|
Even then, the "action rpg" genre is insanely nebulous. You can comfortably fit Diablo, Legend of Zelda, and God of War under its umbrella.
|
#
?
May 11, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 17:13 |
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:True but a big reason why is because the genre as a whole didn't really have much of an identity to begin with.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2020 22:33
|
|
|
It's ridic to pretend ARPG didn't just mean "Diablo clone" for the longest time. That meant real-time Monty Haul-style dungeon crawling, mobs with minibosses dropping special loot that bumps up in quality over time, leveling up primary stats, and skill / ability trees. "Immersion" / choice and consequence / narrative were typically barebones. It was a moribund scene creatively, as it was the sort of thing, like MMOs, that publishers could point at and say "just do that". Even good iterations on it, like the Torchlight games, kind of got lost. "RPG elements" were bolted onto basically every game there was to make starting a certain point in the '00s, but I'd say Borderlands stood out as a very direct and intentional descendant of the Diablo design philosophy, bringing it into the FPS space and reviving it to a degree. The cornucopia of wacky gunz is very Diablo 2. Fallout 4 is arguably descended as much or more from Diablo than it is from the earlier Fallouts, given its randomized special gun loot. Anyway, are From. games a part of that tradition? Soulslikes have clear features of a Diablo clone but they depart intentionally and skillfully from the mold in a lot of ways, so well that they deserve distinction. All PvE encounters are clearly handcrafted. The stats serve mainly as gates to equipment usage, but are technically not even necessary to optimize given a player with enough skill and discipline (a HUGE departure where RPGs are concerned). There is essentially no randomized loot element at all in them beyond basic equipment, though the Chalice Dungeons in Bloodborne are an interesting experiment that most players agree didn't really pan out. But really, the fact that they're even called "Soulslikes" speaks to both how influential they've become and the roguelike elements that they're most famous for. From.'s game loop design and its approach to player death were genuinely revolutionary and I would argue, perfect. The whole "backtrack to where you died" thing is in Diablo, of course, but the drum-tight encounter design of Souls games makes it a very different part of the experience. The way it both instills a sense of constant risk while at the same time making failure something that increases investment in the challenge is so well done. That a game can slap down a player the 10th time going through a basic fight that they breezed through the previous 9 times, and that player will usually say "I got cocky there" rather than "that was bullshit", speaks to how good its design is. Then on top of that, they all have that weird oblique storytelling method that wiki-builders love. It's got something for everyone.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2020 23:19
|
|
|
I think they're just RPGs, or 3rd person RPGs. The first time I played DS, it reminded me heavily of Ultima Underworld and earlier slow-paced dungeon crawlers, just in 3rd-person. Which isn't surprising at all considering the King's Field roots. Souls-like is a useful term though.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 00:15
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:It's ridic to pretend ARPG didn't just mean "Diablo clone" for the longest time. i'm not going to deny that people used that term to mean exactly a diablolike at some point, but when we're using it now it definitely doesn't mean that anymore.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
I'm only really familiar with Japanese RPGs (if only there was a kind of initialism that might refer to said) that are turn-based, is there a tradition of real-time games that resemble Souls?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 00:39
|
|
|
lol, there's like at least 50 japanese action RPGs on the SNES alone ever heard of the mana series? Ys? Soul Blazer? also why would they need to resemble souls
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
Dark Souls is so reminiscent of the Gothic series, I wonder if that series was more popular (less jank) we would have a name for sword fighty 3rd person games. Severence-a-like?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:Dark Souls is so reminiscent of the Gothic series, I wonder if that series was more popular (less jank) we would have a name for sword fighty 3rd person games. Severence-a-like?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 01:47
|
|
|
I always get Gothic and Fable mixed up, on account of their similar level of quality
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 01:55
|
|
|
Dark Souls is the most Japanese rear end ActionRPG and I cant believe it when people say its western its like people dont even look at more than surface details. Of course there is a long tradition of action-rpgs in japan like Amppelix said not just Ys and Mana but Kingdom Hearts, the Tales series, From's own Kings Field, Dark Cloud, and hell you can see Monster Hunter influences (which I wouldn't personally count as a Japanese ARPG). Just because a game is well regarded dose not mean it came form nowhere. There is always a history and a line of influences for every piece of culture, from books to music to video games everything is built on the backs of its predecessors.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:57
|
|
|
Yes, but the gameplay is most reminiscent of games like Gothic, Severance: Blade of Darkness, and Monster Hunter, for sure. They are all 3rd person sword-fighting games, with a dodge mechanic, and the canceling of attack animations to perform combos. I was really good at Dark Souls 3, even though it was my first souls game, because there are even combos and weapons from Monster Hunter that are almost exactly the same. Compared to a game like Y's? Ok, maybe there are conventions lifted from it, but the game play has nothing in common. Like I never thought, man, this game plays like Terranigma; even if the narrative hits the same notes.
Babylon Astronaut fucked around with this message at 06:43 on May 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 06:41
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:Yes, but the gameplay is most reminiscent of games like Gothic, Severance: Blade of Darkness, and Monster Hunter, for sure. They are all 3rd person sword-fighting games, with a dodge mechanic, and the canceling of attack animations to perform combos. I was really good at Dark Souls 3, even though it was my first souls game, because there are even combos and weapons from Monster Hunter that are almost exactly the same. Compared to a game like Y's? Ok, maybe there are conventions lifted from it, but the game play has nothing in common. Like I never thought, man, this game plays like Terranigma; even if the narrative hits the same notes. Right, but the argument isn't "is Demon's Souls an Ys clone?", it's "were ARPGs just Diablo clones until Souls?". The answer to that question is definitively no, because ARPGs out of Japan didn't remotely resemble Diablo, and that includes King's Field, Shadow Tower, all the games From created and iterated on until they finally broke through with Demon's Souls.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 06:52
|
|
|
King of Solomon posted:Right, but the argument isn't "is Demon's Souls an Ys clone?", it's "were ARPGs just Diablo clones until Souls?". The answer to that question is definitively no, because ARPGs out of Japan didn't remotely resemble Diablo, and that includes King's Field, Shadow Tower, all the games From created and iterated on until they finally broke through with Demon's Souls. JRPGs at the time or western (mostly PC) 1st-person RPGs at the time? Just look at the dates and compare what was actually out around then.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 07:15
|
|
|
The Joe Man posted:Where do you think FROM got their inspiration for their first game, King's Field, released in 1994? Just looking at screenshots and from knowledge of what it would evolve into later, it looks like a combination of action RPGs from the time (so think Ys, Xanadu, but also other Japanese ARPGs like Mana) and Wizardry-inspired first person RPGs, of which there were a ton of in Japan at the time (see, for example, early SMT games) and which Japanese RPG developers keep making to this day. What I'm definitely not saying is there are no western influences in Japanese gaming, because that's obviously not true.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 07:29
|
|
|
It's interesting that people mention Diablo and SNES action RPGs, but nobody thought of pure action games like God of War or Devil May Cry. I know of at least two friends who started to play Dark Souls like it was the latter and got their asses massively handed to them until they realized that this brand of action requires a very different approach, more deliberate and less twitch reflexes, but once that clicked, they both excelled by just using a Katana and R1'ing their way to victory. As for me personally, I would never have thought of Ys or the Tales series, because I didn't know those existed until, like, three years ago? I'm German, we didn't get many games during the SNES era, so my frame of reference is just radically different. I feel like this is also a problem in discussing "genres" and "influences", because there are so many cultural differences. I assume that if there were a Japanese person among us, they'd say "how could you forget noted super big game [x], clearly a Dark Souls inspiration", and nobody else ITT would have even heard of it because it came out on the MSX or whatever. Just another random anecdote: when I was younger and read a lot of German videogame magazines, they had a genre for "adventure" games. And that did not mean point&click adventure games, those were already considered curious obsolences, educational games or bargain-bin puzzle trash. Zelda games were "adventure" games, because you're a kid going out on an adventure in a vast world. Of course, with the globalization of the video game market, those curious distinctions of old are beginning to evaporate, as every German video games journalist worth anything (coff) surely knows the "standard" genre conventions established in the anglosphere and presumably also accepted by Japanese publishers by now. But when we're talking early 2000s influences, the genre borders and clear lines of influence were anything but settled, I think.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 07:52
|
|
|
Simply Simon posted:Just another random anecdote: when I was younger and read a lot of German videogame magazines, they had a genre for "adventure" games. And that did not mean point&click adventure games, those were already considered curious obsolences, educational games or bargain-bin puzzle trash. Zelda games were "adventure" games, because you're a kid going out on an adventure in a vast world. Zelda is often called an adventure game hell thats what I call it not an ActionRPG (there are no leveling elements BotW gets close but still is not an RPG). Genre and influences are tricky sure but best practices is to look at what was locally available an extrapolate from there and if you don't know about a countries game scene dont make assumptions. Also "Action" game is even more nebulous than RPG containing everything form Ninja Gaiden (nes and reboot) to Mario to Call of Duty and God of War. Genre can be quite broad. dbzfandiego fucked around with this message at 13:22 on May 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 13:17
|
|
|
Simply Simon posted:It's interesting that people mention Diablo and SNES action RPGs, but nobody thought of pure action games like God of War or Devil May Cry. I know of at least two friends who started to play Dark Souls like it was the latter and got their asses massively handed to them until they realized that this brand of action requires a very different approach, more deliberate and less twitch reflexes, but once that clicked, they both excelled by just using a Katana and R1'ing their way to victory. As I played through DS1 some of the bosses did twig memories of stuff from DMC or Platinum's repertoire. Probably the biggest one for me was actually Ceaseless Discharge. I blundered into him and fought him legit and his limbs crashing down threw me right back into the Metal Gear EXCELSUS fight from MGR. You can't really flail around mashing out combos in Souls games, but some of the skillset's definitely gonna carry over. If only because "dude with sword needs to dodge telegraphed boss move, then retaliate" is such a basic pillar of action/adventure/whatever the gently caress you wanna call it game design.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 16:21
|
|
|
The most Devil May Cry boss fight in the series is Artorias.
punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 17:17 on May 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 16:36
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:The mlst Devil May Cry boss fight in the series is Artorias. 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 16:56
|
|
|
I did it! I just wrapped up today with the "End of Fire" ending. Jesus Christ what an experience. I finished in about 60 hours at SL98 as a k***ht with a claymore. This was my first proper Souls experience (I played Remastered on Switch a bit, but never made it past Undead Burg). I'm probably the 4 millionth person to offer their thoughts on this game and I'm a couple years too late to be relevant, but I'm stuck at home and my wife literally does not give a poo poo about Dark Souls so bear with me. Difficulty: the learning curve for me was super steep. I was stuck on the High Wall for probably 6-7 hours because I just couldn't get the hang of the controls or combat mechanics. It was also a big adjustment for me to be playing a game without any kind of map. Prior to playing DS3 I saw a decent amount of Let's Play content and speed runs, so I wasn't prepared for how much I would suck compared to those folks. I had to be way more careful and way more methodical to avoid dying constantly (which I still did). Some of the parts that gave me the most trouble were High Wall of Lothric in general, the area between the spawning skeleton pathway and getting into the Cathedral, Irithyll dungeon (HP draining jailers), and the Anor Londo archers and knights on the large staircase. I still haven't beaten those two rats that are down the ladder after Pontiff, either. I probably had to fight Hawkwood 20-25 times to get my dragon part back from him. Glad I did because he forced me to try some different things and taught me more about stamina management than any other encounter. I got a little bit cheesy with the later bosses by using summons after a few tries, but I was just excited to see how the game wrapped up so whatever. I'll shoot for 100% solo on the next playthrough. Setting and Story: the level design, appearance, tone, and story (insofar as I understand it) were all amazing. The music was PERFECT. The feeling of entering a new part of the world with fresh eyes was pretty amazing. I didn't know anything about Untended Graves and bizarro Firelink prior to playing, so that was really cool and so unsettling. My only gripe was that there wasn't more exposition from NPCs. Like, even after 40 hours of playing, all the Fire Keeper would say to me was "Ashen One, being unkindled is to be a vessel for souls..." I just wish the NPCs had more to say about the world in general, but I know that part of the charm of these games is how little rope they give you. I also wish I would have played the other Souls games first so that I could understand the story, connections, and call backs a bit better. All in all it was quite a ride. I'm jealous of those that got to play it at launch. The only disappointing aspects of the game for me were the parts that were ruined by having prior knowledge (my fault, it was too tempting to read about this game). I'm looking forward to Elden Ring and Mortal Shell for that reason. I also don't really know much about Bloodborne, so if I scoop up a PS4 I can have a legitimate blind experience on that. It would have been so cool to play this upon release after playing DS1 and DS2. Finishing the game was bittersweet, but I still have the DLC to look forward to. fuckwolf fucked around with this message at 22:34 on May 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
Buy and play both DLCs for the game. The DLC for all the game's isn't like DLC in most games. They aren't crafted as "extra optional adventures" but more so as a continuation of the game after you beat it. For example, much of the story in Dark Souls 2 and 3 directly connect with the DLC of the first game.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2020 22:36
|
|
|
fuckwolf posted:Good vibes Get bloodborne immediately. It is absolutely phenomenal. Play that, and the DLC. Once you’re done go get the DLC for dark souls 3 and finally finish it. I just recommend splitting it up so you have ‘more’ to look forward to
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2020 23:34
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Buy and play both DLCs for the game. For sure. I’ve got both DLCs already. I visited the Snowfield after noticing a new NPC at the Cathedral bonfire and he sucked me into his painting. I then proceeded to get absolutely trounced by a guy spitting fire and a pack of wolves. I also popped into Dreg Heap after finishing the main game to see what it looked like, but I haven’t spent any meaningful amount of time in either location yet. I assume it’s best to do the Painted World first? Aidan_702 posted:Get bloodborne immediately. Yeah I’ve heard great things about Bloodborne. It seems to be the overall favorite of the genre. I was a Cradle of Filth kid in high school, so the aesthetic is right up my alley. Probably gonna wait for the PS5 to come out so I can grab a PS4 on the cheap. I tried to play Bloodborne on my PC via the streaming service but it ran like poo poo so I decided to hold off.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 01:05
|
|
|
fuckwolf posted:For sure. I’ve got both DLCs already. I visited the Snowfield after noticing a new NPC at the Cathedral bonfire and he sucked me into his painting. I then proceeded to get absolutely trounced by a guy spitting fire and a pack of wolves. I also popped into Dreg Heap after finishing the main game to see what it looked like, but I haven’t spent any meaningful amount of time in either location yet. I assume it’s best to do the Painted World first? Start with the Painted World first. You should do it right now. Unless you haven't fought the Nameless King yet, which you should do because he's a good boss fight.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
fuckwolf posted:Difficulty: the learning curve for me was super steep. I was stuck on the High Wall for probably 6-7 hours because I just couldn't get the hang of the controls or combat mechanics. It was also a big adjustment for me to be playing a game without any kind of map. Prior to playing DS3 I saw a decent amount of Let's Play content and speed runs, so I wasn't prepared for how much I would suck compared to those folks. DS3 is pretty heavily designed around the expectation that most players are jumping in after playing through at least a couple of the prior games. It's not impossible, but it can be pretty intense and you might find some levels of DeS or DS1 quaint with how slow and patient the enemies are by comparison, if you ever decide to try them out. Still, congrats on beating the game! fuckwolf posted:Like, even after 40 hours of playing, all the Fire Keeper would say to me was "Ashen One, being unkindled is to be a vessel for souls..." I just wish the NPCs had more to say about the world in general, but I know that part of the charm of these games is how little rope they give you. I also wish I would have played the other Souls games first so that I could understand the story, connections, and call backs a bit better. The Firekeeper has some more to say if you find her some eyes but the level up waifus are not a talkative bunch by-and-large. You tend to pick up more from reading every item description you find than the NPCs. fuckwolf posted:All in all it was quite a ride. I'm jealous of those that got to play it at launch. The only disappointing aspects of the game for me were the parts that were ruined by having prior knowledge (my fault, it was too tempting to read about this game). I'm looking forward to Elden Ring and Mortal Shell for that reason. I also don't really know much about Bloodborne, so if I scoop up a PS4 I can have a legitimate blind experience on that. It would have been so cool to play this upon release after playing DS1 and DS2. Finishing the game was bittersweet, but I still have the DLC to look forward to. Think of it this way: now you can go back and play Demon's Souls through Bloodborne and easily spot the bits DS3 was calling back to in every game! Nuns with Guns fucked around with this message at 15:17 on May 14, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 04:13
|
|
|
The best way to understand a story in a Soulsborne is to do the following: - Observe the general area. - Read item and weapon descriptions, especially if they are dropped by an enemy. - Read the boss souls descriptions. - Talk to random NPCs multiple times. After that you get a general vague gist of what is happening.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 05:34
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:DS3 is pretty heavily designed around the expectation that most players are jumping in after playing through at least a couple of the prior games. It's not impossible, but it can be pretty intense and you might find some levels of DeS or DS1 quaint with how slow and patient the enemies are by comparison, if you ever decide to try them out. Still, congrats on beating the game! Totally, though as a first introduction to the series I thought it was fine. The difficulty is part of the allure with these games, I think. It was punishingly hard at some points but not unfair (except for some frustrating stuff with the camera or enemy attacks clipping through geometry and killing me when I thought I had cover, but I think that's just an inevitable part of 3D gaming). I guess I just thought it was odd that at certain points in the game I could beat a couple bosses and visit a new area and when I returned to Firelink none of the NPCs would have anything new to say. The game has such a rich world that I felt like there is tons that the NPCs could offer in terms of exposition. There's just so much to say. I mean, DS1 has been out for 9 years and people are still talking about lore online. What little that they did have to say was always interesting, so I appreciate the quality over quantity aspect if nothing else. The voice acting was really great which is something I'm not really used to in video games. It was so immersive that it didn't even really occur to me that these were paid actors (as silly as that sounds). I didn't do a great job of reading item descriptions, so I definitely missed a bunch of the narrative there. Anyways, 10/10 from me. Can't wait to start the DLC and then tackle the rest of the games in the series.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 06:49
|
|
|
John Murdoch posted:As I played through DS1 some of the bosses did twig memories of stuff from DMC or Platinum's repertoire. Probably the biggest one for me was actually Ceaseless Discharge. I blundered into him and fought him legit and his limbs crashing down threw me right back into the Metal Gear EXCELSUS fight from MGR. I may be misremembering, but I dont recall being aware of Demon Souls particularly at launch. I had an XBox 360 so it passed me by. Dark Souls came out at a time when I was drifting away from gaming. I think MG:R came out that year and scratched my brawler itch and Skyrim, for all its flaws, my exploration one. My XBox broke soon after and I took a games break other than the occasional Steam game. Dark Souls piqued my interest, but the things I knew about it (its Japanese, it's hard, it has large boss monsters, players are talking about being stuck on one bridge for a week) made me think it was some twitch character action game and I'd already played a really good one of those recently, so I didnt give the series a thought until I picked up a PS4 and learned that it was more akin to an RPG. I honestly thought it was one of those air-juggles and S-Rank games, but masochistically hard, for years.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 10:29
|
|
|
that game does exist, it's the 3d ninja gaiden which i've played a bit of by the way, and i feel like it has more than a little in common with souls. if you can get your hands on it (it's old consoles only) i'd recommend giving it a try for anyone who likes this series.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 10:31
|
|
|
Is Ninja Gaiden more difficult than Soulsborne?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 17:01
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Is Ninja Gaiden more difficult than Soulsborne? It's been years, but my memory is that it relied on raw skill and reaction more. Preparation , creativity and observation go a long way in Dark Souls.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
I haven't played it but the way people talk about Sekuro makes it sound closer to NG3. Even Bloodborne, which is designed around being quick and considerate of where you move, has the rally mechanic that regains health lost if the player is aggressive enough.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
I love the souls series but it's kinda immersion-breaking to have so much info delivered through item descriptions. It makes no sense that your character would have access to that information...am I to presume that you pick up a boss soul and it has a little descriptive inscription carved on the bottom of it? It's awkward but I guess I just learned to accept it as a weird quirk of the Soulsborne games.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 19:35
|
|
|
The 3D Ninja Gaiden definitely felt more difficult than Souls did when I played each of them new, but no idea what it would be like to revisit at this point. The 3D Shinobi was much harder than either of them and probably not a good game but I also loved it.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 19:46
|
|
|
Irony.or.Death posted:The 3D Ninja Gaiden definitely felt more difficult than Souls did when I played each of them new, but no idea what it would be like to revisit at this point. The 3D Shinobi was much harder than either of them and probably not a good game but I also loved it. I loved the 3D Shinobi and got to the second the to the last boss. The game is the closest thing to a "3D Side Scroller" from the 16-bit era released.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Colonel Whitey posted:I love the souls series but it's kinda immersion-breaking to have so much info delivered through item descriptions. It makes no sense that your character would have access to that information...am I to presume that you pick up a boss soul and it has a little descriptive inscription carved on the bottom of it? It's awkward but I guess I just learned to accept it as a weird quirk of the Soulsborne games. The extremely limited and cryptic dialogue is also a deliberate design choice that From. made in the service of making their world(s) mysterious and alien. In DS3 and Bloodborne at least they also go a pretty far distance in conveying an atmosphere of impending doom. What is there to say when the world's ending? Plus it's not like a 1 INT character in Fallout could look at syringe of Psycho for the first time and just know what's in the item description. Basic Chunnel fucked around with this message at 20:25 on May 14, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 20:21
|
|
|
Colonel Whitey posted:I love the souls series but it's kinda immersion-breaking to have so much info delivered through item descriptions. It makes no sense that your character would have access to that information...am I to presume that you pick up a boss soul and it has a little descriptive inscription carved on the bottom of it? It's awkward but I guess I just learned to accept it as a weird quirk of the Soulsborne games. I'm not sure it's really that hard to believe that physically removing and keeping someone's soul would give you some sort of insight into their life story tbh. a worse example is like, the priest gear from DS2 where picking it up somehow informs you that Vendrick didn't like priests
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
Colonel Whitey posted:I love the souls series but it's kinda immersion-breaking to have so much info delivered through item descriptions. It makes no sense that your character would have access to that information...am I to presume that you pick up a boss soul and it has a little descriptive inscription carved on the bottom of it? It's awkward but I guess I just learned to accept it as a weird quirk of the Soulsborne games. Your character looks it up on the wiki.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 17:13 |
|
|
Colonel Whitey posted:I love the souls series but it's kinda immersion-breaking to have so much info delivered through item descriptions. It makes no sense that your character would have access to that information...am I to presume that you pick up a boss soul and it has a little descriptive inscription carved on the bottom of it? It's awkward but I guess I just learned to accept it as a weird quirk of the Soulsborne games. Interestingly the folks at From once shared your opinion there because getting item descriptions at all was a bit of an involved affair in some of the older King's Field games. Personally I like the style of delivering little snippets of story and background info by means of the stuff you find and also hunting down teleporting fortune tellers and eating weird fruit to find out what this or that item does was kind of a pain.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2020 21:24
|
|
