Community The Age of Incline: RPG Codex's 2012-2016 GOTY Results

[Vault Dweller]

No arguing here.

 

[V_K]

Here is how the quest works. You start the game at the inn, the innkeeper tells you to go guard one of the guests, you can say sure or you can say I need to buy some weapons first. Then you go back, tell the innkeeper you're ready and go upstairs. After the guest is killed (that's one outcome you can't change but that's the intro basically), the innkeeper offers you to an optional quest. At this point you aren't offered another option to go and buy weapons because now it's the middle of the night and because you (the player) just did 5 min ago and nothing has changed.

I think the main problem with AoD, and this example is rather telling, is that you approach these things from narrative realism perspective rather than from gameplay perspective. If I'm not misinterpreting your explanation (didn't play that path myself), the player is given the choice whether to buy new equipment before his first battle - i.e. at a point when he can't know whether his starting equipment is any good. Now right after that battle is over he can assess the quality of his equipment and make an informed decision whether he needs better things before starting another battle - but he can't buy it because narrative reasons. Granted, the second quest is optional and you can forgo it - buy why? Because at an earlier and completely unrelated point you made a decision that you didn't have enough information to make? It may make narrative sense, but it doesn't make any gameplay sense.

 

[Azarkon]

Not surprised the Witcher 3 won.

It touched the Codex in places where the Codex has not been touched ... in a long time.

AoD and Underrail are objectively better at systems, but systemfags have never been the majority at the Codex.

Pillars of Eternity being the most well known game, and yet considered mediocre. Again not surprising.

But when are we going to talk about the fact that Heroine's Quest: The Herald of Ragnarok is in the green space?

 

[V_K]

But when are we going to talk about the fact that Heroine's Quest: The Herald of Ragnarok is in the green space?

What's wrong with it being in the green space? Aside from the fact that in the perfect world it would have been in blue one.

 

[Lurker King]

I think the main problem with AoD, and this example is rather telling, is that you approach these things from narrative realism perspective rather than from gameplay perspective. If I'm not misinterpreting your explanation (didn't play that path myself), the player is given the choice whether to buy new equipment before his first battle - i.e. at a point when he can't know whether his starting equipment is any good. Now right after that battle is over he can assess the quality of his equipment and make an informed decision whether he needs better things before starting another battle - but he can't buy it because narrative reasons. Granted, the second quest is optional and you can forgo it - buy why? Because at an earlier and completely unrelated point you made a decision that you didn't have enough information to make? It may make narrative sense, but it doesn't make any gameplay sense.

Well, but this is only a problem if you think that good gameplay means pandering to the player’s ego at the expenses of narrative sense and realism. You are just assuming that AoD should be measured by cRPGs that don’t give a fuck about narrative. Some players don’t have any adaptation problems with it, none at all. That is because they easily come to terms with the fact that they can fail or that the game world holds new challenges and problems they couldn’t anticipate, or because they read think before they click. This rather telling example wasn't a problem for me and many other players. How come? I saw players making idiotic mistakes because they were too lazy to read the option they were choosing. This is player's fault or developer's fault? Maybe it's the cRPG industry fault, i.e., bad developers creating lazy expectations and bad habits, making cRPG players functional illiterates that are a click-happy. That is what good gameplay nowadays. Walk around to click on options you don't read in order to kill things. Choices are all meaningless because thet don't affect actual gameplay.

For me AoD was a revelation. The fact that I’m taking part in an event of a compelling game world, as opposed to another generic and gamey “open the lock to take thing” action was literally the best thing that it could have happened. In fact, every nook and cranny of Teron hides a possibility that needs to be explored, a mini-universe. The inn alone must have more twenty scenarios. If you didn’t try all the choices, and made all the mistakes, you don’t know everything the game has to offer. You talk as if this was an obstacle for real gaming; I say this opens all kinds of interesting possibilities. It’s a different way to conceive cRPG design. The idea that he should reduce its rich narrative gameplay to the garden variety of quest design is an impoverish way to see things. Sorry, but it really means that you don’t care or understand what it’s the role of character building in cRPGs. In a sense, he is not creating nothing revolutionary with this realistic approach. There are a bunch of examples of games that did that, such as RoA2 and KoDP. It seems these criticisms are motivated by a meager and reductive diet of examples.

 

[V_K]

If you didn’t try all the choices, and made all the mistakes, you don’t know everything the game has to offer.

Which basically means that the best way to go about "playing" AoD is to click at random. But where's the game in that?

the game world holds new challenges and problems they couldn’t anticipate

But if you can't make informed decisions, you can't strategize. It all boils down to guesswork and larping. There's no challenge to that, just trial and error.
Oh, I can totally see how this kind of "gameplay" would be a revelation to a certain demographic - the one that's incapable of any intellectual effort but likes to imagine they're some chosen elite.

Funniest thing, I don't even hate AoD. I'm frustrated by it. It has the bones of a great adventure game that I'd really like to play. But these bones crumble under too much branching and "take no prisoners" approach.

 

[Wayward Son]

No C&C...

Not sure if this has already been addressed, but C&C doesn't have to just be in a dialog/story manner. Your character/party build can be C&C as well (you make the CHOICE of what character/party build to use, and, if the design is good (and in Wiz 1's case, it is), you will face the CONSEQUENCES of those choices, so C&C). This is mechanical C&C, my friend.

 

[Mareus]

Here is how the quest works. You start the game at the inn, the innkeeper tells you to go guard one of the guests, you can say sure or you can say I need to buy some weapons first. Then you go back, tell the innkeeper you're ready and go upstairs. After the guest is killed (that's one outcome you can't change but that's the intro basically), the innkeeper offers you to an optional quest. At this point you aren't offered another option to go and buy weapons because now it's the middle of the night and because you (the player) just did 5 min ago and nothing has changed.

I think the main problem with AoD, and this example is rather telling, is that you approach these things from narrative realism perspective rather than from gameplay perspective. If I'm not misinterpreting your explanation (didn't play that path myself), the player is given the choice whether to buy new equipment before his first battle - i.e. at a point when he can't know whether his starting equipment is any good. Now right after that battle is over he can assess the quality of his equipment and make an informed decision whether he needs better things before starting another battle - but he can't buy it because narrative reasons. Granted, the second quest is optional and you can forgo it - buy why? Because at an earlier and completely unrelated point you made a decision that you didn't have enough information to make? It may make narrative sense, but it doesn't make any gameplay sense.

Actually, the way it works is this. You have 2 options:
1. I need better equipment.
2. Accept the quest and go to guest room.

If you choose 1, you get teleported to a trader, then you get teleported back to tavern and then immediately to the dangerous situation. If you choose 2, you get teleported to a dangerous situation immediately. My problem is that if you choose option 2, if you haven't played the game before, you might just assume that after accepting the quest you can manually go to guest room, allowing you to walk around, maybe ask for some extra help, maybe go out into the streets, buy some armor and come back. I mean, that's what all other RPGs let you do. But AoD does not allow for this and instead just decides to teleport you around, even if it means going to your certain death. Another problem is that the game immediately shoe horns you into life and death situation, without giving you even a hint of what will happen - which is a repeating theme in AoD. Now, this is just one example of the limitations of the game and there are many, many more. I am also fully aware that the game later on opens up a bit and does allow you to walk around. I just see no point in continuing this debate if the developer is so dishonest that he will rather twist my words about this 4 times in a row now, rather than addressing the actual point I am making.

It shows he has no other interest than being right, even when I draw to him where exactly the problem lies. And this is a minor issue on the whole spectrum of problems, which I brought up exactly because it is so easy to understand. But NO! We cant have dissent, and instead he chose to twist my words and pretend like I am a moron and don't know that there is an option to buy equipment if you choose option 1. But anyway, the rest of his counter points were the same diarrhea of this cheap sophistry, so this is it. I am not going to waste more time on this. It's not worth it. I could be playing games instead of arguing with dishonest pricks.

 

[Rivmusique]

the impressive array of choices before me was always reduced to 1 because of my build

This isn't true.

Mareus

That was a long way to go for yet another "The first fight is too hard" statement, well done. It's okay to fail occasionally in games, just alter your approach and give it another go. Games don't have to set you up so you're borderline-guaranteed success on your first try.

 

[Mareus]

the impressive array of choices before me was always reduced to 1 because of my build

This isn't true.

Mareus

That was a long way to go for yet another "The first fight is too hard" statement, well done. It's okay to fail occasionally in games, just alter your approach and give it another go. Games don't have to set you up so you're borderline-guaranteed success on your first try.

Oh, you got the wrong impression. Reloading and not making the same mistake next time is no problem. In fact, that is exactly what I did and at first I didnt hold any grudges. It wasn't until similar situations started happening over and over later down the playthrough that I became annoyed. The game shoe horns you into situations you couldn't predict. Anyway, I am not gonna repeat myself. Like I said, I think I made my points very clear and defending this shit design with condenscending: "Games don't have to set you up so you're borderline-guaranteed success on your first try" are a mark of dishonesty or elitist douchebaggery. In either case you can now go eat a dick and go fuck yourself.

 

[Lurker King]

But if you can't make informed decisions, you can't strategize. It all boils down to guesswork and larping. There's no challenge to that, just trial and error. Oh, I can totally see how this kind of "gameplay" would be a revelation to a certain demographic - the one that's incapable of any intellectual effort but likes to imagine they're some chosen elite.Funniest thing, I don't even hate AoD. I'm frustrated by it. It has the bones of a great adventure game that I'd really like to play. But these bones crumble under too much branching and "take no prisoners" approach.

“You can’t make informed decisions, you can’t strategize”. Well, if you spread your skill points too thin, maybe you will fail systematically. But if you have the good sense to invest in the types of skills that are useful to your "line of work", you will have no problems. If you are a merchant, you should invest in persuasion, streetwise, trading, etc. If you are an assassin, you should invest in stealth, alchemy (poison), critical strike. If you are a mercenary, you should be a good fighter, and so on. That is just logic. Now tell me, why players like me have no problem understanding these basic facts? By magic? Or would argue that we are lying? I think this is pure exageration from your part. Or maybe you are frustrated because you lose some content in certain parts. That’s understandable, but these complaints have some problems.

First, it should be expected that only certain kinds of builds have access to certain points. You shouldn’t be able to invade the palace with any build just because you want to explore. If you are used to do this in other games, that’s your problem.

Second, these complaints don’t affected the main game in any way since you are able to finish your main quests without problems – unless, of course, you spread your skill points too thin like a newbie.

Third, most of these complaints are arbitrary because the gated locations are accessible to different builds. Instead, what really happens is this. The player spent all his general skill points on combat skills or one skill. He can’t explore some site. Frustration hits, time to go to the internet to bitch about the game. You will find people on the Codex complaining that is impossible to reach the center of the abyss, when the reality is that you have lots of different ways to get there. I listed them here. You can check. And the same thing holds for the other sites. You prove to players with all the information that what they are saying cannot be the case, but they ignore the information, because they don't want skill checks, they want traditional design. Players talk out of their hats because they are not used to this kind of thing. It’s a childish behavior because the game allows you to explore, make mistakes and try different things. You can explain and list one thousand ways to infiltrate the place and they will keep moaning. Is pure arrogance.

Fourth, the game allows you to make plenty of mistakes and move forward. If you don’t notice this is because you are too afraid or traumatized by failures. Let me give you one of the many examples in Teron. If you try to critical strike Esbenus, but fail, they will throw you on the ground and hit you. You will lose permanently 2 or 3 HPs, but you also receive a bonus in your dodge skill. I don’t know about you, but at this point in the game a free bonus in dodge is a huge advantage. In fact, is always an advantage, and that’s why I always choose to fail in this in order to receive this benefit. I can guarantee you that most players that fail in this skill check moaned about bad gameplay without even bother to read the description of the game event. There are plenty of similar interesting “fuck ups” that allow the player to move forward.

Fifth, I don’t know if make any sense to say that informed decisions would prevent you all kinds of death and dangers, but I do know that AoD telegraphs a lot of the dangers to players. Players are blind to this because they are used to common cRPG tropes and prejudices. The game practically telegraphs you the risks you take by helping an unknown damsel in distress in an obscure street or an excuse deal with a strange fellow (*coug* Miltiades *cough). It’s obvious that they are trouble. What most players do? They go ahead clicking to explore and die in all kinds of indignant ways, and then start complaining about gameplay. Now, ask yourself. The game is designed to punish you for making stupid decisions based on generic cRPG tropes. Players fall in these traps. This is not bad design because it’s working exactly as intended. If I try to explain to some dude that can’t beat Miltiades toughs that he is not supposed to if he is not strong enough and that he have the option to turn around and run, he will feel insulted. I wonder where he got this mistaken idea that he is supposed to know in advance all the dangers without thinking, beat all the fights with a crappy build and never run away because that is what cowards do. Probably from generic borderline popamole traditional design.

So players hate the subversion of poorly thinking tropes because they are prejudiced. They will dismiss all the amazing things the game offers, from the believable characters to the hundreds of interesting scenarios, because they feel personally insulted and overwhelmed. You may complain but others feel rejoice in the fact that someone is finally abandoning the hundredth copy of generic FedEx quest design and making more believable quests. You feel frustrated by gated content while others will feel challenged and will feel rewarded from beating that dam skill check. Do you this is not challenge? Yes, it is, because it takes a kind of person with perseverance and obstinacy to achieve the right build. Do you think this is not rewarding? Not, it is, because you know that most people won’t access that particular content. The other day I find a new death screen that was hilarious. That's awesome because after hundreds of hours there are hidden details I didn't know. That's good stuff. The game is so rich in details and you guys dismissing the game based “I don’t want to reload” dogmatic thinking.

 

[aleam iacis]

Games I played and thought deserved better:
Shadowrun Returns, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, Paper Sorcerer, Tale of Wuxia.

Games I played and thought deserved worse:
Witcher 3, Divinity: OS, Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen, Invisible Inc., Pillars of Eternity.

I don't understand why these third person real time action-RPGs score so highly these days. I'll admit the Witcher 3 was a good game, if not my type, but Dragon's Dogma? That shit's like Divinity Dragon Commander. If I wanted hours of real time bore-fest fantasy action combat, I'd play a nostalgic isometric (or whatever the hell Diablo-style is) hack and slash. The Witcher and Dark Souls may have good combat, but I feel like I'm playing a Zelda game with a realistic combat mod or some shit just without the good music, bright visuals, and annoying fairies.

On a separate note, I don't know why Mankind Divided wasn't more liked? I mean sure, compared to Deus Ex 1 it had a dumbed down inventory and augmentations management and they got rid of limb damage and skills, but compared to Human Revolution the game is amazing, level design is way better, the plot, atmosphere, and side characters are more interesting, and even the enemies... nevermind... Anyway, it has some moments of actually good C&C, and you get the option of killing or not killing morally ambiguous characters, like the police who give you trouble at train stations. And I think you can avoid all the boss battles, just like Deus Ex 1, assuming (ancient spoiler alert****) you can avoid Gunther and Walter Simon which I wouldn't ever choose to. Good memories.

 

[Morality Games]

On a separate note, I don't know why Mankind Divided wasn't more liked?

The game is the closest thing to VTM: B since VTM: B.

It wasn't more liked because people will shit on anything but don't feel like buying or playing it.

It's reputation will grow over time.

 

[Excidium II]

DXMD ran like fucking shit. It lacked the globletrotting aspect of Deus Ex and the conspiracy backstory sucked.

 

[toro]

First, it should be expected that only certain kinds of builds have access to certain points. You shouldn’t be able to invade the palace with any build just because you want to explore. If you are used to do this in other games, that’s your problem.

This is a made up rule.

Second, these complaints don’t affected the main game in any way since you are able to finish your main quests without problems – unless, of course, you spread your skill points too thin like a newbie.

The game cannot be finished with a jack-of-all-trades character and it's not properly advertising the fact that you have to play it with a class system mentality.

This means that once you started with some skills then you have to put points on those skills until the end of the game (probably - I didn't finish it). Trying to experiment or deviate from your "class-corridor" will result in failure.

Third, most of these complaints are arbitrary because the gated locations are accessible to different builds. Instead, what really happens is this. The player spent all his general skill points on combat skills or one skill. He can’t explore some site. Frustration hits, time to go to the internet to bitch about the game. You will find people on the Codex complaining that is impossible to reach the center of the abyss, when the reality is that you have lots of different ways to get there. I listed them here. You can check. And the same thing holds for the other sites. You prove to players with all the information that what they are saying cannot be the case, but they ignore the information, because they don't want skill checks, they want traditional design. Players talk out of their hats because they are not used to this kind of thing. It’s a childish behavior because the game allows you to explore, make mistakes and try different things. You can explain and list one thousand ways to infiltrate the place and they will keep moaning. Is pure arrogance.

Your argument reeks with dishonesty: the multitude of the choices you are describing are actually close to ONE because they are based on your character stats which are the same for most part of the game.

The only one that can be blamed of arrogance is the developer.

Fourth, the game allows you to make plenty of mistakes and move forward. If you don’t notice this is because you are too afraid or traumatized by failures. Let me give you one of the many examples in Teron. If you try to critical strike Esbenus, but fail, they will throw you on the ground and hit you. You will lose permanently 2 or 3 HPs, but you also receive a bonus in your dodge skill. I don’t know about you, but at this point in the game a free bonus in dodge is a huge advantage. In fact, is always an advantage, and that’s why I always choose to fail in this in order to receive this benefit. I can guarantee you that most players that fail in this skill check moaned about bad gameplay without even bother to read the description of the game event. There are plenty of similar interesting “fuck ups” that allow the player to move forward.

Good quest design. I like how it sounds but I wonder if it's a common occurrence in the game.

Fifth, I don’t know if make any sense to say that informed decisions would prevent you all kinds of death and dangers, but I do know that AoD telegraphs a lot of the dangers to players. Players are blind to this because they are used to common cRPG tropes and prejudices. The game practically telegraphs you the risks you take by helping an unknown damsel in distress in an obscure street or an excuse deal with a strange fellow (*coug* Miltiades *cough). It’s obvious that they are trouble. What most players do? They go ahead clicking to explore and die in all kinds of indignant ways, and then start complaining about gameplay. Now, ask yourself. The game is designed to punish you for making stupid decisions based on generic cRPG tropes. Players fall in these traps. This is not bad design because it’s working exactly as intended. If I try to explain to some dude that can’t beat Miltiades toughs that he is not supposed to if he is not strong enough and that he have the option to turn around and run, he will feel insulted. I wonder where he got this mistaken idea that he is supposed to know in advance all the dangers without thinking, beat all the fights with a crappy build and never run away because that is what cowards do. Probably from generic borderline popamole traditional design.

AoD teleports but it doesn't telegraph shit. Stop lying.

The game is designed to punish you and that's about it. There is no informed decision making involved.

So players hate the subversion of poorly thinking tropes because they are prejudiced. They will dismiss all the amazing things the game offers, from the believable characters to the hundreds of interesting scenarios, because they feel personally insulted and overwhelmed. You may complain but others feel rejoice in the fact that someone is finally abandoning the hundredth copy of generic FedEx quest design and making more believable quests. You feel frustrated by gated content while others will feel challenged and will feel rewarded from beating that dam skill check. Do you this is not challenge? Yes, it is, because it takes a kind of person with perseverance and obstinacy to achieve the right build. Do you think this is not rewarding? Not, it is, because you know that most people won’t access that particular content. The other day I find a new death screen that was hilarious. That's awesome because after hundreds of hours there are hidden details I didn't know. That's good stuff. The game is so rich in details and you guys dismissing the game based “I don’t want to reload” dogmatic thinking.

Nope. There are only two ways to beat the skill-checks: (1) trial-and-error approach and (2) meta-gaming.

Even a complete moron can do it with enough time or resolve but I guess it's pointless to explain to you why this shit is not appealing to a lot of people.

 

[Korron]

What are the results if we only count Poles as 3/5 a person?

 

[Jazz_]

This is where we differ.

Dialogue choices and skill checks are actual gameplay. The C&C is the game.

"But no! It's in the interface! Using the interface can't be gameplay, it's just a tool to control the game!" lol

The problem with that approach is that it gives you a disgustingly deterministic system where the player is not an actor but merely a visitor who's taken for a ride he can barely influence.
Again in Fallout the world reacted to your choices, you were an asshole to someone? the word reacted to that accordingly, he reacted to actions in the world, in AoD the world reacts mainly to how you distribuited your skill points beforehand, not to your actions in the world (there really isn't an interactive world to speak of in AoD, there are scripted scenes and then walkable areas where you can buy stuff from merchants). The result of making skill points and branching matter so much instead of actual C&C and open-endedness is that you have a game that mostly plays itself out, it's not you as an actor defining your character and your destiny via gameplay actions, it's your ''genetic make-up'' (read: how you distribuited your skill points) that mostly decides how the game plays out.

 

[Lhynn]

you have a game that mostly plays itself out

Its funny because its true.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Shadenuat]

Let's say some developers get together and say let's make an RPG and make tons of money. What a great idea! What kind of RPG? A sandbox RPG with awesome graphics! Why should Bethesda make all the money?

Is it a design discussion? It's not. The sandbox thing merely indicates a general direction at best, a personal preference (I like sandbox games!) or a business decision (I like money!). It's the design phase that fleshes it out: the character system, combat, magic, quest design, travel system, inventory, dialogue, etc. Until this phase is done, you have no design at all because sandbox can be done in many different ways. Tell me you understand this.

I kinda wonder what's your definition of a sandbox RPG. Is Fallout 1 a sandbox?

 

[valcik]

Oh, I can totally see how this kind of "gameplay" would be a revelation to a certain demographic - the one that's incapable of any intellectual effort but likes to imagine they're some chosen elite.

That's why you rated Shadowrun remake 5? Took some serious intellectual effort to finish the game, right? Okay.

 

[Paul_cz]

On a separate note, I don't know why Mankind Divided wasn't more liked?

The game is the closest thing to VTM: B since VTM: B.

It wasn't more liked because people will shit on anything but don't feel like buying or playing it.

It's reputation will grow over time.

I finished Mankind Divided yesterday and I agree with this. According to what I read I expected half-expansion with shitty story and ending. What I got was the best urban stealth RPG sice Bloodlines. Decent enough writing, great multiapproach quest design, some actual choices and consequences, and a wonderful, wonderful Prague. So huge and detailed (for a game of this type), I could not get enough of it.

The game does have some flaws (those fucking cinematic takedowns, fucked up CZ language, ending really should have been a bit more resolutory) but god damn, I enjoyed it. Really hope Eidos Montreal won't be locked in the Marvel ghetto forever and will actually get the chance to finish this prequel trilogy.

 

[Konjad]

What are the results if we only count Poles as 3/5 a person?

Read a few pages back, dimwit, some people already counted the votes excluding Poles. Guess what the result was.

 

[Korron]

Read a few pages back, dimwit, some people already counted the votes excluding Poles. Guess what the result was.

Hmmm there's 70 pages of sperg comments your asking me to go through so I'm just going to have to go with my gut here. They fucked it up didn't they? God damn Polacks.

Of course if for some reason I'm wrong, have we also considered excluding polish Americans? Perhaps anyone that's had any kielbasa lately as well for good measure.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Konjad]

Read a few pages back, dimwit, some people already counted the votes excluding Poles. Guess what the result was.

Hmmm there's 70 pages of sperg comments your asking me to go through so I'm just going to have to go with my gut here. They fucked it up didn't they? God damn Polacks.

Of course if for some reason I'm wrong, have we also considered excluding polish Americans? Perhaps anyone that's had any kielbasa lately as well for good measure.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Exclude yourself, faggot.

Lol tapatalk, pathetic

 

[makiavelli747]

If you are a merchant, you should invest in persuasion, streetwise, trading, etc. If you are an assassin, you should invest in stealth, alchemy (poison), critical strike. If you are a mercenary, you should be a good fighter

That is Rocket Science!

This is how it is. When Miltiades offers you cheap goods if you just come inside his house, morons don't understand its 99% setup. They just don't have the idea about how to make proper decisions and what comes after. As in real life.
You may ask: what is the big deal, everybody loved that Morrowind style when you retreat to comeback later to kill high lvl monster?
Yes, but Morrowind tells a player to get better gear and more lvls, and AoD is basically telling players they fucked up, that they are morons. Do not do fights you can't pull off... what is that supposed to mean???

 

[Korron]

Read a few pages back, dimwit, some people already counted the votes excluding Poles. Guess what the result was.

Hmmm there's 70 pages of sperg comments your asking me to go through so I'm just going to have to go with my gut here. They fucked it up didn't they? God damn Polacks.

Of course if for some reason I'm wrong, have we also considered excluding polish Americans? Perhaps anyone that's had any kielbasa lately as well for good measure.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Exclude yourself, faggot.

Lol tapatalk, pathetic