Sony reportedly charging publishers for DLC bandwidth

johnnypark

johnnypark

CAGiversary!
Feedback
57 (100%)
Via Shacknews:

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/57760

Publishers were previously able to release PS3 DLC without incurring any bandwidth fees. Microsoft does not charge bandwidth fees for Xbox 360 DLC, claims the site.


The new policy went into effect on October 1, 2008, and charges publishers 16 cents for each gigabyte of bandwidth used. Bandwidth utilized by free content is only billed for the first 60 days, while premium content racks up charges until it's removed from the store.


For example, a 1GB demo downloaded one million times within its first 60 days of availability would incur an extra charge of $160,000. Between the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, Capcom has seen over 4 million downloads of the recent Resident Evil 5 demo.
Click to expand...

More in the article but that's the short of it. I suppose not having size restrictions on PSN games (unlike XBL) and demos which can be any size and provide no compensation to Sony or the publisher (future revenue through advertising via demos excluded) then that's a shitload of bandwidth to pay for.

Perhaps this is a reason why companies like Capcom are charging for DLC that seems like it should be included (MM9 had $10 worth, the cost of the game, and RE5's multiplayer mode). Of course, the budgets for those games were established well before this policy went into effect.

Either way, might this have an impact on the quality of games due to

A) smaller budgets devoted to development vs bandwidth costs,
B) aiming for smaller file sizes and excluding things (which could result in more DLC for modes/options that should be included in the 1st place),
C) publishers releasing fewer games, especially smaller studios,
D) less PSN exclusives or more games becoming XBL exclusive?
 
This is news that is being blown out of proportion. MTV painted it as some kind of thing that all developers hate (read: we don't), and if it's been in effect since October, it's had no repercussions yet.
 
Agree with BCF - most people have completely glossed over the fact that it's been in effect for 5 months already. Have you noticed any huge discrepancies in Live/PSN since then? I haven't.
 
[quote name='johnnypark']Nah, and I'm inclined to agree with you both at this point. Still seemed interesting enough to be worth mentioning, though.[/quote]

Yeah, I figured it would only be a matter of time before someone on CAG posted it since every single gaming news site has posted a story today. I'm just sick of how ignorant most commenters on blog sites are, I swear most only read headlines and never actually read the articles.

But then again the "news" sites don't really help the case with headlines like "Sony now charging bandwidth fees" or "Publishers are unhappy with PSN fees" when they've contacted a grand total of 3 publishers.

And another interesting point I read on one site - what would stop publishers from hosting the content on their own sites? With how open the ps3 platform is, I could see that maybe being a possibility. Of course, it could also turn into a MGO fiasco with 6 different user names and logins.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a very small charge for the audience you are reaching.

Lets say your demo is !GB and its downloaded 1 million times

Then 1% of downloads buy the game at $50. (1% sounds pretty low of a number)

Thats $500,000 in sales, minus the extra expenses and you have recieved that amount of money for the demo being on PSN after 100,000 sales in store.

Ofcourse free would be nice, but a decent bang for your buck
 
Isn't this just the cost of doing business? Bandwidth isn't free. I see this as being nothing but a business expense for Sony and/or the publisher.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']Isn't this just the cost of doing business? Bandwidth isn't free. I see this as being nothing but a business expense for Sony and/or the publisher.[/QUOTE]

That's a fair statement but to play devil's advocate it isn't like the publisher has an alternative if they want to distribute their content to the PS3 community. I'm not sure how fair $0.16 per gigabyte is but if I was a publisher, I knew I could pay less doing it myself, and I was already paying Sony a license fee I could see being irritated.
 
Well, you have to subscribe to XBL, so the customer is paying for it. Here, the publisher is paying for it, and its basically advertising cost. For instance, I had no real interest in Killzone 2, then the demo came out, and I bought the game...$0.16 well spent.
 
[quote name='optimusprime8062']Well, you have to subscribe to XBL, so the customer is paying for it. Here, the publisher is paying for it, and its basically advertising cost. For instance, I had no real interest in Killzone 2, then the demo came out, and I bought the game...$0.16 well spent.[/quote]

Killzone 2 was made by sony so I am pretty sure they didn't charge themselves for it. :)


And that's just per gigabye, is it prorated if the file is less than a gigabyte or do you pay nothing if it is less than a gigabyte.

Doesn't say
 
[quote name='H.Cornerstone']Killzone 2 was made by sony so I am pretty sure they didn't charge themselves for it. :)
[/quote]

ha...yeah I thought about that as I posted it but was like "Well, they know what I mean..." But yeah...if they had to spend $0.16 for that download...then it would have been money well spent. There. :)
 
[quote name='VipFREAK']I'm surprised or wouldn't be surprised if M$ charged the same thing WHILE making us pay for DLC still. :roll:[/quote]

FTA:

Microsoft does not charge bandwidth fees for Xbox 360 DLC
Click to expand...

Don't turn it around on MS to make Sony look a little better.....


This charge is crappy. I feel like Sony should be doing everything in their power to get content to people as easily as possible for game developers. Not charging fees for demos which could lead to software and hardware sales. Everytime I read a news story about Sony it seems thay are shooting themselves in the foot every chance they get.
 
So you honestly believe it's ok to be charged for advertising? Screw that. I rather have the publishers pay for this since that's what it is. Advertising to ME to see if the game is worth buying. I bought plenty of games on the merit of the demo itself. Valkyria Chronicles, Killzone 2, Eternal Sonata and so forth. If there was no demos, I most likely would have not bought any of those games.
 
More in the article but that's the short of it. I suppose not having size restrictions on PSN games (unlike XBL) and demos which can be any size and provide no compensation to Sony or the publisher (future revenue through advertising via demos excluded) then that's a shitload of bandwidth to pay for.

Perhaps this is a reason why companies like Capcom are charging for DLC that seems like it should be included (MM9 had $10 worth, the cost of the game, and RE5's multiplayer mode). Of course, the budgets for those games were established well before this policy went into effect.

Either way, might this have an impact on the quality of games due to

A) smaller budgets devoted to development vs bandwidth costs,
B) aiming for smaller file sizes and excluding things (which could result in more DLC for modes/options that should be included in the 1st place),
C) publishers releasing fewer games, especially smaller studios,
D) less PSN exclusives or more games becoming XBL exclusive?
Click to expand...


Microsoft actually has no size limit on content aside from there ARCADE section. and even that is now 350mb. SSF2THD..WTFFTWBBQ was the "exception" at first, but later they just increased the limit. There O.G. Xbox games are well over a Gig.

at first I was like "WTF? thats crap!" but I thought about it, and it's still free for us. Sony is just having them pay for there bandwidth. While 360 doesn't have this, they make the end user pay. Which I am fine paying, it's a great service that I feel surpasses PSN efforts so far.

it does suck for publishers. So.... I have no idea where I stand, I would think some things would just stop showing up on the PSN network. Guess we'll see what happens *shrug* So far the only notable missing piece of cross-platform software looks to be the CoD:WaW Demo. but that could pop on the PSN in a week or so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That sort of kills the fact the psn is free
But that is sony's decision. In my opinion, they should let devs use however much they want - or Xbox is going to rule the gaming community o.o It's starting to bum me out seeing as sony just cut off a bunch of jobs. I think they're killing themselves.
 
OK, so what are the options here? Lets see, apparently bandwidth cost money, right? Sony offers PSN for free. Thank you Sony. Now, for a developer to put there game on PSN, they charge them $0.16 for every 1+ GB. Fair enough, its a form of advertising, and otherwise its costing Sony in bandwidth (right?) Now, whats the other options? Well, Sony could take the loss, but why? I dont think Sony would give Ubisoft $100,000 to advertise their game on say...TV, or the internet. So why on PSN? The other option is to have the customer pay $0.16 or so for a demo. Do you think the developer would want that? No. Its like walking past a blank sign, and it saying "Please deposit $0.16 to see our ad" No way, no matter how cheap it is.
 
[quote name='pixi']That sort of kills the fact the psn is free[/quote]

This allows PSN to be free. Why do you care if the dev needs to pay 16 cents for you to download a demo (essentially an advertisement).

If the devs make a good game I'll buy it and their 16 cents will be more than made up, if not I'd rather have them pay 16 cents for wasting my time (watchmen demo). Either way I do not want to be paying a monthly fee to have access to a glorified ad.
 
FREE PSN > Paying. Thank god the publishers get stuck and not me. Hell if they need to get cost back they will probably add an AXE ad in the demo and bam 16 cents covered
 
[quote name='happy']This allows PSN to be free. Why do you care if the dev needs to pay 16 cents for you to download a demo (essentially an advertisement).

If the devs make a good game I'll buy it and their 16 cents will be more than made up, if not I'd rather have them pay 16 cents for wasting my time (watchmen demo). Either way I do not want to be paying a monthly fee to have access to a glorified ad.[/quote]


I think peopel making posts like this are only 1/2 reading the articles, not not fully understanding whats going on.

As stated above bandwitch isent free, and someone has to occur the cost. Sure Sony COULD pay for it all, but this is a buisness and that just dosent make any sense. I personally think this is bing blown out of porportion. Paying for bandwitch is no diffrent than paying for a tv add or a bill board. This has been going on since October and the playstation store is going as strong as ever, so obvisley Developers(while they may not be entirely happy about it) see it as a neccasary buisness expense.
 
Yeah, I don't see why consumers are complaining about this. If you want to pay for it yourself, just start cutting extra checks to the devs whenever you download demos or DLC. Be the change you want.
 
[quote name='H.Cornerstone']Killzone 2 was made by sony so I am pretty sure they didn't charge themselves for it. :)

[/quote]
You've must have never worked for a big corporation then. Corporate charges divisions and individual projects for all of their support needs. And of course, you can only get support from corporate.
 
I'll bring this topic back and state that the only major publisher this seems to maybe make a difference for is Activision Blizzard. They have given 360 3-5 demos they have not given PS3 yet, like CoD: WaW, Guitar Hero Metallica, etc.

This is a tough question to ask IMO. Part of me feel publishers SHOULD pay because technically they are paying for space on the PS Store. I mean, if you want a website or a place to host all your stuff, you normally have to pay for it. Also I believe, publishers and console makes have to pay for retail space in store shelves. That's where this all makes sense IMO.

However, my only concern about this is that it may hurt a small publisher from releasing a demo on PSN (like NIS America, since this might hold them back from bringing the Cross X Edge demo stateside). Also, there are some publishers who just like to be cheap and might avoid putting stuff on PSN because of this (looks at Activision/Blizzard).

It's really a tough choice. Bandwidth cost money, and there's no way Sony can continue giving it for free to everyone. It's either we pay or they pay. To an extent I feel publishers should pay because everyone has to pay for advertising, webspace, etc., but then part of me thinks we may have to pay because this may make some publishers just forget demos on the PS Store (I see PSN games getting less demos over this too).

Although if I were in Sony's shoes, I'd probably let each publisher have a small amount for free, and once they exceed it, they have to pay (kind of like how Flickr and PhotoBucket is handled. If you free, the amount of content you can put up is limited. If you want to put a lot of stuff up or have unlimited space/bandwidth, you gotta pay for it).
 
I don't think you guys get the bigger point. Some companies will not pay $160,000 just to put out a demo. This might mean less games for the PS3 in the future.

Why not go over to XBL and put your stuff out for free? That's what I would do if I was running a small development studio. Who wants a bill for $160,000 when the budget for your game might have only been $1 million?

Before you guys flame me out, I 100% support free demos. I just understand that developers might want to go to a service that allows them to put the demos out for free.
 
[quote name='mogamer']You've must have never worked for a big corporation then. Corporate charges divisions and individual projects for all of their support needs. And of course, you can only get support from corporate.[/quote]

I actually do. I work at Target and they don't charge us bandwidth for the internet that we have to use for business purposes. The playstation store in America is run by SCEA with their own servers, SCEJ in Japan, with their own servers, and vice versa throught the entire world. So, why would SCEA charge themselves for having the killzone 2 demo on the marketplace? Why would they charge themselves for free advertising on a game that they are trying to make sell well for the corporation and their division to improve their numbers. That makes ZERO sense.
 
[quote name='depascal22']I don't think you guys get the bigger point. Some companies will not pay $160,000 just to put out a demo. This might mean less games for the PS3 in the future.

Why not go over to XBL and put your stuff out for free? That's what I would do if I was running a small development studio. Who wants a bill for $160,000 when the budget for your game might have only been $1 million?

Before you guys flame me out, I 100% support free demos. I just understand that developers might want to go to a service that allows them to put the demos out for free.[/quote]


We get the bigger point, I thinks its you who dosent get the poin that the only reason why Microsoft can afford to provide developers with free bandwith is because they charge people for XBL membership, while PSN membership is free, These costs need to be occured somewhere, and the public out cry would be HUGE if sony started charging for PSN services. Also I'm pretty sure that the pubisher will foot the bill for any demos put out, just like they do with any other aspect of game production. Also I dont see any way what so ever as to why this bandwith issue might affect the number of ps3 games relased, It might affect if demos for those games are released or not, but wont affect the actual release of a hard copy of a game.
 
[quote name='depascal22']I don't think you guys get the bigger point. Some companies will not pay $160,000 just to put out a demo. This might mean less games for the PS3 in the future.

Why not go over to XBL and put your stuff out for free? That's what I would do if I was running a small development studio. Who wants a bill for $160,000 when the budget for your game might have only been $1 million?

Before you guys flame me out, I 100% support free demos. I just understand that developers might want to go to a service that allows them to put the demos out for free.[/quote]

Well, you are the first one, I think, to give any sort of good argument for the other side (against Sony $ publishers).

Last gen, I rarely played a demo, and I think that goes for most people, because you had to get them in magazines or buy a Jampack disc. Everyone still bought games happily without playing a demo. This gen, things have changed. People seem to look for a demo before they will buy, and the publishers who put a demo out can possibly be ahead of the rest (those who dont put a demo out). But is this really the case?

The end result is the end result. If your game sucks, we will know. Either the demo will tell us, or reveiws will. Putting a demo out there probably isnt going to help you with sales as much as just making a good game will. Plenty of gamers watch G4, surf 1UP, IGN, read Gamepro and know what is good and what isnt (or what is meant to be good and what isnt).

Now, I mentioned earlier that I bought Killzone 2 after I played the demo, and it did sell the game to me. However, that game got such good reveiws I surely would have at least rented it. The demo was just a good advertisement, that worked well for me. So money well spent for them (or not spent sense they are Sony, I dont know). Make a good game and it will sell. Of course there are good games that dont sell, but a demo isnt going to help them (Valkyria Chronicles).

Basically, how many games publishers make for the PS3 is going to depend on how many people own a PS3, and how many people own a PS3 will most likely depend on how much the PS3 is...not if the PSN has demos or not.
 
Oh shit, they're losing $0.04 of the $14.99 I paid for Wheel of Fortune! 4 CENTS!

You think that's bad, 12 CENTS were lost when I bought the $9.99 COD:WaW map pack!!! With Activision taking that 1.2% loss of revenue on the PS3 version, they're going to stop releasing DLC1!!

Sony is fucked!!!
 
^yeah I'm not too sure. Before you said it that way I thought it meant the company was guaranteed royalties since the cost of development was covered.

Either way though it's a pretty good set up. Especially for smaller devs.
 
I don't think any of you really get the big picture. Whether Sony charges the devs or MS charges the masses is inconsequential. The gamers pay either way. Do you think the devs on Sony's side don't pass that charge on to you via games costs and dlc charges, please. So all you fanbois screaming "xbox suxxors for chargeing for d3m0s" can just calm down. You pay for the downloads and demos either way.
 
[quote name='doho7744']I don't think any of you really get the big picture. Whether Sony charges the devs or MS charges the masses is inconsequential. The gamers pay either way. Do you think the devs on Sony's side don't pass that charge on to you via games costs and dlc charges, please. So all you fanbois screaming "xbox suxxors for chargeing for d3m0s" can just calm down. You pay for the downloads and demos either way.[/quote]


Yeah no ones said anything along those lines at all.....This has for the most part been an intelegent discussion about how we fell aout this news and the possible repercussions of it. We only mentioned Microsoft passing the cost on to the customer because it was said that Microsoft offers Bandwitch for free. Also the cost of Playstation store and Arcade games are pretty much the same witch is $10. We get the occasional $15 in PSS, but they are usually exclusives, and are worth the extra cost.
 
This may explain why not all PSN games get a demo. I do like that about XBLA - try before you buy for all Arcade titles. I have held back on many PSN games as I was not sure and then simply forgot about them.
 
[quote name='Malik112099']I think that Sony shouldn't be giving developers ANY barrier to entry considering the position they are in.[/quote]

And I suppose companies would LOVE it for sony to switch to microsoft's policy where the bandwidth is free, but Microsoft charging 30-40% of the total profit per sale right?
 
To me, Sony should allow the companies to host the stuff themselves. If they can get a better deal doing that, go for it. Should be transparent to the user.

Interesting that some developers have weighed in here about it not being a big deal though.

It does seem like the demo scene is a bit better on the 360 though.
 
[quote name='Zyzomys']This may explain why not all PSN games get a demo. I do like that about XBLA - try before you buy for all Arcade titles. I have held back on many PSN games as I was not sure and then simply forgot about them.[/QUOTE]Actually, that isn't the full reason. Keep in mind this just happened in October 2008. Before that, there were many PSN games without demos and here's why:

Shack: Why hasn't Sony made it mandatory for developers to supply trial demos to go along with full downloadable games?

Eric Lempel: We've actually offered several demos of downloadable games since PlayStation Store launched, including a demo for Blast Factor, which was a launch title, as well as Nucleus, Lemmings, Go! Sudoku, PixelJunk Racers, Super Puzzle Fighter II, etc. You can expect to continue seeing more free demos of downloadable titles in the future.

It's something that SCEA encourages developers to do, but it is ultimately up to each developer to make that decision. We want PlayStation Network to be as open as possible and not restrictive for developers, some of whom may have smaller teams and need to devote all of their resources to shipping a great title vs. creating a demo.
Click to expand...
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/50380

That article was written in December 2007, and it basically comes to them being open with publishers/developers. If they rather spend the money on trying to get the game out in a reasonable time frame (creating demos take time) or feel their game is best not represented by a demo (keep in mind that demos can ruin a lot of games, due to being a small part of the game and not the whole scope, like Everyday Shooter would be hard to have a demo for since every stage is vastly different).

[quote name='Malik112099']I think that Sony shouldn't be giving developers ANY barrier to entry considering the position they are in.[/QUOTE]In most of Europe (especially outside the U.K.), PS3 is above 360. Despite them having to pay a fee, they will still try to do what they need to in order to reach the PS3 audience because it is significant there.

Also, if publishers aren't going to pay, then who should? Sony has been losing a lot of money (half of it comes from the strong yen) as a company overall and people downloading stuff costs them money (especially if its free). What should Sony do to get their money back? They can't just be free to everyone and continue taking a loss, they gotta get money somewhere, whether it be publishers or the users themselves. It doesn't matter what position Sony is in, they just can't lose money. This isn't exactly a big deal either with the publishers charging because there's actually a huge percentage of people who never connected their PS3 online (seriously, most casuals who don't know a lot about video games don't know/don't care they can download demos to games. They just buy something they see on TV).
 
^Yeah. PS3 actually outsells Wii in Japan. So, they are in a pretty good position outside of the U.S.
 
[quote name='HowStern']^Yeah. PS3 actually outsells Wii in Japan. So, they are in a pretty good position outside of the U.S.[/QUOTE]I think you meant 360. In March, PS3 outsold Wii there, but that's a different story.
 
Demo does so little on actual purchase decision now a day... If the game is good, most of us know way ahead of time. The purpose of demo is really for the skeptical ones. To me, regardless i have to pay for demo or not. The way i see it, it's a damn advertisement, it cost me time to download it, it cost me time to play it.

For the Xbox, if you're silver member (free), demos are not available for you on day one, you have to wait a week or so to be able to download it. Translation? The game is probably out by the time you're allow to download the demo. Gold is cool, but you have to pay for it...

For the PSN, demos are free for the users, no restrictions, since all users are equal (maybe some are more equal than others, since they get cool Betas). So, if i have to end up paying for PSN b/c demos are incurring fees for the publisher, then i say, the hell with demos, you can keep them and give me my free PSN.

The sole purpose of demo (for me) is to remind me how painful a game can be... Good games, i don't need a damn demo. Teasers? Most likely... If GoWIII or Uncharted II demos are out, the demo will be downloaded, even they release the game 6 hours later or something. I didn't bother with KZ2 b/c i already pre-ordered the game and i can hold my horses to play the actual game.
 
[quote name='The Mana Knight']Actually, that isn't the full reason. Keep in mind this just happened in October 2008. Before that, there were many PSN games without demos and here's why:


http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/50380

That article was written in December 2007, and it basically comes to them being open with publishers/developers. If they rather spend the money on trying to get the game out in a reasonable time frame (creating demos take time) or feel their game is best not represented by a demo (keep in mind that demos can ruin a lot of games, due to being a small part of the game and not the whole scope, like Everyday Shooter would be hard to have a demo for since every stage is vastly different).

In most of Europe (especially outside the U.K.), PS3 is above 360. Despite them having to pay a fee, they will still try to do what they need to in order to reach the PS3 audience because it is significant there.

Also, if publishers aren't going to pay, then who should? Sony has been losing a lot of money (half of it comes from the strong yen) as a company overall and people downloading stuff costs them money (especially if its free). What should Sony do to get their money back? They can't just be free to everyone and continue taking a loss, they gotta get money somewhere, whether it be publishers or the users themselves. It doesn't matter what position Sony is in, they just can't lose money. This isn't exactly a big deal either with the publishers charging because there's actually a huge percentage of people who never connected their PS3 online (seriously, most casuals who don't know a lot about video games don't know/don't care they can download demos to games. They just buy something they see on TV).[/QUOTE]

That makes sense, I mean I like that Sony is so much more open, except why on Earth aren't publishers/developers bright enough to get a demo up there? One of the best ads they could have. I'd think publishers would want demos 99% of the time anyway.

[quote name='Serpentor']Demo does so little on actual purchase decision now a day... If the game is good, most of us know way ahead of time. The purpose of demo is really for the skeptical ones. To me, regardless i have to pay for demo or not. The way i see it, it's a damn advertisement, it cost me time to download it, it cost me time to play it.[/quote]

I disagree. I mean games get hyped up, and there are cases when I know almost for certain I'll like something, but usually it's I have some potential interest, but don't really know. A combination of a demo and reviews are the best thing for me.

For the Xbox, if you're silver member (free), demos are not available for you on day one, you have to wait a week or so to be able to download it. Translation? The game is probably out by the time you're allow to download the demo. Gold is cool, but you have to pay for it...
Click to expand...

They used to be until recently though, and Microsoft is...well I continue to hate being treated as a second class citizen by Microsoft.

The question I brought up before is why not just offer publishers a choice on who hosts the content? Charge them for it if Sony does, or they can host it themselves if they want.

For the PSN, demos are free for the users, no restrictions, since all users are equal (maybe some are more equal than others, since they get cool Betas). So, if i have to end up paying for PSN b/c demos are incurring fees for the publisher, then i say, the hell with demos, you can keep them and give me my free PSN.
Click to expand...

Yeah, good point.

The sole purpose of demo (for me) is to remind me how painful a game can be... Good games, i don't need a damn demo. Teasers? Most likely... If GoWIII or Uncharted II demos are out, the demo will be downloaded, even they release the game 6 hours later or something. I didn't bother with KZ2 b/c i already pre-ordered the game and i can hold my horses to play the actual game.
Click to expand...

But the games we're interested in aren't going to be the same. (Plus they could release the demo after the retail release, as sometimes happens anyway.) I have zero interest in God of War 3. I don't care if it gets all 9/10s, I won't be interested, and would have to be absolutely floored by the demo to consider a purchase.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']
But the games we're interested in aren't going to be the same. (Plus they could release the demo after the retail release, as sometimes happens anyway.) I have zero interest in God of War 3. I don't care if it gets all 9/10s, I won't be interested, and would have to be absolutely floored by the demo to consider a purchase.[/quote]

WHAT? No love for GoWIII? :shock:

Well, that's okay, everybody's cup of tea is different. Again, i like to say, the demos are not free regardless how you look at it, because you're paying with your time to download them and play them. See what i mean? They should be paying you to download them and to play them. Hell, at least offer a discount when buying the damn game. You know, little incentive for thanks for playing the demo, we appreciate your time...
 
Yeah, I don't really like the genre, and find them really hard. Had to give up on Devil May Cry 2, 4 (never tried 3), Heavenly Sword, and God of War 1. Strangely, I really enjoyed Devil May Cry, but I haven't liked any since, and really don't want to play them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top