Zelda: Ocarina of Time review

Mr Durand Pierre

CAGiversary!
Feedback
21 (100%)
I didn't care for Ocarina of Time (OOT) that much. I really wanted to like it, but I had a lot of pretty major problems with it.

First of all, I should mention my nostalgia with the Zelda series. The first Zelda along with the orinal super mario bros was the first videogame I ever played as a kid. And the SNES A Link to the Past was my favorite SNES or earlier console game of all time. But after playing OOT I'm not sure if I've simply outgrown the series, or if Zelda just didn't translate to 3D that well.

I'll start with my problems with the game. For one, Link moves too slow. Watching that pitter-patter of his footstesp strolling along Hyrule Field got real old real fast. I also didn't like how he keeps grabbing on to ledges if he wants to climb anything. A personal pet peeve of mine is the inability to jump in these kind of games. The sounds Link makes are pretty annoying too, esepcially his rolling grunt which you hear way too much throughout the course of the game. Playing this character really hurts the pacing in the game in a lot of places.

And the pacing is already pretty slow. The reason most people go in for the Zelda series is for the dungeons. Lets face it, everything else is just filler. But OOT has unusually long intermissions beween dungeons. I figured that each dungeon took roughly 2 hours to play through, and it took at least that much time simply to make it to the next dungeon. I don't remember A Link to the Past being like that, not to mention that OOT only has 8 dungeons compared to ALTTP's 11. A also spent long periods of time simply being uncelar as to where to go next. As much as I hate walkthroughs I had to resort to one more than I would have preferred (which is never). And I actually do like puzzles in games. A lot actually. Oldschool Lucasarts graphic adventures are my favorite. But in those games when you'd have a puzzle to solve everyhwere you could go would be easily accessable, so it was really the puzzle you had to concentrate on. Here I was often discouraged ot try that hard because it would simply take so damn long to get from one area to another.

Also, Hyrule field just plain sucks. It's long, bland, and the time shifting makes it os there's either a ton of enemies to fight in a constant state of respawning, or there's nothing to fight. I deffinitely prefered the older Zeldas where enemies were just spaced out around the map.

One thing that I never liked that much about the 3D Zelda's that everyone else seems ot love is the "Z-targeting." (no idea why they call it that). I find it's auto-targetting system faulty and boring. If you don't resort to auto-targetting you're a sitting duck, but if you use it the combat is too easy, and you need only hold down the R button to avoid all attacks. Fighting the wolfos really tried my patience. This coupled with the games poor camera made combat a lot less fun than it should have been. Often I'd be in a room with a flying enemy, like a bat, and I would know they were in the room, but be unable to move the camera and lock onto them from a distance. The combat isn't that awful, I enjoyed fencing with the lizards, but it really is overrated.

But the game has it's pluses too. It's really open ended for those who enjoy subquests. There's no way in hell I would ever track down all the gold skulltilas, but I guess that's good, 'cuz it means there's always more game to be played. But there are a lot of subquests that feel less cheap than that one (like the trading sequences) that I really enjoyed.

The dungeon design really is brilliant though. As the highlight of any Zelda game these certainly didn't dissapoint. And the new warp portals you can open was really a stroke of genius (though unfortunately, everyone's most hated enemy, those hands that take you back to a dungeon's entrance, have also returned). The bosses are also really well designed and a lot of fun.

OOT really does have a lot of good in it, but it feels a lot more tedious than previous Zelda games. Maybe it's just me, and I had a hard time adjusting to the 3D, or maybe I just had more patience for these kind of games when I was young, but OOT just didn't do it for me.

7/10
 
ROFL it takes you 2 hours per dungeon? Perhaps the reason you dont like it is because you suck ass. I can beat each dungeon in roughly 30 minutes. It is my favorite game of all time also. Besides your comparing it to todays games. You need to remember it was made in 1998. It was groundbreaksing when it came out and still is.
 
[quote name='bruce_pwns_j00']You need to remember it was made in 1998. [/quote]

EXACTLY!

So why the hell is it being reviewed in 2004? :puke:
 
The Zelda collector's thingamajig is selling for roughly $40 everywhere, plus there's that Ocarina/Master quest thing going around.

And if you don't like old reviews then don't read 'em, bitch!
 
[quote name='Mr Durand Pierre']And if you don't like old reviews then don't read 'em, bitch![/quote]

Even if I don't read them they WASTE server space. So either way your useless reviews affect me.

I said it before, and I'll say it again: if you want to write so bad at least make it about something relevant ie a game that isn't 6 years old.
 
Whether you like it or not Ocarina of Time is one of the most influential videogames ever made, making it still relevant today.

And whoever said you have to review new games? Roger Ebert reviews a new "great movie" every other week, and some of those are over 80 years old. A lot of old games are still worth reviewing because either they're influential, or were sleepers that never got much recognition. Age has nothing to do with it.

"It's not the years, honey... it's the mileage."
-Indiana Jones
 
Yeah, but your entire gripe sounds like a person whining that they didn't like Citizen Kane because it was in black and white, and didn't have digital sound or special effects.
 
One thing that I never liked that much about the 3D Zelda's that everyone else seems ot love is the "Z-targeting." (no idea why they call it that).

Because you hold down the Z button to do it on the N64 controller. :)
 
[quote name='JSweeney']Yeah, but your entire gripe sounds like a person whining that they didn't like Citizen Kane because it was in black and white, and didn't have digital sound or special effects.[/quote]

Well, those problems will be fixed in Citizen Kane: Special Edition, coming 2006.
 
OOT owns for many reasons, it was groundbreaking when it came out, led to MM and WW which were both good and spawned various zelda things that helped further the franchise.
 
[quote name='JSweeney']Yeah, but your entire gripe sounds like a person whining that they didn't like Citizen Kane because it was in black and white, and didn't have digital sound or special effects.[/quote]

Whatever. Most of my favorite games were created before 1996, and I still love A Link to the Past.
 
[quote name='Scrubking'][quote name='Mr Durand Pierre']And if you don't like old reviews then don't read 'em, bitch![/quote]

Even if I don't read them they WASTE server space. So either way your useless reviews affect me.

I said it before, and I'll say it again: if you want to write so bad at least make it about something relevant ie a game that isn't 6 years old.[/quote]

His posts really gonna make a significant impact...
 
As you say, the real highlight and "meat" of a Zelda game is in the dungeons, and the OOT dungeons were brilliantly designed. For me that was the bottom line that factored into my immense enjoyment of the game, but I also appreciated other things about it (the side-quests, the overall immersiveness and atmosphere the game produced).

I don't think the intermissions were too long between dungeons, but I suppose that's going to come down to personal preference. If I recall correctly, the first few dungeons are spaced out a bit, but the rest can be tackled in fairly rapid succession.

The Wind Waker is really where they took way too much emphasis off the dungeons, in my opinion. Talk about lengthy intermissions. :\ The dungeon quality was still there, but with a massive reduction in dungeon quantity and way more emphasis on less interesting overworld quests/side-quests. Disappointing.

To me, OOT is still the epitomal Zelda game and the best in the series.
 
[quote name='Tukka']As you say, the real highlight and "meat" of a Zelda game is in the dungeons, and the OOT dungeons were brilliantly designed. For me that was the bottom line that factored into my immense enjoyment of the game, but I also appreciated other things about it (the side-quests, the overall immersiveness and atmosphere the game produced).

I don't think the intermissions were too long between dungeons, but I suppose that's going to come down to personal preference. If I recall correctly, the first few dungeons are spaced out a bit, but the rest can be tackled in fairly rapid succession.

The Wind Waker is really where they took way too much emphasis off the dungeons, in my opinion. Talk about lengthy intermissions. :\ The dungeon quality was still there, but with a massive reduction in dungeon quantity and way more emphasis on less interesting overworld quests/side-quests. Disappointing.

To me, OOT is still the epitomal Zelda game and the best in the series.[/quote]

Yeah, OoT technically is the better game compared to the Wind Waker, but by the time I got to the Wind Waker I new what to expect more. OoT came as more of a shock.

And I think I was nicer to the Wind Waker because it started out so well, so I was more reluctant to pan it that much, where as Ocarina didn't hook me too well form the get go. It did get better as it went though.
 
my review of pierre's review. your review sucks major ass. you have no business playing videogames. -1/10
 
I also was let down by the game.

What's wrong with a kid that can't jump? Or at least try to jump? There were guys who tried to play on the basketball team in high school who couldn't jump, but they could at least try.

I also didn't like what I perceived as the forced linearity of OOT. In the first Zelda, you could sneak into the 8th Level "Dungeon" before you ever went to the 1st. It would be extremely difficult but not impossible to go through much if not all of it, and you could certainly obtain whatever bonus was in there (I did this when I was a kid cause I loved the game THAT much). In OOT, there is NO chance you will proceed to point B until you have accomplished task A, and so on.

Not that it was bad, just didn't live up to the hype. I'm probably borderline Nintendo fanboy but I can honestly say this is the worst of the Zelda games I played (I say "of the games I played" because I was so disappointed I have yet to muster the desire to play Mask or Wind Waker).

Seriously, what's wrong with a kid who can't jump?
 
No. WW is just plain superior to OoT. Reviews of it are free to have a side bar noting the nostalgia value of OoT and innovations that it brought to the series, but Wind Waker is still the far better version of the formula started in OoT.

On another note, to Mr. Durand Pierre you: give OoT a 7.10 and gave Sphinx and the Cursed Mummy a 8.5/10? Yikes...
 
Here is my old-skool snooty fanboy review of Pong. Everyone loves this game that has been out for 25 years except for me. The graphics are dated and the AI is tuned too high. It took me three hours to beat one opponent. Overall, I would say that even though this game was pioneering and inspiring, compared to such masterful beauty of modern games like DOA 3 and Jak II, Pong is a disappointing title.

2/10
 
[quote name='chosen1s']In the first Zelda, you could sneak into the 8th Level "Dungeon" before you ever went to the 1st. It would be extremely difficult but not impossible to go through much if not all of it, and you could certainly obtain whatever bonus was in there[/quote]

I remember that entering certain dungeons before others was possible but, as I recall, the ladder prevented movement into the dungeons deeper than the starting point and a few adjacent rooms… unless it was possible to get the ladder out of dungeon 3 (or 4?) prior to finishing level 1 and then going to level 8 but didn’t you need the raft to get to level 4…. eh, I’m confused – must go play Zelda…
 
[quote name='javeryh'][quote name='chosen1s']In the first Zelda, you could sneak into the 8th Level "Dungeon" before you ever went to the 1st. It would be extremely difficult but not impossible to go through much if not all of it, and you could certainly obtain whatever bonus was in there[/quote]

I remember that entering certain dungeons before others was possible but, as I recall, the ladder prevented movement into the dungeons deeper than the starting point and a few adjacent rooms… unless it was possible to get the ladder out of dungeon 3 (or 4?) prior to finishing level 1 and then going to level 8 but didn’t you need the raft to get to level 4…. eh, I’m confused – must go play Zelda…[/quote]

You're probably right in some ways. That's what was so great about Zelda though. You couldn't accomplish EVERYTHING without going through and getting certain items, but you could do a LOT of things early if you were the adventuring type. I don't know if this has been done frequently by others or not, but I always prided myself on being able to beat the game without getting either of the first two swords...
 
Even though i sucked at it and it seemed slow i still just love this game. I think for me its in more of a game id like seeing someone else play.
 
Too bad none of you cocks who disagree with me can actually add anything intelligent to say.

Like bruce_pwns_j00 who's posted 4 comments and none of them say anything new. You hate me? Big fucking whoop, what else is new? I don't care about you, so why do you care enough about what I think to post 4 comments on one review? And apparently I suck because it takes me 2 hous to get through a Zelda dungeon, even though the dungeons are the parts I liked in the first place. It's snot faced brats like you who make me not want to be a teacher.

or Skrubking who just bitches about any game reviewed that isn't completely new. His excuse is that it takes up server space. Like his 2,500 and something useless comments don't.

The only good negative feedback I've gotten is from people who think I panned the game because it's old, to which I say I do not. For not once did I bring up the dated graphics or sound. The pacing more than anything ruined my enjoyment of the game.

So I didn't care for the N64 Zelda's and hundreds other critics did. The moral of the story is that you fucks should learn to take a negative review every once in awhile. It'll prepare you for the shitloads of rejection I know you'll endure later in life.
 
But the fact that you ranked Sphinx, a sub-sub-sub-par clone of OoT higher than OoT basically invalidates any reviews you do. Forever. In fact, you're not even qualified to make basic judgements anymore; not even stuff like "fire hot."
 
[quote name='jmcc']But the fact that you ranked Sphinx, a sub-sub-sub-par clone of OoT higher than OoT basically invalidates any reviews you do. Forever. In fact, you're not even qualified to make basic judgements anymore; not even stuff like "fire hot."[/quote]

Sphinx was a knock-off for sure, but a darn good one. I enjoyed playing through it for the 2 weeks it lasted me more than I did Ocarina for the 3 weeks it lasted. But that might be based on my expectations. So many people consider Ocarina to be the best game ever made, so there was no way it could live up to that hype. I didn't have very high hopes for Sphinx, so I was surprised at how much I enjoyed it.
 
You are entitled to your opinion, but man... Ocarina was/is one of the best games to come around in some time.
 
I really think you put your expectations way to high. I think u also got caught up in the new skill mentality. Lttp may still be playable to you because of nostalgia more than anything else.

I really dont want to flame you for your review but come on its on many people's all time greastest games list. What did you expect when you made your comments. You gotta really think about what you say before you say it, Common sense is key
 
Too bad none of you cocks who disagree with me can actually add anything intelligent to say.

Yep, and need to clusterbomb the thread with obscentity obviously gives you intellectual superiority and the moral high ground, right?

Like bruce_pwns_j00 who's posted 4 comments and none of them say anything new. You hate me? Big shaq-fuing whoop, what else is new? I don't care about you, so why do you care enough about what I think to post 4 comments on one review? And apparently I suck because it takes me 2 hous to get through a Zelda dungeon, even though the dungeons are the parts I liked in the first place.

What's next? I know you are but what am I?

It's snot faced brats like you who make me not want to be a teacher.

It's people like you that feed into my disdain of teachers unions and educators as a whole. Finding a good teacher seems to be getting harder and harder these days. I guess it just proves that old adage correct:
"Those who can, do. Those who cannot, teach"
or Skrubking who just bitches about any game reviewed that isn't completely new. His excuse is that it takes up server space. Like his 2,500 and something useless comments don't.

Lashing out again, eh? Or is it that you can't argue what he says, so now your just going to try to minimize the blow to your credibility by attacking his?



So I didn't care for the N64 Zelda's and hundreds other critics did. The moral of the story is that you shaq-fus should learn to take a negative review every once in awhile. It'll prepare you for the shitloads of rejection I know you'll endure later in life.

One should practice what they preach
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']I really think you put your expectations way to high. I think u also got caught up in the new skill mentality. Lttp may still be playable to you because of nostalgia more than anything else.

I really dont want to flame you for your review but come on its on many people's all time greastest games list. What did you expect when you made your comments. You gotta really think about what you say before you say it, Common sense is key[/quote]

haha. Negative reviews are cool like that. They get people all riled up. I give Prince of Persia a 9/10 and not a single person replies. But you give a supposedly great game a 7 (which is still mildly positive) and before you know it you got over 30 replies.
 
[quote name='Mr Durand Pierre']haha. Negative reviews are cool like that. They get people all riled up. I give Prince of Persia a 9/10 and not a single person replies. But you give a supposedly great game a 7 (which is still mildly positive) and before you know it you got over 30 replies.[/quote]

9/10 is negative?
 
Well, for starters, you're playing it for the first time in 2004. You don't even know the game's roots as expressed here:

[quote name='Mr Durand Pierre']One thing that I never liked that much about the 3D Zelda's that everyone else seems ot love is the "Z-targeting." (no idea why they call it that).[/quote]

I'm sure your review is littered with other examples of such ignorance, but I quit reading.

If you hadn't played Link to the Past back in the day you'd be complaining about how "inferior" that is, too.

The idea of the large "Hyrule Field" was an "at the time" thing - it was gigantic and vast, offering lots of possibilities. Blah blah..
 
I think he meant he gave a good review to a good game and nothing happened only with a bad review to a good game does he get feedback
 
[quote name='JSweeney']Too bad none of you cocks who disagree with me can actually add anything intelligent to say.

Yep, and need to clusterbomb the thread with obscentity obviously gives you intellectual superiority and the moral high ground, right?


point taken

Like bruce_pwns_j00 who's posted 4 comments and none of them say anything new. You hate me? Big shaq-fuing whoop, what else is new? I don't care about you, so why do you care enough about what I think to post 4 comments on one review? And apparently I suck because it takes me 2 hous to get through a Zelda dungeon, even though the dungeons are the parts I liked in the first place.

What's next? I know you are but what am I?

Hey, I made fun of the guy for his inability to come up with witty reparte and his immense anger over me not agreeing with him over a game. He didn't have much on me and added nothing new with each comment.

It's snot faced brats like you who make me not want to be a teacher.

It's people like you that feed into my disdain of teachers unions and educators as a whole. Finding a good teacher seems to be getting harder and harder these days. I guess it just proves that old adage correct:
"Those who can, do. Those who cannot, teach"

the quote is, "Those who can't do, teach. And those who can't teach, teach gym." -Woody Allen from Annie Hall.

or Skrubking who just bitches about any game reviewed that isn't completely new. His excuse is that it takes up server space. Like his 2,500 and something useless comments don't.

Lashing out again, eh? Or is it that you can't argue what he says, so now your just going to try to minimize the blow to your credibility by attacking his?

haha. Can't argue with what he says? He didn't say much except bitch about my reviews being old, and if you read earlier i nthe thread you'd see I backed up my argument by saying Ebert and a lot of respectable critics review older stuff.

So I didn't care for the N64 Zelda's and hundreds other critics did. The moral of the story is that you shaq-fus should learn to take a negative review every once in awhile. It'll prepare you for the shitloads of rejection I know you'll endure later in life.

One should practice what they preach[/quote]

I do, otherwise I wouldn't post a review that I know I'd get flamed for. I don't care if people disagree with me, or even flame me, but I wish they'd grow a brain and do it in wittier ways. Things like "You suck," or "shut the hell up" just do nothing these days.
 
I actually agree with him on this review. Some games don't stand up to time very well and I think OoT is one of them.

Sure it got a 10 then but that doesn't mean it stays "perfect" forever. Hyrule Field DOES suck: it's empty, boring, and takes forever to move through. Admit it Fanboys!

The targeting system is flawed and it's been improved in other games since.

The no jumping thing is really annoying. There's no reason why there couldn't be a jump button. Just take out one of the too many yellow arrow button slots. Seriously, you don't need 3 at all.

These are pretty minor complaints but if you can't be honest about the game you're playing just keep reading Nintendo Power.

Rock on Pierre. I would give OoT a point higher than you did but I agree with a lot of what you wrote.

.m
 
[quote name='meteors']I actually agree with him on this review. Some games don't stand up to time very well and I think OoT is one of them.

Sure it got a 10 then but that doesn't mean it stays "perfect" forever. Hyrule Field DOES suck: it's empty, boring, and takes forever to move through. Admit it Fanboys!

The targeting system is flawed and it's been improved in other games since.

The no jumping thing is really annoying. There's no reason why there couldn't be a jump button. Just take out one of the too many yellow arrow button slots. Seriously, you don't need 3 at all.

These are pretty minor complaints but if you can't be honest about the game you're playing just keep reading Nintendo Power.

Rock on Pierre. I would give OoT a point higher than you did but I agree with a lot of what you wrote.

.m[/quote]

A point higher?! You're clearly not 3dgy enough to hang around with the paragon of punk rock that is Mr. Durrand Pierre.
 
Hey, I made fun of the guy for his inability to come up with witty reparte and his immense anger over me not agreeing with him over a game. He didn't have much on me and added nothing new with each comment.

Now are you complaining about him or yourself?
It's rather hard to tell the difference, as you both appear guity of the same crime.


the quote is, "Those who can't do, teach. And those who can't teach, teach gym." -Woody Allen from Annie Hall.
Nope, wrong again. The qoute is:

He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches.
George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists"

Incorrect Correction!

haha. Can't argue with what he says? He didn't say much except bitch about my reviews being old, and if you read earlier i nthe thread you'd see I backed up my argument by saying Ebert and a lot of respectable critics review older stuff.

If you had something to say of value against him, you would pick apart his rant and analyze it, rather that lash out. Of course, your point about Ebert is worthless, because any good critic never applies the full standard of what is expected technically from a movie today to those made in the past. Whether you realize it or not, many of your gripes fall right in with the technical limitations of the day and age when OOT was released. On top of that, Ebert is considered an expert in his field. You, most certainly, are not.

I do, otherwise I wouldn't post a review that I know I'd get flamed for.

No you don't, if you did, you'd bear their chastisement with a smile. Instead, you launch a flurry of obscenity and personal attacks.
You most certainly DO NOT practice what you preach.

Technically, if you post a review that you know will get you flames, then you'd be a troll.


I don't care if people disagree with me, or even flame me, but I wish they'd grow a brain and do it in wittier ways. Things like "You suck," or "shut the hell up" just do nothing these days.


Yep, and Too bad none of you cocks who disagree with me can actually add anything intelligent to say just drips with enlightened wit.
 
Look dont call me a cock you fuckin shithead. Its people like you who make ME hate TEACHERS. The cocks sit us in a classroom thats 90+ degrees in no airconditioning in the school and dont let us out. I get enough teachers at school I dont want more espically when Im on cag. And its not the fact that you rated it bad that i burn you its because of your fuckin pass poor attitude. You act stuck up and pissy at us. Go fuck yourself man.
 
[quote name='bruce_pwns_j00']Look dont call me a cock you fuckin shithead. Its people like you who make ME hate TEACHERS. The cocks sit us in a classroom thats 90+ degrees in no airconditioning in the school and dont let us out. I get enough teachers at school I dont want more espically when Im on cag. And its not the fact that you rated it bad that i burn you its because of your fuckin pass poor attitude. You act stuck up and pissy at us. Go shaq-fu yourself man.[/quote]

Lol, sometimes you can be really hilarious, heh.

As for Mr. Dur whatever Pierre whatever some weird name i dont know -------

Your review is controversial. It's okay to post your opinion on this site but expect that you will be agreed with and expect that you will be disagreed with. OOT is one of the best games ever created in many gamer's opinions. You can't base your review correctly especially when it's out of date. That'd be like taking Super Metroid and saying, "the graphics are choppy, she moves too slow, and not enough cool moves". And Dude, it's because it's a fscking old game! It's only a little old but you shouldn't be bashing other people if they point out that your review is out of date.

JSweeney, I congratulate you on putting Mister Snooty Teacher in his place.
 
If you had something to say of value against him, you would pick apart his rant and analyze it

LOL, rant?

Anyway, like I have been saying this whole flame war that has been started wouldn't have existed if this dated review wasn't here. I am not against an oldschool review now and then, but most if not all of his reviews concern old dated games. Reminiscing is good and all, but give us a break.

Like I said before I could sit here and post a ton of NES reviews, but wouldn't it serve you guys better if I focuesed on more recent games?
 
[quote name='Scrubking']If you had something to say of value against him, you would pick apart his rant and analyze it

LOL, rant?

Anyway, like I have been saying this whole flame war that has been started wouldn't have existed if this dated review wasn't here. I am not against an oldschool review now and then, but most if not all of his reviews concern old dated games. Reminiscing is good and all, but give us a break.

Like I said before I could sit here and post a ton of NES reviews, but wouldn't it serve you guys better if I focuesed on more recent games?[/quote]

Scrubking, if that offended you, I appologize. I used the word rant specifically because I was hoping that he would put two and two together and see that I was doing that to him at that exact moment, and that he was exhibiting the exact behaviors that he was whining about.
 
Instead of pick apart all your complaints and reply to each one of them instead I will pose one simple question:

What about my review is negative that's based on the game being old? The main complaint I hear is that I was judging it by today's standards, which I tried not to do. Anyone have any specific examples from my review?

And Skrubking, I have reviewed plenty of newer games as well Like Prince of Persia and Rebel Strike, and this isn't the only itme I've seen you knock older reviews. Like you knocked some poor bloke's Halo review just because it isn't that new even if it is for the current console generation. If you're going to say something, say something new.
 
[quote name='bruce_pwns_j00']Dude, just shut the shaq-fu up. Your not gonna win. Its 1 against almost all. Just give up and go back to sucking your dick.[/quote]

Win? Win what? It's not a contest and there's no prize. I just wondered if anyone agreed with me about this game, or if anyone could concieve a convincing argument against me. But watching people like you get so riled up is reward enough in itself.
 
[quote name='Mr Durand Pierre'][quote name='bruce_pwns_j00']Dude, just shut the shaq-fu up. Your not gonna win. Its 1 against almost all. Just give up and go back to sucking your dick.[/quote]

But watching people like you get so riled up is reward enough in itself.[/quote]

And therein lies what I suspect the original motivation for the review was.
 
bread's done
Back
Top