Red Dead Redemption

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

VulakAerr:

JohnTomorrow:

Snip!

I enjoy RDR just fine as it is, thanks. The game is about an open world with many things to do and a wonderful story and it delivers on both counts. Like it or not, a lot of gamers simply don't have time to be as hardcore as they used to be.
RDR isn't a quick fix kind of game, but it doesn't get bogged down on frankly stupid mechanics such as food and drinking. That's EverQuest 1 age mechanics for fuck's sake.
You are thirsty.
You are hungry.
Fuck that. It's about taking part in a world, not being reminded that you're playing a game.

I think, in the long run, it just boils down to the type of player you are. I, personally, find it interesting to think of what items would be best for the type of trek i want to take. It brings me closer to the game world if i am doing some of the simple jobs that we as human beings usually do automatically, because then its not just 'gee, I'm getting hurt, I'd better use a medkit', its 'damn, i'm bleeding from the chest and i don't have enough gauze, hope i don't bleed out before i make it to a town'.

Maybe it doesn't boil down to your playing style. Maybe it just boils down to how easily you can assimilate yourself into a world through the controller. Your mind can handle John Marston drinking a miracle elixir that cures the fifteen bullets he's taken, whereas i prefer the Snake Eater 'dig out the bullets, apply antiseptic and gauze, bandage' approach. To me, the game moved for a realistic tone - and that would be as realistic as it gets.

(Even though Snake Eater was full of mystical mumbo-jumbo, but hey, who cares, i still loved it ^^)

Am the only person that places self-constraint (some call ir Role Playing) on themselves when they play games?

It's not that fucking hard children.

So you're don't like the break in realism where you can whistle your dead horse back to life. Here's a tip, don't press that fucking button. Resist your lazy self. You see, constraint at work. Now, let's see how patient you are trying to hike back to town/camp etc. Oh, you can't stand walking in a game? You can't stand repeatively tapping a button to run?

You are the problem!

image

The unimaginative, the lazy, the impatient!

This is why I love reading your stuff, Yahtzee; you have a very clear understanding of what videogames are all about. More than that, you know what you like..sometimes, I wish I could just stick to my guns and avoid hype. Platformers are my favourite games, but I still find myself buying shooters every so often for no reason other than "it's supposed to be good". No more!

I didn't get RDR, and I won't be getting the next 10 shooters to hit shelves, either..so many of them just have you pumping carbon-based life forms full of lead, with little else to justify picking up the controller repeatedly. Story adds a lot to a game like Bioshock, but the most important aspect of videogames, for me, is a challenge, one that's built right into the game mechanics: Modern Warfare's multiplayer feels like an arcade game (putting in another quarter, getting better to play longer), Resident Evil places limitations on your abilities (with scaled upgrades acting as the carrot-on-a-stick), Goldeneye and Perfect Dark had more mission objectives on higher difficulties...all these things keep me coming back for more.

Sandbox games like GTA, though, have little appeal for me, as it can be hard to keep a consistent difficulty curve in such an open-world game (or there's cheats that take any challenge out of the picture). Shooting guys + driving cars + delivering packages/transporting people safely (ie. can't just let cars crash and burn, jumping into another transport) = something that I'll find interesting. Just having one of the above isn't enough for me: killing X number of guys, driving a car from A to B, that's not enough. It happens a lot where some missions are brilliantly deep while others just feel like a chore, and I think it's that inconsistency that takes some of my enjoyment out of games like Red Dead.

Anyways, I think that's enough of my rambling, for now! Keep up the the great work, Mr. Croshaw.

Sounds to me like someone should have been playing Far Cry 2 instead ;)

In the end I have to agree that RDR holds your hand a little too much.
My main complaint is the multiplayer though. Such an intriguing concept, an open western to coop and duel in!!
Unfortunately the game does little to for prevent Halo kids to treat it like a death match. After all, worst that can happen is you respawn 100 feet from last location. No, you challenge someone you lose a level, or a golden gun or something else that really hurts. And you don't get to challenge someone who isnt within 10 levels or so from you.

And, for chrissake carry over stuff I unlock in single player. I didn't knife those cougars so I coulnt use the buffalo rifle online. Or the legen outfit.

Still, a fun game, but too many missed opportunities.

But how annoying would it be to have your horse die when you say a 15min run to a town and there are no roads near by or no one crosses your path on the way back, that's 15min run back just to get a horse again.

Also the whole fatigue and hunger well it was annoying in GTA San Andrea's it would be annoying for RDR as it is in every other game that has a hunger system.
The dehydration mechanic might work so would removing the regenerating health and replacing it with something similar to MGS snake eater. Also something more worth while to spend your money on would of been good.

I probably missed someone mentioning this, but didn't Yahtzee spend nearly a whole two reviews bitching about these things in Sims and Fable 2? Oh, and Mass Effect 2 as well. I seem to remember the phrase "Normal Boring Life" creeping up there too.

Dunno about the rest of you, but when I was watching westerns, it wasn't to see the hero gunslinger taken down by a stray snake that bit his horse and forced him to crawl twenty feet in the blinding desert sun to be taken down by dehydration within an hour. It was the gunfights, the riding, the story I was looking for. RDR gives me that. Story. John Marsden is a badass gunslinger, trying to escape a past that keeps catching up to him, either through the machinations of those who want him to kill an rob for them, or simply through his own, brutal nature.

Seems funny Yahtzee calls himself a writer and game designer, and forgets that most people don't need or want detailed description and re-enactment of people eating dinner and taking a crap. There's a reason such things are only lightly touched upon in books, video games and other media. We want to escape the normal borning, shit lives we have where we have to eat bran flakes to poop properly, and can't shoot people without serving half a lifetime in jail.

Maybe if he wants realism in his game, we can add this: instead of John being sent to jail for his crimes, he can just be hung by the posse, or shot by a lazy sherrif, and boom, game over, tough shit, no more playing for you, ever. Sure would raise the stakes, wouldn't it? It'd also make a game so fucking frustrating that I'd make sure never to do anything that I thought would piss anyone off. No shooting, no horse-stealing, no deals with a shadowy government. Just run off with the family and hole up somewhere in the wilderness. Hmmm. Maybe that'll work for DLC. I can see it now; RED DEAD REDEMPTION, THE ANNE FRANK CHAPTERS.

Sorry, but at this point, Yahtzee's just bitching for bitching's sake. His vids and writing are still somewhat amusing, but I'd no more use them to make judgements about the games I play than I let my dog tell me what to fix for dinner. They're both just yelling for attention and snacks, and they'll get each when I'm damn well ready to give it to them.

I got a game called Pathologic for the PC out of a bargain bin, that has hunger and sleep to worry about but doesn't play in the wilderness, instead you're in some kind of sick town where people are going on crazy witch hunts (if you pick the wrong character to play as you start as the target of the hunt and have to sneak through the town, avoiding the townsfolk that want to murder you on your way to the important NPCs) and you have to worry about your reputation because you don't want them to think YOU are the witch. The crappy graphics somehow make the game's appearance even creepier because the townsfolk look like distorted humans and the lack of emotion shown by them makes it even worse.

wasnt he complaining about having to keep an eye on hunger and weapon stats in the monster hunter reveiw?

It does sound more fun and realistic, but I worry of it becoming like the Sims or something. Something meant to make it more realistic just being another element of the "videogameiness" of it.

It could do to deal with morality more besides the ruminatings of NPCs while slogging to a mission. If you were forced to face it more directly in your travels would be cool. I am planning to play it to completely, but lord knows I wanted a western game and I think I deserve better.

Red Dead Redemption treats players like dogs instead of wolves.

I kinda agree with this situation. I was instantly enthused by the idea that you had to hunt and skin animals, BUT then I was also instantly let down that there was no way to wear, or cook and eat them.

This would also give more incentive to killing every living thing I happen across in free roam, without making myself out to be a digital sociopath.

I understand with the previous comments about the desire to not turn this into a micromanaged "Sim"s-esque avatar raising application, But they have already programmed many of the aspects of this IN THE GAME already, i.e. you can already hunt/gather, store/use items, shop and interact with NPC's.
Rabbit meat rewards little health, Cow/Sheep meat rewards alot, eating a wolf heart fills dead eye, unlimited for 30 seconds, eating a bear heart greatly increases melee damage and effect (k.o. punches send enemies flying). Maybe even various plants alleviate ailments like cholera and snakebites, etc, etc

I think it would help to immerse most players into the games atmosphere greater than before.

This is what always got me about Zelda games. "Why doesn't this elfish bastard get tired!?" I would ask myself after running across the expanse of hyrule for 75 days (in game) straight. O.T. I think that if they put those mechanics in, Red Dead Redemption could've been the best sandbox ever... and on a related note, I just saw a hands-on segment of Fallout: New Vegas on G4 the other night, and it seems that the idea of the ability to turn such a system on and off is exactly what they are doing, including adding whieght to ammo.

Anoctris:
Am the only person that places self-constraint (some call ir Role Playing) on themselves when they play games?

It's not that fucking hard children.

So you're don't like the break in realism where you can whistle your dead horse back to life. Here's a tip, don't press that fucking button. Resist your lazy self. You see, constraint at work. Now, let's see how patient you are trying to hike back to town/camp etc. Oh, you can't stand walking in a game? You can't stand repeatively tapping a button to run?

You are the problem!

image

The unimaginative, the lazy, the impatient!

Despite my prior comment, I do actually fully support this manner of thinking. It's like everytime I discuss games with my freinds "Ohh it's too easy. VATS is for fags. The health system is retarded." etc. Well its like the damned easy mode, YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE IT JUST 'CAUSE IT'S THERE.

Fattimus:

Orekoya:

ModusPwnens:
"Players would have to be sure they were properly equipped before heading out of town."

Didn't you complain about this mechanic in Monster Hunter Tri?

Fattimus:
Wasn't it just two weeks ago that Yahtzee was saying how awful it was of Monster Hunter to "make sure you were properly prepared before setting out", and having "constantly decreasing meters" to be more realistic?

You have a very simplistic way of looking at things. I can make it simple.

Being prepared and well stocked before leaving =/= Having to go home every time you want to change equipment out that you are carrying on you.

It works in Monster Hunter, which is not set up as a sandbox game like RDR is. It's too easy to assume the other person is being too simplistic in thinking.

In RDR, you'd have to Fast Travel or ride yourself back to a town, if you weren't prepared for a mission. In Monster Hunter, if you find you aren't prepared for a mission, you can Abandon it -- Abandoning a mission in Monster Hunter sends you straight back to town, exactly as you were before you left. If you used up all your potions before abandoning, they're back. You don't get to keep anything you might have carved, but if you were being successful, you wouldn't have abandoned. It's not like you'd have to run, on foot, down a mountain, into town, change your armor and weapon, pick up flash bombs, and then run right back up the mountain. It was very easy.

If you haven't played MH, stop parroting Yahtzee. There's a reason the MH Extra Punctuation thread is so long.

I never said he was right, but that is still you looking at things very simply. Since I didn't immediately agree with you 100% then I MUST be Yahtzee's personal foot-bather and think of him as the embodiment of God himself. I simply stated that you were over simplifying what you thought his opinions were and offered clarification what his complaint stated in his MH review was not the same as what he was suggesting now.

If you want my opinion, I can offer that too. Including this option for those who want it as a Survival Mode would work fine because it'll cater to multiple audiences' tastes. Having Infinity Mode in Dead Rising felt like playing a whole new game when having to worry about such things. If you want to worry about it. Having it a core part of gameplay such as it was in Sims 3 World Adventures would be irritating as all get out.

Oh, and I didn't hate MH. But I already have a subscription for two mmos and it did feel just like playing one.

Actually, I agree a lot. I enjoyed RDR for the most part so far but it's losing it's appeal more and more. I'm a little ways into the Mexican part of the story.

If not having hunger/thirst/sleep/bladder meters is gearing a game towards casuals, I'm glad the casual market is gaining steam. I think the most telling element of this is that it seems the answer to a stated problem with an existing solution. No incentive to be bad? Add incentives. No risk? Bring back the risk. Other Rockstar games have it.

It amazes me, however, that the guy who lauded Saints Row 2 and has bashed other sandboxes for not "getting it" is now suggesting we toss hunger and thirst bars into such a game.

Hell, I don't even get why games should be anything other than shiny toys. Hunger and Thirst meters are nothing more than another knob to make a funny noise. Something for us to coo at. Games are a diversion. Adding busywork to games may enhance the "realism," but it doesn't make you any less a dog for being involved. At best, you're still exactly what you were before: A dog playing wolf.

And I can do that in Saints Row 2.

I wouldn't mind the meters if they tick away at a reasonable pace. Like the stamina bar in MGS3. If it was too fast id just be frustrated, but putting the right pressure on can enhance a game experience.

All you need is few mods and youre good to go. Oh wait a sec... its console only for no reason. NVM enjoy your dumbed down game! Meanwhile ill go play some Oblivion with 6gbs of mods and then some Fallout...

SilverHammerMan:
The first time my horse died out in the wilderness I felt a mixture of exhilaration and fear. There I was, far from civilization, vulnerable to predators and bandits alike. Would I dare try to hoof it back to the nearest town? Would I lay in wait, killing the next traveler I saw and stealing him horse, even if it would stain my own self imposed good guy image? Would I try to lasso and break in a new horse using nothing but a lasso, my wits, and the element of surprise? Then I absentmindedly whistled and my magical, reincarnating horse trotted up, thus ruining the drama of the situation...

I experienced the exact same thing.

Shoggoth2588:
It would also make for some funny deaths when a malnourished John Marston mistakes a hungry mountain lion for his trusty steed while on the verge of heat stroke

Ooo! I like that. Don't display injury, malnutrition, or whatever with a bar graph. Instead keep it in-game with hallucinations, drunk-style stumbling, etc.

Man, the whole article is a load of bullshit. Dogs are retarded wolfs? Yes, because we domesticated them for their stupidity. It's not like they can be trained for a variety of tasks, like searching for survivors under collapsed buildings.
But apparently Yahtzee considers civilization to be BAD thing. Then I presume the meaning for human existence would be eating, crapping and fucking each other. What a great role model you are. Sure, we've come a long way since we've started doing more complicated stuff than banging two rocks together, but fuck all that progress, let's just go back to killing each other with pointy sticks for no good reason. Maybe it's time to grow out of the 'people are stupid' mindset, Mr. Croshaw?
Oh, and the concept of ‹bermensch has nothing to do with sweaty cowboys shooting each other. An ‹bermensch is, by definition, a great leader, who's actions are validated because of his superior morals, and thus he would be set above the law that binds common people. This is, according to Nietzsche, justifies whatever he does, as he is working for the betterment of humankind. Just being immoral or a criminal doesn't make one an ‹bermensch.

joest01:
My main complaint is the multiplayer though. Such an intriguing concept, an open western to coop and duel in!!
Unfortunately the game does little to for prevent Halo kids to treat it like a death match. After all, worst that can happen is you respawn 100 feet from last location. No, you challenge someone you lose a level, or a golden gun or something else that really hurts. And you don't get to challenge someone who isnt within 10 levels or so from you.

And, for chrissake carry over stuff I unlock in single player. I didn't knife those cougars so I coulnt use the buffalo rifle online. Or the legen outfit.

I agree with you on all counts, I forget where I read it (It might have been a quick mention on the Penny Arcade blog) but someone said that it was like the alpha stage of a MMORPG. And that sounds accurate, doesn't it?

You've got this big, awesome world out there, crawling with wildlife and what not, but the world still feels pointless and empty. The only enemies are restricted to small, boring, and ultimately pointless, hideouts. The few NPCs you do encounter are like ghosts, vacantly going about their business with none of the vibrancy or life that they have in single player. You can hunt and kill animals, but there's no point, you gain nothing, you are rewarded with meaningless levels.

Murdering other players goes unpunished no bounty for killing them, after all, they asked for it, they had the audacity to be in the general vicinity as you, overly aggressive jerk that you are (Not you, you, but you know what I mean.) you only get what's coming when you're inevitably hunted down by your irate victim. And everyone's like that, even me most of the time, and we're aggressive because everyone else is aggressive and we sure don't want to be the one to die. And the trains don't run, for no damn reason, seriously, the simple addition of running trains would really liven the multiplayer up for me. It's make the world seem not so empty and PVP shootouts on a moving train would kick ass.

You can't roleplay or kick back in town, you can't customized your avatar beyond some lame skins, and your single player progress is worthless. It's a piss-off. The online should feel like a borderline MMO, customization, clans, a living, breathing world.

It's like Apocalypse 1911, an empty, dead world, inhabited by mindlessly aggressive savages. By which I mean us players.

Still a great game, but the online is a huge disappointment.

You basically described Fallout: New Vegas... with whores

That's actually a cool idea.
People, its not realism. It's gameplay. In real life, you die if you starve to death. In a game, you can restart. Nobody is demanding absolute realism.

I would love to see a game that uses the SA stat system and advances on it in a few ways. Suddenly everything would have an actual purpose and consequence. You could even add mental state for an interesting gameplay experience.
Eat too much, get fat. Steal too much, develop a need to steal more things (neglecting this would make your character seem preoccupied and a little slower while stealing or killing could give him a nice high that you can ride until it wears off and you have to commit another act of theft or violence)
Game designers need to stop assuming that gamers can't handle a challenge. If your making a game for adults, assume its an adult who can handle failure. Assume it's an adult who doesn't care enough about the zombie like NPCs too be impressed by silly "moral" choices.

Orekoya:

Fattimus:

Orekoya:

ModusPwnens:
"Players would have to be sure they were properly equipped before heading out of town."

Didn't you complain about this mechanic in Monster Hunter Tri?

Fattimus:
Wasn't it just two weeks ago that Yahtzee was saying how awful it was of Monster Hunter to "make sure you were properly prepared before setting out", and having "constantly decreasing meters" to be more realistic?

You have a very simplistic way of looking at things. I can make it simple.

Being prepared and well stocked before leaving =/= Having to go home every time you want to change equipment out that you are carrying on you.

It works in Monster Hunter, which is not set up as a sandbox game like RDR is. It's too easy to assume the other person is being too simplistic in thinking.

In RDR, you'd have to Fast Travel or ride yourself back to a town, if you weren't prepared for a mission. In Monster Hunter, if you find you aren't prepared for a mission, you can Abandon it -- Abandoning a mission in Monster Hunter sends you straight back to town, exactly as you were before you left. If you used up all your potions before abandoning, they're back. You don't get to keep anything you might have carved, but if you were being successful, you wouldn't have abandoned. It's not like you'd have to run, on foot, down a mountain, into town, change your armor and weapon, pick up flash bombs, and then run right back up the mountain. It was very easy.

If you haven't played MH, stop parroting Yahtzee. There's a reason the MH Extra Punctuation thread is so long.

I never said he was right, but that is still you looking at things very simply. Since I didn't immediately agree with you 100% then I MUST be Yahtzee's personal foot-bather and think of him as the embodiment of God himself. I simply stated that you were over simplifying what you thought his opinions were and offered clarification what his complaint stated in his MH review was not the same as what he was suggesting now.

If you want my opinion, I can offer that too. Including this option for those who want it as a Survival Mode would work fine because it'll cater to multiple audiences' tastes. Having Infinity Mode in Dead Rising felt like playing a whole new game when having to worry about such things. If you want to worry about it. Having it a core part of gameplay such as it was in Sims 3 World Adventures would be irritating as all get out.

Oh, and I didn't hate MH. But I already have a subscription for two mmos and it did feel just like playing one.

Now you're exaggerating, too. I never said you were some Yahtzee fanboy, just that you were repeating what he said about MH3 almost word for word (which you did).

What I said was, that what Yahtzee wanted and what he complained about in MH3 is very similar, to the point of hypocrisy on his part. You don't actually counter that, either, by making a case for any differences. You call me simple and then make a non-relevant tangent about your opinion.

Eh, Yahtzee. Your calling us mentally stuck in childhood moreso than we were hundreds of years ago is incorrect. From an anthropological perspective, mankind has not changed much. Sure, getting food is easier, but now we have different challenges than that, and still face the same old challenges, war, sickness, natural disasters. We're better equipped, but we have found new challenges, mostly mental and intellectual, to occupy us.

I'd say that a lot of people are mentally stuck in childhood, but we have always been that way. The years changing have not changed that. I mean, back in Medievil times, people used to go to war out of boredom. We've always been childish.

I await the mods to make RDR into this awesome game of survival you describe.

That was an immensely well written article and I love the whole dog/wolf metaphor.

I love the toys analogy; it is one of those statements which clarifies and enlightens. Unfortunately, after it sinks in I shake my head and ask myself, "why didn't I come up with that?" Great column.

I have mixed feelings about this. On one side, I would enjoy such a feature, as micromanagement is interesting in a game as long as it is not very intrusive. However, you then get Wild Wild Sims.

On the other, I agree to that it would break down the fantasy of being a western hero, and instead you become a bitch for your digital avatar.

The thing I felt of DRR was, it was too short for me. The few end missions were pretty dull; as someone said earlier, I'd have rather done them at the start, as a tutorial and a way to introduce who we are fighting for. The outlaw situation is dead on too. I don't see a good reason to turn evil, nor can I think of a way that this is possible, aside from the aforementioned micromanagement.

That would be interesting...a RDR kind of game that forces you into breaking the law numerous times to survive, thus more or less guaranteeing an outlaw status on your character.

A very interesting premise indeed: "Let's see how long you will last by being/ doing good in this harsh world"

The survival mechanics kinda make me think of MGS3.

In the trend of saying the exact same thing as everyone else before me, I do like the idea of the survival mechanism. I think the idea of being able to turn it "on" or "off" is a bit strange though. I mean, isn't that what the difficulty settings were supposed to accomplish? Maybe if they added a feature where, after you beat the main "quest", you unlocked another difficulty, called "Survival", where you had to contend with all the things Yahtzee suggested. That way, people like Yahtzee could have the realistic survival game they crave, and it wouldn't be inaccessible to "casual" gamers (oooh, the horror).

i enjoy the challenges, such as sharpshooting, treasure hunting, and hunting. maybe not survivalist, but whatever.

im actually trying to get a hunting licence, and where i live, there is no limit to the amount of deer you can kill.

Ambrose von Carstein:
Man, the whole article is a load of bullshit. Dogs are retarded wolfs? Yes, because we domesticated them for their stupidity. It's not like they can be trained for a variety of tasks, like searching for survivors under collapsed buildings.
But apparently Yahtzee considers civilization to be BAD thing. Then I presume the meaning for human existence would be eating, crapping and fucking each other. What a great role model you are. Sure, we've come a long way since we've started doing more complicated stuff than banging two rocks together, but fuck all that progress, let's just go back to killing each other with pointy sticks for no good reason. Maybe it's time to grow out of the 'people are stupid' mindset, Mr. Croshaw?
Oh, and the concept of ‹bermensch has nothing to do with sweaty cowboys shooting each other. An ‹bermensch is, by definition, a great leader, who's actions are validated because of his superior morals, and thus he would be set above the law that binds common people. This is, according to Nietzsche, justifies whatever he does, as he is working for the betterment of humankind. Just being immoral or a criminal doesn't make one an ‹bermensch.

I feel the need to say that your use of commas just fucked my brain.

Read between the lines is all I can really say. He's not saying lets go back to the stone age, he says man has forgotten to deal with shit rather than make something that deals with it for us.

The human digestive system in the stone age was so strong, you could stop at any muddy creek, drink from it, and you wouldn't have any stomach issues. Today, if it's not "Bottled" or "Purified" it's bad for your system. I walk in the rain all the time, I don't get colds anymore, just one nasty virus per year. My friends that all use their umbrellas or stay in when it rains get 20 colds a year. Rather than deal with heat, we got air conditioners to make us comfy. Rather than deal with cold that in the past would have made us uncomfortable can kill us nowadays because of our systems. THAT is what Yahtzee means.

wolves can hunt for their own food and be self sufficient, domestic dogs, on a whole (as a basic rule) usually can't due to pampering. He's not looking at the dogs from a practical point of view, he's seeing them on a self-sufficient basis.

For a survival system to be good in a game it has to be implemented well.

I'd have no problems with having to eat as long as I can stockpile up on food in one location, so in RDR for example I could use all the meat I've obtained from hunting as a stockpile and then only eat when I get hungry. What ruins systems like this is when the game forces you to abandon what your doing to go and eat. I'd rather spend 10 minutes hunting and gathering to fulfil my needs for for the next couple of hours of gameplay, I do not however want to be forced to hunt every time I get hungry.

I think what would also help a system like this would be if game time moved at the rate of actual time, but allow players to accelerate it if they feel the need. I hate setting out to go somewhere at a certain time of day, and 10 minutes of real time lead to several hours in the game.

If conditions like this were met then a survival system in my opinion would be great, but making it a tedious chore for a player just detracts from a game.

comment on the article: correct, and that is why I invented a term "the grass that grows around" for all the people without capability to think and I intend to start using it.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here