| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
7291
   |
Posted - 2016.01.01 11:34:44 -
[1] - Quote
This is related to EVE by proxy being important information for all those who would see this fine work of art failscade into the realm of free to play.
Watch this video.
Personally, I'm 100% for banning free to play outright.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Solecist Project
The Scope
Gallente Federation
29534
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 11:46:48 -
[2] - Quote
This video doesn't tell anything new except that someone wants governments to stop game companies from literally abusing all the morons who are being slaved into throwing money at them ...
But what's the outcome of such? I'll tell you ... governments will abuse it for their own gain.
People are literally too dumb to realize what's going on in their minds anyway.
Consumers, aka slaves to marketing and neuroscience, will eventually be the majority.
This game will either die or follow suit eventually ...
... simply because at some point the mindless slaves will be the only ones left to play.
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3897
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 12:02:42 -
[3] - Quote
So they want to ban F2P games because a few adults with addictive personalities can't control their own spending habits?
Where does that leave games like Hearthstone, which is a card game like many other traditional card games and works the exact same way. You pay money for cards and use them to compete with other players, the only difference is, you have a much larger pool of players online and don't have to pay an initial fee to get started. This seems like a far better deal than buying real card games, so should the real card games be banned too? What about other toys and games. Toys and games aren't the only threats to addicitve personalities either.
Oh god.
|
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
7291
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 12:13:31 -
[4] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:So they want to ban F2P games because a few adults with addictive personalities can't control their own spending habits?
Partly that, but for me, it's more about gaming developers knowing they can get away with it, and creating predatory F2P systems as a result instead of focusing development time on actual quality games. It's like watching reality TV take the spotlight from quality drama television, and seeing real creativity suffer as a result.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3897
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 12:28:31 -
[5] - Quote
The thing that annoyed me about the video was the language they used. They claimed people who spent money on the games felt they were getting a good deal, because they actually enjoyed the games they played and were happy with their purchases. They then went on to suggest their enjoyment wasn't real and it was just a figment of their imagination... almost as if these companies were tricking people into thinking they're having fun when really they're not. As if such a thing is possible.
Oh god.
|
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
7291
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 12:42:08 -
[6] - Quote
They did that because that's what the research shows. Then they provided citations for the research in the description.
If we're being honest, is it really that far fetched? Denial is a common human trait. Very common.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Solecist Project
The Scope
Gallente Federation
29539
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:00:59 -
[7] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:So they want to ban F2P games because a few adults with addictive personalities can't control their own spending habits?
Where does that leave games like Hearthstone, which is a card game like many other traditional card games and works the exact same way. You pay money for cards and use them to compete with other players, the only difference is, you have a much larger pool of players online and don't have to pay an initial fee to get started. This seems like a far better deal than buying real card games, so should the real card games be banned too? What about other toys and games. Toys and games aren't the only threats to addicitve personalities either.
No.
The issue is NOT a few addictive adults! The issue is that it reaches to EVERYONE! That formdecades now people are being molded into being worthless consumer who need to buy things to be someone and who do not make choices but only follow their insincts!
You really believe it's just a few addictive adults when there's millions of these ****** games out there making BILLIONS from mindless slaves? Come on, take an hour and think about the dimensions this is about, okay?
Sheesh ...
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
|
Solecist Project
The Scope
Gallente Federation
29539
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:02:11 -
[8] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:The thing that annoyed me about the video was the language they used. They claimed people who spent money on the games felt they were getting a good deal, because they actually enjoyed the games they played and were happy with their purchases. They then went on to suggest their enjoyment wasn't real and it was just a figment of their imagination... almost as if these companies were tricking people into thinking they're having fun when really they're not. As if such a thing is possible.
It
*******
Is
!!!!!!!!!
Stop believing in a free will you do not have!
Marketing makes you "make" decisions that are none!
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3898
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:05:39 -
[9] - Quote
What decisions do marketers make for me, that I believe I make on my own?
Oh god.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage
RAZOR Alliance
722
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:06:45 -
[10] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:The thing that annoyed me about the video was the language they used. They claimed people who spent money on the games felt they were getting a good deal, because they actually enjoyed the games they played and were happy with their purchases. They then went on to suggest their enjoyment wasn't real and it was just a figment of their imagination... almost as if these companies were tricking people into thinking they're having fun when really they're not. As if such a thing is possible.
Do you know how gambling works?
The old sales pitch of making someone feel good about whatever they have bought, even if you sold a fridge to an eskimo.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Hengle Teron
Order In Disorder
Virtus Crusade Protectorate
59487
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:07:18 -
[11] - Quote
Watching another vid from that uploader... holy ****, Star Citizen has raised $100 mil ?! And fcking selling ships ingame for 1000s of $ that are not even in the game yet ! |
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3898
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:08:45 -
[12] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Riot Girl wrote:The thing that annoyed me about the video was the language they used. They claimed people who spent money on the games felt they were getting a good deal, because they actually enjoyed the games they played and were happy with their purchases. They then went on to suggest their enjoyment wasn't real and it was just a figment of their imagination... almost as if these companies were tricking people into thinking they're having fun when really they're not. As if such a thing is possible. Do you know how gambling works? The old sales pitch of making someone feel good about whatever they have bought, even if you sold a fridge to an eskimo.
So people don't actually enjoy going to casinos?
Oh god.
|
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
7291
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:13:47 -
[13] - Quote
Hengle Teron wrote:Watching another vid from that uploader... holy ****, Star Citizen has raised $100 mil ?! And fcking selling ships ingame for 1000s of $ that are not even in the game yet !
Do you know what Star Citizen's problem is?
Roberts doesn't appear to understand the concept of an expansion. They could have released a baseline game by now, and thrown in the stretch goals as expansions later - free for backers, charge for non-backers. Really not that hard to figure out. As it is, every time they hit a new funding milestone, they have to add more to the game they're building now, pushing a release date even further back. It's just getting old now, and I'm one of those that have demanded a refund, and received one, as a result. Don't get me wrong, I was a wing commander fan since day one of the first game, but it's not the 90s anymore and I and a few others think that's Roberts' biggest problem - he's still developing a game for the 90s, but with today's tech.
Anyway, this is a digression.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
246
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:14:52 -
[14] - Quote
The unfortunate downside of capitalism is it requires regulation to maintain the system by allowing assets to occasionally shift. The trouble with this is regulation is inherently flawed in that defining a rule allows for legal use of something outside of the bounds of that rule.
No system is perfect sadly and yes our children are being sculpted by consumerism to act a certain way. We've spent billions ensuring we know exactly what buttons to push to get the correct response. Look at movies and video games. The majority of them are formulamatic and all have their token "social norm" characters to ensure they reach the maximum amount of people to increase revenue.
Is this evil? No. Its market science. It was happening when we were children decades ago and it was happening in the Roman period. What is evil is when we as parents fail to translate to our children that the phrase "vote with your wallet" still exists and is still extremely powerful. If people suddenly said "nah the Iphone 6 is ****.. I'm keeping my Iphone5 until something better comes along" apple would suddenly have to shift to respond to its consumers demands. Yes this does happen but the trouble(back to the regulation comment) is that its very hard for "Joe the Phone Maker Guy" to get a loan and buy into that sector to create competition considering apple has nearly 1T bucks in the bank for just that purpose. |
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
246
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:17:21 -
[15] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Hengle Teron wrote:Watching another vid from that uploader... holy ****, Star Citizen has raised $100 mil ?! And fcking selling ships ingame for 1000s of $ that are not even in the game yet ! Do you know what Star Citizen's problem is? Roberts doesn't appear to understand the concept of an expansion. They could have released a baseline game by now, and thrown in the stretch goals as expansions later - free for backers, charge for non-backers. Really not that hard to figure out. As it is, every time they hit a new funding milestone, they have to add more to the game they're building now, pushing a release date even further back. It's just getting old now, and I'm one of those that have demanded a refund, and received one, as a result. Don't get me wrong, I was a wing commander fan since day one of the first game, but it's not the 90s anymore and I and a few others think that's Roberts' biggest problem - he's still developing a game for the 90s, but with today's tech. Anyway, this is a digression.
No Roberts problem is exactly the reason he was removed from the Freelancer project.
He has zero concept of feature sets and cant actually finish anything. This is status quo for every single title hes been on. |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
7291
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:29:30 -
[16] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:What decisions do marketers make for me, that I believe I make on my own?
No one is talking about you. We're talking about the lowest common denominator. The reason we have laws to begin with is the lowest common denominator. Always has been. That's the society we live in, and essentially, the social contract we agree to when we accept the responsibilities of citizenship. Because there are idiots out there that need to be protected from themselves. But, I won't argue the finer points of that particular topic. I will say that, as Sol pointed out (however aggressively), these games are attracting a lot of people that might have been more interested in, say, EVE, if they didn't exist. EVE is pretty cheap. Compared to a 'AAA' selling for $60 then adding a +$20 premium pre-order and a +$100 limited edition, and then paid DLC and on top of that, microtransactions that amount to little more than pay-to-win, while failing to deliver on quality content (Battlefront anyone?), EVE has them beat hands down.
The only time EVE gets expensive is when you add up the totals of what you've spent over time, which I can see how one could also argue makes a subscription model also exploitative. However, there are two things that debunk that argument right off the bat: the first is, you don't pay more than one sub to get a month worth of gameplay. IE, you can't pay twice as much money, and get two months worth of gameplay in only one, if you understand my meaning. In an f2p, you might be building a castle and collect, let's say, 6 units of stone every hour (1 per ten minutes). Pay $10, and suddenly, you're getting 12 units per hour. You get two hours worth of gameplay crammed into one by paying money. If it were competitive, that would make it pay to win. I'm sure you understand this though.
The other reason, of course, is that we are paying for both a good and a service, the good being the actual game itself, and the service being the servers that they're played on, the maintenance they and the game need, and of course, the salaries of the staff that perform that maintenance and manage the game and its community.
I know I went off on a bit of a tangent there but I wanted to cover my bases here because I have actually heard someone argue that subscriptions are exploitative in the same way F2P is. It's easily not, of course, but some people will never get a real grasp of that. However, the main paper cited in that video highlights a lot of what makes F2P exploitative, and it's not just stuff that affects people who are easily addicted.
And of course, they are pulling in huge crowds that, once again, makes developers think they should focus their efforts on this sort of game, and as I already noted, quality gaming suffers as a result. Creativity suffers as a result. At E3 last year, I can remember a grand total of zero new IPs. There may have been some I missed, but the games that got the most attention, the most headlines in "games journalism" and even mainstream news, were basically remakes, sequels, and prequels of existing IPs. Tell me you're not seeing a dwindling of fresh creativity in the gaming industry.
Some real creativity is out there, of course, and there are some great indi devs hitting the scene creating some amazing content. They've been out there for a while. But they're getting beat by Angry Birds and Candy Crush. Why?
Well, because the lowest common denominator isn't just stupid, but it's vast. And easily taken advantage of.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Salah ad-Din al-Jawahiri
New Order Logistics
CODE.
344
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:30:12 -
[17] - Quote
Personally, I don't see anything wrong with F2P per se. For instance, I used to play SMITE on and off when I lived in a place with a good Internet connection. Not being very engaged, I didn't spent a single dollar on it - and yet, I had fun and never had an impression that I was being ****ed somehow. The game is skill-based, the matchmaking is fair, and the only thing you're paying for is vanity items and new characters, which you can unlock for free if you have enough time on your hands. Hence, the only thing you pay for is character progression, which is real, visible, and palpable, unlike in those ****** "Heroin Hero"-type games where you pay just to play more "Heroin Hero" and spend more time chasing the dragon you'll never catch.
I blame the low culture of gaming among certain categories of people. Thankfully, it's slowly withering away as the first generation of modern gamers is starting to have kids of their own, but the perception that "video games are stupid" is still out there and going strong. Those who don't know much about video games don't see them as something at all significant and, thus, refuse to do any research on the subject. And it is very unfortunate that the kind of ferret dookie like Candy Crush turns out to be those exact people's first acquaintance with the world of gaming due to uts aggressive marketing. They're in danger because they don't realize the true power that games have over people.
As far as EVE is concerned, the main point here is simple: F2P is incompatible with a competitive player-driven game economy. I don't exclude the possibility that EVE may develop a F2P model of its own and live, but it won't be the EVE we know and love anymore. |
Poddington Bare
Angur Therapy
40
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:34:11 -
[18] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:What decisions do marketers make for me, that I believe I make on my own?
All of them.
It's worse than that even. You're somebody's alt in real life. |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
7291
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:35:27 -
[19] - Quote
I remember SMITE. It was one of the games that did F2P right, and made developers take notice of its success if I remember correctly. Paradoxically, while doing it right, SMITE may have inadvertently smote quality gaming by 'inspiring' some shady business practice amongst others that saw F2P as an opportunity to take advantage of gamers.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3899
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:47:41 -
[20] - Quote
I understand your point Remiel, but you make the assumption that these F2P games are drawing audiences away from traditional games, which I don't believe is true. Recent studies have suggested that female gamers now outnumber male gamers (or at least reaching an equilibrium) and the reason seems to be that smartphones are bringing gaming to audiences that were not previously interested. I'm guessing this is the audience F2P games are mainly drawing.
Oh god.
|
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
7292
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:50:07 -
[21] - Quote
And that is true to, and an excellent point to consider and factor in. But it doesn't address why we're not seeing any new IPs, and why so many PC games that the demographic you specified won't touch are taking the F2P route as well.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Salah ad-Din al-Jawahiri
New Order Logistics
CODE.
344
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:52:38 -
[22] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:I remember SMITE. It was one of the games that did F2P right, and made developers take notice of its success if I remember correctly. Paradoxically, while doing it right, SMITE may have inadvertently smote quality gaming by 'inspiring' some shady business practice amongst others that saw F2P as an opportunity to take advantage of gamers.
I'll have to disagree with that one. The pioneers of *****y F2P online games were the browser games, the first of which were developed circa 2000, long before MOBAs came to life. |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
7293
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 13:59:43 -
[23] - Quote
Salah ad-Din al-Jawahiri wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:I remember SMITE. It was one of the games that did F2P right, and made developers take notice of its success if I remember correctly. Paradoxically, while doing it right, SMITE may have inadvertently smote quality gaming by 'inspiring' some shady business practice amongst others that saw F2P as an opportunity to take advantage of gamers. I'll have to disagree with that one. The pioneers of *****y F2P online games were the browser games, the first of which were developed circa 2000, long before MOBAs came to life.
Then I'm thinking of something else and I'd have to go and look it up which I'm not doing right now cuz I feel like I'm gonna pass out in a minute. Tired as all hell, had a long day. I'll probably just come back tomorrow and see where this thread's gone. Based on my experience though, F2P may have had it's diamonds in the rough, but all in all, it's been little more that a scourge on gaming that I'd sooner see eradicated than indulge.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Solecist Project
The Scope
Gallente Federation
29572
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 14:17:37 -
[24] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:What decisions do marketers make for me, that I believe I make on my own?
When people say they're hooked, do you believe that's a conscious, rational decision?
No. You're being emotionally steered into playing.
Just look at Indah. She doesn't even like the game as it is ...
... yet she is running three a counts again!
You think there's any rationality behind that?
Nope!
What makes people buy Coke? What makes people buy crap from IKEA?
Mercedes? Intel or AMD?
Marketing is out there to work around your rationality.
If you look at how it worked for decades now, you'll ses that ads constantly want to sell you a value you are lacking.
Be the hero!
Drink Coke and be part of the lifestyle!
Drive this big car, it makes you big as well!
Did you know that the reason diamonds are on engagement rings ...
... is because of a huge, successfull marketing campaign?
Do you understand now?
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
|
Solecist Project
The Scope
Gallente Federation
29572
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 14:18:50 -
[25] - Quote
Salah ad-Din al-Jawahiri wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:I remember SMITE. It was one of the games that did F2P right, and made developers take notice of its success if I remember correctly. Paradoxically, while doing it right, SMITE may have inadvertently smote quality gaming by 'inspiring' some shady business practice amongst others that saw F2P as an opportunity to take advantage of gamers. I'll have to disagree with that one. The pioneers of *****y F2P online games were the browser games, the first of which were developed circa 2000, long before MOBAs came to life.
Zynga.
Farmville.
Iirc they were the first big one.
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3899
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 14:21:06 -
[26] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:And that is true to, and an excellent point to consider and factor in. But it doesn't address why we're not seeing any new IPs, and why so many PC games that the demographic you specified won't touch are taking the F2P route as well.
I can't say I've noticed a lack of new IPs. I think game development is now more accessible to indie devs than it's ever been. Maybe this is why larger developers are going F2P. To be honest, I don't know which kind of PC games are going F2P, other than MMOs and Hearthstone which I mentioned earlier, which is actually an Android game.
Oh god.
|
Nana Skalski
Poseidaon
1769
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 14:56:07 -
[27] - Quote
They should ban microtransactions.
( -á° -ƒ-û -í°)/ GòáGò¼GòªGò¼Gòú - my sandcastle
( -á° -ƒ-û -í°)/ <=X - my yacht
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3899
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 15:14:27 -
[28] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:When people say they're hooked, do you believe that's a conscious, rational decision?
No. You're being emotionally steered into playing. Yes, of course it is. People play games because they are looking for entertainment. That is a conscious, rational decision to look for entertainment.
When they decide on a game, they choose a game that appeals to their interests, something they hope they'll enjoy. That is a conscious, rational decision to allow themselves to become hooked on something they like. People want to be hooked on their chosen form of entertainment. They don't want to be bored.
How often do you hear people complain, "I can't get into any games lately". I say it a lot and that is because I yearn to find something that can grab me and get me hooked. I consciously and rationally want that to happen.
Quote:What makes people buy Coke? What makes people buy crap from IKEA?
Mercedes? Intel or AMD?
Most people are rational buyers (i.e adults with limited budgets). They spend what they can afford and budget appropriately based on their requirements.
People buy coke because they prefer the taste over other products. If they prefer the taste of Pepsi, no amount of advertising is going to make them switch brand and if they can only afford a cheap brand, advertising isn't going to convince them otherwise. Advertising allows new customers to learn about a product and reminds old customers a product is still available. It doesn't convince people to spend money if they have no interest in the product (unless they're hiding something in the small print).
With Mercedes, they are paying for luxury and also a status symbol. They are paying for a brand, but that brand has the benefit of bringing status with it. It impresses women and makes your neighbours jealous. If you can't afford a Mercedes, you get a Ford instead. They don't buy a Mercedes if they can't afford one, if they did we'd all be driving expensive cars and there would be no market for cheap cars. The reason there is a market for cheap cars is because most people spend rationally and would prefer not to get into debt for the sake of making their neighbour jealous. Those that can afford to, do.
AMD vs intel is kinda... well there isn't much choice there as there isn't much competition. You either buy intel or AMD based on reviews, requirements and your budget.
Oh god.
|
Ibutho Inkosi
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 15:36:21 -
[29] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:What decisions do marketers make for me, that I believe I make on my own? One such decision, for example, is the introduction of sugar into foods one wouldn't normally expect to find, or even look for sugar, in order to create a sugar addiction and thus cause you to keep coming back for more. Almost the entire processed food industry does this. McDonalds even does it with its french fries using a starch/sugar chemical function.
As long as the tale of the hunt is told by the hunter, and not the lion, it will favor the hunter.
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3899
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 16:08:42 -
[30] - Quote
Ibutho Inkosi wrote:Riot Girl wrote:What decisions do marketers make for me, that I believe I make on my own? One such decision, for example, is the introduction of sugar into foods one wouldn't normally expect to find, or even look for sugar, in order to create a sugar addiction and thus cause you to keep coming back for more. Almost the entire processed food industry does this. McDonalds even does it with its french fries using a starch/sugar chemical function.
But I don't eat food, it makes me sick.
Oh god.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |