PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Molyneux Opens His Trousers
May 15th 2002, 14:04 CEST by m0nty

I'm probably going to get beat up in the press for saying this one line--I am just opening up my trousers and asking you to kick me in the b**** for saying this--but the ambition of Project Ego is to make the greatest role-playing game of all time.

A nine-page Q&A on GameSpot with Peter Molyneux, creator of Populous, Black & White and many other games, contains much more inflammatory and interesting commentary on the games industry. What's not to like?

Other highlights of the interview:

So just taking that simple inspiration from Black & White, where we had that changing, morphing creature, and applying it to a human being is so much better than having a cow morphing into a more evil cow. I mean, your character will change as you use your skills.

For example, because we play this out over a period of years rather than months and days, the way we tackle that is there are events in the story where time passes much faster. One example is that at one point in the story you're actually thrown in prison and you're there for 10 years, and your character ages, which will affect his appearance.

You can also chat up women in the game. You know you're a hero. I mean one of the benefits of being a hero, for god's sake, has to be that. If you can't chat up women, then what's the point?

I would argue, and this is going to sound like an insanely stupid thing, that something like the double jump could be seen as being as innovative as anything I've done.

Someone should chart it out. Two years ago, there were 3,500 games in development around the world. That number dropped last year, so I shudder to think how low the number is going to be at the upcoming E3.

But Project Ego and BC--Project Ego especially--we had to have the Xbox. It couldn't be done on the PlayStation 2, and it's a very boring reason as to why: because it didn't have a hard drive.

Well, I'll tell you, there's a terrible divide between developers. You'll have the bigger studios with successful titles on one end and the smaller studios on the other. The smaller developers used to be great ground for innovation and kept us big guys on our toes. In Europe there's blood on the streets. It's tragic. It's hard to see how it's going to stop.

One of the big limiting factors in our industry now--and it may seem like it's come up all of a sudden but, if you think about it, logically, it's true--is not 3D motions, or physics systems, or gameplay mechanics, or even artwork. It's animation.

Molyneux says a lot of sound, correct things, but his interviews are always entertaining when he spices it up with the odd British eccentricity. Giving his new RPG a codename of Project Ego might be seen as an ironical dig at Molyneux himself. In any case, no one can accuse him of not being ambitious enough - although perhaps Ego might be characterised as "Black & White with elves".

Will Project Ego win over the hearts of hardcore gamers? Will it be hated by the hardcore like Black & White was, but still be a commercial success? Will you have to teach your mighty-thewed fighter where to crap, and not to eat villagers? Why does he persist with mandatory scripted sequences like the 10-year jail stint, when there was so much uproar over similar indulgences in B&W? Why doesn't he mention Morrowind, which has already fulfilled many of the ambitions he sets out for Ego? Are there really less games being made now? Is the French gaming mafia to blame for the European dev bloodbath? Where are all the animators? Can Molyneux's head expand any further?
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Molyneux Opens His Trousers

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "flamethrower"
2002-05-15 14:33:24
Peter Molyneux?


Old hat, old man, game over.
#2 by jafd
2002-05-15 14:50:54
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1000033180
I enjoyed Black & White. I still fail to see what all the hooraw over it, made by people who didn't like it, was all about. (Other than the total lack of a demo, when Peter had spoken out about an online-capable demo at several points in development. That seems like the most egregious offense that B&W committed against the buying public, but I don't see much complaint about that; more people talk about the poop than the lack of a demo.)

Having said that, I didn't buy the expansion. Is it five bucks yet?

Such thirst doesn't always permit for tact.
#3 by piramida
2002-05-15 15:18:36
Online roleplaying human-driven morphing monkeys, awesome!

signatures are stupid.
#4 by Ashiran
2002-05-15 15:33:49
<insert mandantory Black & White bashing here>

#0
One of the big limiting factors in our industry now--and it may seem like it's come up all of a sudden but, if you think about it, logically, it's true--is not 3D motions, or physics systems, or gameplay mechanics, or even artwork. It's animation.

I can remember him saying this exact same thing a couple of years ago only the word animation was replaced with AI. <insert another mandantory Black & White bashing here>

So will this Project Ego be any good? Could be. Could also be a big dissapointment. Al I know is that I will think twice before buying anything from Lionhead Studios. <insert snide remark towards 'Creatures Isles' sales>

"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil." Psalm 23
#5 by piramida
2002-05-15 15:35:25
oh wait, that'll be console monkeys from dungeon siege. Automatic character development... yawn, that sure will make the game non-replayable... PQuest with nice graphics, again :(

signatures are stupid.
#6 by Martin
2002-05-15 16:11:15
http://www.mocol.nu
Could be fun. Molyneux opening his trousers that is.

He asked us "Be you angels?" And we said "Nay! We are but men. Rock!"
- Tenacious D
#7 by Foodbunny
2002-05-15 16:17:45
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
You can also chat up women in the game. You know you're a hero. I mean one of the benefits of being a hero, for god's sake, has to be that. If you can't chat up women, then what's the point?


Fuck you, Molyneux.

They're cute, they're cuddly and jam shoots out their heads.  I want 'em all!
#8 by godZero
2002-05-15 16:27:49
godzero@gmx.de
Black&White was definitely the most boring/annoying game I've ever played. The next game from him won't be any better, despite the complexity.

Chop Suey-cide!!!
#9 by Bailey
2002-05-15 16:30:16
Looks like Molyneux's hype is already reeling in the approval of the female gamer market! What if you make a yaoi character who could chat up men, Food?

I've got my finger on the detonator for this nuclear sex bomb. Just give me a reason to push it.
#10 by Wintermute
2002-05-15 16:30:42
lucid@evilemail.com
Nice. I wish I could tell the future too. It has been known for people to learn from their mistakes, infrequent as it may be.
#11 by Hugin
2002-05-15 16:33:35
lmccain@nber.org
#7 by Foodbunny
You can also chat up women in the game. You know you're a hero. I mean one of the benefits of being a hero, for god's sake, has to be that. If you can't chat up women, then what's the point?


Fuck you, Molyneux.


Yeah, I noticed that too. Such a stupid thing to say especially in regards to RPGs, which have a whole lot of female players.  

I'm also a little frightened by his repeated references to and love of MGS and Devil May Cry.  I enjoyed Devil May Cry..but..I dunno...I somehow get this itchy feeling the game is going to feature a numerous cutscenes, a lot of completely weird/bad dialogue/plotting, and be wicked short.
#12 by Martin
2002-05-15 16:51:56
http://www.mocol.nu
#7 by Foodbunny
Fuck you, Molyneux.

Well, he has his pants down so just have at it... 8P

But I know where you're coming from. God knows I'm tired enough of chatting up women in real life, why the hell would I want to do it in a game?!




That was what you got upset about, right?

He asked us "Be you angels?" And we said "Nay! We are but men. Rock!"
- Tenacious D
#13 by "fyrewolf"
2002-05-15 16:54:08
I can't wait for this RPG.  You spend countless hours building up your character, getting tons of good equipment and money, and then you're thrown in jail for 10 years and lose it all, coming out a weak old man.  Classic Molyneux.
#14 by Duality
2002-05-15 16:54:46
Dualipuff@yahoo.com http://stratoscape.ath.cx/
FINALLY!  A game where I can get women talk to me!!

Didn't work in real life ... didn't work in the Sims.  VICTORY! *does V symbol with fingers*

The butter religion will spread nicely.
#15 by Warren Marshall
2002-05-15 17:01:58
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
I also liked Black&White.  Say what you want about the AI, at least it was trying to move forward.  And it DID learn, which is more than most games can say.

People want innovation, Molyneaux tries to deliver it and gets spit on.  Such a conundrum...

WoT?
#16 by Morn
2002-05-15 17:04:22
morn@planetcrap.com http://hmans.net
People want innovation PLUS the very best of all the greatest games they've played so far. People == suck. If I were to make games (*cough*), I would make them for machines.

Hendrik "Morn" Mans • morn@planetcrap.com • admin/coder/lover/kraut
#17 by "flamethrower"
2002-05-15 17:06:30
People want innovation, Molyneaux tries to deliver it and gets spit on.  Such a conundrum...


It's a short-bus conundrum. People want deeply playable, innovative games. Molyneaux brings deeply flawed, innovative games.


Dungeon Keeper - so much potential - so wasted.

B&W - so much potential - nothing of it realised.

Project Ego - oh THIS will be the one he get's right?
#18 by Hugin
2002-05-15 17:14:55
lmccain@nber.org
God help me, I have to agree with flamey.  I like some of his games.  I detect a pattern however, that the games where he enthuses the most about innovating and redefining paradigms are the games that are least satisfying to me as games.  I've never, ever, said Molyneux was stupid, or bad, his asinine statements about chatting up women in games aside.  But atthe end of the day, a lot of reasonable people think he loses sight of the forest for the trees.  He polishes whatever his pet idea is at the expense of the game that features the idea.  And worse, he tends to get bored with his pet ideas, and therefore tends not to go back and fix or re-implement his interesting but flawed projects, or stick around to sustain his real winners, they get handed off to others who tend to do inferior jobs on the sequels.  

I'd just prefer he harness his intellect towards sneaking cool ideas into good games, rather than wrapping mediocre games around brilliant ideas.
#19 by Duality
2002-05-15 17:15:51
Dualipuff@yahoo.com http://stratoscape.ath.cx/
Just out of curiosity, what potential was wasted with Black and White?

I enjoyed it.  Though I did get bored of it, but I have the attention span of what amounts to a peanut.  Lightly roasted, at that.

The butter religion will spread nicely.
#20 by Bailey
2002-05-15 17:29:46
The potential for fun?

Life without shame.
#21 by HoseWater
2002-05-15 17:36:31
barneyque@hotmail.com
Someone asked for it, blame them:

I remember the moment I gave up on Black and White. making wood, building houses, making wood, building houses, stomp on creatures ass for doing a bad thing, damn, need more wood and houses...on, and on, and on, I was running out of land.

At that point, I felt like I was at work.

Then the stupid villagers started starving to death, or praying too much, or whatever, just not doing what they were supposed to be doing.

I liken that developement to being at work, and overhearing a couple of guys arguing about killing the red dragon with a fire arrow.

I just removed the CD, and to this day, I don't think I've given it a second look.

Admittely, I was having fun up to that point, but then got bogged down, and just in time to jump on the anti B&W bandwagon.  It seems a lot of people ran into the same wall at more or less the same time.  Which I think says something.

1968-2002 Robert 'HoseWater" Lloyd
#22 by Charles
2002-05-15 17:38:15
www.bluh.org
I fully enjoyed B&W until I realized I had to complete goals to advance.  If I could have just sat there and taught my creature to terrorize the world, I would have enjoyed it completely.  Then again, I don't like god sims.

Bailey:  Beep beep, motherfucker.
#23 by Warren Marshall
2002-05-15 17:46:36
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
Why couldn't you do that?  You didn't HAVE to do the quests.

WoT?
#24 by Ashiran
2002-05-15 17:58:30
#15 by Warren Marshall
People want innovation, Molyneaux tries to deliver it and gets spit on.  Such a conundrum...

The innovation was very commendable, it's just the fact that it tried to be both a game and an a digital at the same time. And failed to do both. Combine that with some incredibly annoying mistakes (no skipping tutorial, fucked savegame system) and the constant hyping of the game and you got yourself a fresh spitting target.
I think the AI was a huge stride forward. Only they forgot to place it in a game.

But then again when it comes to games the developer can't win no matter what he does.

"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil." Psalm 23
#25 by LPMiller
2002-05-15 17:58:58
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
I got good value out of black and white.

Now...why is it offensive to chat up women? I mean, the idea that men might like to date, or what?  I guess I'm missing the offense.

I believe I can fly......urk.
#26 by BabiG
2002-05-15 18:00:45
One of the big limiting factors in our industry now--and it may seem like it's come up all of a sudden but, if you think about it, logically, it's true--is not 3D motions, or physics systems, or gameplay mechanics, or even artwork. It's animation.


From personal experiences, I'd agree. I was making a mini-mod for Half-life, a multi-player battle chess mod using the in game models, it's relatively simple stuff compared to the other mods out there. I had a lot of the programming done (perspective, selecting pieces, the cursor, moving people around, a lot of the rules, etc.), and the "levels" (normal and Disco chess!), and most of the other important areas, but animating pieces getting captured is what derailed the whole thing. I didn't even have to make new animations for most, they were in the models already, but getting everything to sync up from the thousands of different possiblities was more then I wanted to handle.

That's also why I didn't persue my more ambitous project (that I would do after battle chess), a behind the back 3rd person 3d fighter. The success of that would depend almost entirely on how good the animations were...I could do the models eventually, but animating them? Too much for me, and probably too much for anyone not getting paid for it.

"God is dead." --Nietzsche, 1883
"Nietzsche is dead." --God, 1900
#27 by Ashiran
2002-05-15 18:01:11
I don't think most female gamers will be interested in chatting up to women. So Molyneux here basicly states that all gamers are male. And that is pretty offensive to female gamers.

"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil." Psalm 23
#28 by LPMiller
2002-05-15 18:04:47
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
ah. But he might have just been generalizing, and the game could very well have female gamers who can chat up men.  I mean, I think too much is being read into the statement. Not that this group ever does that.

I believe I can fly......urk.
#29 by Bailey
2002-05-15 18:05:40
What about the bisexual/ lesbian gamers?

Life without shame.
#30 by LPMiller
2002-05-15 18:08:22
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
They win either way, don't they?

I believe I can fly......urk.
#31 by Foodbunny
2002-05-15 18:20:22
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
Now that I'm fully awake...

Molyneux can get fucked because of the whole nature of that statement.  Not only do female gamers not exist (much less homosexual gamers) but the only reason people do heroic things is for sex.  I know it's not meant seriously, and I honestly believe I'll be forced to play a male character, but what a retarded statement to make.  Especially when rpg developers are usually all "Whee, we attract more females!".  It's just like the decision to make all player creatures male by default in Black and What... why?  What skin off his nose is it if I want my pink and purple tiger to be a girl?

So it's fuck you for just brushing off the females when he should be courting us because we are a sizable amount of his demographic.  It's just the kind of comment I would expect Scott Miller to make regarding Duke Nukem Forever (though it would probably have more ass) than I would expect from someone making a game that can and will appeal to both genders.

They're cute, they're cuddly and jam shoots out their heads.  I want 'em all!
#32 by LPMiller
2002-05-15 18:27:15
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
Well, you know the code for female players would add to the load time.  Not to mention the need for chicken legs for the homosexual model.

I believe I can fly......urk.
#33 by Foodbunny
2002-05-15 18:29:55
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
And yes, Bailey, if I can't be a prettyboy manslut then I'll be pretty ticked off.

They're cute, they're cuddly and jam shoots out their heads.  I want 'em all!
#34 by Caryn
2002-05-15 18:38:55
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
I agree with some of what Foodbunny said. I'm willing to give Molyneux the benefit of the doubt that there'd be an opportunity for female gamers to play a female character (doubtful) and chat up the guys (if one was interested in that).

This is probably going to sound more inflammatory than I mean it to, but I think it's more "acceptable" (wrong choice of word..."less offensive" maybe?) for 3DR to not actively court female gamers for DNF. It's not necessary for any developer to try and grab the female market (uh, so to speak...); if we don't like their games, we vote with our dollars (or lack thereof). We all know that DNF is geared for young guys. 3DR knows it. They're not expecting women to buy it. Will that get them less money? Miller has said in the past that perhaps it does, but it's a trade off for them because they are more interested in making a game that targets a smaller audience and they don't particular need to make more money by trying to appeal to both genders. Though it's definitely nice when action games make the effort. Though I didn't play it, I hear Wheel of Time had a prominent and strong female character; it's an example of a game that does a fine job of not excluding one gender and making an action game potentially more accessible to a wider demographic.

RPGs, on the other hand, are very much played by women, and for Molyneux to create the game from a standpoint that potentially alienates female gamers is a bad move on their part, I think. Though they could be taking the 3DR stance: maybe they just don't care about 50% of the gaming population. There's no law that says that must create a game that appeals to female gamers just because it's an RPG, but if they do create a game like that, they will see a bigger reaction (fewer buying the game) than 3DR would see doing the same thing, because the built-in audience is bigger.

You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel.
#35 by Foodbunny
2002-05-15 18:48:00
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
Caryn says it so much nicer than I could.

They're cute, they're cuddly and jam shoots out their heads.  I want 'em all!
#36 by chris
2002-05-15 18:49:12
cwb@shaithis.com http://www.cerebraldebris.com
Oh, now you've done it... you've gone and used WoT as a positive example for something. Isn't that some sort of PC taboo? ;)

-chris
#37 by Foodbunny
2002-05-15 18:49:29
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
and I honestly believe I'll be forced to play a male character


Oh yeah, and I'm a moron!  At some point in editing this statement a "don't" between the honestly and believe got removed.  So to clarify, I probably will be allowed to play a female character it's just the way he threw out that statement that ticks me off.

They're cute, they're cuddly and jam shoots out their heads.  I want 'em all!
#38 by Hugin
2002-05-15 18:50:06
lmccain@nber.org
#28 by LPMiller
ah. But he might have just been generalizing, and the game could very well have female gamers who can chat up men.  I mean, I think too much is being read into the statement. Not that this group ever does that.


The screenshots are exclusively of a male character.  Molyneux speaks pretty extensively about following the life of one guy, one man, this guy, he's this, he's that, he does these things, these things happen to him.  Multiple genders/variant base characters aren't mentioned as features or options.

I mean, come on.  No, he didn't commit some great crime.  But it's clear in the construction of the game and his thinking about heroic behavior and such, that he's entirely thinking along "Straight male hero after chicks" lines. So, evidently, Molyneux is all Mr. Daring Innovation, except in terms of social construction.  In the console RPG genre that attracts lots of women, that just seems dumb to me.
#39 by Foodbunny
2002-05-15 18:52:02
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
Well, maybe my statement was right after all.  Now I'm confused.  Bah.

They're cute, they're cuddly and jam shoots out their heads.  I want 'em all!
#40 by Caryn
2002-05-15 18:54:21
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
Hugin:

Molyneux speaks pretty extensively about following the life of one guy, one man, this guy, he's this, he's that, he does these things, these things happen to him.  Multiple genders/variant base characters aren't mentioned as features or options.


And I would go on to say that I don't think there's anything wrong with focusing the story on a single male main character. Just as I enjoy reading a book centered on a male character, I still enjoy playing games from the perspective of a male main character if that's what the story centers on. But if I'm going to roleplay as that character, it would turn me off and severely alienate me to have my character hitting on the chicks in the game.

You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel.
#41 by Hugin
2002-05-15 18:59:26
lmccain@nber.org
Caryn, that first paragraph was simply in response to LP's "Well, he could have been speaking generally, they might be female characters."  There's nothing wrong with male heroes per se, I just didn't think assuming there wouldn't be female ones in the game was overreaching.
#42 by Caryn
2002-05-15 18:59:52
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
All in all, I really like it when games allow you to choose your gender and the game progresses based on that choice. Elite Force did this (although if you chose to play as the female Munro, the female Starfleet officer love interest was still female, which cracked me up :). Few games can do that, though, because the story requires a particular gender, much like a novel requires the character to be a particular gender, be from a particular place, etc. Imagine reading Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series if you could choose for Richard to be a woman. Just wouldn't work.

You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel.
#43 by Foodbunny
2002-05-15 19:01:59
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
Well, according to the official Project Ego forums they were originally going to have a female character and scrapped it.  So yes, you can only be a guy and my mistake was right and now Molyneux can get double fucked.

They're cute, they're cuddly and jam shoots out their heads.  I want 'em all!
#44 by Foodbunny
2002-05-15 19:02:50
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
Oh boy, and you can beat up gay guards!  There's a whole load of fuckery taking place!

They're cute, they're cuddly and jam shoots out their heads.  I want 'em all!
#45 by Martin
2002-05-15 19:05:10
http://www.mocol.nu
Shitfuckery even?

He asked us "Be you angels?" And we said "Nay! We are but men. Rock!"
- Tenacious D
#46 by Hugin
2002-05-15 19:09:16
lmccain@nber.org
#42 by Caryn
 Few games can do that, though, because the story requires a particular gender, much like a novel requires the character to be a particular gender, be from a particular place, etc. Imagine reading Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series if you could choose for Richard to be a woman. Just wouldn't work.


I disagree.  In my experience, relatively few games are written in a way such that the gender of the main character would change the plotting or the text very much, aside from some logistically minor "global search and replace he for she" stuff.  You change a few gender pronouns, you put in a second set of art/animations for the female character, viola.  It just isn't that deep most of the time.

If the game has a love story somewhere in it, well then just expend a little effort and change the love interest to the other gender. Or better yet, expend some effort so that the player could concievably choose from two or three people to even pursue a love story, let the player decide to be straight or gay or bi.  Don't say it takes up too many resources to come up with an alternate love story, if a game can have branching plots for other things, and alternate endings, and all that jazz, then it's doable.
#47 by Caryn
2002-05-15 19:24:32
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
Hugin:

Yeah, I think I agree with you that some games could do that. Not all, though. A game like Duke Nukem, for instance, requires a character that's defined very strictly. The character itself in that case is the franchise, and it just wouldn't work if the Duke Nukem games allowed you to choose the gender of your character.

I thought that when Elite Force did it it really made the game better for me, and I wish more games would follow that example. I'm not sure how much extra work it was. Seems like it might have been a lot, since they had a lot of cinematics and a LOT of voice work that required two sets of everything. It might actually be more work than we think.

You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel.
#48 by Hugin
2002-05-15 19:34:51
lmccain@nber.org
Oh sure, I agree a "Mascot" type game strongly defined by the main character doesn't need a female alt. Duke, Mario, etc. (Though more female mascots would be nice)

I mean games where the starting character is quite generic, or strongly defined by player choices.  Which includes a really high percentage of RPGs.
#49 by Foodbunny
2002-05-15 19:36:34
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
And Project Ego is supposed to be strongly defined by player choices.  As long as you choose not to be female.

They're cute, they're cuddly and jam shoots out their heads.  I want 'em all!
#50 by mgns
2002-05-15 19:46:24
Miller has said in the past that perhaps it does, but it's a trade off for them because they are more interested in making a game that targets a smaller audience and they don't particular need to make more money by trying to appeal to both genders.


Trade off, schmade off. Smaller audience? Heterosexual males ranging from 13 to 33? That's as big an audience as you can get when you're doing video games.

Thing is that publishers and bean counters are only up for a female main character if the game is in 3rd person - so you can show some tits and ass.

Personally - I'm a bit pissed off about the fact that just because I'm a guy I'm supposed to want boobies in my games - originality be damned.

Professionally - it's boring me to tears.

professional philosophical level design monkey.
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Molyneux Opens His Trousers

|«« - 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 (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]