Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Its not a bad idea, of course then there is the issue why spending time to do that instead of more actual game content.

 

It goes down to cost/worth ... does the cost of making such mini game is worth the effect on the game?

 

That is the one of the worst aspect of developing a game, taking ideas and break then down to what is their cost and what is their worth to the game, they have limited time and resources and so they cannot implement everything they like, many times they cannot even try to implement many things they wanted because of time/resources restrictions.

 

Worst case would be starting to implement something and later find out its not worth it, sometimes they cannot even remove what was already implemented and are forced to continue, not because its worth but because there is no other choice.

 

My stand on mini games is this, SW:TSL is first a RPG and it sould focus on RPG elements, mini games are not RPG elements, they are gimmicks to offer a break from repeated gameplay or give some kind of reward.

 

Parzak is a example of that, it offered some rewards that did not unbalanced the game too much (we can argue about the effect of the discount of the Yavin Starbase items) and offered a escape from RPG elements (of course I could ALT-TAB and play solitary and achive a similar effect but ...) and then we have Swoop racing that did offer a break to gameplay and offer some rewards (just credits) but it made the error of making a quest depending on it after making the character we play as some kind of "Swoop Ace Pilot ".

 

Its not a easy choice, personaly I rather it being avoided that tried to be implemented for us to end up with a highly interactive repair screen to build stuff with, I have no problem with easy mini games but stuff like "Button Mashing Yuna Dance Dance Revolution" mini games are more a waste of space that anything else.

drakron.png
Link to post
Share on other sites
Involvement sould never mean forcing players to use their skills, I have no idea how to build a lightsaber but if my character have why sould I be asked to LEARN about it so my character, that knows it already, can use that skill?

You are reading way to deep into this.

 

I'm just commenting that considering they added the fact that you were a Jedi and would construct your own lightsaber in the first game, it was kinda silly that the construction consisted entirely of "you have now built your lightsaber."

 

 

As for not forcing players to use their skills? What exactly do you mean? First skills is rather vague...character skills or personal skills? And are you referring to twitch skills or something else? After all reading and making a few choices is also a skill. All it had to be was a few simple choices...or heck...even a cutscene showing me actually make it would have been cooler. Watching my guy wave his hands and then suddenly poof was a let-down.

 

And why shouldn't a game "force" people to use some sort of skill? The game forces you to use such skills as manual dexterity (for using the mouse and the keyboard)...or are you saying the game should move at a snail's pace. All I'm asking for would be something more entertaining than "Ah....you're lightsaber is complete." It could have been completely automated for all I care.

 

 

And as for why you should be asked to learn about constructing a lightsaber....why not? Makes the game more involved and actually puts you in the role of your character a bit more....but I guess rather than actually roleplaying when you play these games, you'd rather look at some rulebook and see how things are different, and prefer to be led by the hand in such away that any involvement from the character is taken away....sounds like fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont like mini games to be like the Turrent Mini Game, many people complained about lacking the reflexes to pass that and one of the last things we can expect from a RPG is require to have arcade shooter games.

How many people complained about it being too difficult? Most complaints I heard about it was that it was silly because it was so ridiculously easy that it just wasted their time (aside from the obvious complaint that it happened too often...which again goes back to time)...but since this is all anecdotal, it's moot.

 

 

I never complained about Parzak or the Swoop mini game because they were completly optional, even if I am not much of a fan of Swoop Racing overall dificulty.

 

Weren't you required to race swoops at one point in the game?

 

 

I dont think that such mini game on weapon construction is a good idea because its based on player skills, I can and will point out the game overall dificulty sould be set on what gear the party sould have at that point in the game, rewarding player skill will either make combat too easy or too hard and we will have people saying "its too hard" or "its too easy" because there is a mini game there that introduces a unbalancing element to the combat model, things as the challange curve on SW:KotOR are best avoided.

 

First off, I will address a little concern. I have no problem when you say something like "think." The problem is that you seem to "think" that only your ideas are plausible, and "think" that if you don't like an idea, it's obviously a bad one.

 

However, for some reason you "think" that a minigame for lightsaber construction must rely on player skills....and that it must "reward" the player skill. Not once did I mention that players that do better in the minigame (providing it's a game where someone can actually do "better") get a better reward. I wanted more involement in the construction of the lightsaber....I didn't want to get a better lightsaber because I could complete the puzzle faster or whatever. I wanted the game to put me more in the role (a keyword in roleplaying) of constructing the lightsaber in someway, rather than removing me from the immersion and suspension of disbelief by making me stop playing the game simply to watch my character move around his hands. For some reason you champion the virtues of the "role" in roleplaying....yet don't mind watching your character.

 

 

Furthermore, why don't you think more outside the box, since it does seem that people (including yourself) don't mind a little diversion from the repetitiveness of gameplay. Why not have the minigames be dependent on your PC's abilities (and this goes waaaaaaay beyond a minigame simply for constructing a weapon). If you have crazy high abilities in a certain (or multiple) skills, make the game easier. And obviously......make them optional.

 

 

Also on a note, dont go over that "negative" thing ... first people are making sugestions and quite frankly some of then will stick ... fact is people think its a great idea without seeing the obvious flaws in their ideas, being those flaws from a concept point of view, a rules point of view or a implementation point of view

 

Fact is you go spouting off your own subjective views about what is or is not a good idea, and claim it to be THE fact. To use a cliche...it's your way or the highway.

 

 

Besides you are just anoyed because I plain out say what ideas (that you aprove) are bad in a point on the other, the fact I pointed were they are bad just shows I dont go around saying "its crap" because I dont have anything else to do.

 

Aside from the "fact" that the preceding statement doesn't really make any sense, people are annoyed because you are the self-proclaimed authority and what should or should not go into a game......there is no discussion or anything....it's just whether or not you agree. This is also why people don't really care what you say on the board.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It goes down to cost/worth ... does the cost of making such mini game is worth the effect on the game?

 

Well no kidding. I don't think anyone here (certainly not myself) wants Obsidian to break their backs adding ideas. To be honest I think you insult Obsidian's intelligence (as well as my own) if you think you must refute ideas in Obsidian's defense. They are the programmers.....not you. They will know if an idea is easily implementable or not.

 

As an aspiring game programmer myself, I know all too well the careful considerations that are required, in order to make sure time is utilized in an efficient and most productive manner. However, if implementing something that doesn't specficially add to the length of the game or whatever else you are spouting off about, BUT adds to the level of enjoyment (which is the ultimate goal here) of the product, then add it. Obviously there are people that wouldn't mind something more for the construction of a lightsaber (if it even happens in this game, which by the way things sound probably does not), then it's something to consider. It is at this point that considerations are made for level of simplicity o f implementation versus the contribution it makes to the game. Unfortunately, you don't seem to have any faith in Obsidian's ability to make these decisions, despite making them for many, many, MANY years. People can spout off all sorts of suggestions of what they would like to see.....the people at Obsidian are smart enough to know if it is possible, and whether or not it is a good idea to implement....NOT YOU (sorry to burst your bubble).

 

If you don't care for something....fine...but leave it at that.

 

 

mini games are not RPG elements

 

Why can't they be? RPG = roleplaying game does it not (or maybe you think rocket-propelled grenade???).

 

I consider the most important part of RPG to be the R...role. I like to get into the role of my player....I like to have an impact on what exactly my character does in the game...after all...he's kind of a virtual representation of me. Why can a mini-game not utilize the abilities of your character? Or even be nicely integrated into the story (such as the swoop race). Or would you have preferred to watch your character race in the game without any interaction?

Link to post
Share on other sites
mini games are not RPG elements
Why can't they be?

 

Likely because most 'mini games' are elements which rely upon a player's skill instead of a character's skill. Success in a mini game is mostly achieved by you, not the character; and a given rule about RPGs is that success in them should be achieved by a character's possibilities and skills, not 'twitch skills'.

 

Or even be nicely integrated into the story (such as the swoop race). Or would you have preferred to watch your character race in the game without any interaction?

 

The thing with mini games like a swoop race is that you're not winning the race because of your character's skill; you're winning because of your reflexes as a gamer, because of your own personal skill. Watching the race being played by itself wouldn't be an attractive feature for gamers, but that's not quite the issue.

 

You can draw comparisons between two different types of minigames, the one that's player-driven and the one that's character-driven. The player-driven is the one that exclusively relies on what you, as a player, do, and it does not matter what character you're playing. This type is likely what Drakon is against.

 

The character-driven type is the one that takes into account your character's possibilities and skills. Examples would be Neverwinter Night's drinking contest, where the higher your character's Constitution score, the more he can drink. Another example would be in Fallout 2, in Broken Hills, where you test your character's skills against the mad scientist's radscorpion. Your character's perception, agility and intelligence (and gameworld knowledge) are tested.

 

As far as i can tell, Drakon is against the type of mini game that disregards, or is not built to take your character into account; in essence, purely player-driven ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mini games are not RPG elements
Why can't they be?

 

Likely because most 'mini games' are elements which rely upon a player's skill instead of a character's skill. Success in a mini game is mostly achieved by you, not the character; and a given rule about RPGs is that success in them should be achieved by a character's possibilities and skills, not 'twitch skills'.

And yet just about everyone here has no doubt that Deus Ex was one of the best games of all times...as an FPS with RPG elements, almost exclusively a 'twitch' game as far as 90% of the game actually goes. <_<

 

 

 

I think that Beyond Good & Evil (Man, I mention that game alot, maybe because it was just SO AWESOME! :) ) did one of the most excellent jobs with Mini Games EVER even though it was an adventure game and not an RPG. The Hovercraft races were as good as any of the N64 'Cart Racing' titles of old, and were completely optional...though they did give you a butt load of credits, and four pearls, which means that if you wanted to get EVERY pearl in the game, you had to at least beat each of them.

 

The Pallet game in the Akuda Bar was absolutely addictive. I think that game would rock as a real life air hockey style game personally.

 

The Looters Caverns were like Hovercraft Obstacle Course Races. Just awesome. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
And yet just about everyone here has no doubt that Deus Ex was one of the best games of all times...as an FPS with RPG elements, almost exclusively a 'twitch' game as far as 90% of the game actually goes. <_<

 

And yet, you point out yourself that it was, quote, an "FPS with RPG elements", not an RPG.

Link to post
Share on other sites
And yet just about everyone here has no doubt that Deus Ex was one of the best games of all times...as an FPS with RPG elements, almost exclusively a 'twitch' game as far as 90% of the game actually goes. <_<

 

And yet, you point out yourself that it was, quote, an "FPS with RPG elements", not an RPG.

True, but I do distinctly recall people saying it was "Disputedly the best RPG of all time." <shrugs>

 

Just trying to point out that an RPG doesn't neccessarily have to be devoid of all 'twitch' gaming elements. :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites
True, but I do distinctly recall people saying it was "Disputedly the best RPG of all time." <shrugs>

 

Hence, why i dispute it. Truth be told, i'd dispute it anyway, even if some unnamed group of people claimed it was something undesputable, so i'm just playing the part of the opinionated ****.

 

Just trying to point out that an RPG doesn't neccessarily have to be devoid of all 'twitch' gaming elements. :unsure:

 

No doubt. My point was not to imply or claim otherwise, but rather, point out why player-driven elements like mini-games aren't usually associated with an RPG, and are usually something alien to them.

 

 

EDIT: Fixed the url tag, which i have no idea how it got there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont like mini games to be like the Turrent Mini Game, many people complained about lacking the reflexes to pass that and one of the last things we can expect from a RPG is require to have arcade shooter games.

How many people complained about it being too difficult? Most complaints I heard about it was that it was silly because it was so ridiculously easy that it just wasted their time (aside from the obvious complaint that it happened too often...which again goes back to time)...but since this is all anecdotal, it's moot.

 

 

I never complained about Parzak or the Swoop mini game because they were completly optional, even if I am not much of a fan of Swoop Racing overall dificulty.

 

Weren't you required to race swoops at one point in the game?

 

 

I dont think that such mini game on weapon construction is a good idea because its based on player skills, I can and will point out the game overall dificulty sould be set on what gear the party sould have at that point in the game, rewarding player skill will either make combat too easy or too hard and we will have people saying "its too hard" or "its too easy" because there is a mini game there that introduces a unbalancing element to the combat model, things as the challange curve on SW:KotOR are best avoided.

 

First off, I will address a little concern. I have no problem when you say something like "think." The problem is that you seem to "think" that only your ideas are plausible, and "think" that if you don't like an idea, it's obviously a bad one.

 

However, for some reason you "think" that a minigame for lightsaber construction must rely on player skills....and that it must "reward" the player skill. Not once did I mention that players that do better in the minigame (providing it's a game where someone can actually do "better") get a better reward. I wanted more involement in the construction of the lightsaber....I didn't want to get a better lightsaber because I could complete the puzzle faster or whatever. I wanted the game to put me more in the role (a keyword in roleplaying) of constructing the lightsaber in someway, rather than removing me from the immersion and suspension of disbelief by making me stop playing the game simply to watch my character move around his hands. For some reason you champion the virtues of the "role" in roleplaying....yet don't mind watching your character.

 

 

Furthermore, why don't you think more outside the box, since it does seem that people (including yourself) don't mind a little diversion from the repetitiveness of gameplay. Why not have the minigames be dependent on your PC's abilities (and this goes waaaaaaay beyond a minigame simply for constructing a weapon). If you have crazy high abilities in a certain (or multiple) skills, make the game easier. And obviously......make them optional.

 

 

Also on a note, dont go over that "negative" thing ... first people are making sugestions and quite frankly some of then will stick ... fact is people think its a great idea without seeing the obvious flaws in their ideas, being those flaws from a concept point of view, a rules point of view or a implementation point of view

 

Fact is you go spouting off your own subjective views about what is or is not a good idea, and claim it to be THE fact. To use a cliche...it's your way or the highway.

 

 

Besides you are just anoyed because I plain out say what ideas (that you aprove) are bad in a point on the other, the fact I pointed were they are bad just shows I dont go around saying "its crap" because I dont have anything else to do.

 

Aside from the "fact" that the preceding statement doesn't really make any sense, people are annoyed because you are the self-proclaimed authority and what should or should not go into a game......there is no discussion or anything....it's just whether or not you agree. This is also why people don't really care what you say on the board.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices this close minded "I'm the only one who's EVER right about ANYTHING" attitude. Maybe I shouldn't have blown up like I did, but this has been going on for at least as long as I've been a member

Link to post
Share on other sites
Examples would be Neverwinter Night's drinking contest, where the higher your character's Constitution score, the more he can drink. Another example would be in Fallout 2, in Broken Hills, where you test your character's skills against the mad scientist's radscorpion. Your character's perception, agility and intelligence (and gameworld knowledge) are tested.

 

As far as i can tell, Drakon is against the type of mini game that disregards, or is not built to take your character into account; in essence, purely player-driven ones.

I guess the main problem is that he assumed I wasn't talking about minigames like this.

 

I like little things that are directly related to your character. If it makes the game more involved than I am happy. Heck, it would have been cool if you had better control of the swoop-bikes if your dexterity was higher. There is no reason for a minigame to completely remove you from the game. The odd thing is, I know people say that games like final fantasy have better minigames.....when from my knowledge they are just as twitch based. In FF7 you had snowboarding and the escape from Midgar on the motorcycle.

 

 

And if I recall....wasn't the radscorpion a cheater? :o

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually remember playing some kind of espionage game on my computer where when you're character used a lock pick it brought a 3d view of the inside of the lock and you had to actually pick the lock by trying out different button combinations. I can't recall the name of the game but it was a neat feature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually remember playing some kind of espionage game on my computer where when you're character used a lock pick it brought a 3d view of the inside of the lock and you had to actually pick the lock by trying out different button combinations. I can't recall the name of the game but it was a neat feature.

Splinter Cell.

 

Thief 3: Deadly Shadows also has a similar lockpick mini game. Wizardry 8 also has one, one that i find more entertaining than the other two examples.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wizardry's lockpicking was cool (and frustrating)

 

Nothing like getting that one with 8 tumblers with virtually no lockpicking skill :lol:

 

 

And yeah...I remember the radscorpion part now....he called you a cheater and attacked you. Wasn't that right beside the talking plant (who told you the chess move)? :lol:

 

Come to think of it....reminiscing about Fallout 2 has made me want to play KOTOR 2 more :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. If you helped the plant by finding it a new spot, it would tell you the required chess move. When you used it against the radscorpion, he'd go ballistic, cursed the plant (if i recall correctly), and attacked you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How many people complained about it being too difficult?  Most complaints I heard about it was that it was silly because it was so ridiculously easy that it just wasted their time (aside from the obvious complaint that it happened too often...which again goes back to time)...but since this is all anecdotal, it's moot.

 

Many, you can check BioWare forums to see many people complain about and making some rather valid points.

 

Weren't you required to race swoops at one point in the game?

 

That race was easy, I actually lost at first (and seen the blow up swoop FMV) because I did not know were the acceleration button was.

 

With lead us to why the turret was bad, if the turret had a timer were the hawk automatic escapes (and funny enough there are some unused FMV that appear for that purpose) from battle it would be one thing and the fact swoop on Taris was so easy points they did not wanted to penalize players from not being race sim players as well.

 

First off, I will address a little concern.  I have no problem when you say something like "think."  The problem is that you seem to "think" that only your ideas are plausible, and "think" that if you don't like an idea, it's obviously a bad one.

 

Its my opinion, if I dont like I go out and say it and also point were I see the flaws.

 

I lead support to ideas I think are good and work or supplement a option.

 

And some are not bad but come from a flawed conception, people think its a great idea bit it simply does not work ... like having Kun along as a party member.

 

However, for some reason you "think" that a minigame for lightsaber construction must rely on player skills....and that it must "reward" the player skill.  Not once did I mention that players that do better in the minigame (providing it's a game where someone can actually do "better") get a better reward.  I wanted more involement in the construction of the lightsaber....I didn't want to get a better lightsaber because I could complete the puzzle faster or whatever.  I wanted the game to put me more in the role (a keyword in roleplaying) of constructing the lightsaber in someway, rather than removing me from the immersion and suspension of disbelief by making me stop playing the game simply to watch my character move around his hands.  For some reason you champion the virtues of the "role" in roleplaying....yet don't mind watching your character.

 

(even if pointed before by someone else)

 

Problem is if a mini game is not rewarding player skill but character abilities then its simply a fancy interface and that is the diference.

 

A mini game is a small game within the game.

 

Also think about why the scene of Luke building his lightsaber was never made, the fact would be people staring at the screen for about 5 minutes to see Luke Skywalker playing around with a metal tube, its boring for the audience, same goes for seeing the cloud city fixing the Falcon hyperdrive.

 

if you turn lightsaber construction as a mini game its going to happen how many times ... one? two?

 

Being involved does not mean I have to play a mini game or micro mangerment everything, somethings are done automatic because they are simply not overall important of the great scale of things ... I dont see toilets or showers in the Ebon Hawk either.

 

Furthermore, why don't you think more outside the box, since it does seem that people (including yourself) don't mind a little diversion from the repetitiveness of gameplay.  Why not have the minigames be dependent on your PC's abilities (and this goes waaaaaaay beyond a minigame simply for constructing a weapon).  If you have crazy high abilities in a certain (or multiple) skills, make the game easier.  And obviously......make them optional

 

Because I fear the FF X-2 joke, that whole game was a buch of mini games thrown in to a point I start wondering about what the hell was going on with the people that designed the game.

 

Fact is you go spouting off your own subjective views about what is or is not a good idea, and claim it to be THE fact.  To use a cliche...it's your way or the highway.

 

Fact is the final decision is not done by me, I learned that if the developers are looking at ideas they can very well know my stand on it now instead of after the game is done and I complain about it, they will learn someone "good idea" is not everyone "good idea".

 

The "if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing at all" is good for sheep and I am certainly not a sheep.

 

Aside from the "fact" that the preceding statement doesn't really make any sense, people are annoyed because you are the self-proclaimed authority and what should or should not go into a game......there is no discussion or anything....it's just whether or not you agree.  This is also why people don't really care what you say on the board.

 

Some people are anoyed because I dont like their "great idea", deep down we all want the world to resolve around us.

 

People that are long time Internet forum users are not bothered much about people shooting down their ideas, its goes with making something public.

 

However some people are either not used to that or simply lack the maturity to handle with rejection.

 

I did not come here to be popular and I do not post so people like me, unlike some people, fact I disagree with their position or with their ideas means just that.

 

For some insane reason some people get the wierd notion only fanboyish is allowed on some forums, I really dont have the time or the inclination to handle fanboys, expecialy immature fanboys that think their notion of things related to what they are fans of is perfect.

drakron.png
Link to post
Share on other sites
Many, you can check BioWare forums to see many people complain about and making some rather valid points

 

Many is still vague....and your point is completely anecdotal. I have seen more people say it's too easy...who is right?

 

Its my opinion, if I dont like I go out and say it and also point were I see the flaws.

 

I lead support to ideas I think are good and work or supplement a option.

 

And some are not bad but come from a flawed conception, people think its a great idea bit it simply does not work ... like having Kun along as a party member.

 

The problem comes that anything that you don't agree with must be completely wrong. There are ideas out there that I don't think are good, but I don't go around claiming that they are completely foolish ideas that simply would not work (especially considering I'm not the one working on the game).

 

Unless you have detailed knowledge about how to work with the Odyssey Engine, and know the full capabilities of the Obsidian Entertainment team, do not say what can and cannot be done.

 

And people wanting something more than waving hands is nothing like saying "I want Kun as a party member." It's a weak analogy because you are trying to compare something at one absolute extreme that cannot happen (since Kun's story in no way intertwines with the story of Sith Lords..lest we would have heard of it already) to a simple request. In the end it ends up making your statement irrelevant since you cannot compare the to.

 

 

 

Problem is if a mini game is not rewarding player skill but character abilities then its simply a fancy interface and that is the diference.

 

A mini game is a small game within the game

 

Why can you not have a minigame within a game that does not utilize the abilities of your computer character?

 

I think your definition of what a minigame is is entirely closed-minded (which is the problem)

 

Fact is the final decision is not done by me, I learned that if the developers are looking at ideas they can very well know my stand on it now instead of after the game is done and I complain about it, they will learn someone "good idea" is not everyone "good idea".

 

Read your posts again though. You do nothing but complain, pull out the d20 rulebook (even though you yourself admit that these games are not utilizing it), claim that something is silly with poorly thoughtout explanations, without allowing for any discussion. It's just done...and you say it with such an absolute certainty that it comes across as very hostile.

 

Maybe it's just because English is not your first language so you must construct your points to be very direct and almost confrontational.

 

 

Also think about why the scene of Luke building his lightsaber was never made, the fact would be people staring at the screen for about 5 minutes to see Luke Skywalker playing around with a metal tube, its boring for the audience, same goes for seeing the cloud city fixing the Falcon hyperdrive.

 

if you turn lightsaber construction as a mini game its going to happen how many times ... one? two?

 

Being involved does not mean I have to play a mini game or micro mangerment everything, somethings are done automatic because they are simply not overall important of the great scale of things ... I dont see toilets or showers in the Ebon Hawk either

 

However, they didn't promote the Ebon Hawk having toilets when they were promoting KOTOR....they did however mention that in the game the Jedi would be charged with creating his or her own lightsaber. I was hoping for more (please note that a minigame was merely an option...you are narrowing the scope of the discussion).

 

And again you have created a weak analogy. Considering that a Jedi's lightsaber is so crucial to a Jedi (as is reiterated in the movies), it would not be analagous to watching people fix the Millenium Falcon on Cloud City. Furthermore, there are much more film related reasons for that aside from it being "uninteresting."

 

 

The "if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing at all" is good for sheep and I am certainly not a sheep.

 

I'm not saying everyone should agree. I want discussion...not "That's stupid and can't work"

 

 

Some people are anoyed because I dont like their "great idea", deep down we all want the world to resolve around us

 

You clearly have illustrated this point.

 

 

For some insane reason some people get the wierd notion only fanboyish is allowed on some forums, I really dont have the time or the inclination to handle fanboys, expecialy immature fanboys that think their notion of things related to what they are fans of is perfect.

 

No, I do not think only fanboys should be allowed. But what do you expect when you do nothing but complain about the first game, complain about other people's ideas, and complain about how the game still won't be what it should. The insane thing is why someone takes part in a discussion when they have already made up their mind about what is right or wrong in the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...