PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
The future of games (maybe)
November 30th 2000, 23:44 CET by Morn

WildTangent's WebDriver 2.0 is a 3D engine that can be embedded into web pages and programmed using popular web scripting languages like JavaScript or VBScript. WebDriver 2.0 is actually based on the open-source Genesis 3D engine, which was acquired by Alex St. John's company WildTangent in October 1999, so you can also use its C++ API to create standalone executables and basically just treat it like any other 3D engine. But let's talk about the web integration for a bit.

Personally, I've been fascinated by the concept for quite some time now. WebDriver lets you create 3D games that people can play by visiting your website. A bit of JavaScript code fires up the engine within your web browser (or in fullscreen mode) and then downloads all the content you need from the web server.

They may not be too obvious, but there's a pretty interesting list of advantages and disadvantages to this (other than the usual stuff that applies to using a 3rd party 3D engine). The biggest advantages are:

[ul][li]Game distribution is a lot easier, because, well, there's nothing to distribute really. You just send your customers/players to the game's website.
[li]You can create dynamic content or even dynamic code by using a server-side scripting language;
[li]Patching the code is a lot easier, since you don't have to actually distribute patches;
[li]You can split up your game into episodes;
[li]You have better control over who plays your game, less problems with piracy, and more flexibility regarding revenue (for example you could charge players for game time, for chapters played, or even have the game supported through in-game advertising).
[/ul]The disadvantages:

[ul][li]You need to be online to play the game; depending on where you are or who you are, this might make things a lot more expensive/annoying for you;
[li]The more content the game uses, the longer the player will have to wait for the transfers to finish (think FMV, big textures, music, large sound samples, and the likes)
[li]Not everybody likes the thought of being charged for play time or single episodes, or even just in-game advertising.

[/ul]While those advantages and disadvantages seem a bit trivial at first, I think every single one of them raises some very interesting (and important) issues. Personally, I think this is where the games industry is heading, and I won't be surprised if in 5-10 years almost all games will be played online (even if they're single-player games). Whether this is a good or a bad thing? I don't know. You tell me. :)

Anyway, the reason why I'm writing all this is that WildTangent have "released" the first couple of missions from Sabre Wing, a (single-player) space combat simulation game that works exactly like described above. It's no Freespace or Starlancer, but for a game that "runs in a web browser", it's pretty impressive. So if you've always wondered what a loading screen would look like with banner ads, go check it out. ;-)
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: The future of games (maybe)

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "bago"
2000-11-30 23:46:28
manga_rando@hotmail.com
gah.. New topic already!
#2 by "bago"
2000-11-30 23:50:22
manga_rando@hotmail.com
Actually the engine would be an active X control you download to your system and load up in the browser window. Therefore to make updates to the engine and/or content you would need to have local copies to have acceptable speeds. Thusly, updating the local copies = downloads.. OF course the patching would be automagic, not particularly viewable or something the user has to worry about, but that sort of thing also exists in games like allegiance, and other online games.
#3 by "Morn"
2000-11-30 23:59:22
morn@planetcrap.com http://www.planetcrap.com
Well, of course updates to the actual engine still means having to download and install an ActiveX control, which, even if it's a lot more transparent to the user, still means downloading and installing something.

I was referring to the game code though. Everytime the user plays the game, he navigates to a web page containing JavaScript, a Java applet or whatever. So if you change your game code, you change the Java Script, Java code, VBScript...

- Morn
#4 by "Greg"
2000-12-01 00:02:33
greg417@worldnet.att.net
I like playing WildTangent games without banner ads! its fun!

bago, WildTangent downloads the entire game every time, or at least a portion of it. This was my experience when running "Play Online" games. It looks like none of the games are more than about a MB in size.  May not be so great now, but I figure with the technology in place to do this sort of thing, when the speeds of the Internet increase (assuming they don't drop due to increased broadband users), will be a heavily used medium in the future.

Greg
#5 by "Andy"
2000-12-01 00:17:12
andy@meejahor.com
I'd really NOT like to see web-based games gain any sort of dominant position. There are many reasons why they could (and should) be good, but one particular aspect puts me off the general concept. This was examplified in a recent GameSpot article about WildTangent, and specifically Phil Shenk and Paul Steed. One comment stood out to me:

Both men came to WildTangent for similar reasons - an interest in the shorter development cycle of browser-based games and the chance to create their own games with a small team.

Those aren't the sort of people who will create games that I want to play. When one of a developer's primary questions in choosing a career path is "how fast will the games be made?", I don't see anything he/she produces rising above mediocracy. These games will be the equivalent of supermarket fiction -- not bad, but nothing you'll remember.

I'd much rather have the four year development cycles that many people seem to dislike. At least the games that are produced are likely to be good, albeit with a few obvious exceptions.
#6 by "Greg"
2000-12-01 00:29:09
greg417@worldnet.att.net
Andy:
I'd much rather have the four year development cycles that many people seem to dislike. At least the games that are produced are likely to be good, albeit with a few obvious exceptions.

Look at the available games on WildTangent's site. Right now they are small, easy to produce rip-offs of Pac-Man and Asteroids and the like. Nothing mindblowing, or for that matter, with a complex design. I can only hope that a "shorter development cycle" means using an existing engine. Developers won't have to worry about device initialization, windows, etc, that they currently now spend a bunch of time on now. I don't know a lot about their SDK, but I would assume WildTangent gets rid of a lot of OS complexities.  It would allow developers to focus on the game.

And don't forget the lesson of Daikatana: 4 year development cycles do not a good game make.

Greg
#7 by "Morn"
2000-12-01 00:29:24
morn@planetcrap.com http://www.planetcrap.com
Andy:
Well, the "shorter development cycle of browser-based games" is probably due to one thing only: the limitations to content you can include in the game. If you don't have to worry about producing FMV or recording gigabytes of voice samples simply because you can't have them in your game, the development is "forced" to be a lot shorter than with your usual computer game.

Of course right now a game like Sabre Wing won't be able to truly compete with games like Freespace or Starlancer when you only look at the quality/scope of the content, but: a) two words: "Deer Hunter", and b) let's see what kind of crazy stuff they're going to come up with in, say, 5 years. Or maybe 10. Screw "web based games"; this is all about "online games" per se, and not "online" as in the genre.

- Morn
#8 by "GeorgeBroussard"
2000-12-01 00:30:35
georgeb@3drealms.com
Web based games will never be the future.  They are too limited in size and scope.  They will be fun for a certain group of more casual gamers (who don't play games a lot).  And that market may indeed grow large.  But those people are looking for small/fast games like Barbie, Deer Hunter and others.  Not Baulder's Gate 2 or the next big FPS game.

It's a niche market that's developing because of the Internet, but it won't take the place of traditional gaming.
#9 by "Andy"
2000-12-01 00:40:51
andy@meejahor.com
Morn,

If you don't have to worry about producing FMV or recording gigabytes of voice samples simply because you can't have them in your game, the development is "forced" to be a lot shorter than with your usual computer game.

Ah, but that's not the impression I get of WildTangent from the GameSpot article. (Perhaps the article was wrong, but I'm working on the basis that it wasn't.)

The article didn't say that Shenk and Steed were being forced to reduce development time because of limitations, etc. It said they wanted shorter development time, and that was what attracted them to WildTangent.

That's what puts me off. When I decide to do something -- anything, nevermind a big career move -- I think of how I can do it best, not fastest/easiest. That's just not the way to do good work, in my experience.

I take your point, but I think what we're seeing here is essentially corner-cutting, ie: How can we produce 1/10 of the game in 1/4 of the time? Not a good policy.

Just remember -- Quake was worked on until it was done. Q2 was worked on until Christmas. Look which turned out best. ;-)
#10 by "Intaglio"
2000-12-01 01:40:11
eric@gurutech.org
They are too limited in size and scope. They will be fun for a certain group of more casual gamers (who don't play games a lot).


I dunno, it seems to me that as compression technology moves forward, games might have to be played online. The only way to combat piracy is to give your software away and make your money somewhere else; just look at the success of EverQuest and Ultima Online. Granted, these games aren't played through a browser, but you could copy EQ cds all day long and no one would care, because the money is made through your account. Online games played through browsers lend themselves to user accounts and therefore, more perspective users. $10 a month seems a lot more appealing to me than $50 upfront, even though in the long run the $10 a month game will probably end up costing me more.
#11 by "GeorgeBroussard"
2000-12-01 02:16:48
georgeb@3drealms.com
I dunno, it seems to me that as compression technology moves forward, games might have to be played online. The only way to combat piracy is to give your software away and make your money somewhere else; just look at the success of EverQuest and Ultima Online


I'm not talking about playing online.  Hell EQ is awesome.  But if you think WildTanget is going to do a 3 year, 5 million dollar game I think you are wrong.  

My point is not that online play isn't going to be huge - it is.  But that these smaller/faster content type games are a niche and won't relpace EB.
#12 by "warmonger"
2000-12-01 02:48:48
warmonger87@hotmail.com
Is WildTangent being used to create games that will be sold, or is it going to be used for free games only? I think the Lithtech ESD (the $500 thing with Real) is a good solution for people wanting to make a game cheap and also having the chance to make a profit, so maybe WildTangent could be used for that purpose too.
#13 by "None1a"
2000-12-01 03:18:38
none1a@home.com
The disadvantages:


Ha I can think of a few more.

1:The updater program tries to contect wildtangent (this isn't really a big deal it's just looking for updates, but you know how people act when this is set as the defult behavior).

2:The updater and other things are loaded at start up. Considering the games right now are really simmaler to the types on things you'd find with shockwave, and will generaly appile to people with less memory this could be a big deal.

3: No easy uninstaller, again with the current games simmaler to the shockwave stuff, and highly likly to be used by newbies this is very important, even more if a bug shows up in say the updater and causes problems.

Wildtangent's Webdriver looks impressive, but it's still not really ready just yet, pushing it to the wrong people now could become a problem in the future when it is.
#14 by "Rambar"
2000-12-01 04:43:34
rambar@homegettingablowjob.com
Just remember -- Quake was worked on until it was done. Q2 was worked on until Christmas. Look which turned out best. ;-)


Quake2.
#15 by "Milamber"
2000-12-01 05:20:15
milamber@amoeba.com.au
Just remember -- Quake was worked on until it was done. Q2 was worked on until Christmas. Look which turned out best. ;-)


I'd also have to say that Quake 2 turned out a lot better. It had a coherent feel unlike Q1, which had four themes clashing with each other, it had a decent single-player campaign and once they got the maps out it was excellent multiplayer. I suppose a lot of it depends on what you're looking at, in terms of completeness from the box Quake 2 had a much stronger single-player component than Quake 1 tied together with some excellent cinematics but a lot of the multiplayer was cobbled on over a period of two or so months. Then again, QuakeWorld certainly didn't ship with Q1.

Also in terms of browser based games, I'd certainly like to see them gaining popularity. Personally I see browser based games taking over the console style elements of gaming that the PC has been missing out on. We haven't see a good 2d platformer since Jazz 2, and I can't remember the last time I played a good fighting game on the PC. If you can log into your browser and play a sort of massively multiplayer action/console type game, the kind of game you can pick up for 5 minutes whenever...I'd certainly be interested. In terms of storytelling, and interactive environments nothing is going to come close to games with longer dev cycles.
#16 by "paul"
2000-12-01 07:37:05
pbullman@webhitzone.com
My experience with the Wild Tangent engine is that it is sub par, and their commitment to non web browser driven games is almost none.

I was involved with Genesis3d for a few years, then I went to Jet 3d, then to the Game Driver.

Mike S. over there seems to do a good job, but the engine itself greatly struggles. For instance, the engine requires mappers to place tons of vis_portals so the engine knows what should be visibility in certain zones, portals, etc. Extremely inefficient for both drawing the polys and for the mapping process.

My impression of the company is at best a C.

I laughed out loud when I read the difference between quake and quake2. Level design, for instance, in Quake2 was allowed to be much more complex for all sorts of reasons, not the least of which was a higher min system. Quake was an experiment to showcase Carmack's new child, Quake2 was intended to be an actual game. The goals, at least from my armchair, were totally different, so of course the end product will be just that.

- Paul
#17 by "Hulka"
2000-12-01 15:31:11
Sgt_Hulka@Hulka.com
Georgie B stated "Web based games will never be the future."

I disagree.  I think it's possible given how fast technology grows on a yearly basis.  I don't think we're at the end of the spectrum yet, and just five short years ago did anyone think we'd be able to read the Starr Report the same day it came out?  Did anyone think they could do all their Christmas shopping from home?  Did anyone think 3D Realms could make Duke cooler than he already is? (We're still waiting for that one), but you get my point.

Web based games COULD be the future IMHO.  Not this year, perhaps not 2001, but after that, who knows? My crystal ball is broken.  Anyone know where I can get a good used Crystal Ball in mid 20 grand area?

- In hell, all they play is Boogie Wonderland on a jukebox
#18 by "mcgrew"
2000-12-01 19:29:38
mcgrew@famvid.com
[8] GeorgeBroussard (I agree)

5 andy "Those aren't the sort of people who will create games that I want to play..."

Yeah, but if you can make a basic game fast, what could you do slow?

[10] Intaglio "The only way to combat piracy is to give your software away and make your money somewhere else..."

Seems they made quite a small pile with DOOM. Quality sells. Developers ought to think less about who is stealing it and more on who is buying it or who will buy it.

Make a game that appeals to ME and not Warren (in his younger days) and you have a good seller.

Actually, make a game people will pay for and they will pay for it. Produce overpriced buggy shit and you invite piracy.

[14] Rambar - I like q2 better, too.

[17] Hulka  operative word "could", I agree. Nobody's crystal balls are that clear.
#19 by "Vengeance"
2000-12-01 19:31:48
rhiggi@home.com
Off topic, got this in an email and thought I would share, its too funny not to.  

Subject: Dr. Suess Goes to Flori-DUH

 Dr. Suess Goes to Flori-DUH
 
Can we count them with our nose?
 Can we count them with our toes?
 Should we count them with a band?
 Should we count them all by hand?
 If I do not like the count,
 I will simply throw them out!
 
I will not let this vote count stand
 I do not like them, AL GORE I am!
 
Can we change these numbers here?
 Can we change them, calm my fears?
 What do you mean, Dubya has won?
 This is not fair, this is not fun
 Lets count them upside down this time
 Lets count until the state is mine!
 
I will not let this VOTE count stand!
 I do not like it, AL GORE I am!
 
I'm really ticked, I'm in a snit!
 You have not heard the last of it!
 I'll count the ballots one by one
 And hold each one up to the sun!
 I'll count, recount, and count some more!
 You'll grow to hate this little chore
 
But I will not, cannot let this vote count stand!
 I do not like it, Al Gore I am!
 
I won't leave office, I'm stayin' here!
 I've glued my desk chair to my rear!
 Tipper, Hillary, and Bubba too,
 all telling me that I should sue!
 We find the Electoral College vile!
 RECOUNT the votes until I smile!
 
We do not want this vote to stand!
 We do not like it, AL GORE I am!
 
How shall we count this ballot box?
 Let's count it standing in our socks!
 Shall we count this one in a tree?
 And who shall count it, you or me?
We cannot, cannot count enough!
 We must not stop, we must be tough!
 
I do not want this vote to stand!
 I do not like it AL GORE I am!
 
I've counted till my fingers bleed!
 And still can't fulfill my counting need!
 I'll count the tiles on the floor!
 I'll count, and count, and count some more!
 And I will not say that I am done!
 Until the counting says I've won!
 
I will not let this vote count stand!
 I do not like it, AL GORE I am!
 
What's that? What? What are you trying to say?
 You think the current count should stay?
 You do not like my counting scheme?
 It makes you tense, gives you bad dreams?
 Foolish people, you're wrong you'll see!
 You're only care should be for me!
 
I WILL NOT LET THIS VOTE COUNT STAND!
 I DO NOT LIKE IT. AND AL GORE I AM!
#20 by "Jason_Cross"
2000-12-01 21:41:22
jcross@cdmag.com
for a game that "runs in a web browser", it's pretty impressive


I think that's the problem with this model, and the reason it's not going to catch in a mainstream way for some time yet. The hardcore computer users will cut a WildTangent game some slack because, hey, that's not half bad for a streaming downloaded game. But will the general public? Can a game ever break out of the 30,000 hardcore computer nerds who just want to see a streaming downloaded game when the stuff distributed on CD in a store is so much better?

Maybe when internet access gets to be as fast as an 8X CD-ROM, our net connections will replace our CD-ROM drives as a means of game installation and the CD-check will be replaced by unique login indentifiers to a central authorizing server. And instead of playing redbook audio off our game CDs, we'll stream MP3 audio or DirectMusic off the 'net.  Hmmm...

Still, I think that until I see a wildtangent or other "online, stream it and play" game that looks as good and plays as well as a good "50 MB, download it, install and play it demo" does, the appeal will be too limited for serious publishers to put serious developers with serious budgets on game projects using the technology.
#21 by "CreoleNed"
2000-12-01 21:46:58
cned@telus.net
Paul, I don't think Quake was published as an experiment more than it was a game that had a stunningly confused theme behind it. The people at id couldn't agree *what* game it should be so we ended up with a bizarro gothic/futuristic hybrid. Admittedly, some people loved it, but I think it's letting id off easy by claiming it was an experiment. It was a game, just not a well-thought out one. Quake 2, obviously, was planned and executed with a solid "story" (as such) behind it.

Web-based, or to be more accurate, online games, won't be the future. They will be a part of it, but not all of it. There will always be a market for games that you just take home, install, play and then delete when you tire of them. I think the real question is how big will online games be? That, I really couldn't say. Clearly, as long as the majority of people are on dial-up, they will never dominate, but when issues of bandwidth are no longer the biggest concern, the situation could change dramatically.

And Hulka, doing all your Christmas shopping from home...how about the Sears catalog? Not high-tech, but it's always worked. :)
#22 by "deadlock"
2000-12-02 00:09:27
deadlock@eircom.net
milamber:
We haven't see a good 2d platformer since Jazz 2


it's been pointed out before that console style games don't lend themselves very well to the PC. For one thing, PC gamers generally aren't interested. It's well-known as well that developers creating PC ports of console game usually do half-arsed jobs. Case-in-point: Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2. My three year-old heap of shite is superior to a Playstation, yet the PC version of this game is inferior to the original. Why ? If anything, it should be at least the same.

As for Quake/Quake 2, it strikes me that the levels I liked best in Quake, and the ones I like best in Quake 3 are the ones done in a base stylee. Quake 2, to me, is superior to Quake. But that's just opinion, and you'd have to be fool-hardy to underestimate the impact that Quake had.

On a spurious topic, why are the posters on Linux boards so fucking militant ?

deadlock
#23 by "mcgrew"
2000-12-02 00:16:05
mcgrew@famvid.com
[19] Vengeance    "Off topic, got this in an email and thought I would share, its too funny not to. "

When did Jesse Jackson become a Republican? That sounds like a Jackson speech!

As long as we're off topic here, the Sarge pointed out over at the Crapfest that I'm getting sloppy with my links at theFragfest; I screwed one to his page up last week, and this week the link to the current Crapfest thread. All I can do is, oh hell there are a bunch more typos to fix, too. I'm getting sloppy. I apologise to everybody.

It's fixed now, at least that link (thanks, Sarge). The whole thing is going to be archived tomorrow and I'll fix the other typos then, there are a shitload.

And I'm taking a break from updating the Fragfest for at least a few weeks. It needs major maintenance, and I may make an MP3 of "Grandpa Got Dismembered By A Shambler".

If any of you have choirs and decent recording equipment, please let me know.

Now back on topic...


[20] Jason_Cross "Maybe when internet access gets to be as fast as an 8X CD-ROM, our net connections will replace our CD-ROM drives as a means of game installation..."

God no! What happens when Mr. Bill fucks up? Fifty bucks down the tubes. No, before I shell out fifty bucks I want backup. I want a box, and cover art, and a paper manual. Remember paper? (Stupid question to ask a magazine guy aint it?)


[21] CreoleNed "There will always be a market for games that you just take home, install, play and then delete when you tire of them. "

Yes, and then reinstall later... I'm revisiting Quake 1 right now!
-steve
#24 by "mcgrew"
2000-12-02 00:18:35
mcgrew@famvid.com
Forgot to mention, when it's archived the Christmas page takes its place. I apologize for the blatant wh0ring.
#25 by "None1a"
2000-12-02 03:09:27
none1a@home.com
But will the general public?


Possibly, if the game stay on the simple side and stick if say 3d version of populer board games, and arcade games. Take a look at www.shockwave.com for the types of games the mainstream will play online (and hell Blix is damn addictive as well), if the web driver is used in just in the same maner it'll be a hit at some point.

The problem now is that it's not ready for this yet, the hardcore will know that it's still in development and will imporve over the next few years ,and have systems that can handel a game with the added overhead of doing it this way, the mainstream will not. And take a guess what group most of the wildtangent games are created to appile to.

On a spurious topic, why are the posters on Linux boards so fucking militant ?


Are any  groups that belive in any thing strongly not militant?
#26 by "Mark_Asher"
2000-12-02 03:18:38
marka@cdmnet.com
<QUOTE> Web based games COULD be the future IMHO. Not this year, perhaps not 2001, but after that, who knows? My crystal ball is broken. Anyone know where I can get a good used Crystal Ball in mid 20 grand area? </QUOTE>

Well, if you tally up the people playing card games, chess, trivia, and all that other stuff online in a web browser, I bet it dwarfs the kind of gaming you're thinking about. So in some ways the future is already here.

My guess is that hardcore gamers aren't going to be that excited about browser gaming, because the non-browser games will always be more exciting. They'll have more content, better graphics, better sound, etc.
#27 by "RVWinkle"
2000-12-02 05:41:49
drloaf@hotmail.com
I think this concept has quite a bit of potential. Perhaps not in its current incarnation though.  I'm mostly concerned that the engine is too gay right now to be useful but this concept is ahead of its time so I'll cut it some slack for now.

Here's a hypothetical situation that makes this system more reasonable to me...

Let pretend that a future incarnation has a good engine and compare it to some premiere FPS games of today. What if id released the Q3A source but instead came up with an installable executable just for the engine and made up a silly name like Wild-id Web Driver. Then id sells a game online for whatever amount they think is reasonable. Pay your money and download a 50mb package of textures and models (broadband will really help, on my cable modem this would take less than 3 minutes from a decent server). Now you go to their website and their menu interface is all done on a web browser (IE is a full featured interface back-end that's installed on most gaming computers today). Javascript, Java, and HTML all lend themselves to rapid development (and it's easily modifiable due to the fact that it's all stored on the companies servers, plus advertising ). Next you can use their web page interface to select whichever maps you want to play in and click on the corresponding button. This map is then downloaded for play (I know UT has similar features as well as probably all of the other major online FPS games). Now you can play this map online or by yourself. Broadband will once again help with the map downloading and developers have an easy way to post new sets of maps.

What do you gain?
-A portable engine -- seldomly proved useful save for expansion packs.
-Online distribution -- great for small companies that don't want to deal with the large distributors.
-Smaller downloads -- you don't have to save the maps on your hard drive even though having a separate engine and art downloads would be silly unless the engine was used on multiple games (once again, not bloody likely).
-Easy to develop and update front end -- R.A.D.
-Integrate you front end into your news site (think unrealtournament.com) and advertising revenue
-New maps/levels can be added on a continual basis right into your front end

You end up with some very attractive benefits. I just can't seem to justify the disadvantages right now.

Just a thought....
#28 by "cindy upchurch"
2002-01-01 19:45:59
cautlu@yahoo.com www.my yahoo.com
i had the fowllowing games and now they want play any more would like them back
              1. ballblaster
              2.speedway
              3.pig pen
#29 by "Anonymous"
2002-01-18 17:46:43
Thinking...
#30 by "Anonymous"
2002-01-18 17:49:35
yourr ass smells
#31 by "Anonymous"
2002-01-18 17:50:33
fuck me! fuck me! Your webpage is full of crap, you fucker!
#32 by G-Man
2004-09-23 08:17:26
I am an asshole.
#33 by ianblink
2008-11-06 05:33:07
trja_dan22@yahoo.com
Hi friends, I'm playing Cabal Online in a great private server: Elite Cabal, and I want to invite you all to join and enjoy with this great community.

These are the server rates:
Xp: 100 | Sp: 90 |Craft xp: 20 |Drop: 10 |Alz : 50

So, visit www.elitecabal.com and play with us!!
#34 by OwenButler
2008-11-06 05:49:31
http://blog.owenbutler.org/
No.

C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: The future of games (maybe)

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]