Suda 51: Wii is only for non-gamers, games don't sell, only nintendo titles do well

[quote name='zewone']Famitsu's reviews shouldn't mean much to anyone. Their reviews are just fan service or sold to game developers.
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, Famitsu has went to shit. Many high scores to games that ended up getting pretty poor reviews from places like EGM, IGN etc.

As for NMH, I have some confidence that it will be a solid game. But it will likely end up being another Zack and Wiki--very good game but in a Niche genre that most won't care about.

I'm on the fence about it, I don't tend to like beat'em up type games, but somewhere (maybe the latest EGM) described it as a mix of Zelda and GTA. I love action RPGs like Zelda, so that's a plus. But I hate open-ended games like GTA, so that didn't help my on the fence status. I figure if it gets good reviews it will be a pick up at $20 or under game for me.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']No More Heroes is worth $50 though.[/QUOTE]
I doubt it. It looks like a collection of lame "cut the grass" and "fill up the car" minigames with some decent combat sections, repetitive "collect enough money to continue" missions, with its only saving grace (as with previous Suda 51 games) being the (hopefully) good storyline and characters Suda creates (and the bad english dubbed voice-acting will probably ruin even that).

It may well be worth $30 or $40, though. And I'm sure it would sell better at that price as well (case in point: Carnival Games).
 
I disagree with you guys. For established franchises, Famitsu has been known to be on the more forgiving side. However, when it comes to new series, their reviews are trustworthy.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']But I hate open-ended games like GTA, so that didn't help my on the fence status.[/QUOTE]
It's not open-ended. It's actually quite linear. You just happen to have to hop on your bike to drive from linearly assigned mission to linearly assigned mission.

Like I said before, the only reason I could guarantee myself this is a good game is because of Suda's penchant for great characters and storyline. Some people are saying the combat is fantastic as well... though I'm not a huge beat-em-up guy either.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']I disagree with you guys. For established franchises, Famitsu has been known to be on the more forgiving side. However, when it comes to new series, their reviews are trustworthy.[/QUOTE]

They used to be, but for the past year or so I've just seen too many high scores from them on games that get 6's and 7's from places like EGM.

Though honestly I've never really paid much attention to them since the Japanese taste in games is very different from mine (based on what sells well over there, vs. what I like to play).
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']It's not open-ended. It's actually quite linear. You just happen to have to hop on your bike to drive from linearly assigned mission to linearly assigned mission.
[/QUOTE]

Good to know.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']They used to be, but for the past year or so I've just seen too many high scores from them on games that get 6's and 7's from places like EGM.

Though honestly I've never really paid much attention to them since the Japanese taste in games is very different from mine (based on what sells well over there, vs. what I like to play).[/quote]

Examples?
 
[quote name='captaincold']I can say that i've passed on buying ALOT of games because of price not quality.

Geometry Wars Galaxies - $40
Godfather - $50
Cooking Mama - $50
Kororinpa - $40
Table Tennis - $40
Tom Raider anniversary - $40
etc,etc,etc...

IMO all of those should've been released for no more than $30.

I don't know how much "No more Heroes" is gonna be but if it's $50 it'll flop.[/QUOTE]

Most of what you listed are ports or casual games. No More Heroes, aside from looking awesome, is an original game for the Wii, and not a casual one. This warrants $50 as much as any game really can.

I somewhat disagree with his assessment, though; more "hardcore" games have been selling well in America. For example, Mario Galaxy hasn't had a high sell-through rate in Japan, nor has Zelda: Twilight Princess, but both have sold millions in the US. Certainly more than enough to account for the disparity in units sold in both regions.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']Examples?[/QUOTE]

Honestly, can't recall any specific examples. There were just a few times someone (probably you) posted some reviews in the Wii forum of some pretty much shovelware games that got decent scores in Famitsu, and then the threads turned to making fun of Famitsu's reviews being biased by advertising etc. Probably were 2-4 times such reviews came up. Not a ton, but enough for me to discredit them. Hell, the whole Gertsmann firing at Gamespot was one incident, and I'll never read another of their reviews again!

Too lazy to try to dig up examples. And like I said, I wouldn't pay much attention to them even if they started being hardasses like EGM again, as I just don't care for Japanese opinions on games since my tastes are distinctly western when it comes to gaming.
 
I think--but I certainly don't know--that this is going to be one of those games that will be deemed 'worth owning' or even very good mostly because game-starved Wii owners want it to be good.

I'd like to think that Cheapy and/or Wombat would agree with this statement, were they to discuss this thread next week.

EDIT: If the reviews pour in an a strong consensus says it's an "8" or better, I'll probably get it sooner or later. Hey, the post-release buzz sold me a copy of Zack & Wiki.
 
[quote name='alongx']For example, Mario Galaxy hasn't had a high sell-through rate in Japan.[/quote]

Objection

Galaxy is sitting at 802,000 before last weeks #11 placement at maybe 15k.
Wii LTD in Japan is 4,908,487. 815k into that is 16.6%

Nov+Dec NPD combined for Galaxy in the U.S. is (1.12+1.4M)=2.52M
Install base is roughly 8.7 M in the U.S. which yields 29%.

While its much higher, the Japanese situation isnt as bad as it seemed from the slow start it had.
 
I think the third-party dismay is mainly because, as others have said, they just aren't very good games.

RE4 sold well, yes? And it's a good game in a non-niche genre. I don't think third-party games should expect to sell a ton of copies when they are in a niche genre that many will pass over (Z&W).

This is for Wii exclusives only. I can understand when a 360/PS3/Wii game sells less on the Wii, as usually, another version is rated higher. That, and most people will choose better graphics over a few control changes, in most cases it seems.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']I disagree with you guys. For established franchises, Famitsu has been known to be on the more forgiving side. However, when it comes to new series, their reviews are trustworthy.[/QUOTE]
Nintendogs? 40/40?
 
[quote name='pete5883']Nintendogs? 40/40?[/quote]
Nintendogs is not shovelware. It's still the 5th best selling piece of DS software in the States.

Hardly what I would call shovelware.

Just because the music of Limp Bizkit wouldn't fit into a game like Nintendogs doesn't mean it's adequate to equate it to shovelware.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']Nintendogs is not shovelware. It's still the 5th best selling piece of DS software in the States.

Hardly what I would call shovelware.

Just because the music of Limp Bizkit wouldn't fit into a game like Nintendogs doesn't mean it's adequate to equate it to shovelware.[/QUOTE]
Who mentioned shovelware?

He was simply suggesting a 40/40 score for Nintendogs is short of "trustworthy". And that has nothing to do with sales, either.
 
[quote name='alongx']I somewhat disagree with his assessment, though; more "hardcore" games have been selling well in America. For example, Mario Galaxy hasn't had a high sell-through rate in Japan, nor has Zelda: Twilight Princess, but both have sold millions in the US.[/QUOTE]
Did you not read the quote? I even put it in the thread title: "only Nintendo titles do well".
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Who mentioned shovelware?

He was simply suggesting a 40/40 score for Nintendogs is short of "trustworthy". And that has nothing to do with sales, either.[/quote]
The original notion of Famitsu not being trustworthy was mentioned by Dmaul in that they had rated games highly that were in actuality shovelware. By using Nintendogs as an example coinciding from that post, he thus implies that Nintendogs is shovelware.

Regardless, Nintendogs may not be a 40/40 game, but the game has overall received B+ reviews from general Western publications and that's the only title on their list of 40/40 games that widely differs in taste and sensibilities from Western hardcore gamers. It has nothing to do with trust. It's the taste that's in question and the fact is that the game has connected with a LOT of gamers and has sold over 16 million copies worldwide.

Sales have a lot to do with it. It's only behind Tetris, Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Bros. 3, Super Mario World, and Pokemon as the best selling game ever in the history of videogame. When's the last time a crappy, untrustworthy game sold 16 million units?

It's like saying that even though Brawl got 40/40 from Famitsu, it's still likely the game might be complete crap and garbage since Famitsu is as unreliable as some of you say.

The fact is that my opinion will not be the same as your opinion 100% of the time and that goes for reviewers as well, but that doesn't mean my opinion is untrustworthy because of a 10% discrepancy. It's the reason the majority of the internet has opened up this 'I know better than all' mentality in regards to video game reviews.

Pssh! EGM? Their reviews suck! Pssh! IGN? Their reviews suck! Pssh! Famitsu? Their reviews suck! Only I know best!
Click to expand...
 
My response would be to Suda that for the most part, only Nintendo has been making titles worth playing or that are on the surface appealing.
 
Even the clerks at gamestop are telling customers here not to buy any games that aren't made by nintendo. However right now there is nothing on the shelves anyways so people will buy ANYTHING labeled as a Wii game.

I have beat this topic to death too but I think the problem is when the developers learn that crap sells they continue to produce crap. Crap costs less to produce and it sells just as well as a Nintendo first party title that took a while to make and take a lot more money to make. So why produce good quality games when American's are satisfied with whatever low-quality, cheaply produced crap is put on the shelves? Throw a game in a 2 pack and its an instant seller... sigh...

Could it be that Nintendo just didn't deliver enough games to stores this holiday season and that decreased the sales of first party games? From what I saw most first party Wii games were long sold out a couple weeks before Xmas here.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']The original notion of Famitsu not being trustworthy was mentioned by Dmaul in that they had rated games highly that were in actuality shovelware. By using Nintendogs as an example coinciding from that post, he thus implies that Nintendogs is shovelware.
[/QUOTE]

I mentioned shovelware, but I didn't mean to limit it too shovelware. I just meant in general they overrate EVERYTHING, from shovelware to non-game horseshit like Nintendogs.
 
[quote name='SaraAB']I have beat this topic to death too but I think the problem is when the developers learn that crap sells they continue to produce crap. Crap costs less to produce and it sells just as well as a Nintendo first party title that took a while to make and take a lot more money to make.[/quote]
The problem is that the numbers don't reflect this claim. Quick-rush shovelware like Ninjabread Man might be good for a laugh on web forums, but in terms of units sold, nobody buys 'em. The myth that casual gamers are too dumb to distinguish between a polished AAA-title and barrel-scraping crap is one fabricated by game geeks to make themselves feel superior.

And before anyone cites Mario Party 8 or Carnival Games, note that those are fun, well-written title that appeals to their audience, and sell due to positive word-of-mouth from satisfied owners. Just because they're not the kind of games a snooty "hardcore" gamer would enjoy doesn't make them "shovelware."

--R.J.
 
I have beat this topic to death too but I think the problem is when the developers learn that crap sells they continue to produce crap.

Exactly, and that's why I have to laugh and then immediately grimace when people say that the "Pop Cap"/Alpha Mom crowd is actually more discerning because they don't have any 'emotional investment' in a franchise and aren't predisposed towards wanting to like a game from a studio or specific designer. What-the-fuck-ever!

Let's face it, contrarians and self-appointed Devil's advocates: whether it's 'necks that scarf up anything at Wal-Mart with "Cabela" in the title (along with the cheapest military FPS they can find) or PT Cruisin' moms buying for their insufferable children or for their own distractions, non-gamers just don't give a shit. We do, though. Welcome to the same situation that film and music buffs have been dealing with for decades.

Sorry I wasn't blatantly antagonistic towards anyone reading this post. I never fail to disappoint!

EDIT: The myth that casual gamers are too dumb to distinguish between a polished AAA-title and barrel-scraping crap is one fabricated by game geeks to make themselves feel superior.

Well, no...for every Ninjabread Man you can dispute 'our' claims with, there are ten High School Musicals or Hannah Montanas or 50 Cent Bulletproofs. Like I said, people on the whole have no taste. It's not a gamingcentric syndrome. And we're probably all guilty of it in some area. See the scene in Ratatouille where Remy tries to get his brother (or was it cousin?) to savor the food on the same level as he does. Some people just wanna cram hot, greasy shit down their piehole. It's frustrating to those with the cultivated tastes, especially when it starts diluting what we indulge in.
 
I have to agree. Plus I will say I agree with pretty much everything Suda 51 has stated in the past like his concern about lack of younger developers in the industry. He's wiser than people take him to be.
 
Casual gamer or not, who is gonna pick a niche title over a Nintendo title if they're the same price? Which is the safer bet: An unknown anime-themed shooter or Mario and company doing their usual fun shtick?
 
[quote name='davo1224']Casual gamer or not, who is gonna pick a niche title over a Nintendo title if they're the same price? Which is the safer bet: An unknown anime-themed shooter or Mario and company doing their usual fun shtick?[/QUOTE]

If it's a choice between Mario Party 8 or Trauma Center, you bet your ass I'm going with Trauma Center. Not every Nintendo game's a classic.

Of course, if you'd applied this to just casual gamers... then I could see your point for sure.
 
[quote name='rjung'] The myth that casual gamers are too dumb to distinguish between a polished AAA-title and barrel-scraping crap is one fabricated by game geeks to make themselves feel superior.[/quote]

Casual gamers are not so much dumb as ignorant. Most of them will not take the time to read reviews or research games. I can't count the number of times I have seen people ask store clerks (even at Target) "So, what game is good?"

The barrel-scraping crap takes advantage of this by presenting unknown games at attractive prices. How many people have looked at one of these and said "Well, how bad can it be? It's only 20 bucks."

This is probably where the non-first party non-steaming-crap games get hammered. The price is as high or nearly as high as first party, but it's an unknown. If you're going to spend $50, you might as well go with the known quantity.

My son (who is 8) is attracted to anything with a recognizeable icon (Mario, Sonic, etc.) but hasn't yet really gotten the idea that some games are really horrible. He's learning this a bit more as he spends his own money on games, but for him, the impulse is still stronger than the restraint.

For the most part, he'll ask for a game and then I'll tell him if the general opinion is good or bad. Or, if I'm unfamiliar with the game, I'll tell him we ought to go home and check out some reviews. I can tell that this is something that not many people do.
 
[quote name='Chacrana']If it's a choice between Mario Party 8 or Trauma Center, you bet your ass I'm going with Trauma Center. Not every Nintendo game's a classic.

Of course, if you'd applied this to just casual gamers... then I could see your point for sure.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, the sales of Mario Party 8 depress me. 8th game in a series that has added nothing new in years. And it was 4x3 and 480i to boot if I recall correctly. :cry:
 
[quote name='captaincold']I can say that i've passed on buying ALOT of games because of price not quality.

Geometry Wars Galaxies - $40
Godfather - $50
Cooking Mama - $50
Kororinpa - $40
Table Tennis - $40
Tom Raider anniversary - $40
etc,etc,etc...

IMO all of those should've been released for no more than $30.

I don't know how much "No more Heroes" is gonna be but if it's $50 it'll flop.[/quote]

I just wanted to pop in and say that Godfather was worth every penny of $50.

That is all.
 
[quote name='Rocko']I just wanted to pop in and say that Godfather was worth every penny of $50.
[/QUOTE]

To those who hadn't already played it on another console....I assume being a port was why the other poster listed it.

If RE4 could be $30, Godfather probably should have been as well.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']To those who hadn't already played it on another console....I assume being a port was why the other poster listed it.

If RE4 could be $30, Godfather probably should have been as well.[/quote]

Don't be crazy.
 
With the exception of Mario Party 3 and 4, all of them have been fun regardless of how much recycling there is. That means it has good odds just for the series irregardless of the great odds Nintendo games in general have. Killer 7 on the other hand is a love it/hate it game. If they're both the same price and you're not good on funds, you go with the guaranteed choice. However, if you're forced to choose between Mario Party #38 or a game that looks kinda cool AND is $20 cheaper, well then it makes it easier to swallow if the game ends up sucking.

It's also not fair to say that the Wii is the reason that this game might not do well. Killer 7 sold like butt on Gamecube AND PS2 if I remember correctly. That's the risk you take when you make something abstract. You cater to a niche audience. You also apparently cater to an audience that likes "ass" gameplay but I digress.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Did you not read the quote? I even put it in the thread title: "only Nintendo titles do well".[/QUOTE]

Did you not read my post? I even put it in there: not even Nintendo titles do that well in Japan.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I mentioned shovelware, but I didn't mean to limit it too shovelware. I just meant in general they overrate EVERYTHING, from shovelware to non-game horseshit like Nintendogs.[/quote]

So Nintendogs is horseshit? Aimed for non-gamers? It has collecting and activities that make it play like just about every other game. You have to keep your dogs happy and clean. NBA Street Homecourt is similar. You collect clothes and shoes. In the home court challenge(create-a-balla!), if you favor one player[that isn't the home court nobody] your other teammate will get jealous. Does this mean NBA Street is a non-game? Just because you don't like something, doesn't make it horseshit. I hate sport sims and racing sims, I don't call GT or Madden horseshit for non-gamers.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I mentioned shovelware, but I didn't mean to limit it too shovelware. I just meant in general they overrate EVERYTHING, from shovelware to non-game horseshit like Nintendogs.[/quote]
And you still didn't mention what this shovelware you speak of is and although you calling Nintendogs horseshit makes your opinion less legit, not more.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']And you still didn't mention what this shovelware you speak of is and although you calling Nintendogs horseshit makes your opinion less legit, not more.[/QUOTE]


Too lazy to dig it up, and it may well be something I considered shovelware and you didn't. I want to see it was one of the dumbass mini-game collections.

Different strokes for different folks. And Nintendogs is horseshit, as are all virtual pet "games."

But I could care less whether my opinion is legit or not. No one else's is legit to me, so it would be hypocritical to expect anyone to give a shit about mine! :D
 
[quote name='Kendal']So Nintendogs is horseshit? Aimed for non-gamers? It has collecting and activities that make it play like just about every other game. You have to keep your dogs happy and clean. NBA Street Homecourt is similar. You collect clothes and shoes. In the home court challenge(create-a-balla!), if you favor one player[that isn't the home court nobody] your other teammate will get jealous. Does this mean NBA Street is a non-game? Just because you don't like something, doesn't make it horseshit. I hate sport sims and racing sims, I don't call GT or Madden horseshit for non-gamers.[/QUOTE]

It's my opinion that it's horseshit, because I hate that type of games. I hate RTS games, so I think Starcraft is horseshit too.

I don't like something, it's horseshit to me. *shrugs*

Don't really care what others think, if they like it, more power to them. Different strokes for different folks.

As for the NBA game, I don't like those either, but at least it has actual gameplay, where you--you know-- have control of the action.
 
And it's my opinion that your opinion is foolish. Besides you're mainly wrong about the Famitsu thing. It doesn't matter if you take them as a serious source. You're still wrong.

Games that received a near-perfect score of 39 include:

1. The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past (1991, Nintendo, for Super Famicom)
2. Virtua Fighter 2 (1995, Sega, for Sega Saturn)
3. Ridge Racer Revolution (1995, Namco, for PlayStation)
4. Super Mario 64 (1996, Nintendo, for Nintendo 64)
5. Tekken 3 (1998, Namco, for PlayStation)
6. Cyber Troopers Virtual On Oratorio Tangram (1999, Sega, for Dreamcast)
7. Final Fantasy X (2001, Square Co., Ltd., for PlayStation 2)
8. Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec (2001, Sony Computer Entertainment, for PlayStation 2)
9. Resident Evil (2002, Capcom, for Nintendo GameCube)
10. Dragon Quest VIII (2004, Square Enix, for PlayStation 2)
11. Gran Turismo 4 (2004, Sony Computer Entertainment, for PlayStation 2)
12. Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence (2005, Konami, for PlayStation 2)
13. Dead or Alive 4 (2005, Tecmo, for Xbox 360)
14. Kingdom Hearts II (2006, Square Enix and Buena Vista Games, for PlayStation 2)
15. Ōkami (2006, Capcom, for PlayStation 2)
16. The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (2007, Nintendo, for Nintendo DS)

I'd love to see you explain which of the above games is shovelware.
 
None of those are shovelware--though there are several I would put more in the 7-8 range. Zelda: Phantom Hourglass for one (I'd give that an 8)...but no bias from them as it got overrated by everyone IMO.

And I wasn't saying that they gave shovelware near perfect scores, but more than there were reviews posted where they were giving games 7's, 8's and maybe one 9 or something, that were getting 5's and 6's or lower everywhere else.

Just had a thought. Do you have their review for Soul Calibur Legends? That MAY have been one I was thinking of, but I'm not positive. Seemed like there was one place that gave it a higher review early on, then it got slammed everywhere else...but can't remember for sure if that was Famitsu.

Nevermind, found it. They gave it 7,7,7,6...so slightly overated (57% avg on gamerankings). That's what I was getting at. Everything just seems a little inflated in their reviews.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']It's my opinion that it's horseshit, because I hate that type of games. I hate RTS games, so I think Starcraft is horseshit too.

I don't like something, it's horseshit to me. *shrugs*

Don't really care what others think, if they like it, more power to them. Different strokes for different folks.

As for the NBA game, I don't like those either, but at least it has actual gameplay, where you--you know-- have control of the action.[/quote]

In Nintendogs, you have--you know-- actual control of the action too. The dog doesn't train itself. Have you even played Nintendogs? More than just five minutes and deemed it horseshit.
 
Ok, here's a good example of a terrible game getting a great review in Famitsu.

Redsteel: 8,9,9,8 (avg 65% on gamerankings, with lower scores from the reputable places).
 
[quote name='Kendal']In Nintendogs, you have--you know-- actual control of the action too. The dog doesn't train itself. Have you even played Nintendogs? More than just five minutes and deemed it horseshit.[/QUOTE]

A few hours. My gf loved it.

I don't like games where you just interact with something, train something etc. I like games where you have total control of a character. Particlularly either very fast past and action oriented, or having a damn good story if it's slower.

If you liked it, that's great. No need to get defensive because someone thinks something you like is horseshit.

I just finished Mass Effect, loved it. Would give it a 10. But I couldn't give a shit less if someone wanted to call it horseshit. That doesn't change the fact that it's my favorite game of this generation and maybe last generation too.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Ok, here's a good example of a terrible game getting a great review in Famitsu.

Redsteel: 8,9,9,8 (avg 65% on gamerankings, with lower scores from the reputable places).[/quote]

It wasn't terrible... :(
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Ok, here's a good example of a terrible game getting a great review in Famitsu.

Redsteel: 8,9,9,8 (avg 65% on gamerankings, with lower scores from the reputable places).[/quote]

Keep in mind Japan isn't an institute for FPS and you can understand why they would rate it highly.

And look back to my prior post about a 10% difference in opinion.
 
[quote name='Zen Davis']
Keep in mind Japan isn't an institute for FPS and you can understand why they would rate it highly.

And look back to my prior post about a 10% difference in opinion.[/QUOTE]

And my prior post stating everything tends to be "a bit" inflated. But a bit can make a diffrence. Games that I was on the fence about that get below 8/10 I probably won't bother checking out, games over I will. So slight inflation does make a difference.

And yes, they're not big on FPS. Like I also said earlier, they have very different tastes that I (and most western gamers) do, so I just find it hard to pay any attention to their reviews to begin with. Noticing they tend to score a lot of games higher just further soured me on them.
 
[quote name='jollydwarf']Well, no...for every Ninjabread Man you can dispute 'our' claims with, there are ten High School Musicals or Hannah Montanas or 50 Cent Bulletproofs.[/quote]
So have you actually played those games and can tell us what's wrong with them, in terms of gameplay or controls or frame rate or balance or difficulty? Or is this just another case of "I hate the license and I've heard bad things from other snooty 'hardcore'' gamers, so I'll just dismiss it as crap" knee-jerkism at work?

--R.J.
 
[quote name='rjung']So have you actually played those games and can tell us what's wrong with them, in terms of gameplay or controls or frame rate or balance or difficulty? Or is this just another case of "I hate the license and I've heard bad things from other snooty 'hardcore'' gamers, so I'll just dismiss it as crap" knee-jerkism at work?
[/QUOTE]

One doesn't have to play a game to know that you'd hate it. Be it that you hate the license, hate the genre, see that it gets shit review everywhere etc.

I mean, Ninjabread Man is at 17% on Gamerankings for god's sake.

Life's too short, and I'm far too busy, to even play all the great games I'd like. Much less to take time playing the utter shit games so I can have a more informed opinion to express to net nerds.

Give me a break.
 
c'mon people, just love the guy... I have nothing I can find I don't like about him.

5058_19268.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top