Star Trek Online Open Beta opens tomorrow

ScYcS said:
Just plain garbage. They took StarTrek and removed the most important thing from it: exploration and diplomacy and replaced it with senseless cookie cutter mission to mission to mission combat.
Click to expand...

DOA



That's all you do, mission and mission after mission and they get old after ... the 6th time. It's all combat and only that. Boring and totally non StarTrek.
Click to expand...

Sounds boring regardless of property or license. Sounds like a bad game to me.


They could've called it Spacefight online and nobody would've noticed that there's a StarTrek logo on it.
Click to expand...

You bring up a good point: I daresay this game wouldn't be getting anywhere near the amount of hype and attention its had if the name Star Trek were not on it.

It'd be just another MMO and apparently not one of the better ones, at least at these early stages.


If it were the same exact game without the Star Trek stuff in it...I wonder: Would there be any positive feedback for it? Would anyone even give a damn?

I don't think I would.


Here's the thing. I've seen it alluded to and almost stated outright by a few here in this thread and in some other places and it's something I, as a Trek fan, can be guilty of myself and it goes something like this:

Because it's "Star Trek" you're going to give a certain amount of extra latitude, forgiveness, generosity, tolerance, or whatever you want to call it in a situation you normally would not.

That's the gist I'm getting about this beta overwhelmingly. If it weren't Star Trek, most of you would just say it sucks outright and be done with it. Be honest.

I can all but hear some of you saying: "It's Star Trek so I really wanna like it and by golly I'm going to make myself like it even though yeah *fill in the blank* does suck."

No. The game sucks doesn't it, guys?

C'mon...take off the Trek fan hats for a second and really be honest about it. I sympathize. ;)


I'm guessing this thing would be DOA or close to it if it weren't for the Star Trek property. That's the consensus I'm getting.
 
Last edited:
bigdogchris said:
Oh no, if MMO's don't hold yoru hand, i.e. WoW, and constantly give you a bazillion quest to do, as the only means of progression, they suck!
Click to expand...

WTF did you smoke to kill all the braincells in order to come up with THAT response to my post?
 
Maybe we can save this thread by talking about Mass Effect 2 or Bioshock 2 or something?
 
I can't believe it's so combat oriented.

Star Trek should be about giving you a huge universe to explore at will and players discover secrets as they visit strange systems and planets, etc.
 
Spare-Flair said:
I can't believe it's so combat oriented.

Star Trek should be about giving you a huge universe to explore at will and players discover secrets as they visit strange systems and planets, etc.
Click to expand...

I agree, but hope they'll make good on the promise to provide an open area, or get the license taken away from them as CBS said they'd do. That said, i can understand why they are not simply making a "open" universe the way it used to be - it is INCREDIBLY difficult to 1) balance and 2) get people to play. MMO players want combat. They don't want Bioware-esq "Choose 1 of 4 things" to find a diplomatic solution or a real time mining simulator to be the cornerstone of gameplay.

Giving people lots of "empty space" means lots of places that are out and out useless to the player base. You can create a huge galaxy, but if its like the Karanas in original EQ, people are going to be at the two planets that have away team missions, and complain that they have to go so far when "in the show they always warped from planet to planet having adventures". Quite simply, they're going to have to go for SOME amount of mass market appeal. I really hope things expand and have the kind of scale that would be more Star Trek like, but I have to be realistic that Spreadsheet Online (ie. EVE) already found lots of problems in that model that the average post-WoW MMO gamer will NOT put up with.

Some Hardcore Trekkies/Trekkers are going to argue there's too much combat, some will argue there is not enough, so that's a lost cause going for one or the other. TOS-gurus will want more ripped-shirt Kirk action and humping blue people, DS9 aficionados are going to want a comprehensive trading and political system, NG will want plenty of philosophical Picard style storytelling and diplomacy etc.... you can't pander to "one" vision of Star Trek because there isn't any!

I would not want to be Cryptic with this kind of IP to deal with, and I think KOTOR is an "easier" one to work with, but they can still make an enjoyable game out of STO, if they make the right decisions.
 
I sort of wish it was like Star Control 2 or something for some reason in terms of how there is a large universe to explore with things hidden throughout...

Maybe set up all these vast systems and planets and just randomly generate events and encounters. Some systems will be too high a level for you to be successful at so you'll have to come back later, etc. but it's still a free roaming universe without the need for scripted missions always.
 
Spare-Flair said:
I sort of wish it was like Star Control 2 or something for some reason in terms of how there is a large universe to explore with things hidden throughout...

Maybe set up all these vast systems and planets and just randomly generate events and encounters. Some systems will be too high a level for you to be successful at so you'll have to come back later, etc. but it's still a free roaming universe without the need for scripted missions always.
Click to expand...


Star Control 2. A game that set some great precedents and standards and never was equalled or surpassed again.
 
Finished the early tutorials. Here are my thoughts:

Pros:
- character creation has a lot of options (you really can make a sexy green-skinned alien, esp with the options to change the bust size, hip size, and stance).
- ship models look good
- space combat looks good
- easy tutorial

Cons:
- ground combat is boring
- server lag isn't good (but it's open stress testing, so I expected it to be like that)
- can't name my ship the USS Bachman Turner Overdrive (not enough characters, but it seems you can name your ship anything you want - I saw the USS Vagiflap flying around...)

Unknowns:
- ship customization
- player customization
- figuring out how to make the sexy aliens dance
- exploring stuff
 
Before they took the server down I finished a couple missions. I liked my patrol mission. Destroying the space docks were fun. Haven't found a reason to pay monthly, but I haven't found a reason to call it a pile of garbage like others either.
 
After playing it for a good 6 hours or so, I can say that I want to like the game, but it's very hard considering that it takes what trek is, and turns it upside down.

I guess it depends what you look for in an MMO. As a generic space MMO, it might offer something to those people who want a futuristic MMO without the learning curve of EVE and prefer a more casual playstyle.

As a Star Trek MMO, it doesn't seem to do well. I guess if you just want an MMO and could care less about the "Star Trek" part, it might float your boat. Unfortunately the Star Trek part is what may entice many of the people here to play the game, in which case it is sorely misleading.

I think in my 6 hour stint, I saw more ships destroyed than any entire series of Star Trek, or scratch that, perhaps all Star Trek TVs/Movies combined. Total diplomatic missions? Two, and I lost count of the combat missions. So far starships seem meaningless and insignificant, easy to come by - as is the crew required to operate one. Controls are simplistic, WASD in space, whereas on the ground it operates how you imagine it would. In space, A and D turn your ship, this is simple combat. There is no rolling that I have seen, ships can take quite a bit of punishment and keep on ticking. Repair times are measured in seconds.

I understand that some of this is required to field an MMO that will appeal to a wide range of people. But sadly the real Trek experience gets lost in this quest, as I have seen little to nothing in the way of exploring and it seems that everything so far has been heavily instanced. That's not to say it's all bad. Customization is pretty top-notch, allowing ships to be customized in the way they appear, colors (within reason), fleet insignias, etc. Characters maintain the same customization, and when running around on a Starbase you see plenty of characters with wide varieties of uniforms. This is a double-edged sword though, as there appears to be no consistency between uniforms and it gives the appearance that Starfleet is a ragtag group that maintains no standard uniform or dress code. Simply wear whatever garb in your starfleet wardrobe that appeals to you, slap on a combadge and you're ready for your days work of space explor- I mean, Klingon killing.

Finally, while it seems fun to play for a few hours, and perhaps a bit longer, I can't imagine paying for the game, and during my entire career so far I've only found myself genuinely having a good time only two or three times. These were times where as part of a small fleet, we were involved in an engagement with a comparable enemy fleet. Finally it felt like I was watching a Star Trek space battle unfold before me, if only for a moment. Unfortunately, the rest of the game has seemed rather "meh" and for those of us that wanted to be able to fully engross ourselves into the trekkie universe, you'll be sadly disappointed. Bridge officers seem more like stat sticks and there is little interaction with them and I have not seen the interior of my ship, the bridge, or any other sections at all since I've started playing.

Well, I'll leave it up to you to decide if this is something you'll be playing. I have a lot of friends ready to jump on this ship before it's maiden voyage, and I'm afraid I can already see some leaks and poor design elements before we've even left spacedock.

To sum it up, this game is like a Tribble. It may enrapture you at first, but it's only a matter of time somewhere down the line that you'll come to the realization that it's sadly lacking all the qualities that would make it something you'd want to keep around.
 
Yeah too many people are too harsh here. You've played a tiny part of a level capped beta. Try judging WoW on it's first 10 levels...you're barely scratching the surface.

I definitely see potential but I have to put more time in. The only issue for me right now is I'm wondering if there are going to be more abilities to use eventually than just phasers and torpedoes in the ship and the few ground combat moves there are. I haven't looked into it though.
 
Paid steam my $59.99 for the digital deluxe, and alright, here's my 2 latinum worth... Played for a coupla hours yesterday and while not exactly terribly impressed, it definitely has potential. Haven't managed to do much yet, finished the tutorial and flew a rescue mission thing - fly out, beam on board a ship to kill some baddies, beam back to kill some more baddies in ships.

Ground combat is, as many have pointed out, totally terrible. Tab target enemy, fire phaser, rinse, repeat. Dodge for a bit for attempted variety but seriously, wtf. But come on, unless you are hardcore TOS, this isn't what star trek is about.

Space does seem like the final frontier though. Ship battles looks like it could be fun, especially if it manages to evolve into what EVE has going on. Although probably not, which would depend on how much Federation vs Klingon and whoever else comes into play. I'm still trying to wrap my head around how system space and sector space works. In sector space, are you travelling at warp all the time? It does seem that there would be some 'exploration' element, but we shall have to see. I read something about 'patrolling' - just fly about and find planets that need help in one way or other and help out. That might work out.

Oh and no, I wouldn't have given this game a second look if it wasn't Trek IP. I'll probably play the first month and see how it goes. If it crashes and burns, oh well, not the first time I've shelled out money for a crap game and definitely not the last.
 
FrozenLiquidity said:
To sum it up, this game is like a Tribble. It may enrapture you at first, but it's only a matter of time somewhere down the line that you'll come to the realization that it's sadly lacking all the qualities that would make it something you'd want to keep around.
Click to expand...

Then the Klingons destroy your homeworld and your species will only survive if you use time travel to bring them back.

I have no set opinions yet, since I just barely touched the game. The tutorial was easy to go through, and seems to teach most things you'll need. I don't remember it going over picking your skills, but it's not that difficult.

I think the problem is this:
People expect the game to be like the Star Trek universe they are used to - diplomacy, exploration and combat. But... you need to remember that the Federation is at war. Look at the later seasons of DS9. There wasn't too much exploring, and the diplomacy was somewhat limited to getting allies to fight the Dominion. It was mostly combat, or related to Bajoran religion (aka The Emissary). Furthermore, the fighting was all in places that were explored (or in enemy territory). There was little fighting in the Delta Quadrant that was unexplored to the Federation. All the fighting was in known space against known enemies.

People expect it to be like they are actually in Starfleet, but that will never happen. In fact, that would be rather boring I think. Earth & Beyond did a good job with making people want to explore (haven't played EVE). STO seems to be, at it's core, a near pure combat-oriented game. I look forward to seeing some of the ships in battle.
 
Labeling something as Star Trek is nice because then you don't have to come up with art, a universe, cultures, or anything really. Like the new Star Trek movie, had all the characters, ships, etc, etc but it wasn't Star Trek just boom boom space fights.
 
I haven't played this game yet in any shape or form - but I don't see why ground combat/exploration can't be fixed given time? Okay, maybe that might take a lot of time. Maybe it might take a hell of a lot of time. But twelve months from now, eighteen months from now, if the developer continues to work on this game, and they actually make it good, does it really matter to any of us if it took them that long to get there? Nobody's forcing us to buy the game right now are they?

It's an MMO, and as long as the developer has the resources, they can change the game. To me, this is the big difference between an MMO and a non-MMO.

Ah well, I wanted to be a female Vulcan. Now my dream is shattered.
 
Not a fan of star trek or even understand the plot but it seems like an interesting game to try.
 
Arkuatika said:
Not a fan of star trek or even understand the plot but it seems like an interesting game to try.
Click to expand...

Based on what?

Did you even read this thread? I've rarely seen so many people at this forum all agreeing about something.
 
I am a huge Trek fan.. and its unfortunate that many of you are saying this game is garbage. I will be skipping this game as well it seems.
 
WabeWalker said:
I haven't played this game yet in any shape or form - but I don't see why ground combat/exploration can't be fixed given time? Okay, maybe that might take a lot of time. Maybe it might take a hell of a lot of time. But twelve months from now, eighteen months from now, if the developer continues to work on this game, and they actually make it good, does it really matter to any of us if it took them that long to get there? Nobody's forcing us to buy the game right now are they?

It's an MMO, and as long as the developer has the resources, they can change the game. To me, this is the big difference between an MMO and a non-MMO.

Ah well, I wanted to be a female Vulcan. Now my dream is shattered.
Click to expand...

Thats not the point though. The point is that people don't want to buy a broken game, with the hopes that it'll be fixed 12 or 18 months from now. If I said to you, heres a car and it doesn't work and doesn't start. Buy it for $15,000, and I might have it fixed within the next year, you'd laugh.

Too many MMO companies try to get away with this, and the gaming community is on to them, and we don't like it.

Also, a game at this stage of beta is pretty much how its going to be. There are fundamental aspects to a game (those that are very deep and hard to change), and superficial aspects (those that are simple to change).

For example: Fundamental would be changing ground based combat entirely to go from turn based to real time, or vice versa. Superficial would be "The cruiser class ship had 2000 shields, but now has 1500 to balance it with other ships".

You won't be seeing any Fundamental changes before we go live.

For a GREAT example of what happens when you make fundamental changes to a game, see this games counterpart -- Star Wars Galaxies. They completely changed their game, and instead of 'fixing' it, they pissed off their existing player base while completely failing to develop a new one.

I had hoped this would turnout good, but the fast turnaround times and general 'rushed' feeling we've been getting from details about this game had my hopes low. Now that I've read this thread, they're shattered. I hope the company making this game fails miserably and doesn't recoup their costs with it. I hope that the experience teaches a lesson to other companies/execs who want to rush a game out the door before its finished so they can start making money. I know it won't, but a guy can dream can't he?
 
WabeWalker said:
Based on what?

Did you even read this thread? I've rarely seen so many people at this forum all agreeing about something.
Click to expand...

See, that's what I'm noticing.

I'm seeing all kinds of different gamers, Trek fans, not Trek fans, MMO vets, MMO noobs, and everywhere in between and I'm getting by and large the same consensus of agreement on certain things across that whole spectrum that simply can't be denied: This thing is not ready to street in 3 weeks and anyone that really blindly put down $50 $60 on a preorder is taking a very large leap of faith, especially when it comes to a service like Steam where getting a refund is like trying to part the Red Sea with your bare hands.


Even I know that MMO's have a bit of a track record of streeting in a less than "fully polished" fashion at first. Some more than others. Clearly this is going to fall more on the "more" side of that coin by any stretch of the imagination.


That being said:

What is Cryptic's track record like?

The complaints that keep popping up repeatedly...can they be fixed? Can this game really be improved and expanded upon over time?

Can Cryptic be counted on to make this game better over time?

There's no way I'm buying this anytime soon based on what I've perceived as an overwhelming consensus on several issues that I know myself too well: I just don't have the patience or BS tolerance to put up with.
 
Last edited:
Direwolf20 said:
I hope the company making this game fails miserably and doesn't recoup their costs with it. I hope that the experience teaches a lesson to other companies/execs who want to rush a game out the door before its finished so they can start making money.
Click to expand...

Thats a wee bit harsh dont you think? "I hope the company loses their financial structure and employees lose their jobs because they attempted to make a game everyone could enjoy". Come on, what if someone wished that on you because you attempted to make something people enjoyed and it turned out not to be what they expected? Thats fucked up and you know it is. They are not trying to trick or force anyone into buying this game.

Read the reviews and buy it or dont but it, but theres no reason to have this snotty attitude that since it didnt meet your expectations, that "Someone must pay for this injustice!". I feel bad for game developers, they work hard on a game and kids think they are entitiled to it and tell them how THEIR game should be or else they should go bankrupt.

Seriously, get a grip on reality.

And to counter argue the statements that are about to fly at me:
No I don't think its good practice to release a broken game.
No I don't think players should buy the game based on hope of future fixes.
I'm all about making a stand and not buying a game because of their methods but I do not wish for them to "not be able to recoup their losses"
 
Exce said:
Thats a wee bit harsh dont you think? "I hope the company loses their financial structure and employees lose their jobs because they attempted to make a game everyone could enjoy". Come on, what if someone wished that on you because you attempted to make something people enjoyed and it turned out not to be what they expected? Thats fucked up and you know it is. They are not trying to trick or force anyone into buying this game.

Read the reviews and buy it or dont but it, but theres no reason to have this snotty attitude that since it didnt meet your expectations, that "Someone must pay for this injustice!". I feel bad for game developers, they work hard on a game and kids think they are entitiled to it and tell them how THEIR game should be or else they should go bankrupt.

Seriously, get a grip on reality.
Click to expand...

Agreed.



And to counter argue the statements that are about to fly at me:
No I don't think its good practice to release a broken game.
No I don't think players should buy the game based on hope of future fixes.
I'm all about making a stand and not buying a game because of their methods but I do not wish for them to "not be able to recoup their losses"
Click to expand...

If something sucks than I hope it fails.

I don't wish any ill will on the company or these people but really: If something sucks don't be a lemming and buy it anyways. Vote with your wallet. That's the only thing that matters in the end, up or down.

Ignore the name "Star Trek" which clearly some people are going to have to do at some point to step back and attempt to be even remotely objective about this in some instances and if the game really just isn't good, don't buy it, folks. Please. Do us all a favor.

I'm tired of mediocre or subpar or "almost there but not quite" Star Trek games and I feel like that's all we've ever really had.

Vote with your wallet. That's the way to get results.
 
Direwolf20 said:
Thats not the point though. The point is that people don't want to buy a broken game, with the hopes that it'll be fixed 12 or 18 months from now. If I said to you, heres a car and it doesn't work and doesn't start. Buy it for $15,000, and I might have it fixed within the next year, you'd laugh.
Click to expand...

Car analogy detected, destroy thread immediately.
 
PuppeteerNessus said:
ehem -- MW2 -- ehem
:(
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that's the best recent example, albeit a negative one.

For all the complaining on the Internet and the whining... in the end, people were lemmings and bought the thing en masse anyways on the PC to say nothing about the consoles.

It didn't matter how well articulated and laid out the slew of obvious concerns and problems were listed in plenty of time ahead of the game being released. People simply didn't care and bought it anyways.


Despite talk and rhetoric, people voted with their wallets and they've guaranteed that we will see more $60 PC games that take huge shortcuts all over the place.

Great job, guys. The majority is never wrong. :rolleyes:
 
As a Star Trek fan I think it has done a fair job from what I have experienced playing the game so far. I've watched TOS, DS9, Voyager & Enterprise and a bit of TNG. It is way better than the piles of garbage other Star Trek games have been. I think it was bridge commander??? that was the only decent game before this. Not 100% on the name.

I haven't experienced enough of it yet to draw a conclusion but they have delivered what they said in press releases. At least from my early play testing. They put sector patrols in, diplomatic missions, the genesis system, fleet battles, pvp battles.
 
Amaroth said:
As a Star Trek fan I think it has done a fair job from what I have experienced playing the game so far. I've watched TOS, DS9, Voyager & Enterprise and a bit of TNG. It is way better than the piles of garbage other Star Trek games have been. I think it was bridge commander??? that was the only decent game before this. Not 100% on the name.
Click to expand...

Bridge Commander and Elite Force 1 and 2 were the only decent games IMO. Final Unity back in the day was also "decent." Again IMO.

But this is what I'm talking about: If those games weren't "Star Trek"...they would be barely mediocre.

Bridge Commander is tedious as all hell. People are talking about tedious and slow combat? My goodness.

Elite Force 1 and 2 were showing their strings, age, and rails even when they were first released.

These are the "best" Star Trek games?

I think that's sad.

That's where the frustration comes in. We keep getting these games that are mixed bags at best.

How is it that such an obviously great and wide open property as the Star Trek universe has never yielded ONE truly good to GREAT game?

Let's be really honest here folks. It's never happened.


I haven't experienced enough of it yet to draw a conclusion but they have delivered what they said in press releases. At least from my early play testing. They put sector patrols in, diplomatic missions, the genesis system, fleet battles, pvp battles.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
I havent played many MMOs (played WOW when it first came out for a few months) and I can honestly say I don't think it is a bad game from what I have seen. From what I remember with WOW (which was a very short stint) combat is the same...press 1-9 to attack with different attacks. I do like the space combat, lag is horrible though.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Got in on the free open beta key for STO. Played an engineer at first...decided to try a tactical. After a few hours play, the only difference I see between the two is on the ground combat.....and mainly because of the suit effects. And ground combat is pretty boring.

In space, the two classes I tried, played exactly the same for hours...I haven't seen any noticeable difference between them thus far...granted Im not very far in but they don't seem very distinguished. My ships even look similar if not the same.

I ended up playing the tactical officer the most, I think it's level 7 or 8.......and well space combat eventually got boring as all hell too. The automatic teaming is cool when people actually try to play WITH you, but more often than not I end up with 2-3 guys wandering around collecting the anomalies..scanning objectives while I get blown up....or picking a target off to the side and not helping anyone else kill anything. Combat is WAAAAAAAAY faster if people gang bang targets because you can plow through the shields on a straight run and take out the small guys easy. The earthdock place....is laggy as hell when the server gets a few people on it which isn't a big deal if you get past your starter missions...but when you're running around trying to find people and keep rubber banding it'll piss ya off when you might run down a hallway after 1-2 minutes of trying.


And here's the thing about STO that right now really makes me scratch my head and go "WTH were they thinking?!" TWO CHARACTER SLOTS......buy more at the Star Trek Online Store. 3 classes, 1 PVP race.....and two whole character slots. Given how laggy the beginner zones are Im reluctant to delete a guy so I can try a klingon now that it's finally become available to me. There is NO official word on if the two character slots will remain as they are come retail or if they will expand them. But I can't imagine they would expand them much if they plan on charging you for character slots. Understandable if the game is F2P after initial purchase, not cool if they expect subscription money on top of microtransactions.

But so far, the combat hasn't changed much as I level....the NPCs are harder...birds of prey actually cloak (and it's annoying as hell after they torpedo spam you then cloak and repeat)....the big tug boat ships get really annoying...and my ship has barely changed. Add a few DPS in a weapon, sacrifice arc for more DPS...mines..etc. Dunno when my ships get more specialized but pretty blah so far. That two character slots thing just pisses me off though.
 
I don't wish any harm on the actual employees, moreso on the exec's who are most likely responsible for this going out sooner than it should.

We all know that more often than not, its the 'higher up' decision makers that are forcing a game out before its ready, so they can start making money on it. Developing a game for 3 years earns 0 profit. We can also assume that the devs are probably well aware of the game's issues. They aren't stupid. But whats GOING to happen? The execs will blame the Devs for not getting it done in time, and the devs will be hurt by it while the execs collect the big paychecks.

So I'm annoyed at the Execs here, and I hope their mistake stings and teaches someone a lesson. Far too often we have unfinished games getting shoved out the door and at some point that should change.

Sorry if my orginal post was a little poorly worded, thats what I get for posting pre-coffee :).
 
Direwolf20 said:
Thats not the point though. The point is that people don't want to buy a broken game, with the hopes that it'll be fixed 12 or 18 months from now.
Click to expand...

So don't buy it right now then.

Let the suckers buy it now. And just be glad that you're not a sucker. People are going to support this game though - I've seen it happen with every MMO. There's always some nutcase out there who will champion the worst MMO, and will actually stand by it. Great, they love it. Let them pay for the improvements.

18 months from now this game might be decent enough to put down $10 for. I recently bought Age of Conan for $6, and I easily got a month's worth of enjoyment out of it.

Based on what I've read in this thread, I won't be buying this game right now - but that doesn't mean I won't keep it in mind for the future. That was the point I was trying to make. With a single player game, you just don't think that way - if it's bad on release day then you pretty much write it off permanently.
 
MAYBE, but past history has proven that not to be the case. I can't think of ANY games that were bad at release that are successful now. SWG has had about 10 years to fix their broken game, and its still considered one of the biggest failures in history :).

We can hope though.
 
Direwolf20 said:
I can't think of ANY games that were bad at release that are successful now.
Click to expand...

Oh I know someones gonna say it, so i will first...WoW...Sorry I keep picking on you today. But you are right on the note that games that do poorly in the beginning end up failures. I don't know if its because they launched bad that is the reason for the failure tho. I personally feel that its people wanting something new, playing the new MMO but realizing its not what they wanted (regardless of bugs). WAR had an excellent launch but it isnt a huge success.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top