NO MORE HEROES Discussion - FS/FT Pure White Giant Glastonbury LE Pink Cartridge

You can easily get 10 hours out of it, I'm at about 15 hours and I still need to fight Rank 1.

Although I made it a point to collect everything.
 
I'm at maybe 12 hours, and I just need to do a few more assassination missions to go fight number 1. I have all but 6 balls, so I spent a good amount of time collecting. I missed one fucking trading card on the beach level, though. Damnit.
 
[quote name='leveskikesko']Just wondering, but how long has it taken you guys to beat No More Heroes on your first try?

I'm hoping for a good lengthy 10 hours at least....[/quote]

My finish time was about 17:33. I collected everything but all the clothes, including every last buried $1000 LB. I'm going to take a short break with some other games before going back for bitter.
 
I was at about 12 hours ish, but I spent a decent amount of time collecting and just leaving the game paused.

I continue to think GameSpot overrated this one terribly. If Call of Duty 4 deserves a 9.0, this game simply does not.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']I continue to think GameSpot overrated this one terribly. If Call of Duty 4 deserves a 9.0, this game simply does not.[/QUOTE]
I tend to think of it like CoD4 is a 9 compared to other 360/PS3 games vs NMH is a 9 compared to other Wii games. Its like comparing HD oranges to Pac-Man fruit :lol:
pacman-fruit.gif


For me the game was 12 hours, I currently have about 25 hours total on the second rank fight. I think I have everything unlocked now. While its not the prettiest game I haven't given any other Wii game this much time since Zelda.
 
[quote name='CouRageouS']I tend to think of it like CoD4 is a 9 compared to other 360/PS3 games vs NMH is a 9 compared to other Wii games. Its like comparing HD oranges to Pac-Man fruit :lol:
pacman-fruit.gif


For me the game was 12 hours, I currently have about 25 hours total on the second rank fight. I think I have everything unlocked now. While its not the prettiest game I haven't given any other Wii game this much time since Zelda.[/quote]

I guess you could see it that way...(I wouldn't personally because games like Galaxy have proven the Wii is capable of competing on the same level as 360 and ps3 games)

However Zelda is also on the Wii, and it got an 8.8...I just have a hard time believing NMH is better. But I won't say anything for sure until I play it of course.
 
If Suda had the limited budget that someone here mentioned before, then I can overlook the graphical problems.

I need to start playing again, I'm just too distracted by Metroid.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']I continue to think GameSpot overrated this one terribly. If Call of Duty 4 deserves a 9.0, this game simply does not.[/quote]

We get it. :roll:

I just beat it. The ending sucked. What the hell.
 
[quote name='CouRageouS']I tend to think of it like CoD4 is a 9 compared to other 360/PS3 games vs NMH is a 9 compared to other Wii games. Its like comparing HD oranges to Pac-Man fruit :lol:
[/QUOTE]

That's just silly. Reviews should focus mostly on whether the game is fun to play. Not whether the graphics are HD or not.

Mario Galaxy is a solid 9.0-9.5 game just like Bioshock is on the 360. Both deserve the ratings for being great games overall, Mario didn't (and shouldn't) get slighted for only being 480p and having jaggies.
 
[quote name='Rocko']We get it. :roll:

I just beat it. The ending sucked. What the hell.[/quote]

I loved the ending. Did you get the real ending?
 
[quote name='Lan_Zer0']I loved the ending. Did you get the real ending?[/quote]
Yeah.

It just seemed so pointless. I mean, they introduced two brand new characters (well I suppose Henry wasn't brand new, but he may as well be since he only briefly appeared) that are related to you, and that's the climax? Giving you some random backstory at the last minute? It made the whole thing seem so pointless. Not to mention the ending where I'm assuming you both die? Very disappointing.
 
It seems Suda went for satire at the end, poking fun at it's own plot twists. Though the conversation at the end ties in nicely with the Travis monologue during the Death Metal fight.

As for the last scene.
I like to think the girl made up everything in her head while looking at the painting. Twisted.
 
I was fine with the whole UAA not being real thing, I was fine with Jeane being a chick that killed his parents at the end. I also loved the references to Duke Nukem Forever and the fact that you're still playing a game, along with the fast forwarding. However, Jeane is your sister? What the fuck? And Henry's connections are even worse. It would've made so much more sense if Sylvia was Travis's sister, setting up their parent's killer to be killed by him or something. the end was just so far-fetched and jumbled.
 
[quote name='Rocko']
I was fine with the whole UAA not being real thing, I was fine with Jeane being a chick that killed his parents at the end. I also loved the references to Duke Nukem Forever and the fact that you're still playing a game, along with the fast forwarding. However, Jeane is your sister? What the fuck? And Henry's connections are even worse. It would've made so much more sense if Sylvia was Travis's sister, setting up their parent's killer to be killed by him or something. the end was just so far-fetched and jumbled.
[/quote]
That's sort of the point. Like the rest of the game, the ending is not meant to be taken seriously. Personally I think it felt a little forced, but I'm thankful that they didn't try and make the game serious all of a sudden just so they could pretend it was some epic storyline. Actually now that I think about it, aside from leaving the whole Henry thing unresolved, I kind of like the "bad" ending better, just because the scene between Travis and Jeane was so fantastically awesome that it makes a great last scene. I think the fact that the ending followed such a clever and hilarious scene really hurt it. Also, you should really watch the slowed-down version of Jeane's speech, it'll explain a lot.
 
[quote name='tankexmortis']
That's sort of the point. Like the rest of the game, the ending is not meant to be taken seriously. Personally I think it felt a little forced, but I'm thankful that they didn't try and make the game serious all of a sudden just so they could pretend it was some epic storyline. Actually now that I think about it, aside from leaving the whole Henry thing unresolved, I kind of like the "bad" ending better, just because the scene between Travis and Jeane was so fantastically awesome that it makes a great last scene. I think the fact that the ending followed such a clever and hilarious scene really hurt it. Also, you should really watch the slowed-down version of Jeane's speech, it'll explain a lot.
[/quote]

Thanks, just watched it on Youtube. So what I still don't understand is how did Sylvia get Jeane in on it, if the whole UAA was a setup?

After watching that video, it makes me hate the Henry portion much more.
 
So I am procrastinating playing this game all the way through. I'm ranked 7 or so and while I want to play it more, I just can't really get into it a lot. I like the slashing and hacking my way through guys and everything, but I just feel like I'm missing something or other things interest me more while I'm playing it.
 
I liked the ending. It went entirely with the personality of the game. If the ending actually made sense I probably would have liked the game less. All games seem to have traditional endings where this one didn't need to give a shit.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']I was at about 12 hours ish, but I spent a decent amount of time collecting and just leaving the game paused.

I continue to think GameSpot overrated this one terribly. If Call of Duty 4 deserves a 9.0, this game simply does not.[/quote]
See, my problem with this comment is the same as my problem with giving games in general a numerical score as a rating. These ratings are wholly, totally, completely, absolutely, and in all other ways subjective.

It's not like we can run benchmarks between two different games the way we can between two different computer processors. It's not like we can plug both games into a program and say, "Well, No More Heroes generated 8.3 gigawatts of fun, while Call of Duty generated 9.1 gigawatts, therefore, CoD4 is the better game."

FUN IS A COMPLETELY SUBJECTITIVE FACTOR! Sure, we can pretend that these numerical ratings are a breakdown between gameplay and graphics and control and replayability and whatever, but none of it means much at all, if anything. I need lots and lots of words of description in a review to give me any idea if I might like a game or not. A single number means NOTHING to me.

Which is to say, if RollingSkull thinks CoD4 is better than NMH, then CoD4 is better for him. I think NMH is better. It doesn't mean that either of us is wrong, or that any of the reviews of the games in question are inaccurate. It just means we prefer different things. The video game industry is far too hung up on numbers, in my opinion, when all I care about is whether a game is fun or not.

I realize that review scores mean a whole to the industry as a whole, but when we get into minutiae like, "This site gave the game an 8.5, but I think it only deserves an 8.25," then I think we need to step back and say, "Let's just have fun with video games and not obsess over numbers."
 
[quote name='Yaxley']
FUN IS A COMPLETELY SUBJECTITIVE FACTOR! Sure, we can pretend that these numerical ratings are a breakdown between gameplay and graphics and control and replayability and whatever, but none of it means much at all, if anything. I need lots and lots of words of description in a review to give me any idea if I might like a game or not. A single number means NOTHING to me.

............

I think we need to step back and say, "Let's just have fun with video games and not obsess over numbers."[/QUOTE]


Well said! And it's more than just not obsessing over numbers, it's just getting back to playing games, enjoying them, and not giving a flying fuck what anyone else says about them.

This forum is getting nigh unreadable with so many threads being just like this one where it devolves into pissing matches between people who loved the game and people who didn't.

I've never got that. I play games, give some thoughts on them and really don't pay much heed to what other's say. At least not to the point of the bickering in this thread.

Different strokes for different folks. One person's 9.0 game is another person's 5.0 game and vice versa.
 
[quote name='Rocko']We get it. :roll:

I just beat it. The ending sucked. What the hell.[/quote]


Heh me and my girlfriend felt the same way we sort of sat there like umm..what the heck?

I mean come on some dorky american guy in a hotel who doesnt look like he has a drop of irish blood is suppose to be related to the top ranked assasin Jeane and Henry(who happens to be irish) and married to the girl he was trying to sleep with I mean the the whole thing was freaking retarded. At least the fight with Jeane was fun the fight with Henry was ridiculously easy save that on retarded insta kill move he hit me with twice :/.
 
[quote name='PhoenixT']Heh me and my girlfriend felt the same way we sort of sat there like umm..what the heck?

I mean come on some dorky american guy in a hotel who doesnt look like he has a drop of irish blood is suppose to be related to the top ranked assasin Jeane and Henry(who happens to be irish) and married to the girl he was trying to sleep with I mean the the whole thing was freaking retarded. At least the fight with Jeane was fun the fight with Henry was ridiculously easy save that on retarded insta kill move he hit me with twice :/.
[/quote]
Henry wasn't Irish, he was just raised in Ireland.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Well said! And it's more than just not obsessing over numbers, it's just getting back to playing games, enjoying them, and not giving a flying fuck what anyone else says about them.

This forum is getting nigh unreadable with so many threads being just like this one where it devolves into pissing matches between people who loved the game and people who didn't.

I've never got that. I play games, give some thoughts on them and really don't pay much heed to what other's say. At least not to the point of the bickering in this thread.

Different strokes for different folks. One person's 9.0 game is another person's 5.0 game and vice versa.[/quote]
I agree in theory with all this, but I usually approach games from a game design perspective, it's just a natural thing with me. So I've got a lot more respect for something like No More Heroes, which does a lot of things that haven't been done before or that aren't done enough; while CoD4, while it has some good ideas, is still yet another generic-looking war FPS. So that's why I see NMH as a much better game, even if some people have more fun with CoD4.

Still, as you say, fun is the most important thing, and it's completely subjective. And yes, review scores are completely idiotic.
 
That's a perfectly valid view takexmortis, my post was getting at the need for people to just express their opinions (like you did) without flaming everyone who disagrees.

It's perfectly valid to like NMH more than CoD4 for the reasons you gave. There's just no reason for anyone to go the extra step and insult people who like CoD4 more for their own reasons. The latter happens far to often on these forums.
 
reading to much into the game is the worst thing you can do. Again, it's supposed to be looked at as ridiculous, not bad. Everything is just an extreme of the next thing. If you people are looking for a deep story, play killer 7 since it takes months to dissolve the plot. no more heroes bounces entirely the other way which makes the game many times better.
 
I guess thats one way of looking at it rolento the thing is the characters personalites seemed to change from ranking to ranking which just left me wanting to skip half the cutscenes and dialog in the game which to me is annoying since cutscenes are part of what I "enjoy" out of games. Finding out more about the chars and their motivations no matter how ridiculous this one it is this one was hardly coherent most the time which killed a lot of the game for me even if it was still fun and I still would reccommend it.
 
This forum is getting nigh unreadable with so many threads being just like this one where it devolves into pissing matches between people who loved the game and people who didn't.

I've never got that. I play games, give some thoughts on them and really don't pay much heed to what other's say. At least not to the point of the bickering in this thread.

Different strokes for different folks. One person's 9.0 game is another person's 5.0 game and vice versa.
Click to expand...
Pfft. I consider this a healthy debate about video games. NMH is interesting at least because I keep coming back to talk about it.

[quote name='tankexmortis']I agree in theory with all this, but I usually approach games from a game design perspective, it's just a natural thing with me. So I've got a lot more respect for something like No More Heroes, which does a lot of things that haven't been done before or that aren't done enough; while CoD4, while it has some good ideas, is still yet another generic-looking war FPS. So that's why I see NMH as a much better game, even if some people have more fun with CoD4.

Still, as you say, fun is the most important thing, and it's completely subjective. And yes, review scores are completely idiotic.[/quote]

For the amount of people who say review scores are completely idiotic, there's still a huge business in them....

Anyway, I have to disagree with you on a design standpoint. To call Call of Duty 4 a generic war shooter is just ignorant. The art design, the cinematography, the level variety and design, the ability to create a story that can draw the player's emotions in using only the most basic of archetypes. Personally, I think what destroys debate on internet gaming forums is the faux arthouse elitism that tends to overfocus on stuff like NMH while dismissing so many shooters to the level of "Generic war shooter" that folks make no distinction between Timeshift and CoD4.

Just from a design standpoint, CoD4 is simply a superlative product.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']faux arthouse elitism[/quote]
Again, you're confusing me with the people that enjoyed Killer 7. Hell, I hated Ico and never finished Shadow of the Colossus (while it was light years better than Ico, I got tired of fighting the camera rather than the Colossi) - wannabe arty games generally suck, just like anything else that tries to be art.

And CoD4 is, as I said, a good game. I actually haven't played it as I have no new gen systems other than the Wii, but it looks interesting. I'm impressed by some of the design decisions I've read about -
the decision to kill off the main character early in the game
and the pseudo-RPG system are both great ideas. But it's still very low on my list of games to play, simply because it takes place in a warzone and I've played dozens of games in the same setting. It may be that it's the best game of the bunch, but it's still using the single most cliched setting in gaming. And from a visual standpoint, I'm incredibly bored just looking at it. It's another matter of taste, but I'm sick of games trying to look real rather than interesting. Again, I haven't played it, so there may be more to it than I realize.

What I'm saying though is that I'd rather play a game which has strong innovation than play a game which is just polished. Halo 3 is a great example - it's polished, but it's still practically the same game I played 6 years ago. CoD4 looks like a better game than Halo 3, but it's still not really doing anything that hasn't been done before, and that makes it much less fun to me.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']Pfft. I consider this a healthy debate about video games. NMH is interesting at least because I keep coming back to talk about it.
[/QUOTE]

When people actually debate the games it's fine.

The problem is when people start saying people who dislike a game just have bad taste (as happened in this thread) or people who dislike the game start branding the fans as fanboys, or people that like arthouse crap regardless of quality etc.

That type of stuff adds nothing to the "debate."
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']When people actually debate the games it's fine.

The problem is when people start saying people who dislike a game just have bad taste (as happened in this thread) or people who dislike the game start branding the fans as fanboys, or people that like arthouse crap regardless of quality etc.

That type of stuff adds nothing to the "debate."[/quote]
Personally, I prefer the debate about the debate as to whether or not it's a debate.
 
[quote name='tankexmortis']And CoD4 is, as I said, a good game. I actually haven't played it as I have no new gen systems other than the Wii, but it looks interesting. I'm impressed by some of the design decisions I've read about -
the decision to kill off the main character early in the game
and the pseudo-RPG system are both great ideas. But it's still very low on my list of games to play, simply because it takes place in a warzone and I've played dozens of games in the same setting. It may be that it's the best game of the bunch, but it's still using the single most cliched setting in gaming. And from a visual standpoint, I'm incredibly bored just looking at it. It's another matter of taste, but I'm sick of games trying to look real rather than interesting. Again, I haven't played it, so there may be more to it than I realize.

What I'm saying though is that I'd rather play a game which has strong innovation than play a game which is just polished. Halo 3 is a great example - it's polished, but it's still practically the same game I played 6 years ago. CoD4 looks like a better game than Halo 3, but it's still not really doing anything that hasn't been done before, and that makes it much less fun to me.[/quote]

Well, Call of Duty 4 understands that it isn't completely realistic, so it tries to be a COOL looking war-zone at least. You're almost always given something cool to look at. Not quite as interesting art direction as Gears of War, which used its setting to create a bunch of absolutely gorgeous architecture.

I will say Halo 3 is the same thing you have played back on the Xbox... because it is. Same uninspired design decisions mar all three games.

And while I can see where you're coming from on NMH, most of what NMH does that is different than other games is in the un-gameplay oriented aspects of the game. The cool load screens, the boss battle cutscenes (Which themselves are almost just slightly campier versions of what Kojima has done with the Metal Gear games for years.). The setting is decent, but really poorly realized. Santa Destroy as described in the manual was SO much cooler than Santa Destroy in the actual game. Stylistically, the combat was different, but in actuality, it boiled down to button-mashing hack and slash similar to a great many other games... probably best described as a dumbed down version of God Hand with at least slightly better crowd control.

Personally, the most different mainstream game this year I would probably say is either Portal or Assassin's Creed. The latter, though unique only for being so wishy-washy on stealth, is able to deliver art design, cinematography, decent storytelling, movie quality escapes, and some decent rhythm-based combat if you didn't just spend the entire game counter-attacking... all of this not really replicated anywhere else.

I suppose I am getting off topic. I just find your rationale interesting enough that I wouldn't mind discussing it further.
 
I am seriously hearting this game. It's a contender for my favourite ever. Don't much care for the Free Fights - how about some variety, Grasshopper?

I've died three times. Once on the sixth rank
when the one-legged grenade girl went invincible about a hundred million times - I just couldn't attack, and slowly, slowly got whittled down. The rematch was a far fairer fight, and I slaughtered her
.

Twice on the third ranked fight, which I just beat.
First on the bus, when I ran out of battery power when surrounded by enemies. I had no chance to charge up. The second time was against the boss, before I realized that I could bust down the doors. I was swearing all along the way - what the fuck are the red dots on the map for!?

Just need one more Lovikov ball for the last skill - the map radar one. Haven't even bothered getting the lightsaber upgrade to find underground treasure. Also, what the fuck is with the ramp that leads into the sea? Driving off it just sends you back to the motel (as does driving into the river in the middle of the city).
 
Hey, me and my only friend the ol' companion cube have a question. Does anyone know of a guide for this game yet? Not that you really need it but I like to get guides of games that I really enjoy. Thanks ohh yea and *FIRST POST EVER!*
 
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']The Problem with that is that it makes people burn churches.[/quote]Can't say I'm seeing the problem.


firebat.jpg

Fire it up!​
 
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']The Problem with that is that it makes people burn churches.[/QUOTE]
:lol: As long as he keeps away from the forums, he will be safe.
 
Found my first significant complaint with this game. The rank two fight.

First of all, way too many invincible frames. I get it - learn the patterns. But when the chick has her baseball bat raised all the way behind her head and I do a quick slash into her stomach, I expect to to some actual fucking damage. The instant-death thing where she falls on the ground (and, of course, takes no damage from any attacks) was also incredibly weak. I'd have been fine with having to figure out how to counter the flying-henchman thing if they didn't do so damn much damage each time (I accidentally sent them back a time or two, but mostly just dodged them). How do you do those properly? Finally, a lot of those... Dark Side Steps, were they? didn't work. I'd dodge, shit would go dark and slow down, start swinging, and get fucking nothing. Just a bunch of air. Any time I'd dodge to the right, I would be completely unable to hit her. Left dodges were okay 90% of the time, but they were a lot harder to get off in the first place.

The final level/boss is gonna have to be fucking amazing if this game's gonna take Wind Waker's spot as my favourite game ever.
 
The final boss wasn't that hard. You just really have to get used to the pattern. There's one rather annoying unblockable attack, but other than that, it's a fine fight. The boss can dodge a shit-ton, but if you've got the final energy saver, you can sorta compensate by doing your own unblockable leap attack. Doesn't do much damage, but in certain situations, it can really help. Also, try changing stances if you're not hitting.

The real ending, by the way, is fucking awesome.
That was a hell of a fight. Lots of twitchy dodges on my part, no excessive invincibility on his part, etc.
 
I've thought a bit about this. Still have to go through Bitter, which I will begin immediately, but for now...

I loved...
... the basic combat mechanics. Am I basically just mashing "A"? Yes. But fuck me, a little waggle goes a long god damn way. The motion controls are incredibly satisfying.
... the style. This pretty much goes without saying - the game has great style. Blood and money spurting everywhere, the X-Wing paint-job on the Schpel Tiger, the massive amounts of clothing, the cries of "ANARCHY IN THE GALAXY!!!!1!" - it's impossible not to love.
... all but one of the bosses. Especially loved the Kojima-esque monologues. And hell, even the final cutscene for the rank 2 fight was pretty bitchin'.
... Silvia. I am in heart with her.
... the MK II.
Four-bladed lightsaber = YES!

I didn't care about...
... going through the city. Really, I didn't even notice the pop-in unless I specifically focused on it. Finding the balls was easy, as was going through the dumpsters. It was a little irritating driving from K-Entertainment to mission and to K and to a mission and to K and to... but really, you don't have to do that much at all early on. It's only later that I got low on money, and by that point, there was a fucking fantastic mission within sprinting distance of K-Entertainment.
... money grinding in general. The jobs were quick and painless, and you could rack up very large amounts of money in only a few minutes with a couple of the assasination missions. Towards the end, I was consistently getting 140,000+ for three minutes of fighting.

I disliked...
... the second-ranked fight. See: an earlier post of mine for my thoughts there.
... the lack of red sunglasses. What the fuck?
... that there was no "Bad Religion" shirt or jacket. Hacking my way through legions of enemies? Cool. Hacking my way through legions of enemies wearing a crossbuster? fucking cool.
... free fights. Or free battles, or whatever the fuck ya call 'em. No, I'm not going to complain about the difficulty - just the homogeny. How about you just let me do a free fucking fight? What's all this one-hit-kill bullshit?
... the MK III. While it looked really cool drawing it and it had some great flash in its attacks, it just didn't seem as effective for crowd control - or even look as cool - as the MK II.

My verdict is...
... it's not quite the best game ever, but it's definitely my favourite on the Wii.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']I've thought a bit about this. Still have to go through Bitter, which I will begin immediately, but for now...

I loved...
... the basic combat mechanics. Am I basically just mashing "A"? Yes. But fuck me, a little waggle goes a long god damn way. The motion controls are incredibly satisfying.
... the style. This pretty much goes without saying - the game has great style. Blood and money spurting everywhere, the X-Wing paint-job on the Schpel Tiger, the massive amounts of clothing, the cries of "ANARCHY IN THE GALAXY!!!!1!" - it's impossible not to love.
... all but one of the bosses. Especially loved the Kojima-esque monologues. And hell, even the final cutscene for the rank 2 fight was pretty bitchin'.
... Silvia. I am in heart with her.
... the MK II.
Four-bladed lightsaber = YES!

I didn't care about...
... going through the city. Really, I didn't even notice the pop-in unless I specifically focused on it. Finding the balls was easy, as was going through the dumpsters. It was a little irritating driving from K-Entertainment to mission and to K and to a mission and to K and to... but really, you don't have to do that much at all early on. It's only later that I got low on money, and by that point, there was a fucking fantastic mission within sprinting distance of K-Entertainment.
... money grinding in general. The jobs were quick and painless, and you could rack up very large amounts of money in only a few minutes with a couple of the assasination missions. Towards the end, I was consistently getting 140,000+ for three minutes of fighting.

I disliked...
... the second-ranked fight. See: an earlier post of mine for my thoughts there.
... the lack of red sunglasses. What the fuck?
... that there was no "Bad Religion" shirt or jacket. Hacking my way through legions of enemies? Cool. Hacking my way through legions of enemies wearing a crossbuster? fucking cool.
... free fights. Or free battles, or whatever the fuck ya call 'em. No, I'm not going to complain about the difficulty - just the homogeny. How about you just let me do a free fucking fight? What's all this one-hit-kill bullshit?
... the MK III. While it looked really cool drawing it and it had some great flash in its attacks, it just didn't seem as effective for crowd control - or even look as cool - as the MK II.

My verdict is...
... it's not quite the best game ever, but it's definitely my favourite on the Wii.[/QUOTE]


summed up nicely except for the whole t-shirt thing. I have yet to find that I disliked any shirts or saw a need for more.

and yeah, best Wii game for me. To be honest, I can care less still about SSBB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top