yiazmat50112254

what do you think is the hardest thing from so4

what do you think is the hardest thing from so4   44 members have voted

  1. 1. what do you think is the hardest thing from so4

    • time consuming (especcialy 30000 kills bt's)
    • literally hardness (especcialy kill eq in 10min with lymle bt)
    • missables
    • tie between 1 and 2
    • tie between 1 and 3
    • tie between 2 and 3
      0
    • tie of all of them
    • don't have the slightest idea

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

45 posts in this topic

when voting the poll don't vote because of the (especcily) stuff, it is just there to be more clear about what i mean.

 

i go with nr 4 because i think they tie because they are both extremely hard. they can differ slightly, but i dont know absolutely sure because they are very different things. this don't mean i dont think the third one is very hard, it is just a bit less as the other two.

Edited by yiazmat50112254
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listening to the cringe inducing, ear bleeding english dub on the original 360 version.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that is difficult in this game is the Defeat the Ethereal Queen in 10 minutes Lymle battle trophy. The 30,000 kill BTs aren't difficult at all and are just time consuming dood

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is option #1 hard? Time consuming does not equal difficulty.

 

I agree with Snowxsakura, listening to emo Edge, Sarah, and Lymle makes it a torture. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listening to the cringe inducing, ear bleeding english dub on the original 360 version.

 

 

How is option #1 hard? Time consuming does not equal difficulty.

 

I agree with Snowxsakura, listening to emo Edge, Sarah, and Lymle makes it a torture. 

 

 

Sounds like a game I need to buy. Especially since I'm having to deal with FFX's dub.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the EQ in under 10 minutes really that hard? (note: I did it on my first try, without really trying to hard, but I probably was over-prepared for her..)..

 

For me the worst where the 30.000 kills x2 (never forget that we need to do it twice..) as well as the -ology drops.. not really hard, but painfully boring and long..

Edited by Han_the_Dragon
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grindy is not hard.  Grindy is time-consuming and semi-standard for RPGs these days, but it's part of what you sign up for if the Platinum Trophy (or simply doing "everything that can be done") is that important to you.

 

EQ in 10 minutes is a pain, even if you do it on Earth difficulty like most normal people do and not on Galaxy difficulty like I did.  It's not just that it's a difficult task that takes a fair amount of preparation if you want to do it properly and some luck that something doesn't get fouled up along the way.... but that you have to traverse a 20-level dungeon first without any save points.... and then pray that the game doesn't freeze and lock up on you after all that.

 

The poor design and substandard coding complicates everything, but it wasn't a walk in the park to begin with.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missables for sure... collecting all items are preventing me right now from starting it, cause of shitty guides most of the time :S

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6-5-2016 at 8:29 PM, Wdjat Prinny Doods said:

The only thing that is difficult in this game is the Defeat the Ethereal Queen in 10 minutes Lymle battle trophy. The 30,000 kill BTs aren't difficult at all and are just time consuming dood

 

On 6-5-2016 at 8:36 PM, Dragon-Archon said:

How is option #1 hard? Time consuming does not equal difficulty.

 

On 7-5-2016 at 4:37 AM, acasser said:

Grindy is not hard.  Grindy is time-consuming and semi-standard for RPGs these days, but it's part of what you sign up for if the Platinum Trophy (or simply doing "everything that can be done") is that important to you.

 

i get your points, but the "hardness" i talk about is about all of them, that's why i said LITERALLY hardness in my second option. this because they are all very hard in there own way.

 

to make it more specific: you can maybe say which gives you the most trouble to get. or look at all three points how they are when on average, and which one towers the most above it is the "hardest" one.

 

simply said: with hardness i mean all of them, and which one you think is the worst of them all is the option you choose. so by lack of a word that covers all of those points i just call it like this.

Edited by yiazmat50112254
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The battle trophies and the create items trophies are despicable...I got a huge chunk of the trophies when I 1st started playing the game, and by the end I felt like all my passion for gaming was burnt...took a break, and recently after almost 2 years of break, I got the motivation to start hunting again for the last trophies. And now I'm finally close to the platinum. Just need to finish the game on universe and chaos, and I can finally say my farewells to the game. Hopefully the SO from PS4 won't be this annoying, platinum hunting wise.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6.5.2016 at 8:36 PM, Dragon-Archon said:

How is option #1 hard? Time consuming does not equal difficulty.

 

I agree with Snowxsakura, listening to emo Edge, Sarah, and Lymle makes it a torture. 

 

Yes, time-consuming is hard. If you are paying with nothing but your life time, even if there is no effort of learning or anything behind it, it is still incredibly hard because it is something that is hard to get. So yes, time-consumption equates difficulty as well, just differently. And the rumor that it is not should die. If the game in one way or the other wants you to spend a a lot of time for it, then it is hard to get it otherwise people would actually get it. And yes, even if you do not need to be present it can still be counted as hard because that still is planning, dedication, a lot of electricity, etc.

 

You know how I can say that? Because that was the only hard thing for me. Even the Ethereal Queen is an incredibly loser and the only difficulty comes from not killing her too fast and to know when to switch a character out for Lymle. The battle itself is not hard simply because you are expected to be so good at this point that she is just a strong enemy with many HP.

Edited by Cetra29
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2016 at 1:38 PM, Najinceil said:

 

 

 

 

Sounds like a game I need to buy. Especially since I'm having to deal with FFX's dub.

FFX's dub is actually not half bad, all things considering. The problem with Star Ocean 4 isn't just the terrible voice acting. It's the script and writing. FFX has a decent script, honestly. Tidus is questionable at times, but I thought Auron was good, for instance. Especially for its time. (not MGS 1998 levels or anything, but still) 

No amount of quality voice actors can undo the train wreck that is Star Ocean 4's writing and characters (though, mind you, I put 200 hours into it because I did like the gameplay for some reason). Watching any scene with Sarah, Lymle, or basically whoever really, must be what it feels like when you get an aneurysm.

 

I'm unsure as to why Lymle and Sarah even exist. The game tells you that Lymle speaks like she has severe autism because of a traumatic event in her youth, stunting her growth. That doesn't make her a quality addition to the story. If you have a realistically portrayed white supremacist that has a fetish for slinging squirrel shit around the house then it's a properly written character, but it makes it no less of a pain in the ass when you have to deal with the person. People defend Lymle from haters like me because her situation somewhat makes sense. That's great, but then she has no business saving the galaxy. She would only endanger herself and those around her.

Same goes for Sarah, who has the brain capacity of a pigeon at best. It would also be highly inconvenient to have a giant feathered big bird walking around in a ship with highly sensitive technology. Especially when she has absolutely nothing to offer the team apart from lame jokes that fall flat, or clumsy behavior that's just annoying.

 

In short, the hardest part about this game is the realization that you cannot open the escape hatch of your ship to eject the two aforementioned characters into deep space.  

Edited by Paige-ID
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Cetra29 said:

 

Yes, time-consuming is hard. If you are paying with nothing but your life time, even if there is no effort of learning or anything behind it, it is still incredibly hard because it is something that is hard to get. So yes, time-consumption equates difficulty as well, just differently. And the rumor that it is not should die. If the game in one way or the other wants you to spend a a lot of time for it, then it is hard to get it otherwise people would actually get it. And yes, even if you do not need to be present it can still be counted as hard because that still is planning, dedication, a lot of electricity, etc.

 

You know how I can say that? Because that was the only hard thing for me. Even the Ethereal Queen is an incredibly loser and the only difficulty comes from not killing her too fast and to know when to switch a character out for Lymle. The battle itself is not hard simply because you are expected to be so good at this point that she is just a strong enemy with many HP.

 

It's not a rumor that difficulty and time consumption are two different things. They're two different things. I think you're confusing it with effort. Difficulty and time consumption definitely adds to how much effort it takes. Difficulty can add to the time though, meaning that because it's difficult, it takes time to practice and master. Some games will still be difficult, even if you know exactly what to do.

 

Just so we can see it clearly. Imagine a game that if you did everything correctly, it would take 500 hours to 100%. That's a lot of time! Imagine that all you do in the game is navigate a menu over and over and over. No skills required and there's no consequences for wrong decisions etc. It would take no skills at all, just a lot of time. You might find it difficult to sit through, but then you're talking about the effort of doing it. It certainly wouldn't take any skills from you to do so, just a lot of time.

 

You should judge the difficulty by the hardest tasks in the game, and if there's a lot of it, that certainly adds to it as well. What does not add to it is super easy things you gotta do over and over.

 

This is why guides will usually specify difficulty and time. Conflating the two will just give the reader a very wrong understanding.

 

Imagine reading a guide that said Final Fantasy XIII was 6/10 because it took 80 hours to 100%. To be fair, it can probably be 100% in like 45 hours, but whatever. The game itself is among the easiest in the series, and the hardest things you do in the game is 5-starring like 3 or something of the stone missions. The rest is just nothing to talk about. There's no consequences of dying and with some grinding you can easily beat anything. You can of course argue all the equipment trophy is difficult to keep track of etc. What does this add up to in terms of difficulty? The 5-starring is fairly simple if you look up a guide with suggested gear etc and tactics. Though, I'd argue that alone is like 3/10 difficulty. The equipment is just time consuming and a lot to keep track of, might push it to like 3-4/10. That's it.

 

If you conflate the time, the 80 hours given, and the difficulty of the difficult things to do in the game, the difficulty is pointless. It tells the user very little about the difficulty of the game. Saying it is 3-4/10 and 80 hours makes the user aware that it takes 80 hours, but also that the game isn't that challenging in terms of difficulty. If you see 500 hours on a guide, and you know that you don't have the time in your life for that, then you know that "difficulty" already, no need to add it to the difficulty rating.

 

Please stop conflating the two. Thanks! :) 

Edited by MMDE
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Cetra29 said:

 

Yes, time-consuming is hard. If you are paying with nothing but your life time, even if there is no effort of learning or anything behind it, it is still incredibly hard because it is something that is hard to get. So yes, time-consumption equates difficulty as well, just differently. And the rumor that it is not should die. If the game in one way or the other wants you to spend a a lot of time for it, then it is hard to get it otherwise people would actually get it. And yes, even if you do not need to be present it can still be counted as hard because that still is planning, dedication, a lot of electricity, etc.

 

You know how I can say that? Because that was the only hard thing for me. Even the Ethereal Queen is an incredibly loser and the only difficulty comes from not killing her too fast and to know when to switch a character out for Lymle. The battle itself is not hard simply because you are expected to be so good at this point that she is just a strong enemy with many HP.

I'm not sure if you're actually serious or just trolling. I'm mean come on, electricity? Yeah, that really contributes to how hard a game is. There's a difference in spending time on something that's difficult and grinding out drops/kills/damage/jumping/distance/skiils/whatever. None of the grinds in this game are difficult or hard, they're just boring.

Edited by Dragon-Archon
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dragon-Archon said:

I'm not sure if you're actually serious or just trolling. I'm mean come one, electricity? Yeah, that really contributes to how hard a game is. There's a difference in spending time on something that's difficult and grinding out drops/kills/damage/jumping/distance/skiils/whatever. None of the grinds in this game are difficult or hard, they're just boring.

 

I think the time consuming part is what he refers to. Conflate it being difficult to find time in your life to play the game and pushing yourself through the game because of how boring it is with the difficulty of things you do in the game. If you want the time rating, then you already got it by looking at the time. :) But there's something to be said about an enjoyability rating of going for 100% or something, but that's going to be very subjective. One community I'm with on PSN ask people to give a fun rating, not just difficulty, when they post their newest 100%.

 

On the topic of having an enjoyability/fun rating, I think it would be somewhat of a mess, and then I'd rather see written reviews, but I know that's just a bit messy. What I do want to see more of, and I sometimes do, is posting your opinions about the game, not just issues. Post when you liked the game, what you thought about it etc. It can be very useful for others when they consider getting the game, especially from a trophy-hunter perspective.

Edited by MMDE
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is you are wrong with that: Am I not conflating them the way I am talking about it. There is no such thing as just one difficulty. It is all about the context and I already began to show how to differentiate that in my last post. You cannot merely go out and say something is only hard (or difficult) to achieve when the modalities themselves require you to overcome an obstacle by skill, gameplay, et cetera. That is just the difficulty of achieving something in ONE context. A specific context. But not the only one that exists. Like the other guy who seemed to reply to be polemical instead of considering what I have already explained - and although he wanted to diss the game he already showed that there are multiple ways of "chores" that one can get through and needs to endure provided by the statement in his very first post about the characters - we have a very limited amount of time. And we already have to make our decisions of how to spend that time. Now the problem is that a limited resource such as time we never can truly get more of, just try to manage it better. And one cannot afford to spend this time, actually some tasks might be impossible to achieve just because of the time itself. Thus it is not actually logical to say the difficulty of achieving something is defined only by the skill (or the likes) you have to invest. Which is why it is also not "conflating" things because I am talking about difficulty from two different approaches. There are things in life that from a skill-demanding point of view you could easily get. And yet themselves to actually in the end be hard to achieve simply because you are not able to invest the amount of time required. And if time actually exists as a resticting factor it directly provides some relevance to difficulty.

As a matter of fact you already brought in a very very good term: Effort. Let me take your skill examples and expand: In the context of difficulty defined by overcoming in obstacle through sheer skill we ALSO cannot truly dismiss the factor of time because skill is simply something someone has to learn and learning also requires time (actually the part of the cake that you already took and wanted to show me). And when it is something skill-wise harder to achieve you will also need more time to craft your skills to perfection, et cetera, pp. You see, I am not even talking about time like THIS and yet it is everywhere - you basically just gave me another example of why it can never be dismissed. And yet, as said, even time alone on something that requires merely any effort can hardly be dismissed. You are saying "you just need to take a look at time for yourself to know" but I am talking about things in a broader spectrum not just while talking about forums that put one thing in one thread and another in the other. A person with a family that actually does all and everything he can do in his spare time to do such things for his own entertainment will still probably never achieve these things even though the task itself from mere execution is not problematic for him. The limited time can nevertheless make it an impossibility for him. Difficulty by skill is ONE factor. A factor that cannot disregard time (or the combined factor of effort) as well as sole time itself can hardly be disregarded in a fair consideration. When something is an element of a set with restrictive influential power it can serve as an obstacle and thus be considered as a factor for difficulty in one or the other way, even if skill is not the problem.

 think the post now should have cleared this up though and actually this entire discussion was not even necessary because you have phrased one sentence as "... then you know this 'difficulty' already ..." and while you have out it in quotation marks you still actually have acknowledged this by thinking of the respective context I was talking about. A context that very well exists. Having trouble to do and get something because you lack the time is a real thing. This trouble can increase the more time it needs. Time can be an incredibly restrictive factor.

If your mere concern is the confusion of users when they read posts I cannot really agree because I have yet to see someone being confused about such things (more like people actually understanding the point when they also think about a time-eating task) while only seeing those who are eager to say "difficult != time-consuming", so it does not even come to the confusion part and only those who disagree actually come out to post against that. And we cannot even go out and say "put not as we are talking about it!" because even the thread creator himself put it differently giving me the opportunity to very well talk about this in a proper manner. And even if he didn't it still should be listened to for the sake of fairness.

Edited by Cetra29
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cetra29 said:

The problem is you are wrong with that: Am I not conflating them the way I am talking about it. There is no such thing as just one difficulty. It is all about the context and I already began to show how to differentiate that in my last post. You cannot merely go out and say something is only hard (or difficult) to achieve when the modalities themselves require you to overcome an obstacle by skill, gameplay, et cetera. That is just the difficulty of achieving something in ONE context. A specific context. But not the only one that exists. Like the other guy who seemed to reply to be polemical instead of considering what I have already explained - and although he wanted to diss the game he already showed that there are multiple ways of "chores" that one can get through and needs to endure provided by the statement in his very first post about the characters - we have a very limited amount of time. And we already have to make our decisions of how to spend that time. Now the problem is that a limited resource such as time we never can truly get more of, just try to manage it better. And one cannot afford to spend this time, actually some tasks might be impossible to achieve just because of the time itself. Thus it is not actually logical to say the difficulty of achieving something is defined only by the skill (or the likes) you have to invest. Which is why it is also not "conflating" things because I am talking about difficulty from two different approaches. There are things in life that from a skill-demanding point of view you could easily get. And yet themselves to actually in the end be hard to achieve simply because you are not able to invest the amount of time required. And if time actually exists as a resticting factor it directly provides some relevance to difficulty.

As a matter of fact you already brought in a very very good term: Effort. Let me take your skill examples and expand: In the context of difficulty defined by overcoming in obstacle through sheer skill we ALSO cannot truly dismiss the factor of time because skill is simply something someone has to learn and learning also requires time (actually the part of the cake that you already took and wanted to show me). And when it is something skill-wise harder to achieve you will also need more time to craft your skills to perfection, et cetera, pp. You see, I am not even talking about time like THIS and yet it is everywhere - you basically just gave me another example of why it can never be dismissed. And yet, as said, even time alone on something that requires merely any effort can hardly be dismissed. You are saying "you just need to take a look at time for yourself to know" but I am talking about things in a broader spectrum not just while talking about forums that put one thing in one thread and another in the other. A person with a family that actually does all and everything he can do in his spare time to do such things for his own entertainment will still probably never achieve these things even though the task itself from mere execution is not problematic for him. The limited time can nevertheless make it an impossibility for him. Difficulty by skill is ONE factor. A factor that cannot disregard time (or the combined factor of effort) as well as sole time itself can hardly be disregarded in a fair consideration. When something is an element of a set with restrictive influential power it can serve as an obstacle and thus be considered as a factor for difficulty in one or the other way, even if skill is not the problem.

 think the post now should have cleared this up though and actually this entire discussion was not even necessary because you have phrased one sentence as "... then you know this 'difficulty' already ..." and while you have out it in quotation marks you still actually have acknowledged this by thinking of the respective context I was talking about. A context that very well exists. Having trouble to do and get something because you lack the time is a real thing. This trouble can increase the more time it needs. Time can be an incredibly restrictive factor.

If your mere concern is the confusion of users when they read posts I cannot really agree because I have yet to see someone being confused about such things (more like people actually understanding the point when they also think about a time-eating task) while only seeing those who are eager to say "difficult != time-consuming", so it does not even come to the confusion part and only those who disagree actually come out to post against that. And we cannot even go out and say "put not as we are talking about it!" because even the thread creator himself put it differently giving me the opportunity to very well talk about this in a proper manner. And even if he didn't it still should be listened to for the sake of fairness.

 

Please just don't conflate time consuming with how difficult the things you gotta do for the trophies are. In guides etc, the time is where you specify the time, and the difficulty is where you specify how difficult the things you gotta do for the trophies are. Pretty simple shit. Get Fit with Mel B (EU version), is a game where you just navigate a menu selecting what exercise you want to do, and then you press up and X to tell her you did each workout perfectly. The game takes 20 hours, but what you do in the game is super easy. 20 hours, 1/10 difficulty. If the game had taken 500 hours, it would have been 500 hours, 1/10 difficulty.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You literally ignored and entire post that very thoroughly explained that these things are not conflated and are not just about your forum posts. With this I am sorry but you are not in for any discussion. Definitions are not just about your definitions and I have made really spent a lot of time yesterday to make this stuff easier to understand but you just prefered to not read it. This is not about "simple shit". "Simple shit" is that it is not just about your definition of time and I have provided a pretty reasonable explanation for that. Now I ask you to please stop talking about "posting about the trophies" all the time because I ad infinitum already explained that I am not talking about solely trophy definitions.

Edited by Cetra29
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Cetra29 said:

You literally ignored and entire post that very thoroughly explained that these things are not conflated and are not just about your forum posts. With this I am sorry but you are not in for any discussion. Definitions are not just about your definitions and I have made really spent a lot of time yesterday to make this stuff easier to understand but you just prefered to not read it. This is not about "simple shit". "Simple shit" is that it is not just about your definition of time and I have provided a pretty reasonable explanation for that. Now I ask you to please stop talking about "posting about the trophies" all the time because I ad infinitum already explained that I am not talking about solely trophy definitions.

 

You may struggle to find time in your day to play a single game for 500 hours. You may struggle to do something that is boring and repetitive over and over. Sorry, but this struggle is not difficulty of the game. It's just time consuming, and so real-life factors makes it difficult for you to play, though it says little about the difficulty of the game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, MMDE said:

 

You may struggle to find time in your day to play a single game for 500 hours. You may struggle to do something that is boring and repetitive over and over. Sorry, but this struggle is not difficulty of the game. It's just time consuming, and so real-life factors makes it difficult for you to play, though it says little about the difficulty of the game.

 

I'm inclined to agree with Cetra on this but I see where MMDE is coming from as far as strict definitions go.

500 hours of pressing x on anything for me would be difficult due to its monotony. I think most people would struggle to sit there for that allotted time.

I think the issue could be resolved by simply changing the word 'difficulty' and expanding it to 'skill-based difficulty,' which is what MMDE appears to be calling 'difficulty.' This would negate any need to debate the topic further. 'Difficulty' alone is a very general term.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kraven_15 said:

 

 

I'm inclined to agree with Cetra on this but I see where MMDE is coming from as far as strict definitions go.

500 hours of pressing x on anything for me would be difficult due to its monotony. I think most people would struggle to sit there for that allotted time.

I think the issue could be resolved by simply changing the word 'difficulty' and expanding it to 'skill-based difficulty,' which is what MMDE appears to be calling 'difficulty.' This would negate any need to debate the topic further. 'Difficulty' alone is a very general term.

 

I just don't find it useful whatsoever to say a super repetitive and easy, but very time consuming game to be difficult because it's boring or time consuming. Say it's time consuming and boring etc, just don't call it difficult when the game itself is not difficult, it's just you struggling to care to play the game or struggle to find the time to play it enough etc. I mean, it would be one thing if the game required you to play 15 hours a day for a couple of weeks straight, but when it's just about the game taking a long time to play in total and it's just because you get bored, that's a different story all together. It has nothing to do with game difficulty, and more about your life, about how you want to prioritize your time.

Edited by MMDE
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It says little about the difficulty of the game" is where your problem lies though because you are treating it like a natural law that the "difficulty of a game" := "skill-based difficulty" which it isn't. The entire basis is already flawed by claiming that it is just that alone. It is like insisting that a strawberry is under all circumstances a berry because we all call it a berry when, as a matter of fact, a strawberry is NOT a berry from the perspective of botanics. Just as the prioritizing part is true BUT not the only thing because time is not only about prioritizing alone.

Edited by Cetra29
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Cetra29 said:

"It says little about the difficulty of the game" is where your problem lies though because you are treating it like a natural law that the "difficulty of a game" := "skill-based difficulty" which it isn't. The entire basis is already flawed by claiming that it is just that alone. It is like insisting that a strawberry is under all circumstances a berry because we all call it a berry when, as a matter of fact, a strawberry is NOT a berry from the perspective of botanics. Just as the prioritizing part is true BUT not the only thing because time is not only about prioritizing alone.

 

Yes, when you talk about the difficulty of the game, I'm talking about the difficulty of the game. What I'm not talking about how it fits with your real life prioritizing and time management. This is why I say, keep them separate, else you're conflating and it creates poor communication. Say you think it's so boring that you couldn't do it. Say it takes so long that you don't think it's worth it or you don't have the time for it. Don't say it's difficult, because had you actually done the tasks, you know they wouldn't be difficult, just you wanting/needing to do something else.

Edited by MMDE
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the game is specially hard, I remember even the lymle trophy wasnt that hard to get, but... well, more than 600 hours deserve some motivation behind. If you like the scratching then you do not mind the lice, and the game is quite good. A game like Cross Edge needed x3 less time, but omg was that boring and tedious: 150 hours that felt like 900!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.