Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Why you should back Chronicles of Elyria.

12346

Comments

  • VucarVucar Member UncommonPosts: 311
    Why ?  I just learn we can only get ''exposition period'' with KS.  You dont want miss this !
    Not true.  they said the KS tiers will be available after launch on the website but their diluted (less "stuff") or cost more.

    That's really why I am dropping my pledges to the minimum.  If the game actually develops to a point it seems real I can bump up the pledges and get the 3 month head start
    You realize if you wait you'd be spending more money to get less, right?

    If you can afford to "bump up", you'd get more bang for your buck now than later.
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 16,985
    Vucar said:
    Why ?  I just learn we can only get ''exposition period'' with KS.  You dont want miss this !
    Not true.  they said the KS tiers will be available after launch on the website but their diluted (less "stuff") or cost more.

    That's really why I am dropping my pledges to the minimum.  If the game actually develops to a point it seems real I can bump up the pledges and get the 3 month head start
    You realize if you wait you'd be spending more money to get less, right?

    If you can afford to "bump up", you'd get more bang for your buck now than later.
    Yes.... but it might be worth the extra $10 or whatever to actually be closer to release and see what they have been able to develop and if they in fact are on track to release the headstart in 15 months.  the way I look at it is that the hit their funding goal... so I will lower my pledges and play it safe.  If I like what I see at the end of the year I will up them.

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • FluteFlute Member UncommonPosts: 455
    Strizzy12 said:
    The best games I have played were bought during or after launch, with little expectation other than the game looked appealing or seemed interesting. I am talking about games that I ended up playing for years, not a few months. The kicker here is I never expected the game to be great to begin with.

    Now on the flip side I've backed a lot of games in the concept stage, thinking they would be great or the next big thing, only to be let down each and every time. Star Citizen is the last game I'm backing as it seems expecting greatness based on concepts hasn't really worked out "for me." 

    So as much as I'm interested in COE... They won't see a dime of my money until the game officially launches. 
    Hands on is the only way I can determine if a game is good for me or not, unless it's a series that has a proven track record so I pretty much know what to expect.
    I can understand this 100%
    Perfectly valid view.  The down side though is you certainly would start without knowing all the in-game politics and things we learn in Alpha.
  • goobsnewsgoobsnews Member UncommonPosts: 220
    not backing anything anymore after star citizen. sorry indie devs, it's been a good one.
  • FluteFlute Member UncommonPosts: 455
    Kane72 said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    I was going to but then the whole permadeath thing made me walk away. Its tied into their payment model. You keep aging even when you're not playing. As a casual gamer, it just turned me off. 
    This may be a bit radical, but it's my opinion : devs shouldn't make games that are designed to be hardcore ie not casual, as it just encourages a society to spend more and more time behind a computer screen instead of going out in the real world or doing family stuff.

    I do believe there are people out there with families ie young children etc who are growing up and missing out because parents are not dealing with their every day needs because they just have to do one more thing in their hardcore MMO. I know one or two like this and I've read online forums to know its a problem for a lot of people.

    i think just like alcohol and perhaps smoking (I don't smoke btw, never have) are OK in moderation, the same goes for games. One designed to grip you and suck you in to playing in all your spare time just cannot be a good thing morally. 

    I appreciate adults have a choice, but I dont think they always make those choices for the best of their family or their own well-being.

    Thing is, there are people with a lack of self control and a hardcore game acts like a drug, but it's legal. It can be just as damaging.

    It's an interesting view, but whether a game is hardcore or not will have little impact on whether parents are inattentive.  You only need a Steam account to have access to more games than you could every play in a lifetime. 

    Much more importantly, hardcore persistent games that promote collaborative online play are fantastic for people who do not have a family or cannot do other things. 

    There are a huge number of military veterans who play online games, indeed in Star Citizen there are veterans-only organizations.   For such gamers, it would be a terrible thing indeed if every game was deliberately made 'light and soft' or penalized you for playing it for any extended time period.  For some, they would absolutely love to go for a walk, but never will again: why should the games they love be "watered down" because some parents are not good at prioritizing their children?

    Hardcore games can act like a drug, but drugs can be powerfully helpful if used appropriately.  In a world that looks at some and turns away in horror, you can be normal, just like everyone else.  You can run across the fields with your sword held high as you enter the fray like everyone else, even if you can't get up out of bed on your own in real life.

    Never forget the other side of the coin. 
  • Gabriel-KnightGabriel-Knight Member UncommonPosts: 89
    I still remember those times in which people worked for years in a product, and when it was ready they sold it to the public; now for some reason it's backwards.
    I can't stop thinking that every single one of these crowdfundings are nothing more than lame scams. So far the only good title i've seen come out of these things is Divinity Original Sin, and they still needed to rehash the entire game in order to make it right. :surprised: 
  • FluteFlute Member UncommonPosts: 455
    I still remember those times in which people worked for years in a product, and when it was ready they sold it to the public; now for some reason it's backwards.
    I can't stop thinking that every single one of these crowdfundings are nothing more than lame scams. So far the only good title i've seen come out of these things is Divinity Original Sin, and they still needed to rehash the entire game in order to make it right. :surprised: 
    That's why I said "$25".  It's certainly not a scam, but if you like computer games then this is actually a fun project to follow along as they create the game.  Mostly because their CEO actually talks about real things and does not shy away from the tough questions.  Go read the Reddit AMA for examples. 

    Besides, they are not promising "Star Marine - soon(tm)", and they have actually explained what their stretch goal funding is for - e.g. additional animator, rather than just "throw money at us and have a $1,000 space ship that we will not let you see until the game because it will spoil the surprise, even though we promised you open development."  Salty does not even begin to cover the current state of Star Citizen.  But this isn't Star Citizen, which is rather the whole point.

    When you think about it, there are plenty of game products that are made then sold.  But if you don't want yet more boring drivel with highly sexualized female characters, stories that fail the Bechdel Test laughably, and you hit endgame in a week and realize that there is no endgame, I can think of plenty you can choose from.  But if those games were all we ever wanted, we wouldn't be backing projects like this one, that are far more ambitious and dare to say things like "no chainmail bikini", yes to in-game marriages, yes to children, and yes to pvp.  You better believe it that I will be paying attention to on and offline defenses ... because there will be something worth protecting.

    Personally I want something better than most of the *meh* games out there, where you pick a class on character creation that all that changes is how long you have to grind to get the top stats and sets.  I want a game that puts story and roleplaying back into an MMORPG. 

    And I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. 





  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 16,985
    Flute said:

    Besides, they are not promising "Star Marine - soon(tm)", and they have actually explained what their stretch goal funding is for - e.g. additional animator, rather than just "throw money at us and have a $1,000 space ship that we will not let you see until the game because it will spoil the surprise, even though we promised you open development."  Salty does not even begin to cover the current state of Star Citizen.  But this isn't Star Citizen, which is rather the whole point.

    No they aren't selling ships... they ARE selling things like buildings, land, settlements and even Kingdoms.  You can pay $10,000 to be the "King" of an unknown/undefined kingdom and have vassals such as Counts and Barons that serve you...

    No, I didn't buy any ships in Star Citizen other than the one that came in the base package and NO I wouldn't buy any virtual King Title or virtual house for cash either.

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • FluteFlute Member UncommonPosts: 455
    Flute said:

    Besides, they are not promising "Star Marine - soon(tm)", and they have actually explained what their stretch goal funding is for - e.g. additional animator, rather than just "throw money at us and have a $1,000 space ship that we will not let you see until the game because it will spoil the surprise, even though we promised you open development."  Salty does not even begin to cover the current state of Star Citizen.  But this isn't Star Citizen, which is rather the whole point.

    No they aren't selling ships... they ARE selling things like buildings, land, settlements and even Kingdoms.  You can pay $10,000 to be the "King" of an unknown/undefined kingdom and have vassals such as Counts and Barons that serve you...

    No, I didn't buy any ships in Star Citizen other than the one that came in the base package and NO I wouldn't buy any virtual King Title or virtual house for cash either.
    They are being very clear about the fact this isn't pay to win though - and when you look at something like the King pledge, a lot of the "value" to a player is very obviously in the design experience. 

    Who does not want to work with a game dev team to create a unique world event, boss, or your own dream castle?
     
    Hell if you wanted to add something into Battlefront or something like that, and say "see that?  I helped designed that!" - and actually have your name in the credits, because yes you actually did -  how much do you think that would cost? 

    People pay good money to go skydiving.  At the end, you don't have anything more than you did when you jumped out of the plane, but you do have the experience.  That I think skydiving is a silly waste of money, or that you might think a design experience is the same, does not mean everyone else does too.  If I had that kind of money yes I would pledge to "Queen" - not to be a queen in the game, after all they can get deposed anyway, but rather to have that personalized design experience and have the opportunity to add something to the game that I really wanted to be in there.  The hard part would be choosing between a fantastic castle, a boss, or the world event ...
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 16,985
    Flute said:

    They are being very clear about the fact this isn't pay to win though -
    I agree they are trying to sell the idea that this isn't P2W...  I disagree though.  But let's leave it there because we will just get into a circular argument about P2W  :)

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • VucarVucar Member UncommonPosts: 311
    Flute said:

    They are being very clear about the fact this isn't pay to win though -
    I agree they are trying to sell the idea that this isn't P2W...  I disagree though.  But let's leave it there because we will just get into a circular argument about P2W  :)

    Dozens of arguments on this subforum happen every week that could end just as civilly as this.

    Seeing it actually happen is a rare treat.
  • Abydos-CDDAbydos-CDD Member UncommonPosts: 98
    Full PvP Full Loot man !  Pay as you want but I will loot you :D
  • FluteFlute Member UncommonPosts: 455
    edited May 2016
    Flute said:

    They are being very clear about the fact this isn't pay to win though -
    I agree they are trying to sell the idea that this isn't P2W...  I disagree though.  But let's leave it there because we will just get into a circular argument about P2W  :)

    It's a valid area of concern, however to me P2W boils down to "if I pay, I win right?" and in many games that is literally true.  Various Mechs, Planes, and Tanks etc in various games quite literally made you harder to kill, and make it easier for you to kill others, because you paid money in order to be able to win.  A king will die as easily as a peasant in this game - and if they ever change it so that the more money you pay the "more protection from the gods you have" (or whatever else cheese+1 system) then yes I would simply not hesitate to call them out on it. 

    It isn't P2W ... which of course also means there are some big questions over whether paying lots of money up front is a good idea.   King does not come with LTI, after all.  However the design experiences and such have nothing at all to do with winning, and those have obvious value, after all there are those who spend more on a holiday, and come back with memories and photos.  Here you'd still have photos, a signed canvas of the concept art as well as the memories - and a giant "kill me now" sign around your toon's neck when you eventually log in. 

    Honestly I think the reason so few people have backed to the higher levels is because it isn't P2W.  There is no stack of "get out of jail free" cards in the deck, so it's a massive risk if you are looking purely at in-game advantage. However if you love the idea of the design experience, they are fantastic.

    We only need to think back to Ultima Online.  When your horse died, it died.  Unless you had played long enough to have a spirit horse, then it never died.  Now *that* was the beginning of heading down 'pay to win' divide: a direct and permanent combat advantage because you had spent more money than the player.

    Will this be P2W?  Honestly only time will tell.  From the design, no it's not.  But game history tells us that people will happily pay to avoid the risk of losing things, and the temptation for Soulbound to add things like "If you pay $x when you die your talent will be available on your next character" will be very strong.  That would instantly make it P2W; so would eternal mounts, or mounts that are faster than a tamed wild one "simply because you paid $x".  But let's not hoist them up on the pike unless they actually do such things... it isn't currently P2W.  You can pay to start with some cool things, but then again, it's a fully destructible world... 

    And yes, things can change.  Star Citizen always said it wasn't P2W.  Then we saw their idea of "balancing" star-fighters ... and the $30 ship loses every single time to the $250 one.  That's kinda hard to argue over.   But as things stand for Elyria, a poison arrow is going to kill a farmer or a king just the same.  Indeed, the farmer might have better stamina from all the time in the fields ... we'll see.

    ----
    edited typos
  • vernesvernes Member UncommonPosts: 79
    I still remember those times in which people worked for years in a product, and when it was ready they sold it to the public; now for some reason it's backwards.
    I can't stop thinking that every single one of these crowdfundings are nothing more than lame scams. So far the only good title i've seen come out of these things is Divinity Original Sin, and they still needed to rehash the entire game in order to make it right. :surprised: 

    I remember it differently.
    A gamedeveloper had an concept for a game all worked out, and begged publishers to finance it. 
    When they did, changes got made to the original concept, to fit estimated market trends.
    As development continued more changes were made by different people because they made promises to other partners.
    Authentication provider partnered up? Change your game to implement this new technology.
    Contract with eSport organisation? Change your gameplay to support eSport competitions.
    And of-course the sacrificial lamb, your game competes with another game we support, we like the other one better, project is halted, you're fired, don't let us catch you developing your own version of the game.

     Years later we get to hear what the game was suppose to look like and we are left wondering why the fuck they never did that instead.

    Now we have kickstarter, and now the original development team controls the result.
  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,802
    vernes said:
    Now we have kickstarter, and now the original development team controls the result.
    What result?
    Harbinger of Fools
  • DrakenhoffDrakenhoff Member UncommonPosts: 301
    edited May 2016
    Dakeru said:
    vernes said:
    Now we have kickstarter, and now the original development team controls the result.
    What result?
    Yay to take a single part of a whole comment.
    When out into the context of the whole thread that sentence made sense. 

    Signed Davan Drakenhoff ruler of Castle Drakenhoff the impenatrable castle made from cardboard

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,855
    edited May 2016
    I don't believe this is a scam. Not a deliberate one anyway. I think the creators really want this game. I just doubt their ability to produce the dream they have.

    Indie developers have vision and creativity. They have a desire for a quality product in as much as profits. (I hope anyway) What they lack, however, are probably 2 of the most important aspects. The 1st is funding. We all know how much it costs to create an MMORPG. And here comes the dreamers and visionaries who promise to deliver with a tenth of that budget. Assuming they can actually pull that off. The 1st thing players are going to do is bitch about how much it lacks compared to the latest AAA title. Look at Crowfall. It's already got a thread out there comparing its heavy stylized art design (And lack of graphics) to other games. Players want what's being promised. They don't want what will be delivered......if that even ever happens at all.

    The 2nd issue is management. These indie titles are focused on creativity and vision, but there is no balance. Who's there to keep these things on time and on budget? There needs someone with good business and management sense to drive and harness all that creativity.

    As long as developers continue to draw in funding, they make money. However, once the game is released, they stop making it. (boxed sales) and need to make sure they have alternate sources of funding. Business models for Crowd Funded games, as I see it, will need to be very aggressive. Another thing players aren't going to like.
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 16,985
    Vucar said:
    Flute said:

    They are being very clear about the fact this isn't pay to win though -
    I agree they are trying to sell the idea that this isn't P2W...  I disagree though.  But let's leave it there because we will just get into a circular argument about P2W  :)

    Dozens of arguments on this subforum happen every week that could end just as civilly as this.

    Seeing it actually happen is a rare treat.
    And if you scroll up a few you will see why.  Someone almost always has to keep going...

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,802
    Dakeru said:
    vernes said:
    Now we have kickstarter, and now the original development team controls the result.
    What result?
    Yay to take a single part of a whole comment.
    When out into the context of the whole thread that sentence made sense. 
    No you are just misinterpreting my sentece by focusing on CoE.
    I mean it.. what results do we have with kickstarter projects so far?

    vernes made a post about how he remembers things.
    Then surely he can name 3 games where devs said they had been pushed away from their original concepts.

    And on the opposite to that 3 released kickstarter games that releases with the exact features they had promised.
    Harbinger of Fools
  • DrakenhoffDrakenhoff Member UncommonPosts: 301
    Dakeru said:
    Dakeru said:
    vernes said:
    Now we have kickstarter, and now the original development team controls the result.
    What result?
    Yay to take a single part of a whole comment.
    When out into the context of the whole thread that sentence made sense. 
    No you are just misinterpreting my sentece by focusing on CoE.
    I mean it.. what results do we have with kickstarter projects so far?

    vernes made a post about how he remembers things.
    Then surely he can name 3 games where devs said they had been pushed away from their original concepts.

    And on the opposite to that 3 released kickstarter games that releases with the exact features they had promised.
    Then in all fairness that's what you should have asked. Your post looked like a comment not a question and lacked any of what you have just asked

    Signed Davan Drakenhoff ruler of Castle Drakenhoff the impenatrable castle made from cardboard

  • Sid_ViciousSid_Vicious Member RarePosts: 2,177
    I thought they already reached their goal..

    NEWS FLASH! "A bank was robbed the other day and a man opened fire on the customers being held hostage. One customer zig-zag sprinted until he found cover. When questioned later he explained that he was a hardcore gamer and knew just what to do!" Download my music for free! I release several albums per month as part of project "Thee Untitled" . .. some video game music remixes and cover songs done with instruments in there as well! http://theeuntitled.bandcamp.com/ Check out my roleplaying blog, collection of fictional short stories, and fantasy series... updated on a blog for now until I am finished! https://childrenfromtheheavensbelow.blogspot.com/ Watch me game on occasion or make music... https://www.twitch.tv/spoontheeuntitled and subscribe! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUvqULn678VrF3OasgnbsyA

  • DrakenhoffDrakenhoff Member UncommonPosts: 301
    I thought they already reached their goal..
    They are on stretch goals now

    Signed Davan Drakenhoff ruler of Castle Drakenhoff the impenatrable castle made from cardboard

  • FluteFlute Member UncommonPosts: 455
    I don't believe this is a scam. Not a deliberate one anyway. I think the creators really want this game. I just doubt their ability to produce the dream they have.

    Indie developers have vision and creativity. They have a desire for a quality product in as much as profits. (I hope anyway) What they lack, however, are probably 2 of the most important aspects. The 1st is funding. We all know how much it costs to create an MMORPG. And here comes the dreamers and visionaries who promise to deliver with a tenth of that budget. Assuming they can actually pull that off. The 1st thing players are going to do is bitch about how much it lacks compared to the latest AAA title. Look at Crowfall. It's already got a thread out there comparing its heavy stylized art design (And lack of graphics) to other games. Players want what's being promised. They don't want what will be delivered......if that even ever happens at all.

    The 2nd issue is management. These indie titles are focused on creativity and vision, but there is no balance. Who's there to keep these things on time and on budget? There needs someone with good business and management sense to drive and harness all that creativity.

    As long as developers continue to draw in funding, they make money. However, once the game is released, they stop making it. (boxed sales) and need to make sure they have alternate sources of funding. Business models for Crowd Funded games, as I see it, will need to be very aggressive. Another thing players aren't going to like.

    I put my money into this one because the numbers they have been talking about are very realistic. 

    There will always be detractors for any game, because there are literally always trolls.  People complained about Ultima Online's graphics, missing the whole point that the gameplay was amazing.  You literally cannot please everyone, and Soulbound have made it quite clear that they have no intention of trying to do that - they will make the game they want to make, and if we wanted fluffy unicorns that dance on rainbows that's nice, they will likely only add them if they are also liche fluffy unicorns.

    When you read the Soulbound Studios website you get a good idea of who is there to keep things on time and on budget.  Part of why I backed - yes, this team really can deliver.  If you've not read up on the lead dev in a Kickstarter computer game before, you really should.  

    This team got a big "tick" from me for "do I believe they know just how hard this is, and how much it will cost?"   If I was going to put lots of money in I would do so as an investor rather than as a Kickstarter, but this is a project that if I was looking for investments I would certainly consider.  Good people + good idea + right time + right place to make it.

    Their funding model is interesting, but fundamentally it's a subscription model.  Unless you are an utterly brilliant devious so-and-so playing an eternal vampire, to play for 10 years will be X sparks.  And a spark is loosely a $5 monthly sub - less if you are skilled, more if you are extremely cavalier about permadeath.  But when you look at the cost of a spark and how much time it gives you to play, unless you are messing about with Liches or Vampires it really should last you rather a long time, which is the direct equivalent of a subscription.  

    I guess "subscription with a discount if you are a skilled player" is really how it works.

    Point is though, it will deliver ongoing funding - and not through microtransactions.  Nor will game accounts be free, which is an absolutely critical point to prevent greifing.  The ultimate sanction for a greifer is to have their account banned, which loses all meaning if you can just make a new one for free.  That this game will be pay to play, rather than microtransacitons funded, really is a critical point and gets a big tick from me.  They can have as many add-on microtransactions as they want (as long as those don't tresspass into unbalancing P2W), but the up front cost to get an account will reduce the number of greifers in games like this so that must always be there.  Subtly the separation of story points and in-game currency is also a huge positive, and should reduce the "slaughter newbies to buy PLEX" problem that EVE struggles with.
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,000
    I would have more faith in the game if they had some sort of schedule.  What is their time frame for development? ETA on pre-alpha, alpha, beta? They have enough money for the core game yet I'm not hearing anything about fleshing out the world.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • FluteFlute Member UncommonPosts: 455
    I would have more faith in the game if they had some sort of schedule.  What is their time frame for development? ETA on pre-alpha, alpha, beta? They have enough money for the core game yet I'm not hearing anything about fleshing out the world.

    To be honest, I prefer that they have not set out dates.  Nearly every project that has given firm dates has either rushed something out to meet that date, or missed the date and suffered ongoing negative PR for that.  Just look at "Star Marine"; so that they have actually not taken the common track of promising everything under the sun to get more Kickstarter funds, to me, is a very good sign.  There is however enough time between now and their projected release date to have a decent phased Alpha.

    We know they want pre-alpha access to start as soon as possible, and that they will NOT be doing any "early access" on Steam.  But given recent history in the industry staying away from putting specific dates on things is not a bad idea, until you know with total certainty you can hit the timing. 

    A really (really) important point is that this game is not beginning with a blank sheet of paper - they have already done a ton of work on it, including years on the design side.  The Kickstarter is to finish the minimum viable game, and they are being very realistic about how much work things take.  In particular, a huge number of people want tunneling and mounted combat - but those are hugely complex systems to do right, so they made it really clear that to keep the dates and quality they would need more staff to hit those elements at launch.  That kind of transparency is great and shows very realistic planning.  Many kickstarters would have put Mounted Combat at #1 on the stretch goals, because people really want it - these guys have put the price tag on just how much it would cost to do it right, given all the more important things to do right for day 1.  It's well worth reading their posts around that, and the design journals. 

    Or just save you time and throw some money into the hat.  Ultimately we never really know with kickstarters, but some are a lot more likely to make it than others.  I'm picking this one will.
Sign In or Register to comment.