PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Online vs. Offline: Who'll Win?
May 20th 2003, 22:03 CEST by Caryn

Let's attempt to talk about games again for at least the first five posts of a topic and discuss diverging theories of online gaming and who's right or wrong.

Summary: the big three console makers have differing views on the importance of online gaming for console systems.

Some Quotes:

Last week, Sony upstaged Microsoft by announcing that the No. 1 game publisher, Electronic Arts Inc. (Nasdaq:ERTS - news), would roll out online versions of its popular sports games exclusively for the PlayStation 2, or PS2.

Nintendo says its two larger rivals have staked too much on online games without thinking through the costs for consumers.

"I don't think its reasonable to make someone pay for a game and then make them prepare a network connection and charge a monthly fee," Satoru Iwata, president of Nintendo, told Reuters recently.

Doug Lowenstein, president of the Interactive Digital Software Association, the trade group representing game publishers agreed: "Many potential online gamers are continuing to resist paying to play online."


On the differences between the Xbox Live service and Sony's model:

Xbox Live, which launched last fall, is a networked system managed by Microsoft with the software giant maintaining passwords, e-mail addresses and user information. Subscribers pay about $50 a year.

Sony, on the other hand, has opted for an open system that lets game publishers design and manage their own online services and decide whether to charge customers.


And Nintendo...

Meanwhile, Nintendo's Iwata said his company was working on a service that would not require users to cough up regular fees for games.


So who's right? Will Xbox's closed network win out over Sony's option to let the publisher deal with online gaming management? Will Nintendo's lag in the online space hinder the GameCube? Will any of it matter? How important is going online to the console world? Will Brad finally tell Marsha he's carrying her baby after being impregnated by aliens?
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Online vs. Offline: Who'll Win?

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by jjz
2003-05-20 22:04:43
Meow!
#2 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:09:03
erictcheng@hotmail.com
This is what democracy looks like?

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#3 by Charles
2003-05-20 22:11:17
www.bluh.org
Online gaming has traditionally been a very small percentage of total gaming... something like 10%.  Even for games meant to be played online, like UT.  I'd imagine that number is climbing, but I don't think that it'll ever become the majority.  (Exception being games that MUST be played online).  

That being said, I think the only loser will be Sony.  As has already been shown, because they are allowing open networks, cheating is already prevalent, and will continue to be so.  With MS's service, at least they can ban cheaters by disabling their key.  Also, MS can make technical requirements for online games, as well as enforcing them.  Add in the quality of service stuff that's built in to XBox live, and MS has the winner.

Personally, I just hate the trend of "everything has to have multiplayer".  It drives me up the wall.  I want single player gaming more than multiplayer, I get tired of playing with tards nonstop.  So Nintendo choosing to focus on standalone singleplayer (or splitscreen multiplayer) isn't going to hurt them much either.

Of course, this is only a minor technicality, as even when "properly elected" into office, a politician has as much chance of not having gotten there via corrupt means as Dubya has of spelling racecar backwards.  --UncleJeet
#4 by Squeaky
2003-05-20 22:12:48
I agree with what charles wrote.

oh my god, are you giving me cancer? stop it! stopitstopitstopit!
DVDs
#5 by snowcrash-22
2003-05-20 22:16:21
snowcrash22@excite.com
I have very little interest in PC games that do not have a hefty online vs./co-op presence.  Quite frankly it is the primary reason I want an internet connection.  

Taking my favorite console (PS2 woo-hoo!) online is considered "redundant gaming overhead".  Which I am trying to keep to a minimum.

I feel that single player games are more enjoyable on a console anyhow, what with the reclining and laying under a blanket and all.  Sorry fellas, maybe next generation!
#6 by UncleJeet
2003-05-20 22:16:24
The speed at which the democracy wheel turns is directly proportional to whether or not boobies are present.

In a canned food society, the one with the can opener is king.  In an all tripod society, the one without the kickstand is queen.

Someone please notify me when I begin making sense.  Bleh.

I'm fighting terrorism by playing violent video games!
#7 by UncleJeet
2003-05-20 22:18:02
Oh, and I have to side with whatever Nintendo's position is on the matter.  I think a need for explanation on my part is moot.  Mario?

I'm fighting terrorism by playing violent video games!
#8 by Caryn
2003-05-20 22:18:10
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
#6 UncleJeet
The speed at which the democracy wheel turns is directly proportional to whether or not boobies are present.


Yeah...couldn't be because someone thought it might be a good discussion topic. Not at all.

SNIKT!
#9 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:19:20
erictcheng@hotmail.com
The speed at which the democracy wheel turns is directly proportional to whether or not boobies are present.


This is the second time I noticed a topic submission from Caryn that was okay'ed, not even seeing it in the Submission Bin.

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#10 by ...an ethereal being...
2003-05-20 22:21:32
Also, MS can make technical requirements for online games, as well as enforcing them.  Add in the quality of service stuff that's built in to XBox live, and MS has the winner.


What are the technical requirements that Microsoft is placing on the online games?  What quality of service features have they built in?  I'm curious what they have done that Sony (or the PS2 software developers) can't replicate.

Read, Understand, Post: Choose any two.
#11 by TheTrunkDr.
2003-05-20 22:22:07
I also agree with charles, I'd also like to add that I don't believe online games will make a difference in this generation or even possibly the next, 10 years from now it could be interesting though, and I'm sure that's what MS is positioning itself for. MS probably also wants to offer other services via it's X-box live network, video on demand maybe and possibly online shopping? I think X-box live is just the first step to getting an MS network in the living room, they tried before with WebTV but that didn't work as we all know.

It's a Steve Buscemi vibe.
#12 by Chunkstyle
2003-05-20 22:22:12
I predict the game publishers will have their own networks, with their own matching systems and passwords, and their own monthly fees.  Sony wins.

Sort of on topic, does anyone know how well Everquest Adventures is doing, business-wise?  Subscriber numbers and such?

Evil comes from the abuse of free will.
- C. S. Lewis
#13 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:22:56
erictcheng@hotmail.com
I have very little interest in PC games that do not have a hefty online vs./co-op presence.  Quite frankly it is the primary reason I want an internet connection.


The two No One Lives Forever games were one of the best single-player FPS games in the past few years. Both had multiplayer but they were meh at best compared to what other FPSs offered. I personally have a game concentrate on either single-player immersion or multiplayer than doing a so-so job on both.

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#14 by Chunkstyle
2003-05-20 22:23:46
This is the second time I noticed a topic submission from Caryn that was okay'ed, not even seeing it in the Submission Bin.

Some animals are more equal than others.

Evil comes from the abuse of free will.
- C. S. Lewis
#15 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:24:20
erictcheng@hotmail.com
I predict the game publishers will have their own networks, with their own matching systems and passwords, and their own monthly fees.  Sony wins.


Didn't Sony just started offering a flatrate for all their online games?

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#16 by Caryn
2003-05-20 22:24:40
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
#3 Charles
Online gaming has traditionally been a very small percentage of total gaming... something like 10%.  Even for games meant to be played online, like UT.  I'd imagine that number is climbing, but I don't think that it'll ever become the majority.  (Exception being games that MUST be played online).


Not even as internet connections become more and more ubiquitous? I dunno, I think I disagree with you...I think that traditionally, online gaming for the PC has been mostly a hardcore audience thing (until games like Ultima Online and Everquest came along) because internet connections for the PC are generally non-standard -- you could have an uber-rig with DSL and blow your P800/56K modemers away. But consoles standardize everything, don't they? And a service like Xbox Live standardizes the method of connection as well, so it should be very easy to simply load up the game, find a server, and hop on. My guess is that this will grow the online gaming presence quite a bit.

SNIKT!
#17 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:24:43
erictcheng@hotmail.com
Some animals are more equal than others.


Especially blonde ones with boobies.

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#18 by Ergo
2003-05-20 22:26:15
I have very little interest in PC games that do not have a hefty online vs./co-op presence. Quite frankly it is the primary reason I want an internet connection.

Like Charles, I'm exactly the opposite. I don't give a rat's ass about multiplayer simply because I don't have the desire to find a server devoid of l33t d00dz. As long as the single player element is good I'm happy.

Unneeded Editor -- Respawn Games

DVDs
#19 by Foodbunny
2003-05-20 22:27:07
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
I've had topics that languished in the topic bin for at least a week.  Blond with boobies doesn't mean you automatically get pushed to the front page.

Happiness is a warm giant turtle.
#20 by Trunks
2003-05-20 22:27:20
That being said, I think the only loser will be Sony.


I don't think they'd mind so much, with all the revenue they're getting from the PC MMO stuff.

What are the technical requirements that Microsoft is placing on the online games?


There's a section in MS's notoriously thick-and-constantly-changing TCR documentation pack specifically for games that plan to use the Live network.  Easier to try and can get your hands on a copy than summarizing it here.  Either that or I'm too lazy to do it myself.  I suspect the latter.

"Because apparently, Link should be visiting strippers and getting his rocks off every time he blows the magic flute." - LPMiller
#21 by Caryn
2003-05-20 22:27:29
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
#17 Eric T. Cheng
Some animals are more equal than others.


Especially blonde ones with boobies.


Or, as I've already said, someone thought the topic was discussion-worthy. I put it in the submission bin and didn't even tell anyone about it. Then someone who read it suggested to the Powers That Be that it should be pushed through because they wanted to comment on it.

SNIKT!
#22 by TheTrunkDr.
2003-05-20 22:28:15
I'm curious what they have done that Sony (or the PS2 software developers) can't replicate.

It's not a question of "can't" it's a question of will they. With the network being owned by MS they have final say on what goes into an X-box live title, with Sony it would depend on the publisher/developer. since MS won't be making that much money directly on the title they're not as likely to bend the rules as a publisher would with a title they're publishing. There are a slew of TCR's that MS enforces for a Live title, I'm not sure the same thing exists in the PS2 world for online games, I'd imagine it would be up to the developer/publisher to enforce them and we've seen how that can work out at times.

It's a Steve Buscemi vibe.
#23 by Greg
2003-05-20 22:30:26
#15 Eric T. Cheng

Didn't Sony just started offering a flatrate for all their online games?

I don't have a link handy (that's your job), but Sony is going to charge a flat, reduced price for EverQuest and Planetside. It does not include Star Wars Galaxies, and I don't recall seeing anything about future games being part of that deal.

We are OK in a misguided, sadist way.
We are OK in a disabled veteran's way.
We are OK.
#24 by Charles
2003-05-20 22:30:45
www.bluh.org
I predict the game publishers will have their own networks, with their own matching systems and passwords, and their own monthly fees.  Sony wins.


I don't think it'll be that simple.  People are repeating work that MS has already done, and the xbox live standards means that you'll be able to pick up an xbox game and if it has online play, play.  Very simple and easy.  Also, since it's MS's system, they'll know what to test for in certification, and in general keep the whole experience at a level greater than what a bunch of different people will be able to do on their own.

Not even as internet connections become more and more ubiquitous? I dunno, I think I disagree with you...I think that traditionally, online gaming for the PC has been mostly a hardcore audience thing (until games like Ultima Online and Everquest came along) because internet connections for the PC are generally non-standard -- you could have an uber-rig with DSL and blow your P800/56K modemers away. But consoles standardize everything, don't they? And a service like Xbox Live standardizes the method of connection as well, so it should be very easy to simply load up the game, find a server, and hop on. My guess is that this will grow the online gaming presence quite a bit.


People enjoy stories, and characters in their games.  That's something that for the most part only comes along with a single player experience.  Sure, you can say coop or something adds to that, but I don't feel it's required.  Online games generally lack a lot of what people find fun in console games.  I'm used to grabbing a console game, sitting on my couch for a weekend and playing through the game or whatever.  Online games don't play the same way.  While I do agree that Xbox Live will push online gaming further than it's been before, I don't think I can agree in saying that it'll outrank the single player experience.

Of course, this is only a minor technicality, as even when "properly elected" into office, a politician has as much chance of not having gotten there via corrupt means as Dubya has of spelling racecar backwards.  --UncleJeet
#25 by Your Friend
2003-05-20 22:31:11
I think the lack of broadband is only a very small part of why everyone isn't gaming online. Most people just don't want to deal with the bother of everything required to get online: signups, subscription fees, yada yada.  Then, when they do get on, they have tons of things to worry about like cheaters, shithead 14 year olds, etc.

I think there will be significant growth in online playing of sports titles (Madden, NHL, etc), but I don't think any other genre is waiting to have explosive online growth.

I was trendy before it was trendy.
#26 by TheTrunkDr.
2003-05-20 22:31:14
Then someone who read it suggested to the Powers That Be that it should be pushed through because they wanted to comment on it.

And that's what democracy looks like?

It's a Steve Buscemi vibe.
#27 by Caryn
2003-05-20 22:32:12
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
I'm wondering if the instant-just-add-water nature of Xbox Live is an asset in the eyes of publishers. If you're a publisher and the structure is already there and you only have to, say, pay a fee to MS (I have no idea what the requirements are to use Live), wouldn't it be easier on your development time to just let MS handle it? Or would a publisher really reap enough money to justify the expense of managing the nextwork if they went with Sony?

SNIKT!
#28 by None-1a
2003-05-20 22:32:16
#3 by Charles
That being said, I think the only loser will be Sony.  As has already been shown, because they are allowing open networks, cheating is already prevalent, and will continue to be so.  With MS's service, at least they can ban cheaters by disabling their key.


It also limits publisher support since they'd rather handle all of that themselves (EA's reason to snubing Live). Also I'd assume they'll have this stored out by the time the PS3 is released and online gaming really does become important.
#29 by Greg
2003-05-20 22:32:37
Caryn is really a lobbyist from the game industry. She paid her way in. :P

We are OK in a misguided, sadist way.
We are OK in a disabled veteran's way.
We are OK.
#30 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:33:13
erictcheng@hotmail.com
Or, as I've already said, someone thought the topic was discussion-worthy. I put it in the submission bin and didn't even tell anyone about it. Then someone who read it suggested to the Powers That Be that it should be pushed through because they wanted to comment on it.


Possibly.

As for my blondes with boobies comment, it was a joke. :P  Besides I don't care for blondes...they're a bit too common and  "all look the same." Redheads on the other hand... *drool*

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#31 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:34:36
erictcheng@hotmail.com
It also limits publisher support since they'd rather handle all of that themselves (EA's reason to snubing Live).


That and the subscription fees they won't get if they go with Xbox's Live system.

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#32 by Foodbunny
2003-05-20 22:34:40
foodbunny@attbi.com http://www.foodbunny.com
"I didn't mean that insult, I really meant this one!"

Happiness is a warm giant turtle.
#33 by Gunp01nt
2003-05-20 22:34:47
supersimon33@hotmail.com
I think the most important factor in which console's online strategy will succeed, is the consoles themselves, or rather the amount and type of people that own them. And if one single console's online gaming turns out to be good, will that be a motivation for buying that particular console? I think console gamers like to stick to what they've got. You have your X-Box fans (which come from a predominately pc gamer background, and are therefore usually more tech- and windows savvy), your PS2 fans and your GC fans.

Right now the PS2 fans are the majority and with X-Box live doing not too good (requiring a credit card for the payment is a problem for a lot of people), I think the PS2's method will turn out to be the most popular method because keeping it open allows for possibilities (sure, it can be a cheatfest but if publishers put some time into it, they can create a cheat-safe online network themselves).

It remains to be seen which console's fans will want to game online mostly. And on that field I think the X-Box is on first place, but could be hindered by the Microsoft control freak phenomenon.

Todd: "I’ve heard stories about that guy (...) going through parties spraying people with squirt guns filled with pee."
Fat Mike: "That’s standard."
#34 by TheTrunkDr.
2003-05-20 22:35:29
Besides I don't care for blondes...they're a bit too common and  "all look the same." Redheads on the other hand... *drool*

you know natural redheads are more common than natural blondes.

It's a Steve Buscemi vibe.
#35 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:36:03
erictcheng@hotmail.com
"I didn't mean that insult, I really meant this one!"


Not that I would turn away a hot blonde...

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#36 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:37:14
erictcheng@hotmail.com
you know natural redheads are more common than natural blondes.


Yes, I know. Natural blondes are genetically on the decline. It's because of all the fake blondes out there that turn me off on blondes as a whole.

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#37 by Charles
2003-05-20 22:38:17
www.bluh.org
Right now the PS2 fans are the majority and with X-Box live doing not too good (requiring a credit card for the payment is a problem for a lot of people), I think the PS2's method will turn out to be the most popular method because keeping it open allows for possibilities (sure, it can be a cheatfest but if publishers put some time into it, they can create a cheat-safe online network themselves).


The requirement of a credit card is a good shit filter.  It means every 12 year old can't just go on the network and start fucking people with his random exploits he found on the internet.  Also:  The PS2 has an inherent flaw in online games.  No way to patch.  I'm not saying patching is a good thing for consoles, but since the XBox can patch multiplayer games, it means that they'll be able to maintain the quality of gaming, and it won't just flush down the tubes after X time passes.  It nears impossible to find all exploits and flaws in a multiplayer system before ship.

Of course, this is only a minor technicality, as even when "properly elected" into office, a politician has as much chance of not having gotten there via corrupt means as Dubya has of spelling racecar backwards.  --UncleJeet
#38 by Matthew Gallant
2003-05-20 22:39:01
http://www.truemeaningoflife.com
#35 Eric T. Cheng
"I didn't mean that insult, I really meant this one!"


Not that I would turn away a hot blonde...


http://truemeaningoflife.com/images/impress.jpg

"People have asked “why did you choose to have a sister for Link this time?” The reason is a good motivation for challenge in a new life and a new adventure."
#39 by Caryn
2003-05-20 22:39:51
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
#24 Charles
While I do agree that Xbox Live will push online gaming further than it's been before, I don't think I can agree in saying that it'll outrank the single player experience.


I agree with you on that -- consoles' strengths are in the single player experience and I don't see online gaming taking over in that regard. But I'll be curious to see how much online gaming grows due to Xbox Live and how well it grows for other consoles.

SNIKT!
#40 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:40:09
erictcheng@hotmail.com
Also:  The PS2 has an inherent flaw in online games.  No way to patch.  I'm not saying patching is a good thing for consoles, but since the XBox can patch multiplayer games, it means that they'll be able to maintain the quality of gaming, and it won't just flush down the tubes after X time passes.  It nears impossible to find all exploits and flaws in a multiplayer system before ship.


True. That's quite the limitation for the PS2 version of Everquest. Are there any MMORPGs on the Xbox?

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
#41 by TheTrunkDr.
2003-05-20 22:40:32
I'm wondering if the instant-just-add-water nature of Xbox Live is an asset in the eyes of publishers. If you're a publisher and the structure is already there and you only have to, say, pay a fee to MS (I have no idea what the requirements are to use Live), wouldn't it be easier on your development time to just let MS handle it? Or would a publisher really reap enough money to justify the expense of managing the nextwork if they went with Sony?

If only it were that easy! it's not at all a "instant-just-add-water" type of thing, all the work pretty much has to be done from the ground up in the game to support live, there isn't some magic wand that you can wave and just magically have it. There are API's for some of the stuff (the communicator for example), but again it's up to the developer to actually use those API's, things like being able to send and recieve messages in one game to/from another game (and I don't mean just players playing UC on different hosts I mean one person is playing UC and the other MechAssault type of thing). It's also a UI nightmare, something that is already horrible and is made worse by all the TCR's MS requires for the UI.

It's a Steve Buscemi vibe.
#42 by Chunkstyle
2003-05-20 22:41:11
The X-Box is interesting in that it requires fees for included hardware: it has a DVD player, but you have to pay extra for it to play DVDs; it has a network adapter, but you have to pay a monthly fee to play games.  Now that Sony is going to give away network adapters with new PS2s, Microsoft should really consider giving away a temporary subscription to Live with purchase.

Evil comes from the abuse of free will.
- C. S. Lewis
#43 by Charles
2003-05-20 22:42:02
www.bluh.org

I agree with you on that -- consoles' strengths are in the single player experience and I don't see online gaming taking over in that regard. But I'll be curious to see how much online gaming grows due to Xbox Live and how well it grows for other consoles.


Oh, I have no doubt it'll grow by a magnitude at least.  

True. That's quite the limitation for the PS2 version of Everquest. Are there any MMORPGs on the Xbox?


Well, PS2 EQ will require the PS2 harddrive.  Same with FF11.  But now you are asking a player to buy two additional hardware addons.  That's a greater barrier to entry than anything on the xbox.

Of course, this is only a minor technicality, as even when "properly elected" into office, a politician has as much chance of not having gotten there via corrupt means as Dubya has of spelling racecar backwards.  --UncleJeet
#44 by Chunkstyle
2003-05-20 22:44:33
PS2 EQ does not require the harddrive.  It gets past that by being extremely simplistic.

Evil comes from the abuse of free will.
- C. S. Lewis
#45 by Charles
2003-05-20 22:45:41
www.bluh.org
it has a network adapter, but you have to pay a monthly fee to play games.


Not really.  When you buy the headset, you get a year of play time.  Which is very clever on MS's part.  You get to play without paying for a full year.  By then, you've either decided you hate online gaming, or you can't live without it.  Then it's too late, you are hooked.  

And anyway, I'd rather pay for quality of service rather than get free service complete with 12 year olds hacking their game with gamesharks and fucking me over.

Of course, this is only a minor technicality, as even when "properly elected" into office, a politician has as much chance of not having gotten there via corrupt means as Dubya has of spelling racecar backwards.  --UncleJeet
#46 by BobJustBob
2003-05-20 22:46:22
I am glad that Nintendo isn't wasting their time taking games online. With that said, I must admit that Steel Battalion Online threatens to change my opinion about console multiplayer.

Voices tell me I'm the shit.
<Whisp> BJB is a troll. <Whisp> Troll I say!
#47 by Bailey
2003-05-20 22:47:21
Surprisingly, even my behavior portrays me as a gentleman in these environs. Location, location, location.

I am a celebration of the english language.
#48 by Charles
2003-05-20 22:47:55
www.bluh.org
PS2 EQ does not require the harddrive.  It gets past that by being extremely simplistic.


Oh?  I must have misread something then.

But that just makes it funny, because they are now charging for a service that'll be totally fucked over within a month.

Of course, this is only a minor technicality, as even when "properly elected" into office, a politician has as much chance of not having gotten there via corrupt means as Dubya has of spelling racecar backwards.  --UncleJeet
#49 by Chunkstyle
2003-05-20 22:48:04
Not really.  When you buy the headset, you get a year of play time.

Can you play online if you don't buy the headset?

Evil comes from the abuse of free will.
- C. S. Lewis
#50 by Eric T. Cheng
2003-05-20 22:49:28
erictcheng@hotmail.com
Well, PS2 EQ will require the PS2 harddrive.  Same with FF11.  But now you are asking a player to buy two additional hardware addons.  That's a greater barrier to entry than anything on the xbox.


And we all know how well add-on hardware sells. Just ask Sega with the 32X.

Is the PS2 HD out already? EB's listing for EverQuest Online Adventures doesn't mention the PS2 HD under "system requirements."

Kilt Wearing Pixel Pushing Monkey Boy
IMDB Entry
DVD Collection
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Online vs. Offline: Who'll Win?

|«« - 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]