Post by: GunstarSilver on December 18, 2003, 10:58:00 AM
There are many things in this interview that really push it's credibility right down, but it's frustrating when this stuff is printed!! Check it out!
Post by: Ian Sane on December 18, 2003, 11:23:33 AM
He f*cking likes Tomb Raider?! Who cares how long he's been playing his opinion doesn't mean sh!t. That game series is like the litmus test of gaming hardcoreness.
Actually he doesn't seem totally off his rocker. He just seems to not be interested in "kiddy" games anymore. He's like a hardcore gamer with market friendly tastes. At least he isn't pushing Enter the Matrix as a GOTY candidate. I think "what the industry considers a mature gamer" is a good title for him since he falls into the "if it's colourful and happy it's kiddy" category.
Post by: Munky on December 18, 2003, 01:24:07 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on December 18, 2003, 01:48:19 PM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on December 18, 2003, 01:50:15 PM
When questioned about what makes the Xbox's line-up so great, he replies with "Well Microsoft have Grand Theft Auto now!". That's just sad. Yeah, Xbox is the best because it's only just now got a port of a two year old PlayStation 2 game. That's alright man, ignore the actual good games on Xbox. No, no, don't mention anything that makes the lineup good, just spew on about Grand Theft Auto.
.. Pay no attention to this 'interview with a l337 hardcore gamer'.
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 18, 2003, 01:54:19 PM
Quote
Oh, so the guy's 29 years old and he's too 'mature' for 'kiddy' games? What is it with these people? Who are they trying to impress? "Hey ladies, I'm mature! I only play Medal of Honor because it has guns!"
It makes me wonder, too. Jeez, who are they trying to impress? I mean, you know what they say about losers that like big guns. . .
Post by: Grey Ninja on December 18, 2003, 01:56:48 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 18, 2003, 02:02:51 PM
Quote
It makes me wonder, too. Jeez, who are they trying to impress? I mean, you know what they say about losers that like big guns. . .
I don't think telling anyone you play videogames is going to impress them.
Post by: Grey Ninja on December 18, 2003, 02:10:02 PM
Post by: GunstarSilver on December 18, 2003, 02:15:51 PM
Post by: Termin8Anakin on December 18, 2003, 02:47:23 PM
While we don't mind, this isn't a good mentality to have when that is basically what drives people to buy game consoles. Adults buy more to their taste, and kids wanna act like grown ups. Nintendo doesn't have to make full on gore to break this, but they can at least try a different approach to making games. From what I've seen, some of their games (Nintendo-made, not 2nd party) are getting brighter and happier. Hell, SM64 was scarier than SMS, and OoT/MM was darker than WW.
I don't mind. But Nintendo are going backward. It all started with OoT. They made such a beautiful game in that, and the controls were excellent. It was even movie-like. Same with WW. But by blatently refusing to make games like that anymore, they are ignoring the reason why they are making a powerful next-gen console to begin with. Oh sure, we're going to have the most powerful console in the world, but that doesn't mean our games have to look the best. Then why make one? Just to satisfy the devcos that DO care? Nintendo at least have to try to make their games look as good as the hardware can provide. The gameplay can be simple, but if it is, at least make the game longer to accommodate US hardcore Nintendo fans. There really isn't a good reason to spend 100 bucks on a game that will only last 1 day.
Post by: yellowfellow on December 18, 2003, 03:36:21 PM
Post by: Renny on December 18, 2003, 03:52:44 PM
PETE: It's still Grand Theft Auto Vice City. It's been a year now since the game came out, and although there have been some really good releases over the past 12 months, nothing has really come close. Even if the Xbox version is a simple rehash of the PS2 version, with nothing new added to it, I'll still spend weeks on it.
Plenty of other misinformation, but that pretty much says it all.
Post by: WesDawg on December 18, 2003, 05:05:18 PM
On another note, I'm not intimidated by games with bright colors. Neither are my friends, but I did see a guy at EB once who said WW looked stupid. Seriously though, theres some cool realistic looking games out for the Cube, Metroid and RE come to mind. Theres some cool colorful ones too. WW is an epic game, whether you like the graphics or not. Miyamoto has said that the console has more power than he knows what to do with. Considering what he's shown himself willing to use that power for, I doubt we see anything seriously realistic out of him for awhile. The thought of a realistic Mario game starring a drunk Captain Lou Ablano kinda scares me anyways.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on December 18, 2003, 05:14:22 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on December 19, 2003, 02:56:01 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on December 19, 2003, 06:27:28 AM
I agree. It seems Nintendo has been getting "kiddier" ever since the N64. That's rather poor timing since that's exactly when the "kiddy" accusations started getting out of hand. Just look at many of their franchises. Mario got kiddier in Super Mario 64 because he now had a voice that really made the character sound childish. Mario was a lot more neutral when he never talked. Then Super Mario Sunshine was even brighter and cheerier than Super Mario 64. Yoshi was as neutral as Mario was on the SNES until Yoshi's Story came out on the N64 and made him cuter, gave him a sissy voice, and designed his game specifically for kids. The Zelda series actually got darker on the N64 (and sold better than it ever has, funny how that worked) but of course has taken a complete 360 and become a cartoon. All these are EAD franchises which I don't find surprising.
Super Mario Sunshine, Wind Waker, and Mario Kart: Double Dash are arguably the most "kiddy" releases yet for their respective series. No wonder the stereotype maintains despite the best efforts of every other Nintendo developer but EAD. EAD's franchises already are kid-friendly so it's absolutely ridiculous for them to make them MORE kid-friendly. Since those franchises are Nintendo's most popular it's really up to EAD to fix the stereotype. Hopefully they're realizing this after the general backlash Wind Waker caused. I'll bet if Zelda went back to an Ocarina of Time style and the Mario games started having better graphics and less voice samples the kiddy issue will become less significant.
Post by: ExtremeGcube on December 19, 2003, 06:37:50 AM
I also dont think that the EAD franchises became more kiddie. I think that the games you mentioned have gotten progressively better. I adored WW and SMS. I havent played MK
D yet, but if you look at the backgrounds in those games compared to N64 or SNES then you can see that it has gotten better as well. The sheer level of detail in all of these games makes them great.
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 19, 2003, 06:41:53 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on December 19, 2003, 06:49:32 AM
Perhaps you do prefer that style but would you NOT buy the next Zelda game if it looked like Ocarina of Time? I imagine you would buy it no matter what provided it was a good game. However the average gamer who thinks that Nintendo is kiddy is not going to buy Zelda if it continues with the cel-shaded approach. They however may have an interest in something that looks more like Ocarina of Time. Nintendo fans will buy either style but the average picky 18-30 year old fan is really only interested in one style. Therefore it makes perfect sense to go with that more market friendly style particularly when it WON'T turn away the existing fanbase. I think Nintendo can very easily make some of their franchises less "kiddy" without changing the fundamentals of the game or turning away existing fans.
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 19, 2003, 07:04:14 AM
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 19, 2003, 07:14:08 AM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 19, 2003, 07:22:20 AM
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 19, 2003, 07:26:01 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on December 19, 2003, 08:01:29 AM
Post by: WesDawg on December 19, 2003, 10:18:49 AM
I have no desire to ever see Nintendo start catering the Zelda or Mario series into exactly what the average gamer wants. Thats disrespectful to the names of the two series. They've established themselves as mascots for the entire industry. Using 'em to cater to the lowest common denominator (and I mean that in the sence of maturity, gamers who won't play a game because they think it looks stupid are immature) is just wrong.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 19, 2003, 11:33:17 AM
Sadly, it's true.
Post by: dee kay on December 19, 2003, 11:33:53 AM
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 19, 2003, 01:04:13 PM
Post by: Raising_Hell on December 19, 2003, 01:41:26 PM
I myself have been playing games fanatically for 20 years and believe me, regardless of how long each and every one of you have been playing it all comes down to one thing:everyone plays what they find to be fun. Or at least that is the lesson and the attitude we teck geeks had 20 years ago.
I can't accept a person speaking the truth about playing games for 20+ years when he tells me he finds todays games to ge great. To be frank I have spent more time playing with old emulated games than with my GC, and the GC along with the titles I have have, has given me the old good feeling that older games gave me.
Historical ignorance is the indication that a man can be manipulated. And older games are gaming history. You lived it or you've played it and studied it...your historically educated, as long as games are concerned. Today the media and the advertising attitude have not marked only Nintendo as kiddy and lame, but old games too, so people don't play them and thus never see the obvious about todays games.
What is it? Even when you take games an analyze them to the core (which I believe is a bad habit unless your in the buisness) one can rarely find anything other than graphical and acoustical superiority to be the only difference. There are even times when this superiority is lacking in comparison to older games. But still, gameplay is what defines a good game and in this department (a part of games that still has not been properly and accurately defined) monstrous things have been said: "Next gen gameplay" and all the game has is a jump action, an attack action and maybe an inventory. So all mindless people who spit on old games because the block of pixels doesn't look like a head think that the money muncher they are buying really has "next gen" gameplay and they never even realise that the gameplay style they are playing with is a 20 year gameplay concept, unchanged! All we need now is a super neat looking glowing 3d bar moving up and down blocking a sphere an then wait for the whole gaming media to tell us that this will be the best and newest thing in gamplay (fine print:because none of the millions who will play have ever heard of Pong!).
Had this guy really been playing for so long as he claims, he would have understood the difference in the gameplay of,say, Megaman, Castlevanina and Donkey Kong. All platformers, all the same actions but still many differences in their gampley, that are not to be mentioned here, that have made them different games alltogether, basic lessons in gamemaking that todays designers seem to ignore. And why shouldn't they, since people like this guy don't care and don't notice. They will, in 10 years maybe.
They say that thinking that you know is worse than not knowing. I guess it is correct.
Post by: Garnia on December 19, 2003, 03:54:13 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 19, 2003, 04:06:52 PM
Post by: NarmaK on December 19, 2003, 09:36:43 PM
Quote
The past year has been a very decisive one in the so-called console war. Last year, we knew the Xbox was a superior piece of hardware compared to its competitors, but there were questions about whether Microsoft could produce a good number of quality games for it. Well, that question has been answered with a resounding "yes." Landing the Grand Theft Auto games (set for release on Xbox this November) was an absolutely huge coup for Microsoft — one that can't be understated. It sent a message to gamers that was loud and clear: Microsoft is willing to do whatever it takes, and pay whatever it takes, to makes its console a success.*
Good idea, purchase all of your game equipment based on the company that is more devoted to buisness strategy, instead of the company devoted to good games.
Also, you idiot, microsoft didnt produce GTA, in fact there is no evidence that they did squat to get it ported to xbox (also, get a PC, they got the GTA games quite a while ago).
* Accept for anything that might involve quality games.
Quote
The message game developers seem to have taken from this is that it doesn't make financial sense to produce titles exclusively for one console, so better to produce for all of them. But the thing is, these games tend to be better on the Xbox because of its superior hardware.
Games actualy tend to be better on the PC. And one developer that wont be developing for all consoles is Nintendo, the most succesful developer in gaming history.
Quote
In terms of mobile games, Nintendo is really scoring big on its little Game Boy Advance wonder-box. It's an absolutely fantastic system and I recommend it to anybody with an itch for portable gaming. One word of warning though: Nintendo's success in this niche has not gone unnoticed, and now others are gunning for a piece of the portable gaming market. It remains to be seen how well Nokia's N-Gage does, and there's also talk that Sony has something in the works. And when have we ever known Microsoft to sit quietly by when there's money to be made?
This just in, the N-gage is a piece of ****. Oh yeah, and you belive that microsoft is going to create an x-boy? Thats ****ing halarious.
"And when have we ever known Microsoft to sit quietly by when there's money to be made?" Reminds me of a toothless pimp. "yo im microsoft, check out my fat ass x-ho, any blind fokes wanna git wit her?"
Quote
What's not to like? It beats the other consoles in every department.* What probably intrigues me the most now is Xbox Live — I've liked what I've seen so far, but I think it can go farther. I'm excited to see what the next year has in store.
The only complaint I have with the Xbox is the same one I had last year — it's too big.
*Except sales good games and a ton of other ****
Quote
The Playstation 2 still has the largest variety of games. The PS2 is a good system to have in a household that might have gamers of several age groups. There are kiddie titles and there are mature games.
But hopefully Sony is putting some serious resources into developing Playstation 3, because the PS2 is being shamed by Xbox, especially in the peripherals department. Memory cards, controller multi-taps and on-line adapters — all add-ons you need to buy, whereas Xbox has them all built in. The PS2's DVD player is also pretty crappy.
Adults dont usualy use the term kiddie. Child oriented seems more appropriate.
Crappy how? And dont you have to purchase additional equipment to even use the xbox dvd player?
And seriously, how many f***ing dvd players do you need? You live in your mammas basement, so im guessing just one.
Also, the atari jaguar makes a good paper weight while the xbox is the size of a 1970s VCR.
And of course the s***ty controller, with the xbox you have to replace it. Sooo, stfu.
Quote
Nintendo has a serious niche going with the whole Gamecube-Gameboy Advance connectivity thing. I haven't yet seen this utilized in a way that gets me excited, but the potential is there.
But on the game side, it almost looks like Nintendo isn't even trying any more. Last year at this time, there was a lot being made about Nintendo's supposed move to "adult" games. Well, where are those games? It seems like there's more and more kids stuff coming out for this console, and less and less to interest games my age.
What exactly does he mean by games his age? Does he mean he cant play anything that doesnt have a mature rating? If so he has a warped mind and should be analized by a professional. And yes you imbecile, gamecube has plenty of mature games, claiming they have none is just proof that you havent even tryed to find any.
Quote
It's simple — high-quality portable gaming. The thing packs immense power for its size.
The game prices are too high, though. Considering you're paying about $70 (Cdn.) for a console game, it doesn't seem fair to shell out $50 on a stripped-down portable title. Hopefully the emergence of competition in this niche will bring prices down.
And hes canadian! Bahahaha!
If he thinks games are going to be priced down to $10 just because there is a little competition, or because canadians have a problem with a weak as hell economy, he is truly more ingorant than most 13 year old kids I have met online.
Quote
Hopefully the manufacturers are starting to realize that forcing gamers to buy all sorts of extra accessories only serves to tick them off. With any luck, all the next-generation consoles from Nintendo and Sony will come with everything you need built in: DVD players, on-line adapters, hard drives and an extra controller.
As for the Xbox, the hardware is there, the on-line capability is there, so why not introduce an Xbox Cam? If Microsoft really wants to turn the Xbox into something more than just a gaming system, why not add a little video camera and introduce video conferencing? And while we're at it, why not empower the Xbox to read e-mail? Hackers are already doing it with Xbox hardware, so why not offer it as a feature to the general public?
I like the GBA just the way it is, and I would actually prefer if it was left alone and not subjected to silly peripherals, like the original Gameboy's pointless camera.
OH MY GOD! HES A F***ING GENIUS!! HE JUST INVENTED THE F***ING HOME COMPUTER!!!
Except that nobody wants to video conference with fat greesy canadian 29 year old that lives in his mammas basement.
Seriously, this retard actualy has a job?
Quote
I don't know if it's the best, but it's certainly the coolest (literally) — Nyko's line of air-cooled controllers is an idea whose time has come. No more sweaty hands! If only these babies were made standard issue...
Ahahahahahaha, A PUN!!!!!!!!
Quote
I can't really complain about the game selection for any of these systems in terms of volume any more. The PS2 always had a good library going for it, but the Xbox has really ramped it up over the past year and can really be considered an equal right now. As I said before, it looks like Nintendo is targeting younger gamers. There aren't many titles on the Gamecube that older gamers will enjoy that can't be found on one of the other two consoles, though.
Why does he keep refering to sony, microsoft, and nintendo as if they actualy made all of the games produced for their consoles. Doesnt he understand anything!?
Also, he keeps contradicting himself.
"I can't really complain about the game selection for any of these systems in terms of volume any more."
"As I said before, it looks like Nintendo is targeting younger gamers. There aren't many titles on the Gamecube that older gamers will enjoy that can't be found on one of the other two consoles, though."
Yep, hes an idiot.
Quote
Like the other consoles, the Xbox is lacking a good turn-based strategy combat game, like the Command and Conquer titles. For some reason, these types of games just haven't translated well to consoles. The Xbox is also a little light in the role-playing department. Luckily, the few RPGs that are available are quite good.
On the Playstation 2, there simply haven't been very many good on-line games released yet.
On the Gamecube, again there needs to be a bigger selection of titles that appeal to older gamers and which can't be found on the other consoles. Rebel Strike is really, really welcome.
For the Gameboy Advance, how about releasing a game based on a licensed property that isn't terrible?
No good online titles for ps2? Hey look! Its a bird! No a plane! No its, youre a f***ing idiot.
Beating a dead horse is useless, youve made your point, if I want to play GTA ill go somewhere else. Of course not Xbox, though.
All licensed games suck, and once again, GBA doesnt make the ****ty games, GBA is just a video game playing device. And uh, why do you care about 10 different crappy games based on sponge bob? Homo.
Quote
The PS2 and Xbox consoles seem to be shooting for the same target audience — teens to adults. The PS2 does have a little bit more going on for kids, though.
The Gamecube and Gameboy Advance offer a lot of kids titles. But don't be fooled — some kids games can be enjoyed at any age, and the two systems also offer a smattering of titles that will appeal to older gamers.
Contradiction.
Quote
The Xbox has really broadened its appeal over the past year by pumping out some good games in all genres. Initially, it was the system of choice for tech geeks, but it's a little more accessible now. Tech geeks still love it, though.
The Playstation 2 has such a good track record with sports titles that it's going to be hard to persuade all the sports game fanatics to ever try a non-Sony product.
Kids and adults looking to play easy-to-learn and inoffensive games are likely to find the Gamecube appealing.
Again, the GBA is largely in the domain of children. However, serious game junkies, like myself, will love it as well.
Contradiction.
Quote
It's still Grand Theft Auto Vice City. It's been a year now since the game came out, and although there have been some really good releases over the past 12 months, nothing has really come close. Even if the Xbox version is a simple rehash of the PS2 version, with nothing new added to it, I'll still spend weeks on it.
You know who agrees with him? 5 Million 12 year olds. Hows that for a kiddie game.
Quote
At the risk of sounding like I'm on Microsoft's payroll (and I swear that I'm not!), this is a pretty simple question to answer: Xbox. To boil down all the reasons mentioned above: it's got the best hardware and now, a substantial game library. It's also got momentum, and developers and hackers alike are fans. Love Microsoft or hate it, the company has created a great video game system.
Not only have I been suggesting getting an Xbox to friends who are thinking of purchasing a console, I've been doing the same thing to people thinking of buying a DVD player. Why shell out $200 on a DVD player when you can spend $50 more and get a video game system with on-line capabilities thrown in?
What momentum?
Developers like it? Who exactly and prove it.
Hackers? What hackers? Do you know any hackers? You know what hackers like? They like the old days back when you could rob an ATM easy as hell because it was such a piece of crap.
$200? I got my DVD drive for 80 bucks and its the best available. And that was 2 years ago.
Online capabilities that cost a large monthly fee.
Quote
Pete's Top Five picks across all consoles for 2004 are as follows:
1. Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell
Sure, there have been some good stealth games, but none have blown me away — along many other gamers —like Splinter Cell did. Yes, it was linear and really hard, but it forced you to think like no other stealth game did. This game also showcased the power of the Xbox, proving that as far as graphics were concerned, the other consoles don't even matter. And I really liked the ability to download a new level using Xbox Live — a fantastic feature that I'd like to see more of.
2. Freedom Fighters
Just as Splinter Cell redefined stealth games, so too did Freedom Fighters take squad combat to a new level. Forget complicated button or voice commands — this title proves that all you need to give orders are three simple buttons. And aren't we gamers lucky — it's available for every console. If only the game was longer...
3. Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic
Possibly the most ambitious game of the year was Bioware's Star Wars role-playing game. I wasn't sure it could be done, but gosh darn it, Knights of the Old Republic ended up being the game I played the most this year. It's incredibly deep and detailed, and it really felt like you were in the Star Wars universe. Bioware proves yet again it can do no wrong.
4. Advance Wars 2: Black Hole Rising
Some may be surprised that I have a Gameboy Advance title on my list, but I'll be damned if this isn't a really fun game. It started when I innocently brought my GBA on a camping trip, just in case it rained all weekend or something. That's exactly what it did, and I ended up playing Advance Wars 2 the entire time. This is a better turn-based combat strategy game than any I've seen for the consoles, and it ate up more of my time this year than any game not named Knights of the Old Republic.
5. Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Tides of War
Being a big fan of first-person shooters, I was anxiously awaiting this one — the long-awaited descendant of the genre's grand-daddy, Castle Wolfenstein. And it did not disappoint. Moreover, the game also has the best on-line play features I've seen yet in a console.
1. Not xbox exclusive and best on PC.
2. Not xbox exclusive and best on PC.
3. Not xbox exclusive and if your PC can run it properly, best on PC.
4. Thats a kiddie game and not worth $50, or so he implied.
5. He doesnt get out much.
I think I have proved beyond the shaddow of a doubt, that this guy is a dumbass.
Hes canadian.
He frequently contradicts both himself and the truth.
Ive never heard of @play.
Hes canadian.
And after reading all of this I have to think that everything that makes xbox so great, makes PCs alot better. He should realy buy one.
Or go **** himself, it makes no difference to me.
Pfft, Gaming Overlord my ass.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 20, 2003, 12:20:34 AM
Post by: Garnia on December 20, 2003, 01:21:27 AM
Post by: VideoGamerX on December 20, 2003, 08:29:49 AM
Quote
PETE: Like the other consoles, the Xbox is lacking a good turn-based strategy combat game, like the Command and Conquer titles.
Errmm... I thought Command and Conquer was a real-time strategy game...
It's clear that this guy is trying really hard to sound like someone "in-the-know" as a game reviewer for some place online. He just isn't playing with a full deck when it comes to speaking about all three consoles. It'd be like most of us trying to list ten good things about the Xbox and it's gaming line up. It's not in our realm of interest, and we're not the best suited people to speak off the top of our heads about the console or its games.
This is heavily skewed toward the Xbox and is one man's opinion. His credibility took a big hit, but it's not like it matters. I don't even remember what his name was.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on December 20, 2003, 09:30:27 AM
Post by: Cap on December 20, 2003, 10:23:12 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: NarmaK
I think I have proved beyond the shaddow of a doubt, that this guy is a dumbass.
Hes canadian.
He frequently contradicts both himself and the truth.
Ive never heard of @play.
Hes canadian.
And after reading all of this I have to think that everything that makes xbox so great, makes PCs alot better. He should realy buy one.
Or go **** himself, it makes no difference to me.
Pfft, Gaming Overlord my ass.
you know, i'm not sure who the dumbass really is. the guy that is featured in the article, or the idiot who keeps making stupid immature comments about canadians? could go either way if you ask me.
Post by: Renny on December 20, 2003, 11:04:01 AM
What's the difference between a canoe and a Canadian?
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 20, 2003, 11:05:27 AM
Post by: Renny on December 20, 2003, 11:10:24 AM
Post by: Cap on December 20, 2003, 11:41:43 AM
Post by: ThePerm on December 20, 2003, 12:14:57 PM
Post by: Renny on December 20, 2003, 03:48:53 PM
Canoes tip.
Post by: NarmaK on December 20, 2003, 04:15:54 PM
If he was french im sure you would be laughing like hell at him.
Damn up-tight canadians, dont even get simple jokes.
(By the way, canada happens to be one of my favorite countries, I just like making fun of people. Who the hell doesnt?)
Post by: Garnia on December 21, 2003, 01:49:26 AM
Post by: Cap on December 21, 2003, 08:59:33 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: NarmaK
Damn up-tight canadians, dont even get simple jokes.
personaly i dont find anything funny about other countrys or races. i guess you can have your opinion of what you find funny though.
"simple jokes" dont get made four times. next time i read an article by an american writer that i dont agree with, i'll be sure to "joke" that its simply becouse hes a stupid fat american. then i'll go on to mention that 3 or 4 more times.
hey dont worry about it, i'm only joking.
just forget it.
Post by: NarmaK on December 22, 2003, 12:59:25 AM
Post by: Garnia on December 22, 2003, 01:19:07 AM
Post by: nolimit19 on December 22, 2003, 04:50:44 AM
