;cid=29823565" title="slashdot.org">read this comment</a> [slashdot.org].</p><blockquote><div><p>If you have a chopper extraction, and lose a team member, cross a check point (oh did i mention no freaken quick saves?), then die... if you continue playing from the last check point you will never finish the mission, as the chopper won't take off as it waits to check for all the team mates.</p></div></blockquote><p>So really, the reason you see so many gamers who want high resolution hardcore rendered movies is because they are the ones who are left after all this. The gamers who want real game play have to sift through indie offerings, if they have time. Though sometimes a game developer comes out with something which has decent game play.

</p><p>This is part of the reason the only gaming device I own is a Nintendo DS. It has low graphics ablities, so for a game to succeed, it has to focus on gameplay. I didn't consciously do this. Even then many of the games suck since many of them are still in the "form is more important than substance" mindset.

</p><p>...except for puzzle games, but I never really liked games which were exclusively puzzles. Also, I had two strokes (possibly other brain damage), and things which require certain kinds of thought like many puzzle games (and card games) eat up my available CPU time. I don't like turning around to do something and not remembering why I turned around!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like it or not , a good part of gaming is still eye-candy.When Hollywood took over the gaming industry , they made it about eye-candy .
Most gamers cared about game play , but there are not many good game play based offerings anymore , so they do n't pay much attention to mainstream games .
Really the current generation of games only concentrate on the visual aspect of the game .
Apparently , the game developers do n't focus much attention to game mechanics at all , or even debugging the mechanics they do have .
For an example , read this comment [ slashdot.org ] .If you have a chopper extraction , and lose a team member , cross a check point ( oh did i mention no freaken quick saves ?
) , then die... if you continue playing from the last check point you will never finish the mission , as the chopper wo n't take off as it waits to check for all the team mates.So really , the reason you see so many gamers who want high resolution hardcore rendered movies is because they are the ones who are left after all this .
The gamers who want real game play have to sift through indie offerings , if they have time .
Though sometimes a game developer comes out with something which has decent game play .
This is part of the reason the only gaming device I own is a Nintendo DS .
It has low graphics ablities , so for a game to succeed , it has to focus on gameplay .
I did n't consciously do this .
Even then many of the games suck since many of them are still in the " form is more important than substance " mindset .
...except for puzzle games , but I never really liked games which were exclusively puzzles .
Also , I had two strokes ( possibly other brain damage ) , and things which require certain kinds of thought like many puzzle games ( and card games ) eat up my available CPU time .
I do n't like turning around to do something and not remembering why I turned around !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like it or not, a good part of gaming is still eye-candy.When Hollywood took over the gaming industry, they made it about eye-candy.
Most gamers cared about game play, but there are not many good game play based offerings anymore, so they don't pay much attention to mainstream games.
Really the current generation of games only concentrate on the visual aspect of the game.
Apparently, the game developers don't focus much attention to game mechanics at all, or even debugging the mechanics they do have.
For an example, read this comment [slashdot.org].If you have a chopper extraction, and lose a team member, cross a check point (oh did i mention no freaken quick saves?
), then die... if you continue playing from the last check point you will never finish the mission, as the chopper won't take off as it waits to check for all the team mates.So really, the reason you see so many gamers who want high resolution hardcore rendered movies is because they are the ones who are left after all this.
The gamers who want real game play have to sift through indie offerings, if they have time.
Though sometimes a game developer comes out with something which has decent game play.
This is part of the reason the only gaming device I own is a Nintendo DS.
It has low graphics ablities, so for a game to succeed, it has to focus on gameplay.
I didn't consciously do this.
Even then many of the games suck since many of them are still in the "form is more important than substance" mindset.
...except for puzzle games, but I never really liked games which were exclusively puzzles.
Also, I had two strokes (possibly other brain damage), and things which require certain kinds of thought like many puzzle games (and card games) eat up my available CPU time.
I don't like turning around to do something and not remembering why I turned around!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822279</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824367</id>
	<title>Re:Hold on there, Tex</title>
	<author>mewsenews</author>
	<datestamp>1256144460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>All that you really had to know was to shoot the demons - the player has no other way to interact with the world other than shooting.</p></div></blockquote><p>Not quite true -- Doom had a "use" key, spacebar by default, that would open doors, flip switches, and summon elevators. This was "streamlined" in Quake so that you would simply press your face against doors and switches for them to activate.</p><blockquote><div><p>When, exactly, did computer game snobs decide it was cool to call DOOM 'rubbish'?</p></div></blockquote><p>Well, TFA said "from a story perspective" and I'm sure you agree that Doom's plot wasn't even rubbish, it was simply non-existent. You and I both disagree with TFA's assumption that a plot is necessary.</p><p>Sorry if this is overly nit-picky, I agree with your main points.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All that you really had to know was to shoot the demons - the player has no other way to interact with the world other than shooting.Not quite true -- Doom had a " use " key , spacebar by default , that would open doors , flip switches , and summon elevators .
This was " streamlined " in Quake so that you would simply press your face against doors and switches for them to activate.When , exactly , did computer game snobs decide it was cool to call DOOM 'rubbish ' ? Well , TFA said " from a story perspective " and I 'm sure you agree that Doom 's plot was n't even rubbish , it was simply non-existent .
You and I both disagree with TFA 's assumption that a plot is necessary.Sorry if this is overly nit-picky , I agree with your main points .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All that you really had to know was to shoot the demons - the player has no other way to interact with the world other than shooting.Not quite true -- Doom had a "use" key, spacebar by default, that would open doors, flip switches, and summon elevators.
This was "streamlined" in Quake so that you would simply press your face against doors and switches for them to activate.When, exactly, did computer game snobs decide it was cool to call DOOM 'rubbish'?Well, TFA said "from a story perspective" and I'm sure you agree that Doom's plot wasn't even rubbish, it was simply non-existent.
You and I both disagree with TFA's assumption that a plot is necessary.Sorry if this is overly nit-picky, I agree with your main points.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822459</id>
	<title>Doom invented reality?</title>
	<author>shish</author>
	<datestamp>1256135160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Things like the wobble of the guns and the on-screen feedback that tells you which direction you are being shot from  these were things that id Software invented</p></div><p>Surely having a wobbling gun is an element of realism, not an id created idea? Knowing the general direction you've been shot from is also pretty realistic, and on-screen feedback is just the logical replacement when actual pain inflicting devices are unavailable...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Things like the wobble of the guns and the on-screen feedback that tells you which direction you are being shot from these were things that id Software inventedSurely having a wobbling gun is an element of realism , not an id created idea ?
Knowing the general direction you 've been shot from is also pretty realistic , and on-screen feedback is just the logical replacement when actual pain inflicting devices are unavailable.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Things like the wobble of the guns and the on-screen feedback that tells you which direction you are being shot from  these were things that id Software inventedSurely having a wobbling gun is an element of realism, not an id created idea?
Knowing the general direction you've been shot from is also pretty realistic, and on-screen feedback is just the logical replacement when actual pain inflicting devices are unavailable...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821695</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256130000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For the last 5 years the evolution in mainstream PC gaming has been all around fancy new graphics.</p></div><p>Even starting with Wolfenstein, the evolution in mainstream PC gaming was ALWAYS around fancy new graphics.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the last 5 years the evolution in mainstream PC gaming has been all around fancy new graphics.Even starting with Wolfenstein , the evolution in mainstream PC gaming was ALWAYS around fancy new graphics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the last 5 years the evolution in mainstream PC gaming has been all around fancy new graphics.Even starting with Wolfenstein, the evolution in mainstream PC gaming was ALWAYS around fancy new graphics.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822665</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>space\_jake</author>
	<datestamp>1256136240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Strategic zoom, multi-display support, multi-core processor support, anti-rush mechanics, various different AI strategies instead of just easy, medium, and hard difficulties.  SC had a lot of innovation going on, most of it was outside of the actual game play though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Strategic zoom , multi-display support , multi-core processor support , anti-rush mechanics , various different AI strategies instead of just easy , medium , and hard difficulties .
SC had a lot of innovation going on , most of it was outside of the actual game play though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strategic zoom, multi-display support, multi-core processor support, anti-rush mechanics, various different AI strategies instead of just easy, medium, and hard difficulties.
SC had a lot of innovation going on, most of it was outside of the actual game play though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825325</id>
	<title>Aren't there other genres besides FPS?</title>
	<author>Peganthyrus</author>
	<datestamp>1256148900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this guy use his machine to play <em>anything</em> else besides FPSs? Most of the people I see arguing for PC over console is that net distribution makes it easier for weird new experiments to find an audience, but he's just going on about Doom, Doom, Doom, and how about five FPSs after it have ever even tried to get narrative into the picture. It's not until like six pages in that I skimmed down and saw a screenshot of EVE with a caption along the lines of "We used a snazzy render of EVE because the real game is so boring."</p><p>FPSs bore the hell out of me. <a href="http://llamasoft.co.uk/frontpage.php" title="llamasoft.co.uk"> <i>Gridrunner Revolution</i> </a> [llamasoft.co.uk] was the best $20 I have ever spent on a game in a long time, and it's only available on Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this guy use his machine to play anything else besides FPSs ?
Most of the people I see arguing for PC over console is that net distribution makes it easier for weird new experiments to find an audience , but he 's just going on about Doom , Doom , Doom , and how about five FPSs after it have ever even tried to get narrative into the picture .
It 's not until like six pages in that I skimmed down and saw a screenshot of EVE with a caption along the lines of " We used a snazzy render of EVE because the real game is so boring .
" FPSs bore the hell out of me .
Gridrunner Revolution [ llamasoft.co.uk ] was the best $ 20 I have ever spent on a game in a long time , and it 's only available on Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this guy use his machine to play anything else besides FPSs?
Most of the people I see arguing for PC over console is that net distribution makes it easier for weird new experiments to find an audience, but he's just going on about Doom, Doom, Doom, and how about five FPSs after it have ever even tried to get narrative into the picture.
It's not until like six pages in that I skimmed down and saw a screenshot of EVE with a caption along the lines of "We used a snazzy render of EVE because the real game is so boring.
"FPSs bore the hell out of me.
Gridrunner Revolution  [llamasoft.co.uk] was the best $20 I have ever spent on a game in a long time, and it's only available on Windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</id>
	<title>Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>Aceticon</author>
	<datestamp>1256125680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the last 5 years the evolution in mainstream PC gaming has been all around fancy new graphics.</p><p>The only new original gaming style that poped-up was MMORPGs (not really new, but it did became mass-market in the meanwhile).</p><p>[This point was really hammered down for me when "Supreme Commander", highly hailed as innovative, came out and it turns out it's an almost 1-to-1 copy of the old "Total Annihilation" from 10 years ago only with better graphics]</p><p>The other grand "evolutions" have been the not releasing of demos anymore, the crazy DRM + phone home features, the rise of the "major game publisher" and the death of the small independent software house.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the last 5 years the evolution in mainstream PC gaming has been all around fancy new graphics.The only new original gaming style that poped-up was MMORPGs ( not really new , but it did became mass-market in the meanwhile ) .
[ This point was really hammered down for me when " Supreme Commander " , highly hailed as innovative , came out and it turns out it 's an almost 1-to-1 copy of the old " Total Annihilation " from 10 years ago only with better graphics ] The other grand " evolutions " have been the not releasing of demos anymore , the crazy DRM + phone home features , the rise of the " major game publisher " and the death of the small independent software house .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the last 5 years the evolution in mainstream PC gaming has been all around fancy new graphics.The only new original gaming style that poped-up was MMORPGs (not really new, but it did became mass-market in the meanwhile).
[This point was really hammered down for me when "Supreme Commander", highly hailed as innovative, came out and it turns out it's an almost 1-to-1 copy of the old "Total Annihilation" from 10 years ago only with better graphics]The other grand "evolutions" have been the not releasing of demos anymore, the crazy DRM + phone home features, the rise of the "major game publisher" and the death of the small independent software house.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821671</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1256129820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Does every game need to have a story? A movie or a fiction book without story, that is bad. But for a game it shouldn't be a negative criticism if it doesn't have one.</p></div></blockquote><p>It's an old but true quote that story in video games is like story in pornography. It's expected to be there, but really only the flimsiest pretense of setting is necessary. Many early video games got on quite well with a handful of paragraphs in the manual.</p><p>I can recall playing Sonic 3 in 1994 and thinking it had a great "story" for a platformer, as in addition to the manual paragraphs, it used in game "cut scenes" to advance what shred of a plot there was. Interestingly, the game told its micro-tale without using a single word of text. The on-screen actions and emotions of the characters were like those from a silent film, without the captions.</p><p>Nevertheless, I did and still do consider the "story" in that game to be more than sufficient and moreover very suited to the type of game it was. I imagine it's similar for other games like Doom.</p><p>The watershed for storytelling in video games was probably Metal Gear Solid in 1998. After Hideo Kojima blew everyone away with his storytelling, developers started offering ever more elaborate and "cinematic" storylines in their games which ate up ever larger portions of the budget. The trouble came from two important flaws<br>1) Hideo Kojima never made a "cinematic" game. The resulting end product of MGS was a very different form of entertainment from a film. People focused too much on the cutscenes,(which were still quite different from raw film) and missed out on the wider package offered. It became usual to see ever more pompous and over produced cut scenes strapped on to games that never lived up to the "epic" tone set in them.<br>2) Most directors are not Hideo Kojima. This was probably the more pertinent point. Developers wanted to make epic (action)storylines in the mould of Metal Gear Solid, but simply lacked the writing ability to pull it off. Even Kojima himself managed to foul this up in MGS2. The end result is a pretentious and overbearing plot that gets in the way of the game and severely reduces enjoyment and playability.</p><p>I think a good example the benefits and pitfalls of story in games is given by the juxtaposition between Gears of War 1 and 2 on the Xbox. The first game has a minimalist story. Characters are barely introduced and have almost no development, detail on the setting is shamelessly scant, and where the plot is not entirely one dimensional, it contains gaping holes. Yet it works in the context of the game that Gears of War is, and I would argue works very well.</p><p>Gear of War 2 by contrast, suffers from an overblown and overproduced story that makes a mockery of the proceedings. Attempts to develop characters are almost comically absurd, the setting is wildly different tending towards the spectacular, the plot is incohesive and convoluted throughout and leaves loose ends everywhere. The end result, while eye candy laden, detracts significantly from the game. People just wanted to play as Marcus Fenix and shoot aliens; instead they ended up unsatisfied and confused. The developers desire to create an "epic" story instead created an epic farce. Smaller was definitely better in this case.</p><p>Obviously, the same rule does not hold across all video games. RPGs require a significant story. But even here, overproduction and poor writing can create an epic farce that taints the whole game. The prime example is Final Fantasy VIII; Your characters are all teenagers attending assassins'  high school, and you fight the sorceress who was actually your matron in the orphanage where you grew up, who was actually being controlled by another sorceress, so she could rescue <i>another</i> sorceress and cause "time compression", and when that failed you simply allow the second sorceress to take over a party member who happened to be yet <i>another sorceress</i> so that they could go back in time to allow the <i>third sorceress</i> to cause "time compression" and I wish I was making this up. The game had spectacular FMV cutscenes amidst all this, but realistically, little could be done for its utter train wreck of a plot.</p><p>KISS is definitely a philosophy that applies to video game plots. Sure, make it eye candy, make spectacular events occur, make interesting characters. But remember not to let any of these get in the way of the game. People didn't turn on your game to hear a spiel. They turned it on to make their own spiel.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does every game need to have a story ?
A movie or a fiction book without story , that is bad .
But for a game it should n't be a negative criticism if it does n't have one.It 's an old but true quote that story in video games is like story in pornography .
It 's expected to be there , but really only the flimsiest pretense of setting is necessary .
Many early video games got on quite well with a handful of paragraphs in the manual.I can recall playing Sonic 3 in 1994 and thinking it had a great " story " for a platformer , as in addition to the manual paragraphs , it used in game " cut scenes " to advance what shred of a plot there was .
Interestingly , the game told its micro-tale without using a single word of text .
The on-screen actions and emotions of the characters were like those from a silent film , without the captions.Nevertheless , I did and still do consider the " story " in that game to be more than sufficient and moreover very suited to the type of game it was .
I imagine it 's similar for other games like Doom.The watershed for storytelling in video games was probably Metal Gear Solid in 1998 .
After Hideo Kojima blew everyone away with his storytelling , developers started offering ever more elaborate and " cinematic " storylines in their games which ate up ever larger portions of the budget .
The trouble came from two important flaws1 ) Hideo Kojima never made a " cinematic " game .
The resulting end product of MGS was a very different form of entertainment from a film .
People focused too much on the cutscenes , ( which were still quite different from raw film ) and missed out on the wider package offered .
It became usual to see ever more pompous and over produced cut scenes strapped on to games that never lived up to the " epic " tone set in them.2 ) Most directors are not Hideo Kojima .
This was probably the more pertinent point .
Developers wanted to make epic ( action ) storylines in the mould of Metal Gear Solid , but simply lacked the writing ability to pull it off .
Even Kojima himself managed to foul this up in MGS2 .
The end result is a pretentious and overbearing plot that gets in the way of the game and severely reduces enjoyment and playability.I think a good example the benefits and pitfalls of story in games is given by the juxtaposition between Gears of War 1 and 2 on the Xbox .
The first game has a minimalist story .
Characters are barely introduced and have almost no development , detail on the setting is shamelessly scant , and where the plot is not entirely one dimensional , it contains gaping holes .
Yet it works in the context of the game that Gears of War is , and I would argue works very well.Gear of War 2 by contrast , suffers from an overblown and overproduced story that makes a mockery of the proceedings .
Attempts to develop characters are almost comically absurd , the setting is wildly different tending towards the spectacular , the plot is incohesive and convoluted throughout and leaves loose ends everywhere .
The end result , while eye candy laden , detracts significantly from the game .
People just wanted to play as Marcus Fenix and shoot aliens ; instead they ended up unsatisfied and confused .
The developers desire to create an " epic " story instead created an epic farce .
Smaller was definitely better in this case.Obviously , the same rule does not hold across all video games .
RPGs require a significant story .
But even here , overproduction and poor writing can create an epic farce that taints the whole game .
The prime example is Final Fantasy VIII ; Your characters are all teenagers attending assassins ' high school , and you fight the sorceress who was actually your matron in the orphanage where you grew up , who was actually being controlled by another sorceress , so she could rescue another sorceress and cause " time compression " , and when that failed you simply allow the second sorceress to take over a party member who happened to be yet another sorceress so that they could go back in time to allow the third sorceress to cause " time compression " and I wish I was making this up .
The game had spectacular FMV cutscenes amidst all this , but realistically , little could be done for its utter train wreck of a plot.KISS is definitely a philosophy that applies to video game plots .
Sure , make it eye candy , make spectacular events occur , make interesting characters .
But remember not to let any of these get in the way of the game .
People did n't turn on your game to hear a spiel .
They turned it on to make their own spiel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does every game need to have a story?
A movie or a fiction book without story, that is bad.
But for a game it shouldn't be a negative criticism if it doesn't have one.It's an old but true quote that story in video games is like story in pornography.
It's expected to be there, but really only the flimsiest pretense of setting is necessary.
Many early video games got on quite well with a handful of paragraphs in the manual.I can recall playing Sonic 3 in 1994 and thinking it had a great "story" for a platformer, as in addition to the manual paragraphs, it used in game "cut scenes" to advance what shred of a plot there was.
Interestingly, the game told its micro-tale without using a single word of text.
The on-screen actions and emotions of the characters were like those from a silent film, without the captions.Nevertheless, I did and still do consider the "story" in that game to be more than sufficient and moreover very suited to the type of game it was.
I imagine it's similar for other games like Doom.The watershed for storytelling in video games was probably Metal Gear Solid in 1998.
After Hideo Kojima blew everyone away with his storytelling, developers started offering ever more elaborate and "cinematic" storylines in their games which ate up ever larger portions of the budget.
The trouble came from two important flaws1) Hideo Kojima never made a "cinematic" game.
The resulting end product of MGS was a very different form of entertainment from a film.
People focused too much on the cutscenes,(which were still quite different from raw film) and missed out on the wider package offered.
It became usual to see ever more pompous and over produced cut scenes strapped on to games that never lived up to the "epic" tone set in them.2) Most directors are not Hideo Kojima.
This was probably the more pertinent point.
Developers wanted to make epic (action)storylines in the mould of Metal Gear Solid, but simply lacked the writing ability to pull it off.
Even Kojima himself managed to foul this up in MGS2.
The end result is a pretentious and overbearing plot that gets in the way of the game and severely reduces enjoyment and playability.I think a good example the benefits and pitfalls of story in games is given by the juxtaposition between Gears of War 1 and 2 on the Xbox.
The first game has a minimalist story.
Characters are barely introduced and have almost no development, detail on the setting is shamelessly scant, and where the plot is not entirely one dimensional, it contains gaping holes.
Yet it works in the context of the game that Gears of War is, and I would argue works very well.Gear of War 2 by contrast, suffers from an overblown and overproduced story that makes a mockery of the proceedings.
Attempts to develop characters are almost comically absurd, the setting is wildly different tending towards the spectacular, the plot is incohesive and convoluted throughout and leaves loose ends everywhere.
The end result, while eye candy laden, detracts significantly from the game.
People just wanted to play as Marcus Fenix and shoot aliens; instead they ended up unsatisfied and confused.
The developers desire to create an "epic" story instead created an epic farce.
Smaller was definitely better in this case.Obviously, the same rule does not hold across all video games.
RPGs require a significant story.
But even here, overproduction and poor writing can create an epic farce that taints the whole game.
The prime example is Final Fantasy VIII; Your characters are all teenagers attending assassins'  high school, and you fight the sorceress who was actually your matron in the orphanage where you grew up, who was actually being controlled by another sorceress, so she could rescue another sorceress and cause "time compression", and when that failed you simply allow the second sorceress to take over a party member who happened to be yet another sorceress so that they could go back in time to allow the third sorceress to cause "time compression" and I wish I was making this up.
The game had spectacular FMV cutscenes amidst all this, but realistically, little could be done for its utter train wreck of a plot.KISS is definitely a philosophy that applies to video game plots.
Sure, make it eye candy, make spectacular events occur, make interesting characters.
But remember not to let any of these get in the way of the game.
People didn't turn on your game to hear a spiel.
They turned it on to make their own spiel.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823951</id>
	<title>Who needs graphics?</title>
	<author>nycguy</author>
	<datestamp>1256142660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first game I played on a PC was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star\_Trek\_(text\_game)" title="wikipedia.org">Star Trek</a> [wikipedia.org]. Those old text-based BASIC games were the best!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first game I played on a PC was Star Trek [ wikipedia.org ] .
Those old text-based BASIC games were the best !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first game I played on a PC was Star Trek [wikipedia.org].
Those old text-based BASIC games were the best!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825339</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True for america. Untrue for other parts of the world.</p><p>PCs still play a huge role in europe (the earlier mentioned online-sales not even included).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True for america .
Untrue for other parts of the world.PCs still play a huge role in europe ( the earlier mentioned online-sales not even included ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True for america.
Untrue for other parts of the world.PCs still play a huge role in europe (the earlier mentioned online-sales not even included).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29827213</id>
	<title>Re:Doom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256156280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(Yeah, wot 'e said!) I'm 47 and played tic-tac-toe on a PDP-11 for my first game. Even though I had Fighter Duel Pro on the Amiga, I still think of DOOM as a kind of a beginning of modern gaming. Playing that for the first time on a PC was a huge eye-opener. Things really seemed to start moving at that point. It's not a bad place to start a discussion -- sniping about the author's presumed age is just silly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( Yeah , wot 'e said !
) I 'm 47 and played tic-tac-toe on a PDP-11 for my first game .
Even though I had Fighter Duel Pro on the Amiga , I still think of DOOM as a kind of a beginning of modern gaming .
Playing that for the first time on a PC was a huge eye-opener .
Things really seemed to start moving at that point .
It 's not a bad place to start a discussion -- sniping about the author 's presumed age is just silly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(Yeah, wot 'e said!
) I'm 47 and played tic-tac-toe on a PDP-11 for my first game.
Even though I had Fighter Duel Pro on the Amiga, I still think of DOOM as a kind of a beginning of modern gaming.
Playing that for the first time on a PC was a huge eye-opener.
Things really seemed to start moving at that point.
It's not a bad place to start a discussion -- sniping about the author's presumed age is just silly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826451</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1256152980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, as every industry matures the mainstream tends towards the lowest common denominator. Britney on music, Transformers on movies, now Crysis on games, is it at all surprising?</p><p>But look beyond the purely mainstream and you'll still find plenty of innovation done during the past five years. Sins of a Solar Empire's real-time version of classic strategy games (though arguably the Europa Universalis series did it first, it all depends on what you define as "real time"), Zeno Clash's mix of the FPS and beat 'em up genres, or Peggle and Portal's reinvention of the puzzle genre.</p><p>And no, the small independant software house hasn't died, far from it. They may not be able to achieve mainstream popularity before being hired/bought by a large publisher (ala Portal and Valve), but they're alive and, thanks to the wonders of digital distribution, doing better than ever. Check out the catalogues at Impulse and Valve when you have time, you'll be surprised.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , as every industry matures the mainstream tends towards the lowest common denominator .
Britney on music , Transformers on movies , now Crysis on games , is it at all surprising ? But look beyond the purely mainstream and you 'll still find plenty of innovation done during the past five years .
Sins of a Solar Empire 's real-time version of classic strategy games ( though arguably the Europa Universalis series did it first , it all depends on what you define as " real time " ) , Zeno Clash 's mix of the FPS and beat 'em up genres , or Peggle and Portal 's reinvention of the puzzle genre.And no , the small independant software house has n't died , far from it .
They may not be able to achieve mainstream popularity before being hired/bought by a large publisher ( ala Portal and Valve ) , but they 're alive and , thanks to the wonders of digital distribution , doing better than ever .
Check out the catalogues at Impulse and Valve when you have time , you 'll be surprised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, as every industry matures the mainstream tends towards the lowest common denominator.
Britney on music, Transformers on movies, now Crysis on games, is it at all surprising?But look beyond the purely mainstream and you'll still find plenty of innovation done during the past five years.
Sins of a Solar Empire's real-time version of classic strategy games (though arguably the Europa Universalis series did it first, it all depends on what you define as "real time"), Zeno Clash's mix of the FPS and beat 'em up genres, or Peggle and Portal's reinvention of the puzzle genre.And no, the small independant software house hasn't died, far from it.
They may not be able to achieve mainstream popularity before being hired/bought by a large publisher (ala Portal and Valve), but they're alive and, thanks to the wonders of digital distribution, doing better than ever.
Check out the catalogues at Impulse and Valve when you have time, you'll be surprised.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825771</id>
	<title>ahaha</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256150400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Flaw" lol.</p><p>Lack of any story in DooM(apart from a screen of text telling you how cool you are here and there) is one of it`s strong points. Cuz there is no melodramatic b-movie-like shite like in modern games, there is only monsters and you. Get out alive is the best story ever made in shooter games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Flaw " lol.Lack of any story in DooM ( apart from a screen of text telling you how cool you are here and there ) is one of it ` s strong points .
Cuz there is no melodramatic b-movie-like shite like in modern games , there is only monsters and you .
Get out alive is the best story ever made in shooter games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Flaw" lol.Lack of any story in DooM(apart from a screen of text telling you how cool you are here and there) is one of it`s strong points.
Cuz there is no melodramatic b-movie-like shite like in modern games, there is only monsters and you.
Get out alive is the best story ever made in shooter games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823241</id>
	<title>Re:same as life</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256139000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pac-man was even closer:<br>1. Ever-present wail of sirens<br>2. Relentlessly pursued by ghosts<br>3. Four special pills daily keep ghosts at bay<br>4. Occasionally eat some fruit</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pac-man was even closer : 1 .
Ever-present wail of sirens2 .
Relentlessly pursued by ghosts3 .
Four special pills daily keep ghosts at bay4 .
Occasionally eat some fruit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pac-man was even closer:1.
Ever-present wail of sirens2.
Relentlessly pursued by ghosts3.
Four special pills daily keep ghosts at bay4.
Occasionally eat some fruit</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823655</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>PhrstBrn</author>
	<datestamp>1256141040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC.  Just $300, and any game works immediately without hassle.</p></div><p>Bullcrap.  You'll spend an extra $300-400 on extra overpriced accessories before the end of the product's lifecycle, and games are generally more expensive on the console.  When a game releases for $60 on the console, PC version releases for $50.  At the end of the console's lifecycle, the price difference is a wash, plus you can usually get more years usage out of your PC than your console counterpart before upgrading.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The majority of the gamers in the world don't have the patience or knowledge to screw around with the many, <b>many incompatibilities and bugs associated with PC hardware and software.</b></p> </div><p>Citiation needed</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC .
Just $ 300 , and any game works immediately without hassle.Bullcrap .
You 'll spend an extra $ 300-400 on extra overpriced accessories before the end of the product 's lifecycle , and games are generally more expensive on the console .
When a game releases for $ 60 on the console , PC version releases for $ 50 .
At the end of the console 's lifecycle , the price difference is a wash , plus you can usually get more years usage out of your PC than your console counterpart before upgrading.The majority of the gamers in the world do n't have the patience or knowledge to screw around with the many , many incompatibilities and bugs associated with PC hardware and software .
Citiation needed</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC.
Just $300, and any game works immediately without hassle.Bullcrap.
You'll spend an extra $300-400 on extra overpriced accessories before the end of the product's lifecycle, and games are generally more expensive on the console.
When a game releases for $60 on the console, PC version releases for $50.
At the end of the console's lifecycle, the price difference is a wash, plus you can usually get more years usage out of your PC than your console counterpart before upgrading.The majority of the gamers in the world don't have the patience or knowledge to screw around with the many, many incompatibilities and bugs associated with PC hardware and software.
Citiation needed
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822769</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>Fozzyuw</author>
	<datestamp>1256136720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Games with good stories are good, but games like Doom are too. Does every game need to have a story?</p></div><p>I think TFA missed the point about Doom and it's story comment.  I think it shows the greatness of Doom that you COULD start in a room, with evil imps and a gun, you <i>knew</i> exactly what to do and where to do.  Now that's game design.</p><p>Sure, games like Half Life really injected a great story into the model, but that doesn't mean Doom's half-ass lack of a story was a strike against the game.  More of a testament if you ask me.  I felt like the story was more than there and made sense.  At least, maybe it was just my imagination and connection to the hero of the game way back then that I made it feel like it had some story. *shrug*  Isn't that what a game's suppose to do?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Games with good stories are good , but games like Doom are too .
Does every game need to have a story ? I think TFA missed the point about Doom and it 's story comment .
I think it shows the greatness of Doom that you COULD start in a room , with evil imps and a gun , you knew exactly what to do and where to do .
Now that 's game design.Sure , games like Half Life really injected a great story into the model , but that does n't mean Doom 's half-ass lack of a story was a strike against the game .
More of a testament if you ask me .
I felt like the story was more than there and made sense .
At least , maybe it was just my imagination and connection to the hero of the game way back then that I made it feel like it had some story .
* shrug * Is n't that what a game 's suppose to do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games with good stories are good, but games like Doom are too.
Does every game need to have a story?I think TFA missed the point about Doom and it's story comment.
I think it shows the greatness of Doom that you COULD start in a room, with evil imps and a gun, you knew exactly what to do and where to do.
Now that's game design.Sure, games like Half Life really injected a great story into the model, but that doesn't mean Doom's half-ass lack of a story was a strike against the game.
More of a testament if you ask me.
I felt like the story was more than there and made sense.
At least, maybe it was just my imagination and connection to the hero of the game way back then that I made it feel like it had some story.
*shrug*  Isn't that what a game's suppose to do?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824629</id>
	<title>Re:The TRUE winners of the Doom/Wolf 3D era</title>
	<author>mdarksbane</author>
	<datestamp>1256145840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What really amazes me is how ahead of its time Marathon still seems today.</p><p>Play Marathon and Doom, then play a modern shooter. Tell me which one seems closer to the modern gameplay. You even had mouselook in Marathon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What really amazes me is how ahead of its time Marathon still seems today.Play Marathon and Doom , then play a modern shooter .
Tell me which one seems closer to the modern gameplay .
You even had mouselook in Marathon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What really amazes me is how ahead of its time Marathon still seems today.Play Marathon and Doom, then play a modern shooter.
Tell me which one seems closer to the modern gameplay.
You even had mouselook in Marathon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821997</id>
	<title>Re:Doom3</title>
	<author>MadnessASAP</author>
	<datestamp>1256132160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except for muzzle flash, that will lens flared and bloomed so much that it comes out as a near blinding white strobing blob in the middle of the screeen.  There used to be a time when games had only 16 colours to work with and they used every last one of them, we now have 2^24 colours but only ever used white, black and brown and then call it the future of gaming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except for muzzle flash , that will lens flared and bloomed so much that it comes out as a near blinding white strobing blob in the middle of the screeen .
There used to be a time when games had only 16 colours to work with and they used every last one of them , we now have 2 ^ 24 colours but only ever used white , black and brown and then call it the future of gaming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except for muzzle flash, that will lens flared and bloomed so much that it comes out as a near blinding white strobing blob in the middle of the screeen.
There used to be a time when games had only 16 colours to work with and they used every last one of them, we now have 2^24 colours but only ever used white, black and brown and then call it the future of gaming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823591</id>
	<title>Re:Doom</title>
	<author>Reapman</author>
	<datestamp>1256140740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember getting really excited about Quake, especially after trying the demo that came up.  I was ok with the brown on brown colors and the crappy weapons because hey it's a demo, they'll put the real weapons in later.</p><p>I never finished Quake.  In a lot of ways I consider Doom superior.  Although now that I'm older I do appreciate what Quake did, bringing true 3D in compared to Doom's engine, but I hated the game.</p><p>I still fire Doom up from time to time but can't remember the last time I fired up Quake.  Maybe I should fire it up tho, see what the latest engines offer.  This article really makes me feel old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember getting really excited about Quake , especially after trying the demo that came up .
I was ok with the brown on brown colors and the crappy weapons because hey it 's a demo , they 'll put the real weapons in later.I never finished Quake .
In a lot of ways I consider Doom superior .
Although now that I 'm older I do appreciate what Quake did , bringing true 3D in compared to Doom 's engine , but I hated the game.I still fire Doom up from time to time but ca n't remember the last time I fired up Quake .
Maybe I should fire it up tho , see what the latest engines offer .
This article really makes me feel old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember getting really excited about Quake, especially after trying the demo that came up.
I was ok with the brown on brown colors and the crappy weapons because hey it's a demo, they'll put the real weapons in later.I never finished Quake.
In a lot of ways I consider Doom superior.
Although now that I'm older I do appreciate what Quake did, bringing true 3D in compared to Doom's engine, but I hated the game.I still fire Doom up from time to time but can't remember the last time I fired up Quake.
Maybe I should fire it up tho, see what the latest engines offer.
This article really makes me feel old.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822447</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822771</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>LtGordon</author>
	<datestamp>1256136720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to say that DRM is one of the reasons that modern PC games bug me. I don't like having to jump through hoops to prove that I rightfully own the software and am licensed to use it. I remember when the biggest annoyance was that you had to have the serial number and the disk present to play the game.</p><p>I re-installed a copy of StarCraft the other day and I have to say that it was nice to only have to enter the CD key. No need to hook up a network connection or make a phone call to activate, and I don't get made to feel like a pirate just because I want to continue to play the game after upgrading my operating system or PC components.</p><p>I guess that's one of the reasons that console gaming will always be popular. There's something comforting about owning a physical copy of a game that I can continue to play on any compatible console, even if I replace the console.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to say that DRM is one of the reasons that modern PC games bug me .
I do n't like having to jump through hoops to prove that I rightfully own the software and am licensed to use it .
I remember when the biggest annoyance was that you had to have the serial number and the disk present to play the game.I re-installed a copy of StarCraft the other day and I have to say that it was nice to only have to enter the CD key .
No need to hook up a network connection or make a phone call to activate , and I do n't get made to feel like a pirate just because I want to continue to play the game after upgrading my operating system or PC components.I guess that 's one of the reasons that console gaming will always be popular .
There 's something comforting about owning a physical copy of a game that I can continue to play on any compatible console , even if I replace the console .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to say that DRM is one of the reasons that modern PC games bug me.
I don't like having to jump through hoops to prove that I rightfully own the software and am licensed to use it.
I remember when the biggest annoyance was that you had to have the serial number and the disk present to play the game.I re-installed a copy of StarCraft the other day and I have to say that it was nice to only have to enter the CD key.
No need to hook up a network connection or make a phone call to activate, and I don't get made to feel like a pirate just because I want to continue to play the game after upgrading my operating system or PC components.I guess that's one of the reasons that console gaming will always be popular.
There's something comforting about owning a physical copy of a game that I can continue to play on any compatible console, even if I replace the console.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29828733</id>
	<title>We've Come a Long Way, Baby!</title>
	<author>Flere Imsaho</author>
	<datestamp>1256119680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fired up an Amiga 500 emulator the other day and played Populous. I can't believe I spent a few months immersed in that game!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fired up an Amiga 500 emulator the other day and played Populous .
I ca n't believe I spent a few months immersed in that game !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fired up an Amiga 500 emulator the other day and played Populous.
I can't believe I spent a few months immersed in that game!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821445</id>
	<title>Compared to what?</title>
	<author>TimeElf1</author>
	<datestamp>1256127780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>On the other hand, from a story perspective, Doom was absolutely rubbish. You start in a room, no idea what's going on and you are surrounded by demons.</i>
<br>
<br>
<b>You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike</b>
<br>
<br>
<i>There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible.</i>
<br>
<br>
Huh, right story driven.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , from a story perspective , Doom was absolutely rubbish .
You start in a room , no idea what 's going on and you are surrounded by demons .
You are in a maze of twisty little passages , all alike There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible .
Huh , right story driven .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, from a story perspective, Doom was absolutely rubbish.
You start in a room, no idea what's going on and you are surrounded by demons.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike


There were years and years where the lessons of early story-driven games were forgotten and all anyone really cared about was having as many sprites or polygons as possible.
Huh, right story driven.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832145</id>
	<title>Re:Doom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256149980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sheesh please, Ultima Underworld was there before Doom it came out around Wolfenstein 3d, and before that there was Ultima 7, those games really showed what was capable on a PC and what could not be done on any other affordable machine at that time (the console port of U7 was subpar because the machine could not handle it)<br>I would rate Looking Glass and Origin Way higher than Id software. Doom just was a mass phenomenon, Looking Glass and Origin really were driving the techology.<br>UUW had real3 to some extent, a physics engine, fully environmental interaction, a story etc... that game absolutely was a milestone both technologically and gameplaywise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sheesh please , Ultima Underworld was there before Doom it came out around Wolfenstein 3d , and before that there was Ultima 7 , those games really showed what was capable on a PC and what could not be done on any other affordable machine at that time ( the console port of U7 was subpar because the machine could not handle it ) I would rate Looking Glass and Origin Way higher than Id software .
Doom just was a mass phenomenon , Looking Glass and Origin really were driving the techology.UUW had real3 to some extent , a physics engine , fully environmental interaction , a story etc... that game absolutely was a milestone both technologically and gameplaywise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sheesh please, Ultima Underworld was there before Doom it came out around Wolfenstein 3d, and before that there was Ultima 7, those games really showed what was capable on a PC and what could not be done on any other affordable machine at that time (the console port of U7 was subpar because the machine could not handle it)I would rate Looking Glass and Origin Way higher than Id software.
Doom just was a mass phenomenon, Looking Glass and Origin really were driving the techology.UUW had real3 to some extent, a physics engine, fully environmental interaction, a story etc... that game absolutely was a milestone both technologically and gameplaywise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29835635</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256228400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well done for missing big bits of story in FFVIII!</p><p>If you paid attention the sorceress is unable to die, she must first pass her powers into another (effectivly taking over the body). At the very end of the game the sorcesses you defeat, teh future one, passes her powers into the matron, effectivly starting the cycle again, as it also means the matron knows who defeats her (as squall is there as well).</p><p>Theres also a bit of fan debate saying that rinoa is actually ultimecia (which would make sense her being unable to die , seemingly having a bit of a link to squall , and her GF being the thing from squalls neckthing).</p><p>theres also the whole thing of actualyl finding out who squalls parents are in the game (hint, he fights with a gun, and his battle music is ace)</p><p>The plot is actually quite well done i thought, the SeeD were created to fight ultimecia from the start because otherwise time would stop!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well done for missing big bits of story in FFVIII ! If you paid attention the sorceress is unable to die , she must first pass her powers into another ( effectivly taking over the body ) .
At the very end of the game the sorcesses you defeat , teh future one , passes her powers into the matron , effectivly starting the cycle again , as it also means the matron knows who defeats her ( as squall is there as well ) .Theres also a bit of fan debate saying that rinoa is actually ultimecia ( which would make sense her being unable to die , seemingly having a bit of a link to squall , and her GF being the thing from squalls neckthing ) .theres also the whole thing of actualyl finding out who squalls parents are in the game ( hint , he fights with a gun , and his battle music is ace ) The plot is actually quite well done i thought , the SeeD were created to fight ultimecia from the start because otherwise time would stop !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well done for missing big bits of story in FFVIII!If you paid attention the sorceress is unable to die, she must first pass her powers into another (effectivly taking over the body).
At the very end of the game the sorcesses you defeat, teh future one, passes her powers into the matron, effectivly starting the cycle again, as it also means the matron knows who defeats her (as squall is there as well).Theres also a bit of fan debate saying that rinoa is actually ultimecia (which would make sense her being unable to die , seemingly having a bit of a link to squall , and her GF being the thing from squalls neckthing).theres also the whole thing of actualyl finding out who squalls parents are in the game (hint, he fights with a gun, and his battle music is ace)The plot is actually quite well done i thought, the SeeD were created to fight ultimecia from the start because otherwise time would stop!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823091</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>bravecanadian</author>
	<datestamp>1256138280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wing Commander and Privateer were two of my favourites.  Great mesh of story and action.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wing Commander and Privateer were two of my favourites .
Great mesh of story and action .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wing Commander and Privateer were two of my favourites.
Great mesh of story and action.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821421</id>
	<title>Re:Crazy DRM and Phone home games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256127540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's kind of like Idiocracy.</p><p>Take this brand new game, <a href="http://www.joystiq.com/2009/08/25/bayonettas-automatic-mode-demonstrated-with-one-hand/" title="joystiq.com" rel="nofollow">Bayonetta</a> [joystiq.com]. It looked like a pretty bad-assed title; I recently found out that they added a "one handed gameplay mode". You can watch a video of it over there.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>There aren't many games that allow you to play one-handed. You might be able to get by with one hand on certain RPGs -- leaving the other hand free to grab some popcorn during those really long cutscenes -- but, for the most part, it just doesn't work. Of all the upcoming games we wouldn't expect to play one-handed, Bayonetta sits right at the top of the list. As an action game from Hideki Kamiya, the mind behind Devil May Cry, we can't even imagine trying to play it without two hands sweatily clamped around the controller.</p></div><p>Or how about the Nintendo trend of games "playing themselves"?: <a href="http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/14/new-super-mario-bros-wii-future-titles-will-play-themselves/" title="joystiq.com" rel="nofollow">New Super Mario Bros. Wii, future titles will play themselves</a> [joystiq.com] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Are games too hard for you, Johnny? Don't worry -- Shiggy's got your back. Starting with upcoming New Super Mario Bros. Wii, <b>future Nintendo Wii titles will be shipping with the ability to, well, play themselves.</b> In an interview with USA Today, the man who birthed Mario confirmed the existence of "demo play" for the next Mario game and "future games, too" -- essentially an option to allow the game to play itself when the player encounters an area too difficult for them to handle.</p></div><p>Or take a look at the trends in console sales. <a href="http://www.vgchartz.com/" title="vgchartz.com" rel="nofollow">VGChartz</a> [vgchartz.com]. The new world gaming order is here, and it only cares about the casual gamer.</p><p>The casual gamer has money, and <a href="http://www.destructoid.com/madden-10-is-loaded-with-micro-transactions-143358.phtml" title="destructoid.com" rel="nofollow">he'll gladly take part in microtransactions to buff his character out.</a> [destructoid.com] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>A YouTube video has surfaced displaying the megaton of content that will be offered when the game hits retail in a few days. Most of it only affects Franchise Mode. You can download advanced trainers, staff, and scouts as well as a plethora of game-breakers such as temporary boosts to player and coaching statistics.</p></div><p>So, yes. New graphics are in, new gameplay is out. Small studios can die, nickel and dime-ing is in. Damn it. Where'd all the gamers go.</p><p>Oh, that's right. I'll let VGcatz sum it up for me: <a href="http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip\_id=282" title="vgcats.com" rel="nofollow">Nerd Rage</a> [vgcats.com]</p><p>End Transmission.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's kind of like Idiocracy.Take this brand new game , Bayonetta [ joystiq.com ] .
It looked like a pretty bad-assed title ; I recently found out that they added a " one handed gameplay mode " .
You can watch a video of it over there.There are n't many games that allow you to play one-handed .
You might be able to get by with one hand on certain RPGs -- leaving the other hand free to grab some popcorn during those really long cutscenes -- but , for the most part , it just does n't work .
Of all the upcoming games we would n't expect to play one-handed , Bayonetta sits right at the top of the list .
As an action game from Hideki Kamiya , the mind behind Devil May Cry , we ca n't even imagine trying to play it without two hands sweatily clamped around the controller.Or how about the Nintendo trend of games " playing themselves " ?
: New Super Mario Bros. Wii , future titles will play themselves [ joystiq.com ] Are games too hard for you , Johnny ?
Do n't worry -- Shiggy 's got your back .
Starting with upcoming New Super Mario Bros. Wii , future Nintendo Wii titles will be shipping with the ability to , well , play themselves .
In an interview with USA Today , the man who birthed Mario confirmed the existence of " demo play " for the next Mario game and " future games , too " -- essentially an option to allow the game to play itself when the player encounters an area too difficult for them to handle.Or take a look at the trends in console sales .
VGChartz [ vgchartz.com ] .
The new world gaming order is here , and it only cares about the casual gamer.The casual gamer has money , and he 'll gladly take part in microtransactions to buff his character out .
[ destructoid.com ] A YouTube video has surfaced displaying the megaton of content that will be offered when the game hits retail in a few days .
Most of it only affects Franchise Mode .
You can download advanced trainers , staff , and scouts as well as a plethora of game-breakers such as temporary boosts to player and coaching statistics.So , yes .
New graphics are in , new gameplay is out .
Small studios can die , nickel and dime-ing is in .
Damn it .
Where 'd all the gamers go.Oh , that 's right .
I 'll let VGcatz sum it up for me : Nerd Rage [ vgcats.com ] End Transmission .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's kind of like Idiocracy.Take this brand new game, Bayonetta [joystiq.com].
It looked like a pretty bad-assed title; I recently found out that they added a "one handed gameplay mode".
You can watch a video of it over there.There aren't many games that allow you to play one-handed.
You might be able to get by with one hand on certain RPGs -- leaving the other hand free to grab some popcorn during those really long cutscenes -- but, for the most part, it just doesn't work.
Of all the upcoming games we wouldn't expect to play one-handed, Bayonetta sits right at the top of the list.
As an action game from Hideki Kamiya, the mind behind Devil May Cry, we can't even imagine trying to play it without two hands sweatily clamped around the controller.Or how about the Nintendo trend of games "playing themselves"?
: New Super Mario Bros. Wii, future titles will play themselves [joystiq.com] Are games too hard for you, Johnny?
Don't worry -- Shiggy's got your back.
Starting with upcoming New Super Mario Bros. Wii, future Nintendo Wii titles will be shipping with the ability to, well, play themselves.
In an interview with USA Today, the man who birthed Mario confirmed the existence of "demo play" for the next Mario game and "future games, too" -- essentially an option to allow the game to play itself when the player encounters an area too difficult for them to handle.Or take a look at the trends in console sales.
VGChartz [vgchartz.com].
The new world gaming order is here, and it only cares about the casual gamer.The casual gamer has money, and he'll gladly take part in microtransactions to buff his character out.
[destructoid.com] A YouTube video has surfaced displaying the megaton of content that will be offered when the game hits retail in a few days.
Most of it only affects Franchise Mode.
You can download advanced trainers, staff, and scouts as well as a plethora of game-breakers such as temporary boosts to player and coaching statistics.So, yes.
New graphics are in, new gameplay is out.
Small studios can die, nickel and dime-ing is in.
Damn it.
Where'd all the gamers go.Oh, that's right.
I'll let VGcatz sum it up for me: Nerd Rage [vgcats.com]End Transmission.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821749</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>Targon</author>
	<datestamp>1256130420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While there is a good reason to want/need fun gameplay, I feel that what is missing from many games is the feeling of purpose that a storyline will bring.    I do NOT suggest from this that long cut-scenes or pauses in the game are needed to bring this about, but instead suggest that the idea of "if it moves, shoot it", or just random acts of violence in games for no purpose without there being other types of games that get a lot of publicity is what is KILLING gaming.</p><p>I have been playing computer games since well before Wolfenstein 3D(which came out before Doom and Quake for those who don't know).   The old gold-box D&amp;D games starting with Pool of Radiance, Wizardry, Bards Tale, and other classic fantasy RPGs had a strength to them that makes some modern games seem pathetic by comparison, just because you felt like you had some purpose to what you were doing.</p><p>I don't mind violence in games, but I find that the biggest games that are released really focus so much on player vs. player that the whole point of WHY you are fighting is lost.   Why not set it up so that you have multiple sides in a player vs. player environment, but make it so there really is a point to WHY you are fighting.    A way to make this work would be to have storyline chains, similar to the original Wing Commander, where you have a war going on, but the missions the players are going on are based on how each side is doing in the war.   Make it so a war will go on for a full 30 days, and teams fighting on both sides can tip the balance.   People have the option to come in fully supporting the losing side, just to help keep the balance, or you will have people supporting the clearly stronger side, or weaker side.    If a mission is won or lost, contributions of different types will earn credit, so that support roles have a purpose as well(people playing a medic in a war game for example), or technical support roles where you have to run out to fix things for others.</p><p>And that is the biggest weakness, that the big games that come out are based on the idea of players wanting to play the soldier/warrior, and the idea that not everyone WANTS to be fighting on the front lines has been lost on many developers.   Even the RPG scene is more about action/adventure these days, rather than about roleplaying and giving the player options on how he/she wants to play.   Being able to COMMAND troops for example(earning rank, command status, or even moving from being on the front lines to the command tent where you set the strategy have others out there doing the fighting) is something that most games don't provide.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While there is a good reason to want/need fun gameplay , I feel that what is missing from many games is the feeling of purpose that a storyline will bring .
I do NOT suggest from this that long cut-scenes or pauses in the game are needed to bring this about , but instead suggest that the idea of " if it moves , shoot it " , or just random acts of violence in games for no purpose without there being other types of games that get a lot of publicity is what is KILLING gaming.I have been playing computer games since well before Wolfenstein 3D ( which came out before Doom and Quake for those who do n't know ) .
The old gold-box D&amp;D games starting with Pool of Radiance , Wizardry , Bards Tale , and other classic fantasy RPGs had a strength to them that makes some modern games seem pathetic by comparison , just because you felt like you had some purpose to what you were doing.I do n't mind violence in games , but I find that the biggest games that are released really focus so much on player vs. player that the whole point of WHY you are fighting is lost .
Why not set it up so that you have multiple sides in a player vs. player environment , but make it so there really is a point to WHY you are fighting .
A way to make this work would be to have storyline chains , similar to the original Wing Commander , where you have a war going on , but the missions the players are going on are based on how each side is doing in the war .
Make it so a war will go on for a full 30 days , and teams fighting on both sides can tip the balance .
People have the option to come in fully supporting the losing side , just to help keep the balance , or you will have people supporting the clearly stronger side , or weaker side .
If a mission is won or lost , contributions of different types will earn credit , so that support roles have a purpose as well ( people playing a medic in a war game for example ) , or technical support roles where you have to run out to fix things for others.And that is the biggest weakness , that the big games that come out are based on the idea of players wanting to play the soldier/warrior , and the idea that not everyone WANTS to be fighting on the front lines has been lost on many developers .
Even the RPG scene is more about action/adventure these days , rather than about roleplaying and giving the player options on how he/she wants to play .
Being able to COMMAND troops for example ( earning rank , command status , or even moving from being on the front lines to the command tent where you set the strategy have others out there doing the fighting ) is something that most games do n't provide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While there is a good reason to want/need fun gameplay, I feel that what is missing from many games is the feeling of purpose that a storyline will bring.
I do NOT suggest from this that long cut-scenes or pauses in the game are needed to bring this about, but instead suggest that the idea of "if it moves, shoot it", or just random acts of violence in games for no purpose without there being other types of games that get a lot of publicity is what is KILLING gaming.I have been playing computer games since well before Wolfenstein 3D(which came out before Doom and Quake for those who don't know).
The old gold-box D&amp;D games starting with Pool of Radiance, Wizardry, Bards Tale, and other classic fantasy RPGs had a strength to them that makes some modern games seem pathetic by comparison, just because you felt like you had some purpose to what you were doing.I don't mind violence in games, but I find that the biggest games that are released really focus so much on player vs. player that the whole point of WHY you are fighting is lost.
Why not set it up so that you have multiple sides in a player vs. player environment, but make it so there really is a point to WHY you are fighting.
A way to make this work would be to have storyline chains, similar to the original Wing Commander, where you have a war going on, but the missions the players are going on are based on how each side is doing in the war.
Make it so a war will go on for a full 30 days, and teams fighting on both sides can tip the balance.
People have the option to come in fully supporting the losing side, just to help keep the balance, or you will have people supporting the clearly stronger side, or weaker side.
If a mission is won or lost, contributions of different types will earn credit, so that support roles have a purpose as well(people playing a medic in a war game for example), or technical support roles where you have to run out to fix things for others.And that is the biggest weakness, that the big games that come out are based on the idea of players wanting to play the soldier/warrior, and the idea that not everyone WANTS to be fighting on the front lines has been lost on many developers.
Even the RPG scene is more about action/adventure these days, rather than about roleplaying and giving the player options on how he/she wants to play.
Being able to COMMAND troops for example(earning rank, command status, or even moving from being on the front lines to the command tent where you set the strategy have others out there doing the fighting) is something that most games don't provide.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823073</id>
	<title>Re:Growing up on Wizardry, Empire, Starflight</title>
	<author>Fallingcow</author>
	<datestamp>1256138220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AFAIK, the last good space fighter game was Tachyon: The Fringe, and it's 9 years old.  It and X-Wing: Alliance, released a few months earlier, were kind of the last gasp of the genre.</p><p>Those sorts of games have too steep a learning curve for the modern gaming crowd, and use too many buttons.  Kind of like the Mechwarrior series.</p><p>Modern gamers.  Ugh.  Don't get me started.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AFAIK , the last good space fighter game was Tachyon : The Fringe , and it 's 9 years old .
It and X-Wing : Alliance , released a few months earlier , were kind of the last gasp of the genre.Those sorts of games have too steep a learning curve for the modern gaming crowd , and use too many buttons .
Kind of like the Mechwarrior series.Modern gamers .
Ugh. Do n't get me started .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AFAIK, the last good space fighter game was Tachyon: The Fringe, and it's 9 years old.
It and X-Wing: Alliance, released a few months earlier, were kind of the last gasp of the genre.Those sorts of games have too steep a learning curve for the modern gaming crowd, and use too many buttons.
Kind of like the Mechwarrior series.Modern gamers.
Ugh.  Don't get me started.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821627</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>javilon</author>
	<datestamp>1256129400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doom is like tetris. You learn the game mechanics and you play and play and never get bored.</p><p>If it had a story, once you go through it and learn how the story ends, that's it. you are not going back to play. This may be good for the publishers that can sell you a new game with a new story, but I contend that a game that is as enjoyable as Doom without a story is better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Doom is like tetris .
You learn the game mechanics and you play and play and never get bored.If it had a story , once you go through it and learn how the story ends , that 's it .
you are not going back to play .
This may be good for the publishers that can sell you a new game with a new story , but I contend that a game that is as enjoyable as Doom without a story is better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doom is like tetris.
You learn the game mechanics and you play and play and never get bored.If it had a story, once you go through it and learn how the story ends, that's it.
you are not going back to play.
This may be good for the publishers that can sell you a new game with a new story, but I contend that a game that is as enjoyable as Doom without a story is better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823565</id>
	<title>Re:play operation flashpoint 2</title>
	<author>Reapy</author>
	<datestamp>1256140680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah what a slap in the face that was. The PC version feels hardly playtested at all, glaring errors like no mouse look in a vehicle, probably because they bound it to an analog stick and game stopping bugs. If you have a chopper extraction, and lose a team member, cross a check point (oh did i mention no freaken quick saves?), then die... if you continue playing from the last check point you will never finish the mission, as the chopper won't take off as it waits to check for all the team mates.</p><p>That is a pretty reasonable way of playing the game too, losing AI who can't take cover, then dieing later yourself. Worse is the game has been out for a month and still no hot fix for bugs like this. Oh wait, friday we get a list of bugfixes in the next patch... wow, good work guys.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah what a slap in the face that was .
The PC version feels hardly playtested at all , glaring errors like no mouse look in a vehicle , probably because they bound it to an analog stick and game stopping bugs .
If you have a chopper extraction , and lose a team member , cross a check point ( oh did i mention no freaken quick saves ?
) , then die... if you continue playing from the last check point you will never finish the mission , as the chopper wo n't take off as it waits to check for all the team mates.That is a pretty reasonable way of playing the game too , losing AI who ca n't take cover , then dieing later yourself .
Worse is the game has been out for a month and still no hot fix for bugs like this .
Oh wait , friday we get a list of bugfixes in the next patch... wow , good work guys .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah what a slap in the face that was.
The PC version feels hardly playtested at all, glaring errors like no mouse look in a vehicle, probably because they bound it to an analog stick and game stopping bugs.
If you have a chopper extraction, and lose a team member, cross a check point (oh did i mention no freaken quick saves?
), then die... if you continue playing from the last check point you will never finish the mission, as the chopper won't take off as it waits to check for all the team mates.That is a pretty reasonable way of playing the game too, losing AI who can't take cover, then dieing later yourself.
Worse is the game has been out for a month and still no hot fix for bugs like this.
Oh wait, friday we get a list of bugfixes in the next patch... wow, good work guys.
:(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821279</id>
	<title>"plot was optional"</title>
	<author>s-whs</author>
	<datestamp>1256126340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Yet the idea that plot was optional caught on and the same flaw<br>&gt; was replicated in other games of the era, such as Quake and<br>&gt; (to a lesser extent) Duke Nukem 3D.</p><p>The article appears to only think of games from ca. 1993 on, but I will expand this and include 8 bit home computers in my comments:</p><p>Old home computer games invariably had no or a paper thin plot that was described in a manual. Different from Doom? Not at all. Perhaps all early PC games had long introductions or manuals, but not most home computer games. So even if early PC games had good plots, leaving those home computer games out of the comparison is nonsensical as they all influenced each other.</p><p>You didn't need to read the manual/instructions in most cases either even for games that had a solid plot. You just dive into it and figure out what's going on later... I did that in 1985 and it still works now. Mostly. For more complex games, e.g. Elite in 1984, reading the manual was both interesting and made the playing more fun. For most games it was moot.</p><p>FTA:</p><p>&gt; Duke Nukem 3D is a notable turning point from a stylistic point of view,<br>&gt; introducing the idea of a vocal player character with a pre-defined personality in an FPS<br>&gt; - but it's one which has also been outdated since then.</p><p>Outdated? No way. Duke 3d is still fun to play, just as Doom is. And both are still a lot of fun in a network. You don't need bleeding edge graphics to enjoy the fun of multiplayer gaming nor to enjoy Duke's commentary...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Yet the idea that plot was optional caught on and the same flaw &gt; was replicated in other games of the era , such as Quake and &gt; ( to a lesser extent ) Duke Nukem 3D.The article appears to only think of games from ca .
1993 on , but I will expand this and include 8 bit home computers in my comments : Old home computer games invariably had no or a paper thin plot that was described in a manual .
Different from Doom ?
Not at all .
Perhaps all early PC games had long introductions or manuals , but not most home computer games .
So even if early PC games had good plots , leaving those home computer games out of the comparison is nonsensical as they all influenced each other.You did n't need to read the manual/instructions in most cases either even for games that had a solid plot .
You just dive into it and figure out what 's going on later... I did that in 1985 and it still works now .
Mostly. For more complex games , e.g .
Elite in 1984 , reading the manual was both interesting and made the playing more fun .
For most games it was moot.FTA : &gt; Duke Nukem 3D is a notable turning point from a stylistic point of view , &gt; introducing the idea of a vocal player character with a pre-defined personality in an FPS &gt; - but it 's one which has also been outdated since then.Outdated ?
No way .
Duke 3d is still fun to play , just as Doom is .
And both are still a lot of fun in a network .
You do n't need bleeding edge graphics to enjoy the fun of multiplayer gaming nor to enjoy Duke 's commentary.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Yet the idea that plot was optional caught on and the same flaw&gt; was replicated in other games of the era, such as Quake and&gt; (to a lesser extent) Duke Nukem 3D.The article appears to only think of games from ca.
1993 on, but I will expand this and include 8 bit home computers in my comments:Old home computer games invariably had no or a paper thin plot that was described in a manual.
Different from Doom?
Not at all.
Perhaps all early PC games had long introductions or manuals, but not most home computer games.
So even if early PC games had good plots, leaving those home computer games out of the comparison is nonsensical as they all influenced each other.You didn't need to read the manual/instructions in most cases either even for games that had a solid plot.
You just dive into it and figure out what's going on later... I did that in 1985 and it still works now.
Mostly. For more complex games, e.g.
Elite in 1984, reading the manual was both interesting and made the playing more fun.
For most games it was moot.FTA:&gt; Duke Nukem 3D is a notable turning point from a stylistic point of view,&gt; introducing the idea of a vocal player character with a pre-defined personality in an FPS&gt; - but it's one which has also been outdated since then.Outdated?
No way.
Duke 3d is still fun to play, just as Doom is.
And both are still a lot of fun in a network.
You don't need bleeding edge graphics to enjoy the fun of multiplayer gaming nor to enjoy Duke's commentary...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826619</id>
	<title>Re:They still have far to go</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1256153700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem with head-to-head gaming on the PC is that there's little point these days</p></div><p>Then for which platform should a small developer that doesn't qualify for a console license develop a head-to-head game?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with head-to-head gaming on the PC is that there 's little point these daysThen for which platform should a small developer that does n't qualify for a console license develop a head-to-head game ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with head-to-head gaming on the PC is that there's little point these daysThen for which platform should a small developer that doesn't qualify for a console license develop a head-to-head game?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821603</id>
	<title>Re:Doom's gameplay</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1256129280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I definitely agree that not all video games need to have a definite narrative -- but I would go one step further and question the need for movies and books to have one as such -- there are some excellent books and movies out there that don't have a definite narrative, at least in the classical sense of the word. Go read <i>Naked Lunch</i> and get back to me as to whether a book needs a "story" to be a great work of literature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I definitely agree that not all video games need to have a definite narrative -- but I would go one step further and question the need for movies and books to have one as such -- there are some excellent books and movies out there that do n't have a definite narrative , at least in the classical sense of the word .
Go read Naked Lunch and get back to me as to whether a book needs a " story " to be a great work of literature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I definitely agree that not all video games need to have a definite narrative -- but I would go one step further and question the need for movies and books to have one as such -- there are some excellent books and movies out there that don't have a definite narrative, at least in the classical sense of the word.
Go read Naked Lunch and get back to me as to whether a book needs a "story" to be a great work of literature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29853575</id>
	<title>Re:Shame it's dying</title>
	<author>Uberbah</author>
	<datestamp>1256308440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC. Just $300, and any game works immediately without hassle.</i></p><p>Funny how console fanboys always leave out the cost of the HDTV, the stereo system, and the price of a new console every 4-5 years (sooner if it breaks down).  Whereas the PC I built in 2004 is still good enough to play Crisis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC .
Just $ 300 , and any game works immediately without hassle.Funny how console fanboys always leave out the cost of the HDTV , the stereo system , and the price of a new console every 4-5 years ( sooner if it breaks down ) .
Whereas the PC I built in 2004 is still good enough to play Crisis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The OTHER reason is much bigger : consoles are vastly cheaper to purchase than a gaming PC.
Just $300, and any game works immediately without hassle.Funny how console fanboys always leave out the cost of the HDTV, the stereo system, and the price of a new console every 4-5 years (sooner if it breaks down).
Whereas the PC I built in 2004 is still good enough to play Crisis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821435
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29827655
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832063
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821435
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823841
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821287
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29837537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29837737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823499
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821937
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29834551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29827213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821251
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29831543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821251
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821671
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29835635
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821671
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822771
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823073
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824367
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822499
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821287
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821695
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822971
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822955
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823913
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824079
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29829161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824701
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29828711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29853575
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823655
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821671
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823565
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29829485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822043
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822951
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833279
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821841
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823241
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824165
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823273
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825561
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29835009
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832145
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821421
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823069
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823323
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822627
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821965
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821251
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821447
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_0718239_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29834551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822645
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29829485
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821937
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823241
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821209
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821287
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826273
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826619
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821541
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821127
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821525
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833305
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825867
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822447
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823591
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823813
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823323
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832145
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29827213
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824629
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822769
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821671
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29835635
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832041
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821965
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821627
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824253
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821435
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29827655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823841
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29853575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823913
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823845
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825339
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822627
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824079
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822279
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29837737
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832235
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821501
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821775
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824165
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823197
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29837537
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821409
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29829161
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821203
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821337
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29832063
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822043
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821423
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821411
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821421
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822771
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821563
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824367
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29829501
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821251
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29831543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821447
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823069
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29826413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823073
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29835009
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824701
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29828711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29833279
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823091
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821211
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822133
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29824739
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821429
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29823565
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_0718239.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821151
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821519
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29825561
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29821997
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_0718239.29822951
</commentlist>
</conversation>
