|
Are you getting the Wii U? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
9031 | 65.25% |
| No |
|
1191 | 8.60% |
| Maybe |
|
808 | 5.84% |
| I'm an idiot |
|
460 | 3.32% |
| Waluigi |
|
1603 | 11.58% |
| Waa |
|
748 | 5.40% |
| Total: | 13841 votes | ||
|
Bobnumerotres posted:Rayman origins is the best platformer I've ever played, it is incredible. I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not but I'm echoing this. The controls and speed of it are what sell me on it. Each level is designed in such a way that there's a LOT to do, plenty of exploring and poking around for secrets, while at the same time made in such a way that it'll challenge you to beat a level in just about 3 minutes. My initial reaction to each time trial is "Man there's no way that's possible!" only for me to be amazed at how free flowing the running and jumping can be if you put your mind to blitzkrieging the stage. The controls as I somewhat mentioned are perfect, in Mario games he has a slight delay or cool down on running/sliding and just feels kinda floaty, but Rayman turns on a dime and I always feel like I'm in control. I've genuinely never played a platformer that felt as "right" to me. Add in a insanely quirky and enjoyable soundtrack, some of the best 2D visuals, and you have a phenomenal game. It's a game with a LOT of care put into it. It's also why I was so miffed about Murphy existing, because he made the game slow to a crawl and didn't let me personally explore all the levels I wanted to. Edit: Here's a example of how fast it can be ThisIsACoolGuy fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Feb 10, 2013 |
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:54 |
|
|
Soul Glo posted:That is the extremely hypothetical not really substantiated negative impact. I'm pretty sure that's what you meant.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:What he's implying is if RL is released now on the Wii U, it will be $20 or cheaper used on that console when the 360/PS3 versions drop in September, where it would presumably launch at full price. Then a PS3 owner is holding his version of the game and looking at the cheaper Wii U version. He buys neither, because gently caress it, why would he pay full price for a game when it's on a system he doesn't have for 1/3 of the price. That makes sense, and it was certainly an issue with Wii U launch ports. For some reason the reverse scenario doesn't seem the same though. Everybody who is into gaming as a hobby, unless you are a PC only gamer, more than likely has at least a 360 or a PS3. So if you previously had one of those and bought a Wii U the prices for things like ME3, Assassins Creed and Arkham City were idiotic. The Wii U install base is still in it's infancy so in order to take advantage of that $20-30 dollar savings on a used Rayman game on the Wii U, you also have to factor in the cost of the system at which point just paying full price on the 360/Ps3 is the better deal. For example if I want to play Arkham city and I owned a Wii U, I wouldn't buy a Ps3 just so I could get the game for $15 dollars. I don't know, it doesn't seem the same to me but maybe i'm just talking out of my rear end.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:09
|
|
|
Glimm posted:I'm pretty sure that's what you meant. You'll also learn upon re-reading my post that I said that is what's being implied. No one knows what would happen, but I imagine Ubisoft is doing this to maximize profits going into the end of the year. Which would explain delaying to a simultaneous release schedule.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:13
|
|
|
katkillad2 posted:That makes sense, and it was certainly an issue with Wii U launch ports. For some reason the reverse scenario doesn't seem the same though. Everybody who is into gaming as a hobby, unless you are a PC only gamer, more than likely has at least a 360 or a PS3. So if you previously had one of those and bought a Wii U the prices for things like ME3, Assassins Creed and Arkham City were idiotic. Yes, but a person in a store is less likely to take the price of buying a whole other console into account to play the $15 version. They just see the $15 version and think "well, that's what it's really worth, so why buy this $50-60 version for the console I have?" Also, if it dropped in price on that platform, you have definitive proof that your console's version will reach that price point sooner or later. E: sorry for double post
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:16
|
|
|
PC versions of multiplat games are usually £10-15 cheaper the day they're released, nevermind months down the line when they're on some ridiculous steam sale, yet that's never stopped people buying the Xbox or PS3 versions of those games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:20
|
|
|
Bland posted:PC versions of multiplat games are usually £10-15 cheaper the day they're released, nevermind months down the line when they're on some ridiculous steam sale, yet that's never stopped people buying the Xbox or PS3 versions of those games. Pc games are an entirely different beast and culture.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:22
|
|
|
WendigoJohnson posted:Pc games are an entirely different beast and culture. So? The fact remains that it's the same games available at a significantly cheaper price.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:You'll also learn upon re-reading my post that I said that is what's being implied. No one knows what would happen, but I imagine Ubisoft is doing this to maximize profits going into the end of the year. Which would explain delaying to a simultaneous release schedule. No, I knew what you said. I just wanted to elaborate that the supposed reasoning isn't very solid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
Bland posted:So? The fact remains that it's the same games available at a significantly cheaper price. Yeah but very few people bother changing their hardware on their PC and it pretty much stays the same as it did when it came out of the box. For example I gifted someone Portal 2 about a month ago and they couldn't run it because they were still using an Nvidia 7300 LE.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:29
|
|
|
ThisIsACoolGuy posted:I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not but I'm echoing this. Not a hint of sarcasm. I really think it's absolutely loving incredible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 02:55
|
|
|
Judging from your comments on the games it sounds fantastic. Should I pick up a copy of Origins now or wait for Legends to be released?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:02
|
|
|
Widdiful posted:Judging from your comments on the games it sounds fantastic. Should I pick up a copy of Origins now or wait for Legends to be released? Just wait for the next Steam sale and get origins. There'll be like two of them before loving Legends comes out now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
Widdiful posted:Judging from your comments on the games it sounds fantastic. Should I pick up a copy of Origins now or wait for Legends to be released? That depends, do you want to play a good game now or do you want to play a sequel to a good game in seven months.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
Widdiful posted:Judging from your comments on the games it sounds fantastic. Should I pick up a copy of Origins now or wait for Legends to be released? If you have a console that can play Origins (other than the 3DS, that version sucks) then you should totally get it. You can probably find it for super cheap these days,
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
edit: ahh wrong topic ignore me
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
Widdiful posted:Judging from your comments on the games it sounds fantastic. Should I pick up a copy of Origins now or wait for Legends to be released? Buy Origins. It's kind of a masterpiece in terms of the classic platformer formula.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
Widdiful posted:Judging from your comments on the games it sounds fantastic. Should I pick up a copy of Origins now or wait for Legends to be released? You can get it for about $20 or less for any platform of your choosing (except the 3DS which I believe is $30 and is also not that good). Just pick the platform you want to play it on because it's good no matter which you choose.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
The 360 version is technically the best if you have multiple platforms. The colors are slightly more vivid and it has full surround sound if that matters. The PS3 doesn't for some reason. Really is great no matter what you get it on though. Bobnumerotres posted:Not a hint of sarcasm. I really think it's absolutely loving incredible. It really is. They took the Mario formula of platforming and made it their own beautiful tightly controlled game. The difficulty gets a little irritating sometimes but it feels great to complete those levels. Hopefully the sequel is the devs perfecting their game and setting up a series that will be remembered for a long time. Also good lord I wish steam would get out of all the non steam threads. Kilometers Davis fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Feb 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:22
|
|
|
Kilometers Davis posted:Also good lord I wish steam would get out of all the non steam threads. Pretty rich coming from a guy recommending the Xbox version in a non-Xbox thread. The Steam version is great and a Steam sale is probably the cheapest way to get the game, I'm not sure why you're so against someone bringing it up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:28
|
|
|
Crowbear posted:Pretty rich coming from a guy recommending the Xbox version in a non-Xbox thread. Especially when he ignored the fact that the 360 version technically has a lower resolution than the other versions. It's upscaled nicely and it's a beautiful game, but it seemingly doesn't look quite as sharp as the native 1080p of the PS3 or the PC versions. All of the console versions are great, but complaining that Steam needs to get out while recommending a version of the game with a modest flaw compared to both the system the thread is discussing AND the steam version is ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:34
|
|
|
Fergus Mac Roich posted:Especially when he ignored the fact that the 360 version technically has a lower resolution than the other versions. It's upscaled nicely and it's a beautiful game, but it seemingly doesn't look quite as sharp as the native 1080p of the PS3 or the PC versions. All of the console versions are great, but complaining that Steam needs to get out while recommending a version of the game with a modest flaw compared to both the system the thread is discussing AND the steam version is ridiculous. Good point on the resolution actually! About Steam, I'm just irritated about how often it gets brought up lately in the big console threads. There are plenty of pc game threads and a huge steam one for that. I wasn't trying to be ridiculous about it, just putting my feelings out there. Has anyone played the Rabbids game? I got it from Target for $10 since it seemed like a great price and something to hold me over until we get a proper Mario party game. I haven't played a full game of it yet but it seems alright.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
Kilometers Davis posted:The 360 version is technically the best if you have multiple platforms. The colors are slightly more vivid and it has full surround sound if that matters. The PS3 doesn't for some reason. Really is great no matter what you get it on though. Apart from the resolution difference already mentioned, the PS3 version does have surround sound. For some reason it only does multichannel PCM though and not DD/DTS so you can only get surround sound over HDMI.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 03:47
|
|
|
katkillad2 posted:That makes sense, and it was certainly an issue with Wii U launch ports. For some reason the reverse scenario doesn't seem the same though. Everybody who is into gaming as a hobby, unless you are a PC only gamer, more than likely has at least a 360 or a PS3. So if you previously had one of those and bought a Wii U the prices for things like ME3, Assassins Creed and Arkham City were idiotic. Those late ports going to the Wii U at launch were an attempt to add some more sales, hopefully adding more than it cost to make the port. They weren't part of the financial plan from the start, with that port having to pull <x> sales in order for the title's initial development plan to work out. They're just looking for it to generate more money than the port cost, giving them a little extra money out of the game. They were hoping to sell on a combination of name recognition, being one of the only titles available for the system as part of the launch lineup, and from making themselves available to anyone who had a Wii but didn't own a 360/PS3 (there were significant numbers of these people, the question was just how many of them were still playing games and would move up to the Wii U and how many of them were non-gamers who got hooked by Wii Sports and have been letting their systems gather dust and weren't interested in going up to Wii U). Rayman was in the boat of having a lead Wii U version, with 360/PS3 ports coming late to mop up a few extra sales because it was a relatively easy and cheap port. The sales numbers on Wii U seemingly scared Ubisoft off, making them realize that if the Wii U was going to be their lead platform in sales, the sales numbers weren't going to be what they needed. Once they came to that realization, the question became how do you get these numbers up? Well, you take the 360/PS3 ports and make them more important, because you have much bigger potential sales on those platforms because of the far bigger installed console base. You can't just let them bring in a little extra cash, you need them to help recoup initial development costs. That means that your 360/PS3 ports can't be late to the game. As a bonus, by not doing 2 separate launches, you can run 1 media campaign for all 3 versions, lowering your costs some.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
So here's a question regarding Rayman. What's stopping Ubisoft from doing a Digital-only launch on the original Wii U launch date? Delay the retail release until September where it'll launch alongside the PS3/360 versions (so Ubi only has to do one advertising campaign), and those of us starved for a new Wii U game can grab the digital version now. Prices are determined by the publisher, so as long as they don't do any price drops until after the September launch, they won't even lose any money in the long run. Or would that go against Microsoft's supposed "No late ports" policy?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
Artix74 posted:Or would that go against Microsoft's supposed "No late ports" policy? It would, yeah. Microsoft is pretty snooty about this stuff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 05:05
|
|
|
Kilometers Davis posted:It really is. They took the Mario formula of platforming and made it their own beautiful tightly controlled game. I'd say it's closer to Donkey Kong Country than Mario, personally.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 05:08
|
|
|
Artix74 posted:So here's a question regarding Rayman. What's stopping Ubisoft from doing a Digital-only launch on the original Wii U launch date? Delay the retail release until September where it'll launch alongside the PS3/360 versions (so Ubi only has to do one advertising campaign), and those of us starved for a new Wii U game can grab the digital version now. Prices are determined by the publisher, so as long as they don't do any price drops until after the September launch, they won't even lose any money in the long run. Because it still marks Rayman as an old game. Part of the problem is from having retail copies that are marked down in price from the launch, but the other factor is how fresh the game is in people's minds. Digital downloads are still kinda less known than full retail products, but part of the simultaneous launch for 360/PS3 is so that you don't have people going "Rayman Legends? You mean that game that came out back in February?" quote:Or would that go against Microsoft's supposed "No late ports" policy? One, no late ports has never been shown to apply to retail games (and the fact that Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge is being ported with an April release date and no word of any new content for the 360 version is an indication that it doesn't apply there). Two, it's so easy to contravent that it's not a problem. If the Wii U version got even 1 level as DLC, you could stick the 1 level of DLC into Rayman and, hey, the 360 version has added content and it's around the rule. And even in the worst case scenario, where you needed substantial work to get around a rule that Microsoft actively enforced against retail releases, that rule has existed for years. Ubisoft didn't suddenly go "Oh, poo poo, that's right, better delay the Wii U version". thefncrow fucked around with this message at 08:58 on Feb 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 05:14
|
|
|
Artix74 posted:So here's a question regarding Rayman. What's stopping Ubisoft from doing a Digital-only launch on the original Wii U launch date? Delay the retail release until September where it'll launch alongside the PS3/360 versions (so Ubi only has to do one advertising campaign), and those of us starved for a new Wii U game can grab the digital version now. Prices are determined by the publisher, so as long as they don't do any price drops until after the September launch, they won't even lose any money in the long run. Nobody has confirmed that Microsoft has had anything to do with it. I'm currently leaning towards (with nothing to back it up, mind) that Ubisoft saw that Nintendo missed their projected sales, came to Nintendo with numbers in hand demanding some money to keep the exclusive since there were fewer consoles out in the wild to sell it to. Fewer than projected consoles = fewer projected sales of the game. In my scenario, Ubisoft says that unless they get a cash guarantee they'll delay the game and port it to other consoles in the meantime, and Nintendo calls their bluff leading to a September simultaneous release across the big platforms. It seems more likely than Microsoft phoning up France and saying that they'll give money to Ubisoft to prevent a Nintendo game shipping on time. This was all probably decided sooner than three weeks before the game's launch, but the earnings call was three weeks before the game's launch, so that's when the information was dumped. Soul Glo fucked around with this message at 05:19 on Feb 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:I'm currently leaning towards (with nothing to back it up, mind) Nintendo being all "Yeah!?! Well we'll go ahead! You ain't got the guts to stall on this 2 million player base machine!" to Ubisoft sounds about as equally ridiculous as Microsoft picking up the phone and being all "Yeah, Yves? That game you guys got exclusive on the WiiU that had the predecessor that didn't sell dick until the price got cut in half... yeah we want that pie." just on the other end of the coin. I have no doubt that they looked at the 2 million sold by now (which isn't bad at all in perspective) and thought "well we'll port it" and i'll be damned baffled if they weren't planning to port it in the first place eventually. I think the only contention here is whether or not it's sound to delay a finished game to a starved crowd in order to sell it with its counterparts later at the cost of bad will on the aforementioned starved crowd and your own workers who had to rush like hell to put it out only to be told they not have 7 months to sit on their asses they could have had prior. I'm leaning toward the side that it wouldn't matter at all to sell it on the WiiU now and when it comes 360/PS3 bound to sell it at half price since it Origins didn't sell at all hardly till they slashed prices across the board. We'll probably never know though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 06:03
|
|
|
Sly Pistachio posted:I made a compilation of some of the best responses I saw posted in the Uplay community on Miiverse. This is some of the most fun I've had with my Wii U in weeks. This is fantastic; I love all of these people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 07:26
|
|
|
I think it's great how Nintendo's allowing the complaints to show up on the launch screen of every Internet-connected Wii U in America. Of course, I doubt they'd do that if people were, say, criticizing a Zelda delay.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 09:50
|
|
|
PaletteSwappedNinja posted:So, anything interesting in the pipeline between now and Rayman? The PS4.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 12:07
|
|
|
Mennonites Revenge posted:I think it's great how Nintendo's allowing the complaints to show up on the launch screen of every Internet-connected Wii U in America. Of course, I doubt they'd do that if people were, say, criticizing a Zelda delay. It goes by most popular Miiverse boards, so unless Nintendo was willing to go and delete every single complaint post, it'd show up regardless. Which to be honest, seems like a happy accident now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
WendigoJohnson posted:But Rayman Legends isn't sprite based. All those character models are polygons with modfiers in the stacks to make them act like 2D. Origins was the same way, the entire point of the UbiArt engine was to simulate 2D with 3D objects. Sorry to bring this up from a couple days ago but this is incorrect; Ubiart is first and foremost an engine for 2D animation. The games use occasional 3D models but it's almost entirely 2D art otherwise. It's defining feature is how easily you can rig up a 2d image with a skeleton. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_QhZYTukac
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
TL;DR, sorry 'bout your Franchise, Ubisoft, you make a ton of (some are great) games and I might still get Legends, but it's far less likely now than it was. gently caress you for doing this to your devs as well. I've personally never played a Rayman game before the demo for Legends, but that demo was good enough to warrant a desire to buy the game. Now that I have franchises which have been proven to be good (or ones that are far more promising to me) releasing before/during the Legends release, I will not be buying it. Just looking at the 2013 releases, the money I will have then will be spent on: Lego City - Definite purchase. Dropping the "plug in a franchise" thing for a game and using City? Brilliant. Mix in Castle (Royal Knights) and Space (Any/all sets from the 90s) and you'll have my entire Lego childhood in a game. Also, until researching for this post I had no idea there were so many variations on each overarching theme (City alone has had 31 varieties over the years) MH3U - Wasn't really sure about this but now that rayman is gone i'm considering buying it for the void as well, never played MH at all, but it looks like a Pokemon truck slammed into a JRPG and somebody released a polished sculpture of the crash. So Ubisoft helped Capcom a little! Pikmin 3 - Nintendo has had a small credit card at the bank of me issued to Olimar since the first game released. It's the best RTS/Survival/whatever it is and I wish they would have used it more and not skipped the Wii. Still, definite purchase. Wonderful 101 - Again, comedy is a good thing, and can make games fun as well if done right. Between this and the  idea about "You, the player are Wonderful #101" along with 100 unique looking superhero types and those gameplay videos, I will probably buy this even without a demo.Zelda WW HD: Buying. Just buying it. Yeah, there are things I want (cut dungeons, smoother triforce hunt, gamepad tingle tuner, I didn't mind the sailing because of the music and watch tower raiding), and they might overprice it (add all of that in and I will pay the 60 easily), but my cube is barely holding on and I'm sure it will look far more amazing than "adding bloom". Disney Infinity: Multi-platform because Disney, but video game money is video game money. Side note before I get into this: Buy/rent/whatever and play Disney Universe with three of your friends. It's easy, fast, you can beat the hell out of each other, and the teamwork mechanics are fantastic friend-griefing fodder. Now, for Infinity, the trailer I just watched looked amazing, but showed a Skylanders-style platform at the beginning. I'm a huge hateful asshat about the whole Skylanders "brick and mortar DLC" (or maybe BMC?) system where you buy a thing that takes up space to get more content, but looking at another video, where they show some actual game play and the quality of the figures, this will come down to pricing. I will also admit I never looked at the pricing for Skylanders, but i'm not going to get it anyway, as I've never played any Spyro games, but having watched LPs I have no interest in them. "X" from Monolith - Dinosaurs and gundams from somebody who makes celebrated JRPGs? The hype over Xenoblade (and my inability to get it due to availability in my area) and that trailer makes me want to purchase a Monolith product and see if it's all that great. But to be fair, they didn't even say 2013, so this probably doesn't count. Also, I was going to pick up Sonic Racing at the same time I got Rayman, as I will have some spare cash for gaming right at Rayman's old release date. Looks like it's just Sonic now. This is all just the Wii U, too. There's even more stuff I want to try/buy that isn't Wii U, but still, Legends was at least three weeks before anything else and more than a month after other things. I'm excited for E3 this year. Finding out about Durango, Smash IV, Mario Galaxy "3" (please not Land 2), more Yoshi Epic Yarn (Please call it this and make it a thing for a Kirby/Yoshi crossover later) info, and more WWHD screens (hopefull to shut up the "it's just blooooooom" crowd. One more thing though, Microsoft has to be bluffing. If Legends sold well at all, they'd back down and let it come out on whatever box they have at the time, because Ubisoft is a good developer and freezing out a good developer is bad business. Also, has Microsoft actually "enforced" this with anything? It just seems like a dumb thing to do. Note: I'm not saying Ubisoft is scared and that's the reason, I'm just saying it's a stupid posturing gimmick and we just need somebody to call them on their poo poo. Okay, I'm still not done: Re: "Tablet interfacing is hard" from developers: Where the gently caress have you been for the ENTIRETY of video games? Nintendo innovates, the other companies try to improve on it, but usually don't make it that far beyond "more of the thing Nintendo thought of" (bumpers from shoulder buttons, Kinect from motion control). So when Nintendo says "touch screen" and you say "but I dun wanna", why aren't you realizing that Microsoft (rumored but come on they just released Surface) and Sony were going to be working on the exact same thing as soon as they got wind of it? Get your practice in now on innovating your games so you can multi-platform dual-screen your games for the eighth generation of consoles and be ready before other developers! Sure you can't map to something that isn't there, but "a second screen" is something you can easily think about! Magnatux fucked around with this message at 17:54 on Feb 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
Crowbear posted:If you have a console that can play Origins (other than the 3DS, that version sucks) then you should totally get it. You can probably find it for super cheap these days,
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
Chaltab posted:What's wrong with the 3DS version? Tiny resolution, mostly. I think I've heard about some small framerate issues too, but someone might have to correct me on that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
Magnatux posted:But to be fair, they didn't even say 2013, so this probably doesn't count. In Nintendo's financial report thing, the Xenoblade Wii U game is only scheduled for 2013 in Japan so we'll probably be waiting until 2014 for it overseas. Just in time to fight against Versus 13 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:54 |
|
|
Artix74 posted:Tiny resolution, mostly. I think I've heard about some small framerate issues too, but someone might have to correct me on that. Yeah I haven't actually played it, but from what I've read the visuals look compressed and muddy compared to other versions, there are framerate issues that other platforms don't have, and the soundtrack sounds worse too. It's especially sad next to the Vita version which is pretty much perfect (aside from not having the coop mode) and looks stunning on that screen. If you don't have any other choices then I suppose you could make due with the 3DS version, but it's the worst port of the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2013 18:22
|
|