• 0

    posted a message on Mojang is adding too much to minecraft
    Quote from Lord_Garak»

    Don't look now, but consoles have been continuously updated for the past 6 years in order to make them as identical as possible to PCs. Consoles are no longer "for the sole purpose of playing games". They aren't really that much cheaper than a PC these days either. The line is becoming thin, and PC is more popular than ever for the gamer who wants it all.

    Let me rephrase that—the sole reason one would get a console over a PC is to play games. I mean, even TVs can do media streaming now, so why would you want a console for that purpose. Consoles, at least at the time of release, are cheaper than a gaming PC, so they have more mass market appeal. Sure, it's no secret that the most hardcore of hardcore gamers use a gaming PC, but that's only because they have $1.5k to spend on one. Most people who want to game prefer something that is cheap yet still powerful, hence the popularity of the PS4 and XB1.
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 4: The Crafting (Updated 9/15/17)
    Quote from fishg»

    Aimed towards a more "hardcore gamer" audience than the original, being a bit more difficult and focusing more on depth than simplicity

    • A longer progression system, with less grinding and content padding between major progress points
    • Implementation of Cubic Chunks
    • Modern graphics that don't require a behemoth graphics card to run
    • Maximizing customizability while still be a great game on its own by default
    • An underground worthy of being in a game called Minecraft
    • Not being afraid to break a major convention of the current game if it would lead to a more fun overall experience

    ______________________________________________________________


    Judging by your attitude, I can imagine that this has been discussed in length before. My point is that all these reasons for adding "Minecraft 2" could just be added to the game. We don't need to make a separate game just to focus on the "hardcore gamer". Mojang can just add more difficult and in-depth features to the game (Woodland Mansions are pretty tough). Worst case scenario, one could just use a mod. It isn't worth adding an entire new game just for one small branch of players.


    Likewise, Cubic Chunks can just be added to the current game. The same with more customization and a better underground. All these ideas have originated from suggestions for the current game, not a sequel.


    The only legit reason I see for Minecraft 2 is better graphics, and I don't think that's enough to warrant a sequel. I could see instead a "Minecraft Remastered Edition", which would just be the same game but with better graphics. Mojang could still get extra money and avoid distancing themselves from long term, nostalgic players. If Better Together has caused people to freak out about Minecraft getting replaced, then how would they react to Minecraft 2?


    A longer progression system: I dare you to make up a suggestion for a new ore tier on this forum (your bedrock armor suggestion is a good example). With the current game's mechanics a new tier is either too insignificant of an upgrade or overpowered. Besides ores, the only main progress point is the grind for ender pearls.

    Cubic Chunks: Just how would you implement them, though? The biggest hurdle is sunlight, and my "solution" would completely break the game.

    Modern Graphics: Eh, this is subjective, see part 2 if you want more details on this.

    Maximizing Customizability: This is referring mostly to part 1, which would essentially require the entire game to be rewritten.

    A better underground: This stands the best chance of being added, but part of my idea requires cubic chunks and more ores to find.

    Breaking Conventions: This is a very bad idea to do as an update. It splits the community and causes negative media. However, it's perfectly fine in a sequel.

    Adding these would require rewriting and rebalancing the entire game, so why not add some new content worthy of making it a sequel instead? It's a huge waste of time to only go halfway.

    You say that it would be for just a small branch of players, but realistically, if Minecraft 2 was released, do you honestly not think it would get a huge amount of sales? It would take a while to get anywhere near the original's popularity, but Minecraft has had an 8-year head start.

    Simply adding more and more stuff makes the game feel more cluttered and causes it to lose focus, and it can't be done indefinitely without alienating the playerbase (1.9 is a good example of this). While things like the Woodland Mansion may be more content, they don't really improve the player's overall experience or make the game better; it's just something new to do. Minecraft isn't going to make any serious critic's top ten, and a new dungeon or two isn't going to change that.

    "Minecraft Remastered Edition" is the new "Super Duper Graphics" setting that's coming to consoles later. That's not enough to be called a sequel.

    Better Together really isn't causing a big uproar. If you look at the opponent's arguments, they usually consist of inaccurate information and flaming towards Microsoft. I imagine Minecraft 2 would cause some ire, but not enough to counter the excitement a sequel could generate.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Mojang is adding too much to minecraft
    Quote from Lord_Garak»

    "hardcore gamers who want to buy a dedicated gaming machine" buy a PC. Console is casual.

    A console is for the sole purpose of playing games. Those are geared towards hardcore gamers while at the same time trying to be more affordable than a gaming PC. A PC, on the other hand, covers a far wider demographic, from those who use it mainly for schoolwork, to those who use it in their career, to those who use it to game.
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 4: The Crafting (Updated 9/15/17)
    Quote from fishg»

    I appreciate the thought and effort put into this, but I really don't see the need for a "Minecraft 2". It might run smoother, but I don't think that's enough for an entire new game. Minecraft has been around for a long time, and I don't think it will ever fully fade from view. For example, Pac-Man. That game will never leave people's memories, and to this day is played all around the world. But when I say the game with "the yellow mouth guy and four ghosts", do you think Ms. Pac-Man?


    It's the same with Minecraft. This game has gotten so huge it will help define our generation. We don't need a sequel- just update the current Minecraft. We know that Mojang is willing to make extreme game-altering changes (1.8 coding change that ruined every mod, 1.9 attack cooldown, and now changing nearly ever texture in the game). If Mojang is willing to do all those things, then it isn't a stretch for them to eventually implement every idea here into the normal game.


    With that in mind, I just couldn't take this suggestion seriously. It started feeling like a mod rather than a new game. Don't get me wrong, these are all interesting and well-thought out concepts. But the central idea of Minecraft 2 just doesn't work for me.




    >sigh< Do I really need to go through this again? Well, here's a copy-paste from part 1:

    Note to Critics-Please Read
    Yes, I know that Minecraft 2 is a generally disliked suggestion. I am aware of the big arguments against it, and I don't anticipate this series of suggestions to be my most successful ones yet. However, I ask that you give this suggestion a chance, not instantly discounting it just because other Minecraft 2 suggestions tend to be either bland and uninteresting, or because suggestions that don't fit into the current game are often just thrown into the idea of a sequel. I believe I have found a way to make the game different enough to warrant a sequel yet still be Minecraft. Also, as this series progresses, I ask that you don't choose to not support the whole thing just because you disliked one entry.

    Why we could use a Minecraft 2, and what the goals of a sequel would be (in my eyes)
    I'll get this out of the way first: I am not making this thread because I think Minecraft is dying and that it needs a new game to reinvorgorate interest in the game. As far as sales goes, the game is still going strong, even if servers and social media interest is declining. Hence, why I have titled this segment "Why we could use a Minecraft 2" and not why we need it. However, I do believe that Minecraft is past its prime and that many players are getting bored with or at least are no longer impressed with the game. That's natural and happens with every other game in existence, and the game is nearly six years old (eight if you include Classic). However, that doesn't excuse the sense of staleness the game has, and the recent updates are largely just considered good rather than great, and very rarely "the best" update (from what I've seen on this forum, anyway). I think the Minecraft franchise would largely benefit from a new game, as it could be such a new experience it could bring back those who thought it stale, as well as bring in many new players. There's also the fact that the game needs a complete rewrite, which would be a great time to rethink the game as well.

    Now, I think you understand that I want a new experience, but certainly there must be more to justify the time and resources into a sequel? Well, I've got a bunch of ideas, but it would make this suggestion a wishlist to include them all, so I'll just give you an idea of the guidelines I'm following for these suggestions:


    • Aimed towards a more "hardcore gamer" audience than the original, being a bit more difficult and focusing more on depth than simplicity
    • A longer progression system, with less grinding and content padding between major progress points
    • Implementation of Cubic Chunks
    • Modern graphics that don't require a behemoth graphics card to run
    • Maximizing customizability while still be a great game on its own by default
    • An underground worthy of being in a game called Minecraft
    • Not being afraid to break a major convention of the current game if it would lead to a more fun overall experience


    As you can see, I don't think a Minecraft 2 needs to happen, I just think that it would help reinvigorate interest in the game. It's a clean break that lets the developers break free from the limitations of the past. Yoshi9048, the author of the old critic's guide, summed it up pretty well:

    Quote from yoshi9048»

    There's a major point here. Minecraft needs a sequel. This game isn't going to continue selling forever, and the easiest way to monetize a complete rewrite is to sell it as a sequel.


    There are inherent risks in that; but not nearly as unwieldy as rewriting the game without a revenue source and focus break from the established media.


    Here's what I mean:

    Minecraft's sales are decreasing. I'm not an accountant, and even if I were, I'm not THEIR accountant. This is based on the fact that any saturated media loses popularity with time.

    Minecraft has a TON of competition within the same genre. This includes games like Rust, Roblox, Terraria, or other similar games following a survival or crafting theme. When in the face of competition, the best course of action is to innovate.

    Let's say Mojang did a major rewrite of Minecraft. Let's say it bombed, now there is a major rollback and the idea is scrapped or reinvisioned in a way that's far more palatable for the current end-users.


    A sequel does these things:

    It can reinvigorate sales (if marketed correctly and reviewed properly). This means that Mojang has more cashflow available to rewrite the engine.

    Minecraft is capable of innovating into its sequel (or offshoot Minecraft) and given enough emphasis on positive core design, can hold its own against competitors and give a compelling reason to bring people back to the franchise.

    Finally, if the sequel bombs, it won't directly hurt the original game. The sequel may end up with enough revenue to legitimize seperate teams for Minecraft and it's sequel allowing parallel support across both titles



    Overall, I can only see benefits to a sequel, done right of course.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Mojang is adding too much to minecraft
    Quote from Lord_Garak»

    What are you going to do, argue that mobile edition is most popular? It's a cheap little thing people get and forget. You just can't compare mobile devices with actual video gaming. Of course the stats will be skewed in its favor, it's the most widely available to every audience.

    Even if you completely ignore the PE and use only the console edition, which is geared more towards hardcore gamers that want to buy a dedicated gaming machine, it still far surpasses the PC version. Console players represent 35.2% of sales, while the PC version only counts for 22.8% of sales. The point is, the PC version is the least popular, it makes the least sales, and modding didn't help much.
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 4: The Crafting (Updated 9/15/17)

    Also lastly you can still do all that but you are saying it's s'posed to be harder than minecraft, so why would I want to play it?

    Because it's a completely different game. There's new things to do and the extra challenge is supposed to make it more fun, though there's still an easy mode.



    Bolded parts are why I don't like this one bit. We don't need 2.0. especially when all the updates we are getting going to lead to Minecraft 2.0 in the first place.



    My vision for Minecraft 2 is supposed to be something different from the current game. Updating the current game to just be like this is going to break so many current mechanics and it would be better to keep them separate.



    Again even though you are suggesting a whole different game, point is suggestions is meant for minecraft not minecraft 2 a whole new game.



    Funny, I actually said this once to another guy. Strange how opinions change.


    Anyway, the fact that this hasn't been locked (Badpreenup, a moderator, has even commented here) and that there is no forum for a Minecraft 2 at the moment indicates that this forum is the right place for it.



    Hence why I never posted in this and figured by now it should have been locked.



    Why? Because you don't like it? Threads are only locked if they violate a rule, not if they are old or disliked. Besides, it's only been considered inactive for a few days, it's not like my update was a necro post.



    By also logic states microsoft is greedy and would steal all these idea's and apply them to the original and hence why I figured I should post, saying I don't support any of it just for safety.



    Seriously? You're going to try to bring Microsoft into this, even though it's been stated multiple times that they don't have any say in what features get in the game? That's not a good reason to reject support. If I was afraid of Microsoft stealing my idea I wouldn't have posted in the first place. I'd take it as a compliment if these ideas were added, unless they were directly plagiarized, which again I have this thread to prove I had the idea first.


    Why call it minecraft, call it something different is my point.



    I'm not calling it Minecraft, it's Minecraft 2. It's the same type of game set in the same universe, but with some updated mechanics.



    Minecraft should stay Minecraft(I already hate the editions name on all other platforms)

    So let's just say I agree to disagree with you and move on.



    I respect other's opinions, but that doesn't mean I won't fight for my own.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 4: The Crafting (Updated 9/15/17)

    It sounds more like minecraft; survival edition really and I don't really like the crafting table making it harder to get(I'm one the few that carries it around), and I dislike the advancements and stuff we already have in 1.12. If it were up to me, I'd get rid of advancements, improve the commandblocks and the modding so that it's easier for them to mod. just my opinion.

    Also it makes it sound harder for new players to understand and harder for them to kill themselves. Every game I test three things.


    Can I jump:

    Can I Fall:

    Can I die:


    If I answer yes to those three than I'll enjoy the game. If I say no to all of them, than I won't play it anymore. If I answer no to Can I jump, I return game. Other two aren't as important.


    Yes it doesn't sound like it at first in your suggestions but at the same time it's a simple, the answer would be if all three are no that also means the game is going to be harder than I like.


    The crafting table is only a little bit harder to get, and that is to justify its existence. It's not so expensive that it's nigh irreplaceable if you lose it, though the Advanced Crafting table is pretty expensive and discourages you from carrying that around.

    This suggestion has nothing to do with advancements and other additions from 1.12. This is supposed to be a new game that does borrow from its prequel but isn't necessarily bound to have all the same stuff.

    It shouldn't be any harder to understand than the current game, and I would think that there would be some kind of tutorial anyway.

    You can still jump, fall and die. This game is meant to be harder than Minecraft, but the difficulty curve is more evenly placed. I fail to understand what this has to do with my suggestion.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Mojang is adding too much to minecraft
    Quote from Lord_Garak»

    The most definitive parts of the game are only available on Java. Nearly every single youtube video, screenshot, or reddit post is based on PC. It's not concrete, but it seems pretty clear to me that the originally PC only game remains dominantly thought of as being there.

    Definitive? I'm sorry, but I'm pretty sure the most definitive parts of the game are blocks, creepers, and redstone, and those are available on all platforms, and have been for a while. The mapping and modding community, while one of the best parts of Minecraft, are actually pretty insignificant compared to the whole of players. The reason the PC version is the most covered in the media is because it was the first version and has the most media significance already, but the media, especially stuff as subjective as YouTube and Reddit, don't necessarily paint an accurate picture. I mean, I used to say that Minecraft was dying because its internet coverage was diminishing, but sales data quickly proved me wrong.
    Quote from Herb_»

    Unfortunately, it is very difficult to provide solid evidence. Millions of people have been playing Minecraft on PCs for years before the console editions existed; a lot of those dedicated players get involved with downloaded maps, mods, and so on. But those people only buy the product once, and love the free updates forever.

    Console and phone players are quite different; they buy the game for different platforms (a new phone or console), and play tends to be more casual, sorter term; a lot more mini-games, a lot less 100-hour builds.

    PE sales have made a lot more money than PC sales, but that doesn't mean it is more popular. People are more willing to spend $6.99 on a phone app that they might play just a few times, but when you spend $26.95 on the PC version it is a more 'serious' purchase.

    But again, we don't have solid evidence that these people are mostly casuals, or how many copies of the game everyone owns. If even half of the console players and none of the PE players played the game on a regular basis, it would still outshine the total PC players in the Americas and is pretty close to the PC sales for the entire world.

    minecraft sales chart

    At any rate, you still don't have any solid evidence to disprove my claim, and it simply being hard to get such evidence is not an argument.

    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 0

    posted a message on Mojang is adding too much to minecraft
    Quote from Herb_»

    You think bottled water is more popular than tap water?

    No...?

    Besides, more people probably pay a water bill than buy bottled water. Anyway, I'm not saying Lord_Garek is wrong, I'm just asking for some solid counter evidence.
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 4: The Crafting (Updated 9/15/17)

    Well, I finally got to updating this. The furnace mechanics have been tweaked, allowing the creation of alloys, enchanting now requires lapis, something I had originally intended and forgot to add, and the anvil has been overhauled. Mock ups of all GUIs except the crafting table, which should be incredibly easy to figure out, have been added. I'm still working on part 5, and it's almost done.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Mojang is adding too much to minecraft
    Quote from Lord_Garak»

    Most monetized, not most popular. And due to the massive amount of children on those platforms, it's not hard to see why. Notch said himself the only reason it was ported was to take their parent's money.

    Sources? Mine is this article, along with some other Mojang articles that I'd have to look really far back to find.

    Without more concrete evidence, the most popular platform is the highest-selling platform.
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 0

    posted a message on Mojang is adding too much to minecraft
    Quote from Lord_Garak»

    And sometimes, because the content they have either needs fixing, tweaking, or expanding.

    That's what mods have always done.

    While I personally like mods, I feel that the community is given too much credit, considering that the most popular versions of the game (by far) have been unmoddable until recently.

    Anyway, on topic, while I do like the new changes, I believe that each update is becoming less and less significant and the fact that the game changes developers (from Notch to Jeb to Dinnerbone etc.) shows as the game doesn't seem to have a goal in what it wants to achieve next. I believe a new game, with a dedicated team and goal, would be healthier for the Minecraft brand, and then we wouldn't need any of this two-version "Java and Bedrock" nonsense since they'd be the same game since launch.
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 2

    posted a message on Uploading screenshots

    Alternatively, if your picture isn't huge, you can just save it as an attachment on your posts by clicking the "upload an image" button on the bottom or dragging it there.


    If you want your image in your post, after you've submitted the post you can right-click the attached picture and click "Open in new tab." A new page will open with just the image with the image URL in the address bar. You can then edit your post and add the picture using the URL.


    Posted in: Forum Discussion & Info
  • 0

    posted a message on New /gamerule
    Quote from FINTonza»

    You do realize, that this same can be implemented to you as well, as me, and any other user writing on this forum, how biased it might be.
    Every opinion is either true, or false, but still an opinion. For me, and for Cerroz the "durrherpclickyclickyspamspam", like he calls it isn't really appealing, nor does it have any real skill needed. Other, than when to attack/lunge towards that poor soul, who aren't prepared for it. Now the same goes to the new system, but at least the player who gets targeted have time to lift his/her shield up after the initial attack.

    The thing is, this argument consists of both opinions and facts. You'll notice that whenever I state an opinion without any objective supporting evidence, I try to lead with something like "I find," "I believe," "I'd say," etc. It's a clear flag that I'm stating an opinion so that it can be agreed that I'm not actually using this as a point of defense and thus there's no reason to attack it. However, in this case, Cerroz was stating his opinion as fact without much in the way of supporting evidence, besides more opinions.

    True. It might. But I highly doubt it will ever be implemented. Not that it would save the player base, that has already been split in more, than 2 halfs.

    Speaking of which, weren't the pro-1.9 people constantly trying to say that the new combat wouldn't split the community? If they were wrong in that regard, then there's no reason to believe they're not wrong in their other arguments.

    Anyway, we're not trying to save the player base. It's a year too late for that. We're trying to salvage what we can and prevent more damage to the community.


    Sorry. Had to do that. Well, that's one exact reason. Really. And also, how much the pro 1.9 combat peeps actually hate the old system. They don't even want to see little piece of it on the game anymore. Sooo....



    Contrary to what you seem to be insinuating, people aren't all haters of one combat system or the other. There is already a piece of the old combat in the form of the NBT tags, and many maps and servers already use the 1.8 combat system, and yet Minecraft has continued to stay popular. People who hate the old system so much to dislike the game if it's possible to use the old combat are in such a miniscule minority that they might as well not exist. I doubt you could point me to even just one such "hater" on this forum.

    I would say no, but that's just my opinion. How wrong or true it might be. But like I said, I do not see it happening any time soon, if ever. C'est la vie, is all I can say to this. (And that's only stuff I know of the language, so don't start with me xD)

    Ultimately, it seems the outcome of this argument is "Theres nothing wrong with adding a gamerule, but the 1.9ers don't care that a lot of people want one." There doesn't seem to be a way for either side to "win" if this is how it's going to be.
    Quote from Badprenup»

    I think the problem most people have with this is threefold.


    First, yes a bit of selfishness. Lots of people like the new combat and think "why should an option be added for people who can't adapt to this new system, especially when the new system is obviously better?" (their opinion). People don't like the idea of the developers spending resources on something they won't use and don't want. That is only natural.


    I don't use llamas. I don't want llamas. Yet, I'm not demanding that they be taken out of the game, am not against other people using them, or take any measures to remove them. This isn't a good reason to deny a compromise.



    Second, say what you will but this would require additional balancing after the fact. You can argue "none of the other gamerules have been changed to be balanced after the fact" until you are blue in the face, but none of the other gamerules are anything like what this would be. Let's run through a scenario.


    This gets implemented, and Mojang just doesn't modify how items work under 1.8 rules for combat, they only focus on the new combat. Mojang decides the enchantments are not balanced or that axes need to be rebalanced (things they did with 1.9 specifically for the new combat). Balance gets better for new combat. But then you have spam clicking axes that do massive amounts of damage for old combat, which is what you would get now. Say they add a new weapon that has armor piercing but a long cooldown, like a spear for example. Works fine on the new combat because it was balanced for that. But on the old combat armor just became worthless because you have a spam clicking weapon that ignores armor.


    The first thing that would happen if any changes happen to the combat that are balanced in the new system would be people complaining that old combat is getting worse because it is unbalanced. And I mean basically any changes to weapon damage, armor protection, enchantments, attack speeds, etc. This is something that I can guarantee, and I know people who say that it doesn't need to be balanced would be right there with them because they didn't look ahead and see that including 2 combat modes but only balancing changes and additions to combat for one of the modes will severely unbalance the other one.



    The thing is, just removing the cooldown as the game is now is going to heftily unbalance the game, with axes now being stronger and better than swords in every respect. However, the people who want a gamerule don't care. They just want the cooldown removed.

    It's just like a "legacy feature" in some utility program. It's long been deprecated and may become broken in future releases, but it's still there for those who want it and are willing to deal with some bugs. If a gamerule is added and people demand that combat be rebalanced, I will stand with you guys, as the compromise has already been given and there is no reason to further cater to this group (unless it's still a huge minority, but I find that unlikely, since the most major complaint will have been addressed).


    Third, because it is already incredibly easy to emulate 1.8 combat. Dozens of tutorials, from a single command to make swords work how they previously did to larger functions to modify the entire 1.9 plus combat system back to 1.8. And as an added bonus, if you run a server and don't want to rely on command blocks, there are plugins that do the very same thing.



    It may be easy but it's very time-consuming. For me (and I know what I'm doing), it would take about half an hour to find the command, get the command block ready, and make sure everything works. For the casual gamer who's barely touched commands? Expect it to take an hour or more, and if something goes wrong they'll have no idea how to fix it. This time sink and high likelihood of failure can be very discouraging and is part of the reason a gamerule is constantly suggested even though we already have a workaround. It's also extremely annoying as you have to drop every little weapon on the ground, and if you're playing singleplayer, it will only work in the Overworld. There's also the fact that commands are constantly changing and just because a command works on one version doesn't mean it will work in another. Having to do upkeep on your 1.8 combat command blocks makes things worse.

    Plugins don't count in this argument for the same reason mods don't.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on New /gamerule
    Quote from FINTonza»

    Neither do you, or me, or anyone else on this forum. And yes, while you're part of the 40%, that's STILL minority. The vocal minority, but still a minority.
    Yes, the new combat system did break up the player base even more, than it already was before (remember, there was the calm and casual survival and even calmer creative servers in addition to constant chaos of PvP servers. Yes, I think, that PvP servers doesn't have anything else, than chaos in them, hence the PvP) There has been several threads suggesting an addition of either "slider" to the options, or game rule to revert to old combat for those, who desires so. And every single one of them has been bashed to shreds. So much so, that these threads have kind of become pointless and redundant.

    The reason I said that is because he was giving a highly subjective statement as objective fact. I was just pointing out that his opinion isn't necessarily true.

    All I'm saying is that we should have a compromise. 40% isn't high enough to merit a revision on the combat, but it is high enough to merit a compromise. If a gamerule is constantly suggested despite being constantly bashed, I think that would mean it's time to reconsider. Why do people dislike the idea of a gamerule so much? Is it just stubbornness, or does having a gamerule in the game actually hurt one's ability to enjoy it?
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.