Page 40 of 51 FirstFirst ...
30
38
39
40
41
42
50
... LastLast
  1. #781
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendulous View Post
    Name one game that had as many major gameplay flaws at launch as Diablo 3, and the devs had to admit the game crashed pretty hard
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendulous View Post
    I never said they said that, I was paraphrasing, jesus.
    You can't say "show me a game that did X", when the game you're so adamant about didn't have that. If I made the claim that Pokemon was the worst game ever, that the devs said that they were lazy and the game was horrible, and then I made the challenge to find another game that did that, and then backtrack to say that that's not really what you meant, how can one find a comparable game?

    *link*
    Funny, I didn't see them trash the game.

    Here, game too hard at launch
    And that's a bad thing? Difficulty? Especially when we're (well, I assume) talking about Inferno, which is kind of the point.

    itemization sucks and needs major changes (still)
    Not what they said, but okay. With paraphrasing, could it be better? Sure.

    class skills are still terrible and need reworked
    I had fun with my sorceress, I in no way thought it was "terrible"; I had many different choices. Were some better than others? Of course, there's almost always going to be a better choice when you're talking about taking X, Y, or Z.

    social features suck
    I can chat with my friends, all I need. Even if I couldn't, I have Skype, which I use regardless; I don't need social features.

    But yeah, with your phrasing your mind is 100% made up, so I sincerely doubt there's any point continuing.

    D3 is not bad. It could be better. But it's fine. Jesus.

  2. #782
    Fluffy Kitten Pendulous's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Treno
    Posts
    19,499
    Quote Originally Posted by icedwarrior View Post
    Funny, I didn't see them trash the game.
    "I think many people would agree that, at launch, the game was too challenging." Fixed as of now.
    "When a perfect pair of gloves is “Core Stat, Vit, Res All, Crit Chance, Crit Dmg, Attack Speed” and you can’t even imagine another stat you would want instead of one of those, we have a bigger problem."
    "so I’ll just say that we agree and we want Legendary items to feel game changing. " Among others, but the itemization blog clearly shows that items are not where they ought to be.
    "Yes, there are a lot of runes and abilities that are lacking"
    "What crafting was meant to be and what it ended up being aren’t necessarily the same. Again there are a long list of reasons why it turned out to be a bit underwhelming for some people."

    Obviously, they can't just say "our game sucks, and we're working hard to make it better". It's their game, they can't do that for PR and money purposes. But looking at all these quotes, they SAY "this is how we're working to improve this game". They HAVE to spin that because if they didn't, they wouldn't have a job afterwards. But when you're working on CORE ASPECTS of a game, you know that something went wrong. Again, Legacy Legendaries.

    Quote Originally Posted by icedwarrior View Post
    And that's a bad thing? Difficulty? Especially when we're (well, I assume) talking about Inferno, which is kind of the point.
    That the game was too hard for most of the playerbase, in a game where items are one-in-a-million for upgrades? Yeah, that's why they changed it. Now, people have the option to change the difficulty as they see fit.


    Quote Originally Posted by icedwarrior View Post
    Not what they said, but okay. With paraphrasing, could it be better? Sure.
    No, this is pretty much what they are saying. Legendaries still aren't, and rares are too infrequent to offer any kind of excitement over finding items. The itemization blog and this post, among others, makes it very clear.



    Quote Originally Posted by icedwarrior View Post
    I had fun with my sorceress, I in no way thought it was "terrible"; I had many different choices. Were some better than others? Of course, there's almost always going to be a better choice when you're talking about taking X, Y, or Z.
    Are you talking about an actual sorceress, or are you mistaking sorceress for wizard? Because this has nothing to do with Diablo 2. Class skills still need a lot of work, so at least there are multiple options for people to TRY. My go-to skill here? Inner Sanctuary. Worse skill for monks that nobody ever uses, yet it exists, and so far hasn't been touched. Meaning, it's going to take a lot of work to get to where people might actually want to try it. When you only have one "cookie-cutter" spec, and one optional spec, something's wrong. It would be ok if you could try out other things and get them to work well enough so you can at least enjoy yourself, but it just doesn't happen.



    Quote Originally Posted by icedwarrior View Post
    I can chat with my friends, all I need. Even if I couldn't, I have Skype, which I use regardless; I don't need social features.
    At the moment, co-op play is sub-optimal for farming gear or XP. As mentioned by Travis Day, and from personal experience I agree. By far, solo play gets you both a lot faster. 1.0.8 seeks to fix some issues, so playing with your friends is a lot better and you don't feel gimped just for doing so.

    Quote Originally Posted by icedwarrior View Post
    But yeah, with your phrasing your mind is 100% made up, so I sincerely doubt there's any point continuing.
    I could say the same for you, since you disregard direct quotes from devs that admit important aspects the game are lackluster.

  3. #783
    Quote Originally Posted by BenBos View Post
    The thread was about general "fail" and not about your personal opinion.

    So overall it is a success (certainly in sales) AND in player numbers as 10 months after launch there still is a 25 % retention rate of 3 million unique loggings per month.

    Most games are never played longer than a few hours. Hell, stats show that 90% of all games never are finished.

    So while I consider D3 a fantastic game to be played in HC mode and you would consider it not a good game, the overall stats in both sales AND multi million unique loggings per month shows a lot of people like it.

    I hate it when people want to trash talk games I like to play. Why ? Because I don't think your opinion is superior than mine. That's a very simple statement and people should respect the multi million fans of D3.

    This last sentence is something Pendulous does not seem to grasp: fans of D3 LIKE TO PLAY this game... GOT THAT Pendulous ?????

    And yes I would like to give an advice: play D3 hardcore and you'll see its huge element of fun.
    People can play D3 for other reasons than it being good. Some want to get their money out of it, some play when bored, some play because they actually enjoy it. Stop spinning the numbers to suit your favor, you aren't winning anything here.

    The irony in you telling Pendulous off is that you cannot grasp simple logic yourself: People play D3 for other reasons than fun. Strange, I know, but when you cannot return something...

    EDIT: Fix't your snide remark to say who you were addressing. Got that Benbos ???????

  4. #784

  5. #785
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendulous View Post
    That the game was too hard for most of the playerbase, in a game where items are one-in-a-million for upgrades? Yeah, that's why they changed it. Now, people have the option to change the difficulty as they see fit.
    The problem with this is that people will again figure out the most optimal path and use it.

    It's a core design issue, what they should have done was end the game (reach max level) at the end of nightmare/beginning of hell, then had monsters and gear scale up through hell and inferno. That way everyone that hit max level had something to progress through and would have been able to get increasingly better rewards for doing so, this would have fit in with their "Inferno isn't for everyone" mantra pre-launch.

    Or just create an actual end game like GGG did with PoE. :P

  6. #786
    Deleted
    the reason why D3 failed so much was because of its in-game auction house, it made gearing up so easy and you didnt really have a reason to do anything else, provided you had the gold for it, it litterally made playing the actual game pointless and another thing for me, was that it is supposed to be random dungeons with random enemies but it never was, it was the same dungeons and the same creatures, it didnt matter if you played it on normal, nightmare, hell or inferno which also made the replay value plummet to non-existing. it wasnt like d1 or d2 where everything was randomized, you might have had the same tiles but they were organized differently and it wasnt always the same monsters you faced which was a huge part why those 2 games was such a huge success, they had replay value, something D3 never did which was a pity coz i felt the classes were well made but that doesnt help much when everything else was crap.
    Last edited by mmoca748dddcc2; 2013-04-14 at 02:37 AM.

  7. #787
    Spam Assassin! MoanaLisa's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Tralfamadore
    Posts
    32,405
    By every measurable metric that isn't based on personal feelings and opinions Diablo III didn't really fail at all. Sales, longevity, retention: all wins.

    Now: Like most people I think it came up short and there are lots of different reasons for that; as many reasons probably as there are people that played it. My own personal reasons have to do with the mess that was Inferno at launch and the general incompetence at Blizzard that let this get out without proper public beta testing. For me that's at the heart of nearly all of it. I don't mind the always on-line (wouldn't have bothered with it if I did) or the auction houses. I've avoided the RMAH altogether and for the first few months of the game used the gold auction house sparingly; now not at all. It's a much better game for the latter. I've started playing a bit with hard core and so far think that's fine.

    PVP was never a big deal for me but promising it and not delivering it was unconscionable. Not figuring out that the PVP they had wasn't working until well after launch was entirely laughable. All of this gets laid at the feet of the game director and his bosses. Maybe the long birth of the game made it like one of those epic movies that takes years to make, has a dozen writers and three directors and always...always...ends up laughably bad when it gets into the movie theater.

    But even with all that I won't go so far as to say it's a failure. Disappointment? Absolutely. Fixable? Maybe, we'll see. I don't see the game as a sequel to anything. It's a reboot/redesign altogether and given its development history it's not surprising that it ended up like it did. I'm also not even a little bit on the bandwagon that it should have been a prettier version of Diablo II. Charging $60 for what amounts to a reskin would be as bad as what they did to be honest. And lastly, factored into all of this was a decade of ever-rising player expectations. Expectations raised to the point where there's really nothing that would have satisfied a lot of people. You see this all the time now with other large games. Expectations rise and then get more-or-less crushed when the final product rolls out the door. It's a very good game that avoids this. Skyrim comes to mind as a good example of that I suppose.

    Anyway, I'm hopeful that by now they've got their heads around what the problems are and much like Diablo II will elevate the game enormously with the expansion. I'm still playing it and after taking a few months away from it and returning to it fresh, find it actually a lot of fun. Time will tell on whether or not they can make it meet the promise. That's my two cents anyway.
    Last edited by MoanaLisa; 2013-04-14 at 02:53 AM. Reason: Spelling and syntax issues.
    "...money's most powerful ability is to allow bad people to continue doing bad things at the expense of those who don't have it."

  8. #788
    Deleted
    i like how so many here says POE is much better than D3 and D3 should be like POE

    i dislike POE for some reasons and i'm sure many others do too and i like D3 for some reasons as many others also do.. the game didn't FAIL!

    This thread is not about why diablo 3 failed but why diablo 3 failed for you! diablo 3 is obviously still doing good and have lots of players whatever you will ever see as fail in the game it's only your opinion and not a fact.

  9. #789
    Deleted
    For me it came down to the fact it had no end-game at all, and the overall difficulty was too low due to the AH (gold, never spent ££). And sure, you can say "BUT YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO USE THE AH", well the game was designed around it, so gimping yourself to add artificial difficulty wasn't really an option. The game has improved a lot since release but the AH kills it, plus you're still running the same act over and over which is extremely boring.

    I've been playing PoE and I love the map system, every one feels different and unique so it doesn't get as repetitive. I would like to see a map system added in the first expansion if not sooner.

  10. #790
    Mechagnome Fishyface's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In your fish aquarium eating your fish flakes. NOM NOM
    Posts
    678
    A couple of the reasons that D3 failed for me:

    The replay value was nearly nonexistant for me. Which is wierd because i seem to be able play torchlight II over and over and not get bored of the story or the scenery. Only thing i can think of is that getting to inferno mode felt like a massive chore, like i wasnt able to gear farm until i got there for anything decent.

    Secondly i HATED how gear was handled. You get things that are up to 10 levels behind you in D3, making it where i could go up to an entire act without an upgrade. And in ARPGS for me the gradual accumulation of power is the fun part. In torchlight II you get gear around your levels and they seemed to have the more "fun" items.

    I know thats subjective but i just like in general how Torchlight II handled things, they did a great job, bought it at release and i still play it off and on.
    Torchlight II Vanilla Player
    Looking for a vanilla only group?

    http://forums.runicgames.com/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=40739

  11. #791
    LOL where to start:

    -Terrible Itemization
    -Brutal RNG
    -Awful and Predictable Story
    -Little Replayability
    -Ridiculous Affix Combinations
    -Cheesy Villains with lame dialogue
    -No chat lobbys
    -Online only
    -Nephalim buff was lame and poorly implemented

    Kiting mobs forever in inferno was boring at release, group play was not enjoyable at inferno some classes were totally useless past act 1 (I haven't played since I cleared it so I don't know what its like now). The IAS nerf while I agree was needed was poorly handled and also implemented at a terrible time. It should of been implemented before release. Did anybody even remotely fucking test this game on harder difficulties internally at Blizzard? Yeah it sold millions of copies riding off the coattails of the Diablo and Blizzard names and that alone.

    No runewords, horadric cube or anything carried over from Diablo 2. They will probably implement it in the future expansion just so people buy it which is total corporate bullshit. All of that should of been brought to this game and then added totally new things to the franchise in the next xpac. That right there shows total lack of innovation and creativity.

    I personally know roughly 50 people who purchased this game and 1 of them is still playing and they play it extremely casually, they're still playing nightmare/hell. I did get my money's worth based on time spent but that doesn't change the fact that the game was a major disappointment and huge failure on behalf of blizzard. People that are claiming 3 million people play it a month. You know that includes bots...

    You people that are defending this game are either being paid to support it in this forum or you are easily pleased, either way good for you and I'm glad you're getting paid for such a menial task or having fun playing. (Or Both)

  12. #792
    Monetary wise, D3 is nothing short of a success. This is pretty much indisputable.

    Actual game itself failed to the majority of players expecting a "Diablo" game. The list explaining why is rather long and it differs between the players (some hate the online-only, some hate the RMAH, endgame, etc.) and my personal list is rather long as well.

    -Simplified Item Stats was a major step down from D2 (On this I blame the lack of innovation and making every form of dmg Crit-able)

    -D3 is more of a goldfarm than an item hunt (Many factors from bad Item RNG to Global AH tool)

    -Terrible post-login interface compared to D2 (and I promise this isn't nostalgia talking)

    -Too tired to continue the list but those are the big ones for me

    Now Blizz did provide something on D3 that I praise them for on this and just about all of their games: the smooth gameplay/visuals. ATM its the best I've seen compared to other ARPGs.

  13. #793
    i agree about the replay value.. huge + in diablo 2.. the game is still quite playable with the exception of some lag and bots... i remember going through act 1 storming the cathedral finally getting through the catacombs to Andariel... and running as far as i could away from her so i dont get killed lol.

    act 2.. collecting staff pieces for the horadric staff.. utilizing the cube and looking at the arcane sanctuary view.. its really nice.. Act 2 may seem boring but the sanctuary makes up for it.

    Act 3. running through the jungle collecting pieces.. overall not super fun but still ok. mephisto and the moat trick still make the boss entertaining.

    Act 4 just race to diablo and kill him... but still you are fighting through hell itself to get there. its a lot easier to skip quests and stuff in diablo 2.. but that can be the fun part if u want to take it slow, or just zerg through. and act 5. not a huge fan of Harrogath but they added some neat things in the expansion.. like runes class specific items/ 2 new classes... runewords of course.. charms.. and the uber bosses just to keep things interesting.

    plus there were a variety of builds u could use for d2. for barb theres WW or zerker.. even a warcry barb was attempted and did ok for lvling although not great for bossing... for the druid theres 2-3 builds you can choose.. sin 1-2.. sorc 3.. amazon 1 i think.. necro 2.. pally 2-3....

    the real problem with d3 was the terrible storyline.. its fun but we have no desire to repeat it 3 times.. the cutscenes were very nice but.. they get old real fast.. and figuring how this game was being developed for 8-10 years or more.. i mean come on. the other issue was bad itemization. str on sorceress gear? random dex on my occulus ring? wat the fuck.... atleast d2 had the decency to not have retarded itemization on the best gear pieces.. first time u find a legendary should be like.. yay.. and not.. oh i hope its not a magical barb sword with 400 int on it.

  14. #794
    The game has been out for about ten months and it still has one massive massive flaw:

    Loot itemization.

    This is the main component that has killed this game for so many people. It is the worst I have ever seen in a game designed around loot. This game was a financial success but it will be really interesting when the expansion comes out and those sales numbers are announced.

    If loot itemization stays the same, I know I will not be buying it along with several other friends.

  15. #795
    Quote Originally Posted by Amonthar View Post
    The game has been out for about ten months and it still has one massive massive flaw:

    Loot itemization.

    This is the main component that has killed this game for so many people. It is the worst I have ever seen in a game designed around loot. This game was a financial success but it will be really interesting when the expansion comes out and those sales numbers are announced.

    If loot itemization stays the same, I know I will not be buying it along with several other friends.
    Curiously when you would have played the game in hardcore mode, you would see the game itself, the itemisation and in game AH is fabulous.

    Why?

    Because of the following:

    1. Goals: you set out goals in Hardcore : class to 60, kill D3, try to reach upper paragon levels ... Always with ONE prime goal: do not die once.
    2. do it with several classes.

    Now comes the part of D3 where it works: by building up your gear over all these classes in hardcore mode, ... Each death not only resets the overall gear offer, but it extends your gear over your avatars as well ...

    Suddenly you realise that the AH in such a system makes sense: because of masses of gear resets due to deaths, BUT the overall economy pushes the players to compete for an ever thinning market. Now enter ... The crafting market. Crafting is awarded in hardcore mode, not only because of the constant need for (leveling) gear and goods, but also to feed your own needs for currency...

    In hardcore this game does not even need a ladder system. It is a self regulating economy and grinding game ... Until death reaches out on your latest avatar.

    So to those complaining' they really play a different game as long as you didn't try out HC modes.

    It may seem ridiculous, but each death actually pushes you back to play even more. Because you can build up again from the earlier gathered resources faster and more rewarding than your last dead avatar.

    Fabulous game as such.

    Diablo 3' s hardcore mechanics are back to basics of why we play video games in the first place. Not for some stupid story you are fed up with once you see it played through: but video game play in its purest form: survival ... As long as possible and trying to better the avatars.

    That's why we played Pac Man, Donkey Kong and Mario. Diablo 3 hardcore play is pure gold at the moment and the whining masses don't have a clue ... Yet.

    Softcore is just a practising mode with an extreme good responsive engine, but hardcore is where this game really shines.
    Last edited by BenBos; 2013-04-14 at 09:00 AM.

  16. #796
    Dreadlord yuca247's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Winterfell
    Posts
    807
    The reason D3 failed for a lot of people is because they have bad memory. People seem to forget when D1 and D2 came out the times were different, the players were different. At that time D1 and then D2 pushed the boundaries of what a game could do and could become FOR THAT TIME. The times have changed. Compare D1 and D2 to today's standards and expectations and it's not all that great it's even boring for a lot of players in this generation. That's why blizzard decided against just doing a reskin and calling it D3.

    It's the same reason why that game you used to love 10 years ago when you play it now it just feels "meh" it's good but it's not THAT great.

    D3 is not perfect by any means and there are improvements that the devs need to make but it didn't fail in ways people would have you believe.

  17. #797
    Quote Originally Posted by Eschaton View Post
    But even with all that I won't go so far as to say it's a failure. Disappointment? Absolutely. Fixable? Maybe, we'll see. I don't see the game as a sequel to anything. It's a reboot/redesign altogether and given its development history it's not surprising that it ended up like it did. I'm also not even a little bit on the bandwagon that it should have been a prettier version of Diablo II. Charging $60 for what amounts to a reskin would be as bad as what they did to be honest.
    No one is really asking for it to be a prettier version of D2, they did however expect it to be an evolution of D2, improve on the classic game they loved for a decade. Blizzard decided to instead take it apart and remove most features and start to re-invent the wheel again, building a new ARPG from the ground up with heavy WoW design influences.

    Now if they had instead stated that it's going to be a reboot and called it Diablo:Infernal or some other lame name it would have been different, people would then expect a ARPG set in the Diablo universe with Blizzard quality (which isn't all that these days since they sold out to the almighty dollar).

  18. #798
    I am Murloc! Kuja's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    City of Judgement
    Posts
    5,493
    I think one word is enough: Grindfest.

    Diablo 2 was the same, but it was fun to play and I wasn't aware that games like wow existed then and offered way better leveling experience than just killing stuff and doing a few quests repeatedly in different difficulty settings.

    My gold making blog
    Your journey towards the gold cap!


  19. #799
    Stood in the Fire
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    450
    Quote Originally Posted by BenBos View Post
    Softcore is just a practising mode with an extreme good responsive engine, but hardcore is where this game really shines.
    If that is the case the game is even more of a failure in my eyes, Hardcore is not reliable or playable long term because of regular rubber banding and server lag with my above average connection here in Sydney.
    I would play hardcore alot and love it even with the broken itemisation and ah, if I didn't have to cross my fingers and hope the server doesn't decide to fk me mid rare pack.
    Its not quite as bad with the new MP changes but now its mostly playing an invulnerable character just in case the connection spikes, not quite the HC experience I had in mind.

  20. #800
    Quote Originally Posted by Fishyface View Post
    So now that blizzard has openly admitted its lacking endgame ive got to ask the question. What are people expecting out of diablo 3? I just dont get what some people were expecting from this game. I honestly dont get what even blizzard was expecting at this point.


    Were you expecting an mmo?

    Were you expecting a game you could play for 12 hours a day for 6 years straight?

    I expected D3 to be like any other game, you play it for a while and beat it, it isnt an mmo with eternal gameplay. Sure you can fire it up once in a while and go through a couple of the difficulties (which is its replay value to me), but in my mind D3 shouldnt sustain your gaming habits eternally.

    I feel like the gear grind is like maxing out your chars in any final fantasy game. Its fun but its for people who just want something else to do to make their gameplay last a little longer, and it should have an ending point.

    Im really sorry for all the poeple who expected that D3 would last longer than it did for them. But really i just dont get why people are so angry about what is essentially a single player game
    Diablo 1 and 2 were created at a time when repetitive game play was a very popular concept amongst gamers. The loot hunt was both challenging and rewarding, and the randomized dungeons with ramped up difficulty levels made it all the more worthwhile. Back then, internet connections were slow as shit, and the design of the game allowed for most of the important data to be stored PC side, which allowed for lan and offline play. Part of the hype behind such games was getting a group of your real life friends together on a Friday night, having them all bring their computers, ordering pizza, then spending hours just scraping dungeons for loot.

    These days, the ARPG formula is a tired one. People are used to new games and content coming out rapidly, so their attention spans have diminished when it comes to gaming. Games that are repetitive get finished and set aside quickly, and Diablo 3 proved as much. While is has a pretty substantial player base (considering it's a PC title), a lot of those players have moved on to other games.

    Blizzard bet the farm with the dungeon crawling ARPG style of the previous Diablo games, and while in theory, it was good to bank on the success of those games in their prime, the end product just wasn't what most gamers were expecting with a Diablo game. Even setting aside the numerous design mistakes and service bugs, it just doesn't present itself as a Diablo game in the right way. It's lost a lot of the gritty feel that the original Diablo games have, and the combination of short, repetitive story, along with the implementation of 'buy to win' RMAH and the 'always online' DRM, it was almost an instant turn off for most players.

    In fact, I would say that those two features alone were some of the biggest mistakes that Blizzard made with Diablo. In general the art design and game concept were solid and very polished. On their own merits, they are very fresh and exciting interpretations of the Diablo universe. However, under the hood of the game, any player can begin to tell where Blizzard made mistakes less than 10 hours into the game.

    1. Too much useless loot. This was due to the wild variance in the stat rolls. You can literally go through the entire game from 1-60, from normal to hell, and not see any really good drops for your class. Almost everything is mediocre, and it forces you to spend time on the AH to get quality gear.

    2. Most affixes are largely ignored. Any player will tell you that even on MP10 Inferno, you're really only looking for 3 stats.

    3. The game itself doesn't really change at all when you're playing through each difficulty. Bosses are all the same, they just hit harder. The only really noticeable difference are the number of affixes on rares increases, and the difficulty of the monsters increase. Technically speaking, a player can complete Normal in just about 10 hours (casually) and they have beaten the game. There's nothing new left to see, nothing important left to do. The only thing that keeps players playing the game is the addiction of attaining more power within the game so you can flex your epeen to other players who are also addicted to power.

    4. The lack of pvp is embarrassing. Games are fun, but games where you only kill NPCs get boring a lot faster than games where you can kill other players.

    5. The requirement for being always online is also embarrassing. Sure, companies have every right to cut down on piracy, but this isn't the sort of game where you want to be connected to the internet unless you are playing with friends. On top of that, they gave away over 1 million copies of this game for FREE, which is essentially the same thing as 1 million people pirating the game. Really not sure why DRM exists for this game when they had the potential to never actually sell a single copy of this game, and still get 10 million people to play it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •