[QUOTE="Mr_Anderson1817"]i still can't believe you couldn't have sex with that hooker in fallout 3. It was M, they should've done it. they had it in mass effect and gta IV Ironserpentno see, thats what I was talking about, that kind doesn't move the story at all and seems... i dunno... just... Stupid, i guess. getting high and drinking doesn't advance the game, but you can do it
Sex in videogames...yes or no?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Ironserpent"][QUOTE="Mr_Anderson1817"]i still can't believe you couldn't have sex with that hooker in fallout 3. It was M, they should've done it. they had it in mass effect and gta IV Mr_Anderson1817no see, thats what I was talking about, that kind doesn't move the story at all and seems... i dunno... just... Stupid, i guess. getting high and drinking doesn't advance the game, but you can do it one of the reasons I think gta4 is lame.
In real life, 80% of what we do is sex-related (as an example: everyone wants to look good. Why? To be attractive to the (most of the time) other sex), so yes, I feel that sex could (as opposed to should) be a part of games, especially when it concerns games that have a deeper social level to them. Games where there's a more or less true image of a (real or imaginative) society where all kinds of peoples from different races interact with each other, could and should have some form od sex imbedded, or at least, the possibility of sex. Mind, I don't want Mass Effect 2 to turn into an outright shagfest, but some erotic shenanigans could be a natural course of events, just like in 'real' life...
JJ
i find it quite staggering, and may I add is a sign of the sheer stupidity of the human race, how it can be acceptable for games to show extreme levels of violence and murder yet the smallest hint of any sexual content, something that is enjoyable to the human race and something we are 'meant' to do, the gaming community (or at least the censors, media, killjoys and ahem religious types) go nuts. I remember the first ever leisure suit larry way back in the 80's. The censors and killjoys were going crazy over what essentially were a few green monochrome pixels that vaguely resembled a woman with badly drawn jugs.wurdViolence in games is generally not very palatable but is usually "justified." (The player is often endeavoring to "save the world" or "defeat the enemy regime" or fulfill another classic trope.) Not all games present "violence for the sake of violence" in the vein of Unreal Tournament and Mortal Kombat. Most games that actually allow "murder" (which is quite different from "killing") take the time to distinguish between killing and murder. Even the now-infamous "kill the civilians" scene (I'm not even sure if that constitutes a spoiler now, considering how much it's been in gaming news) from "a certain" ultra-popular upcoming game, has been disclaimed as something the developers obviously don't endorse. As for sex, what bothers me here is not so much the nudity (the only issue you addressed about sex at all) but the context. Most games with violence have at least something of a justification for it, but the vast majority of games I've seen that offer any sort of sexual interaction at all (e.g. Planescape: Torment and other role-playing games from that era, Mass Effect, Grand Theft Auto), portray sex as simply, as you put it, "something that is enjoyable to the human race," as though there are no real consequences for the people involved. I'm not talking about STDs or pregnancy; I'm talking about real and actual psychological consequences, good and bad, for the people involved. "Yes," I realize that "games are games," but if games are actually trying to tell *more* immersive stories, then games are only shooting themselves in the foot if they take something as ridiculously complex as sex and reduce it to "just something that people who are 'in love' [another term that needs to be rethought] do." In short, violence in games usually has a sensible context. Sex usually does not, and naturally I realize there are many exceptions in both cases. But let's take this: Imagine a game that "implies" that people have sex: the screen fades to black, the characters' relationship is further developed (maybe), for good or ill, and the game goes on. Would actually showing the sex improve the game? (That's not a rhetorical question.) Why is the sex in there in the first place -- for the sake of character development or for the sake of gratifying the player?
[QUOTE="wurd"]i find it quite staggering, and may I add is a sign of the sheer stupidity of the human race, how it can be acceptable for games to show extreme levels of violence and murder yet the smallest hint of any sexual content, something that is enjoyable to the human race and something we are 'meant' to do, the gaming community (or at least the censors, media, killjoys and ahem religious types) go nuts. I remember the first ever leisure suit larry way back in the 80's. The censors and killjoys were going crazy over what essentially were a few green monochrome pixels that vaguely resembled a woman with badly drawn jugs.dracosummonerViolence in games is generally not very palatable but is usually "justified." (The player is often endeavoring to "save the world" or "defeat the enemy regime" or fulfill another classic trope.) Not all games present "violence for the sake of violence" in the vein of Unreal Tournament and Mortal Kombat. Most games that actually allow "murder" (which is quite different from "killing") take the time to distinguish between killing and murder. Even the now-infamous "kill the civilians" scene (I'm not even sure if that constitutes a spoiler now, considering how much it's been in gaming news) from "a certain" ultra-popular upcoming game, has been disclaimed as something the developers obviously don't endorse. As for sex, what bothers me here is not so much the nudity (the only issue you addressed about sex at all) but the context. Most games with violence have at least something of a justification for it, but the vast majority of games I've seen that offer any sort of sexual interaction at all (e.g. Planescape: Torment and other role-playing games from that era, Mass Effect, Grand Theft Auto), portray sex as simply, as you put it, "something that is enjoyable to the human race," as though there are no real consequences for the people involved. I'm not talking about STDs or pregnancy; I'm talking about real and actual psychological consequences, good and bad, for the people involved. "Yes," I realize that "games are games," but if games are actually trying to tell *more* immersive stories, then games are only shooting themselves in the foot if they take something as ridiculously complex as sex and reduce it to "just something that people who are 'in love' [another term that needs to be rethought] do." In short, violence in games usually has a sensible context. Sex usually does not, and naturally I realize there are many exceptions in both cases. But let's take this: Imagine a game that "implies" that people have sex: the screen fades to black, the characters' relationship is further developed (maybe), for good or ill, and the game goes on. Would actually showing the sex improve the game? (That's not a rhetorical question.) Why is the sex in there in the first place -- for the sake of character development or for the sake of gratifying the player? buddy, let me just say that you are freakin brilliant! I agree 100 percent!
well, theres nudity & sex scenes in movies so i dont see the big deal about it being in video games but for some reason critics flip out just from the thought of it, remember GTA:SA's hot coffee lolshinigami8912The problem with HC was that it wasn´t suposed to be there and if it was from the begining,the game would have had another rating in countries such the US,Australia or even Germany.
No because we do not want to get sued!
I wouldn't mind it, as long as it ties in with the story.
The problem with HC was that it wasn´t suposed to be there and if it was from the begining,the game would have had another rating in countries such the US,Australia or even Germany. That was why San Andreas got re-rated Adults Only (so Rockstar had to release a second edition). Rockstar's original ploy was to try to make the Hot Coffee mod look like just that -- an external mod that wasn't representative of Rockstar's intentions. Then people began discovering similar content in the [unmodifiable] PS2 version of the game, disproving Rockstar's initial claim. (I don't think the Xbox edition came out for another year.) http://www.gamespot.com/news/6129301.html So, yes, Rockstar did try to hide it, but it's not like they never tried to put this content in the game.[QUOTE="shinigami8912"]well, theres nudity & sex scenes in movies so i dont see the big deal about it being in video games but for some reason critics flip out just from the thought of it, remember GTA:SA's hot coffee lolArach666
[QUOTE="Arach666"]The problem with HC was that it wasn´t suposed to be there and if it was from the begining,the game would have had another rating in countries such the US,Australia or even Germany. That was why San Andreas got re-rated Adults Only (so Rockstar had to release a second edition). Rockstar's original ploy was to try to make the Hot Coffee mod look like just that -- an external mod that wasn't representative of Rockstar's intentions. Then people began discovering similar content in the [unmodifiable] PS2 version of the game, disproving Rockstar's initial claim. (I don't think the Xbox edition came out for another year.) http://www.gamespot.com/news/6129301.html So, yes, Rockstar did try to hide it, but it's not like they never tried to put this content in the game. Yeah,I think the xbox version was released without it.[QUOTE="shinigami8912"]well, theres nudity & sex scenes in movies so i dont see the big deal about it being in video games but for some reason critics flip out just from the thought of it, remember GTA:SA's hot coffee loldracosummoner
If tasteful(yes, sex can be tasteful) than I am all for it. I would rather games avoid the "boob shots" that movies are populated with however.
Also, I think that pornographic games are perfectly fine of you are an adult and want to purchase one. Good luck learning Japanese.
heysharpshooter
Thing is, what's considered a more serious artistic medium? Games or movies?
Sure we have movies with pointless sex and gratuitous nudity. Same way that there are movies with excessive and near-pornographic levels of violence and gore. But there are a hell of a lot of movies that also use nudity, sex, and gore as a way to make an artistic statement.
Games will never gain the same level of legitimacy unless this is allowed to happen. Now granted, many will argue that games will inherently be a far less legitimate form of artistic expression anyway. But even after that, that should become evident only after they've been treated as a legitimate medium for artistic expression. If they're artificially limited because of a predisposed notion that they AREN'T a valid medium for serious artistic expression, then that's not exactly fair, is it?
[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]
If tasteful(yes, sex can be tasteful) than I am all for it. I would rather games avoid the "boob shots" that movies are populated with however.
Also, I think that pornographic games are perfectly fine of you are an adult and want to purchase one. Good luck learning Japanese.
MrGeezer
Thing is, what's considered a more serious artistic medium? Games or movies?
Sure we have movies with pointless sex and gratuitous nudity. Same way that there are movies with excessive and near-pornographic levels of violence and gore. But there are a hell of a lot of movies that also use nudity, sex, and gore as a way to make an artistic statement.
Games will never gain the same level of legitimacy unless this is allowed to happen. Now granted, many will argue that games will inherently be a far less legitimate form of artistic expression anyway. But even after that, that should become evident only after they've been treated as a legitimate medium for artistic expression. If they're artificially limited because of a predisposed notion that they AREN'T a valid medium for serious artistic expression, then that's not exactly fair, is it?
Good point.Yeah why not?theres nuttin wrong with itI know this topic probably came up before,but it´s a discussion that I find relevant.
Games like Fahrenheit(Indigo prophecy)and Mass effect did have love scenes but they are just a drop on the ocean.
Your thoughts?
Arach666
agreedSure why not. Videogames aren't just for kids an teenagers. If a company wants to make an adult game they should be afforded that right to do so. There are appropriate venues where those games could be sold.
Archangel3371
[QUOTE="wurd"]i find it quite staggering, and may I add is a sign of the sheer stupidity of the human race, how it can be acceptable for games to show extreme levels of violence and murder yet the smallest hint of any sexual content, something that is enjoyable to the human race and something we are 'meant' to do, the gaming community (or at least the censors, media, killjoys and ahem religious types) go nuts. I remember the first ever leisure suit larry way back in the 80's. The censors and killjoys were going crazy over what essentially were a few green monochrome pixels that vaguely resembled a woman with badly drawn jugs.dracosummonerViolence in games is generally not very palatable but is usually "justified." (The player is often endeavoring to "save the world" or "defeat the enemy regime" or fulfill another classic trope.) Not all games present "violence for the sake of violence" in the vein of Unreal Tournament and Mortal Kombat. Most games that actually allow "murder" (which is quite different from "killing") take the time to distinguish between killing and murder. Even the now-infamous "kill the civilians" scene (I'm not even sure if that constitutes a spoiler now, considering how much it's been in gaming news) from "a certain" ultra-popular upcoming game, has been disclaimed as something the developers obviously don't endorse. As for sex, what bothers me here is not so much the nudity (the only issue you addressed about sex at all) but the context. Most games with violence have at least something of a justification for it, but the vast majority of games I've seen that offer any sort of sexual interaction at all (e.g. Planescape: Torment and other role-playing games from that era, Mass Effect, Grand Theft Auto), portray sex as simply, as you put it, "something that is enjoyable to the human race," as though there are no real consequences for the people involved. I'm not talking about STDs or pregnancy; I'm talking about real and actual psychological consequences, good and bad, for the people involved. "Yes," I realize that "games are games," but if games are actually trying to tell *more* immersive stories, then games are only shooting themselves in the foot if they take something as ridiculously complex as sex and reduce it to "just something that people who are 'in love' [another term that needs to be rethought] do." In short, violence in games usually has a sensible context. Sex usually does not, and naturally I realize there are many exceptions in both cases. But let's take this: Imagine a game that "implies" that people have sex: the screen fades to black, the characters' relationship is further developed (maybe), for good or ill, and the game goes on. Would actually showing the sex improve the game? (That's not a rhetorical question.) Why is the sex in there in the first place -- for the sake of character development or for the sake of gratifying the player? Showing the sex improves the experience of playing the game in the same way that showing the violence improves it. It makes for a more complete experience just like in every other medium it is used. Your argument is no more valid for games than for any other kind of medium. Any kind of content can be questionable or tasteful depending on the context in which it is used. I cannot understand that you justify violence in that is has a sensible context in games as opposed to sex. That would depend entirely on the game. I am of the belief that violence in any form is wrong and sex is a pretty necessary part of life without which none of us would be here. But none of that means you cannot tell stories about any of it. Both, in a sense, is there to gratify the player since that is pretty much what gaming is about (or any other kind of entertainment for that matter). And that you think sex is a more complex issue than killing someone, is just disturbing.
Nothing wrong with it...
Crimsader
Yup.
I don't think its a good idea cause some people might buy the game just for the fact it has boobs in it and not cause its a good game and then complain. And do you really need to have sex in a video game for it to be fun?
Its in movies, magazines, tv shows, so yea mind as well put it in video games
You don't need a lot of things in videogames for them to be fun, but that's not a good reason by itself to exclude anything. Really depends on the developers vision for the game, though if that vision includes possible hanky panky, it would be nice if it were handled better than the sad, clunky, awkward looking stuff found in Mass Effect and Dragon Age.I don't think its a good idea cause some people might buy the game just for the fact it has boobs in it and not cause its a good game and then complain. And do you really need to have sex in a video game for it to be fun?
oceanbacon
Well let's not take such a broad approach now, I really don't need to see Mario getting nekkid anytime soon.Its in movies, magazines, tv shows, so yea mind as well put it in video games
Memoryitis
I see your point,but the same aplies to violence.I don't think its a good idea cause some people might buy the game just for the fact it has boobs in it and not cause its a good game and then complain. And do you really need to have sex in a video game for it to be fun?
oceanbacon
And yet,there´s violence all over...
[QUOTE="dracosummoner"][QUOTE="wurd"]i find it quite staggering, and may I add is a sign of the sheer stupidity of the human race, how it can be acceptable for games to show extreme levels of violence and murder yet the smallest hint of any sexual content, something that is enjoyable to the human race and something we are 'meant' to do, the gaming community (or at least the censors, media, killjoys and ahem religious types) go nuts. I remember the first ever leisure suit larry way back in the 80's. The censors and killjoys were going crazy over what essentially were a few green monochrome pixels that vaguely resembled a woman with badly drawn jugs.LarsBlaabjergViolence in games is generally not very palatable but is usually "justified." (The player is often endeavoring to "save the world" or "defeat the enemy regime" or fulfill another classic trope.) Not all games present "violence for the sake of violence" in the vein of Unreal Tournament and Mortal Kombat. Most games that actually allow "murder" (which is quite different from "killing") take the time to distinguish between killing and murder. Even the now-infamous "kill the civilians" scene (I'm not even sure if that constitutes a spoiler now, considering how much it's been in gaming news) from "a certain" ultra-popular upcoming game, has been disclaimed as something the developers obviously don't endorse. As for sex, what bothers me here is not so much the nudity (the only issue you addressed about sex at all) but the context. Most games with violence have at least something of a justification for it, but the vast majority of games I've seen that offer any sort of sexual interaction at all (e.g. Planescape: Torment and other role-playing games from that era, Mass Effect, Grand Theft Auto), portray sex as simply, as you put it, "something that is enjoyable to the human race," as though there are no real consequences for the people involved. I'm not talking about STDs or pregnancy; I'm talking about real and actual psychological consequences, good and bad, for the people involved. "Yes," I realize that "games are games," but if games are actually trying to tell *more* immersive stories, then games are only shooting themselves in the foot if they take something as ridiculously complex as sex and reduce it to "just something that people who are 'in love' [another term that needs to be rethought] do." In short, violence in games usually has a sensible context. Sex usually does not, and naturally I realize there are many exceptions in both cases. But let's take this: Imagine a game that "implies" that people have sex: the screen fades to black, the characters' relationship is further developed (maybe), for good or ill, and the game goes on. Would actually showing the sex improve the game? (That's not a rhetorical question.) Why is the sex in there in the first place -- for the sake of character development or for the sake of gratifying the player? Showing the sex improves the experience of playing the game in the same way that showing the violence improves it. It makes for a more complete experience just like in every other medium it is used. Your argument is no more valid for games than for any other kind of medium. Any kind of content can be questionable or tasteful depending on the context in which it is used. I cannot understand that you justify violence in that is has a sensible context in games as opposed to sex. That would depend entirely on the game. I am of the belief that violence in any form is wrong and sex is a pretty necessary part of life without which none of us would be here. But none of that means you cannot tell stories about any of it. Both, in a sense, is there to gratify the player since that is pretty much what gaming is about (or any other kind of entertainment for that matter). And that you think sex is a more complex issue than killing someone, is just disturbing. Bear in mind, please, that I did say that violence is "usually," not "always" justified in games. I did account for situations such as, say, unwarranted murdering sprees in certain action and role-playing games. "Violence in any form is wrong" Self-defense? Defense of innocent others? Law enforcement? Sure, sex is "necessary" for life to continue, but sex in games is rarely about pregnancy (note that I didn't say "never"; I realize that some games even weave the player character's children into the overall storyline). There are too games with sexual themes where characters end up being exploited for the gratification of other characters or the player. I can think of many instances where, quite frankly, killing someone may very well be justified (see my response to your statement above), but I can't think of any situations where sexually objectifying someone is right. (Again, I realize that "not all" games with sex as a theme end up objectifying their characters, but if sexual objectification and perversion weren't problems, especially common problems, then I wouldn't be complaining as much if at all.) As I said, my problem lies not with nudity or even with sex itself but with context. In order for sex to have any real "meaning," it might do to adhere to some basic ground rules such as, for starters, commitment. Yes, that word still has value, but how many games that allow for player-initiated sex even acknowledge the idea of commitment? (This was one of the things that I found strangest about God of War: the main character Kratos was attempting to avenge his wife and children, but what does he go around doing with random women he meets, in more than one installment of the series to boot?) Regarding your claims that showing sex makes for a more "complete" experience, I can think of many, many sex scenes in movies, for example, where those scenes weren't in the least "romantic," even in the idealized-propaganda sense prevalent in pop culture, let alone did those sex scenes have any real "meaning."
I don't think its a good idea cause some people might buy the game just for the fact it has boobs in it and not cause its a good game and then complain. And do you really need to have sex in a video game for it to be fun?
oceanbacon
So?
Brokeback Mountain got a hell of a lot of critical appraise, but I'll bet that SOMEONE out there bought the movie just because he heard that Anne Hathaway whips her boobs out.
Who cares why people buy it? That's irrelevant. As a form of art, it's only inportant why you put that content in it.
And yeah, you don't need nudity or sex in a game in order for that game to be fun. You also don't need nudity or sex in a MOVIE in order for that MOVIE to be fun. That's not a valid argument against putting nudity and sex in movies, and it's not a valid argument against putting nudity and sex in games. Furthermore, you could make a similar argument concerning violence. You sure as hell don't need to have killing in a movie for that movie to be fun. Yet, take a look at games. Outside of sports games, I'd wager that about 90% of games consist of some form of killing or maiming.
I think this brings up the question...what exactly ARE games? Are games a legitimate and valid form of artistic express? Are they NOT a legitimate and valid form of artistic expression, but merely because people don't TREAT them as a legitimate form of artistic expression?
And as much as some people try to TREAT games as an art form, why is it that so many of them largely base their gameplay on the character/player running around and killing people/things?
One thing I can say for CERTAIN is that videogames will never be seen as a truly respectable and legitimate form of artistic expression unless people start TREATING games as if they have the POTENTIAL for such aspirations. I'd say that Final Fantasy VII was a step in the right direction, and I'm sure that other people could point to games that did this better. So there's certainly at least SOME potential there. And if games CAN be a valid and legitimate form of artistic expression, then they should be ALLOWED to have the freedom to pursue these goals.
So for starters, I advocate treating games like movies. The standards for sex and violence are ridiculously strange when it comes to whether or not the violence is in a game or a movie. But the age-guidelines are equivalent. Which makes it weird. I've seen some gory-ass sadistic games that would probably easily get an NC-17 if that content were in a movie, but yet the games only got an M rating. Meanwhile, the most timid depiction of sex will give you an AO rating in a game, whereas I've seen some SURPRISINGLY explicit sex in movies that only got an R.
Furthermore, the MPAA ratings don't take artistic merit very much into consideration. Just mostly content. Ang Lee and Stephen Spielberg faced problems over some of their movies, while Eli Roth is still putting out exploitative sick trash that gets passed off with an R.
So for starters, revise the rating systems. Treat violence and gore more harshly, and start allowing more depictions of sex and nudity. As games continually try to provide a more cinematic experience (goddamn you, MGS4), it only makes sense to adjust the ratings and guidelines so that they can be SOLD and CRITIQUED on similar grounds as movies.
Start TREATING games as a form of artistic expression at least on par with the freaking movies, and then trust that game developers will treat games as artistic forms of expression. If some game developers choose to put out what is in essence pornography, then we can criticize them on those grounds, same as we do with filmmakers who do the same thing.
But the bottom line is that KEEPING games from having hardly any significant sexual content on the grounds that sexual content isn't needed shouldn't fly. It's arguable that violent content isn't needed either, certainly not on the level of some of the bloody-ass games that have been released over the last few decades. Games might NOT be a medium that lends itself to artistic expression. But as long as you keep games held as a third-class form of entertainment based on the ASSUMPTION that games have no artistic merit, that's just not fair. That's like walking up to a marathon runner, preemptively deciding that he's going to finish last, and then LITERALLY shooting him in the goddamn foot before he ever starts the race. Of COURSE he's going to finish last now. You just shot him in the goddamn foot before the race even started.
All of the popular game developers are always saying, "Our games are coming to the point where we really can't make them much more realistic with todays hardware and software." Well, if they had adult content then I will believe them. This could mainly be implied for the James Bond games.
if its used to further the storyline then yeah , theres nothing wrong with sex in videogames
but if its there just for the sake of it, then no, I believe its clutter and a waste of time
Yes, it's okay to have sexual references in games but I think it should be in moderation. A scene here and there if it's intune with the story (like in MAss Effect)but I can't imagine many games wouldNEED it. Game developerswould be selling out if they thought they could intice gamers to buy into theirgames just becausethere are AI nude scenes. The bouncing boobs feature in theDead or Alive serieswas bad enough so full blown sex scenes would be completely uneccesary....unless you are a computer geek who has never seen 'the act' for themselves.
The last thing we want is an age of cyber porn in top video games! Not cool.
LOL good point.Yes, it's okay to have sexual references in games but I think it should be in moderation. A scene here and there if it's intune with the story (like in MAss Effect)but I can't imagine many games wouldNEED it. Game developerswould be selling out if they thought they could intice gamers to buy into theirgames just becausethere are AI nude scenes. The bouncing boobs feature in theDead or Alive serieswas bad enough so full blown sex scenes would be completely uneccesary....unless you are a computer geek who has never seen 'the act' for themselves.
The last thing we want is an age of cyber porn in top video games! Not cool.
olrion
I dont know. It depends on the game. And if they do, it shouldnt be all nasty and stuff, but I dought they will put it in. If they do, probably rated for adults only, banned in like 50 countries, blah blah blah. but I dont thinkt they should. Maybe nudity, but not sex.
My take on it is that if a developer wants it in their game then they should be able to have it in their game without any backlash from society. Whether it moves the game forward or not is irrelevant because the developer felt it should be in there. In fact, I actually wish they would push the envelope more due to the fact that society is so taboo about sex in video games.
We get knee-jerk responses from the media with games such as Mass Effect and that makes developers less inclined to keep with their vision of how they wish the game to be presented. Now with Dragon Age, a game with a deep engrossing story, comes around and my character gets to the point that Morrigan is attracted to him I get and she wants to "stay warm in her tent" I get a great built up kissing scene and some flirtatious sparring and then a slow fade to black. The moment has been built up, smooth music is playing and the scene opens up to reveal... two people in a bikini dry humping each other.
That completely takes me out of the immersion of the game because the story is so mature. I feel like I am being patronized with a "safe" sex scene.
When it comes down to sexual content and a developer wants it in their game, regardless of if it has a place or not, then I am all down for that. If anything, just to get us past this whole "OH MY! There is sex in that video game!?"-era that we are still continuing to go through.
Movies had to go through this. Music had to go through this. Books had to go through this. Comics had to go through this.
Well, I wish video games would hurry the hell up and go through this, too.
The only game I've seen a sex scene in (That I remember anyway) is Mass Effect. It was awkward.
[QUOTE="Desulated"][QUOTE="theharlemshake"]As long as I'm not made to play some awkward sex mini-game, I'm fine. Arach666
This. :lol:
Fahrenheit(Indigo prophecy)comes to mind eh?;) And the God of War games.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment