Community Ensure the Warriors of Diversity will live on in Eternity

[almondblight]

Actually, at best, that description sounds more like "two hundred years after an Age of Exploration".

(At worst it's basically a description of every age ever)

"The most recent technologies seeing use in the world are ocean-going carrack-style ships and black powder firearms (notably absent: the printing press). Cultures with large navies and mercantile traffic are exploring the world, which has led to contact with previously-unknown lands and societies and settlement in new lands. Despite their intense drive, these explorers have been restricted from aggressive long-range exploration by monstrous sea creatures that pose a lethal, seemingly insurmountable threat to even the stoutest, most well-armed ships."

This isn't hard. Advanced civilizations of the world that are on the verge of something like the renaissance have recently created ships that can explore the ocean, leading them to meeting less advanced civilizations, meetings that sometimes end in genocide or conquest. Though they are trying to explore what they can, massive sea monsters limit how far they can go. That's the Age of Exploration in a fantasy setting.

 

[Infinitron]

almondblight OK, but like I said to Mrowak, unless the game actually sends us exploring, it won't be the game's theme. There were things going on in Europe also during those years, you know?

Josh Sawyer is known to be a huge German history buff (he himself is a German-American), so our POV of this pseudo-Renaissance world is quite likely to be strictly continental.

 

[tuluse]

He also said that while technology was Renaissance-esque, they were not going through a similar social upheaval.

 

[almondblight]

almondblight OK, but like I said to Mrowak, unless the game actually sends us exploring, it won't be the game's theme. There were things going on in Europe also during those years, you know?

Josh Sawyer is known to be a huge German history buff (he himself is a German-American), so our POV of this pseudo-Renaissance world is quite likely to be strictly continental.

I doubt we're going to be going on the Elfish version of Magellan's voyage in this game or anything, but it gives us a good sense of the setting. It's an interesting one, and I can't think of any game off the top of my head that's used it before.

 

[Roguey]

Of course there are grounds. You really think a professional company like Obsidian is making this game up on the spot? They've had plenty of time. They've only been working on one other game. Roguey can back me up here.

Well they've been actively developing/pitching new concepts, but yeah Sawyer and Brennecke have been on this thing for six months with part-time help from others. They had a list of ideas for what they'd use as stretch goals but didn't have anything solid locked in because they thought they'd have more time to figure it out.

 

[Kane]

Of course there are grounds. You really think a professional company like Obsidian is making this game up on the spot? They've had plenty of time. They've only been working on one other game. Roguey can back me up here.

Well they've been actively developing/pitching new concepts, but yeah Sawyer and Brennecke have been on this thing for six months with part-time help from others. They had a list of ideas for what they'd use as stretch goals but didn't have anything solid locked in because they thought they'd have more time to figure it out.

sometimes i wonder if you make that stuff up on the fly as you go.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Just give us outline of what you are going to include and stage by stage process when features are going to be ready.

We never asked this from any devs who did a KS. Why the sudden change?

Competition and market saturation. Lots of KickStarters around now - which one should we be putting our money into, in the promise of not getting anything for two or more years?

Again, you assume that this will be in the game because you played Wasteland 1 and W2 is a sequel. It is easy to say that Fargo did great because he gave us a lot of info about W2. No, he didn't give us jackshit about W2 (at least not more than Obsidian). We know what kind of W1 was, and we ASSUME that the sequel will be similar.

I think that's a valid assumption to make though, given that's what Fargo said in the KickStarter itself:

Wasteland was set in a dangerous, post-apocalyptic world in the American Southwest. Over the course of adventures rangers would receive promotions, acquire new skills and equipment, then face new challenges with outcomes that changed depending on the strategy used to defeat them. The game featured a strong storyline which required painful decisions by players; and a storyline that allowed for maximum re-playability. Wasteland 2, with your participation and insights, will recapture all that and provide more. It'll finally be the game worthy to be a Wasteland sequel, as challenging and rewarding as the original, with all added capacity and dazzle of games today.

Compared to:

Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment.

Fun Fact™: All those games are based on the D&D licence and D&D mechanics, and yet Project: Eternity will be using "a new RPG system" and "a whole new world". So what, exactly, is really being carried over from those games?

 

[Mrowak]

Well, I have to say they are doing worse and worse job at advertising the damn thing. Update 10 is one gigantic mess with nothing new to say, gratuitous pandering to the fanbase, which on the top of all completely redefines the term "wobbly cam".

 

[Infinitron]

I liked the wobbly cam, it fits perfectly with MCA's dreamlike tone somehow.

 

[RK47]

Ask him to do it topless on the next one.

 

[skuphundaku]

I won't even go into how awesome is that they aim to allow you to crash asteroids into planets. This is the first RTS to do this using the in-game engine, not some shitty cutscene, for what I know.

Yes, it will be "Awesome." But once the novelty of crashing asteroids into planets wears off, where does that leave us? Does an asteroid actually take out a players base? Or will it be like the Starcraft nuke - powerful, but not overwhelmingly so, with few people actually trying to pull it off in multiplayer. It sounds great in the abstract, but what's important in an RTS is how it plays.

The Galactic Annihilation mode is just expanding all of this to a galactic scale. It won't be a 4X space strategy game. It will be closer to Sins of a Solar Empire, which is something of a cross between a 4X game and a RTS. What PA has over SoaSE is that SoaSE had just ships fighting in solar systems in a traditional RTS manner, with a layer of 4X planet economy management on top, while PA is focused on a more realistic approach by allowing seamless transitions and interactions between planets and space, all of it being based on all out warfare.

Again, sounds great in the abstract, but how will it actually play? If there are enough planets to really give you a galactic feel, then it seems like either you'd be better off focusing on macro, since there could be 10 or 20 solar systems on the front line at any time, and the game becomes a very simple 4x with the ability to directly control one of the many battles. If it instead focuses on one solar system at a time, you just get a really, really drawn out game. Like the crashing of asteroids, it sounds "AWESOME!", but so did Spore. The question is how it's actually going to get implemented, which we don't know.

You sound like you need to play it first to decide. In that case, you'll have to wait another 18 months. All criticism about the fact that we don't know "how will it actually play" is true for any yet unreleased game, so I don't see the point of complaining about that particular thing.

The existence and number of stretch goals was revealed since the the first stretch goal reveal. The nature of the stretch goals was kept secret and unveiled as the donations were coming in, in order to make people donate to see what's in store. It is highly unlikely that the stretch goals weren't already established since before the project was launched.

Based on what? That they listed three "secret stretch goals"? Yeah, no way they could have used that as filler to figure something out.

You're welcome to think whatever you like. It's not my job to convince you that they had a plan laid out since before the start of the campaign. If you're dead set on disregarding the evidence suggesting that, there's nothing I can do about it.

Did you read what I posted? Contrast what they do to what's happening with AoD, what Styg did with Underrail, or what's happening with KoTC 2.

There's a difference between the projects you're mentioning and the KS projects. In the case of the former, they need to create an audience that will buy their product after release in order to recoup their expenses and, ideally, turn some profit. In the case of the latter, they already have their expenses covered, so there's a less urgent need to have a community cocked and locked, waiting for the release. All the effort spend interacting with the community can, now, be better spent realizing their vision for the game. You think all the hate VD got after the release of the AoD demo was conducive to Iron Tower's development process? I would bet it wasn't. I'm not saying that it's better to disregard your games' community altogether, but listening to it too much is just a short way to design by committee, which is exactly what the AAA devs do, only that the committee is different, and a significant drain on your resources.

The alternative is KoTC 2, Underrail, Chaos Chronicles, Divinity: Original Sin, Age of Decadence, etc. Turn-based incline RPG's that didn't say they needed 100k or 1,000,000 to start. All of those have also been much more open than most Kickstarter "we're bringing development back to the people" games have been so far. I'm not sure about Original Sin, but for all the others the developers have either been on this board or their own answering questions directly, and most of those answers are pretty straightforward.

I'm not saying I dislike Kickstarter entirely. I think it was a good way for promising titles like Legend of Eisenwald and Conquistadores to raise some money, and I even think it was a decent way for games like Project Eternity, Wasteland 2, and Shadowrun Returns to get made. But I can't ignore the fact that people are willing to make good RPG's right now without needing us to funnel millions of dollars first, and I think they should be supported just as much as the people that will only do so if they get the money upfront.

Your examples are of games with very little reach. I'm not thinking about what I want to play NOW. If your main request is to have TB games to play, then these games will do, and do it well. But that's not the most important thing for me. The most important thing is how these games will shape the game industry and the game communities at large. Small games like the ones you mentioned have little chance in changing something on their own. Their power was in showing that indie development is feasible, and as soon as KS showed that indie funding is available, it is the new wave of KS funded games which will lead the true revolution of the game development business model. What's at stake is the future of gaming - do you want a future dominated by AAAs with some minuscule indies here and there, that almost nobody knows about, or a future where the AAA paradigm is not viable anymore and, instead of that, we have a vibrant game industry that's constantly innovating and catering to everybody's demands?

 

[almondblight]

You sound like you need to play it first to decide. In that case, you'll have to wait another 18 months. All criticism about the fact that we don't know "how will it actually play" is true for any yet unreleased game, so I don't see the point of complaining about that particular thing.

Not really. I've never played Prison Architect or Gunpoint, but I have a decent sense of how those will play. There are ways you can give someone a sense of a game without it playing out. For instance, the PA people could have talked about how a game normally unfolds, or the basics of what a Galactic Conquest game could be like. They didn't, and I'm not sure how clear a view they had themselves.

Now, this isn't saying PA is going to suck, but rather that I don't think we know much more about how it, or Wasteland 2, will actually play than we do about Project Eternity. What we saw looks cool, but don't confuse that with actual gameplay.

There's a difference between the projects you're mentioning and the KS projects. In the case of the former, they need to create an audience that will buy their product after release in order to recoup their expenses and, ideally, turn some profit. In the case of the latter, they already have their expenses covered, so there's a less urgent need to have a community cocked and locked, waiting for the release. All the effort spend interacting with the community can, now, be better spent realizing their vision for the game. You think all the hate VD got after the release of the AoD demo was conducive to Iron Tower's development process? I would bet it wasn't. I'm not saying that it's better to disregard your games' community altogether, but listening to it too much is just a short way to design by committee, which is exactly what the AAA devs do, only that the committee is different, and a significant drain on your resources.

Well, I don't disagree with most of what you're saying, but it seems counter to the claim we've seen several time about how open the development process will be and how much they'll be able to interact with their fans. It's probably more so than when these studios deal with developers, but still less than most smaller developers.

Though I disagree that most smaller developers are doing this to build and audience. Sure, some are, but I also get the sense that smaller developers are more passionate about the games (like the guy at Larian that loves to blog about these things), or perhaps lack a community of coworkers to talk about these things (like many smaller developers).

Your examples are of games with very little reach. I'm not thinking about what I want to play NOW. If your main request is to have TB games to play, then these games will do, and do it well. But that's not the most important thing for me. The most important thing is how these games will shape the game industry and the game communities at large. Small games like the ones you mentioned have little chance in changing something on their own. Their power was in showing that indie development is feasible, and as soon as KS showed that indie funding is available, it is the new wave of KS funded games which will lead the true revolution of the game development business model. What's at stake is the future of gaming - do you want a future dominated by AAAs with some minuscule indies here and there, that almost nobody knows about, or a future where the AAA paradigm is not viable anymore and, instead of that, we have a vibrant game industry that's constantly innovating and catering to everybody's demands?

It really depends, no? Larian has been a successful company, and if Original Sin does well they will have the resources to continue making old-school games. The guys that are making Chaos Chronicles also have that opportunity, and I think the people making Conquistadores and Eisenwald do to. Vince says if he does well he plans on making games full time, and he already has a small team put together. FTL had a very successful Kickstarter, and now seems to have gotten a lot of success upon release. Sure, KoTC didn't do so well financially, but it's pretty much become the Codex's go to example for good fantasy TB combat, and the Chaos Chronicles developers said it influenced them.

Any of these groups making games like this full time would be great. I'm not sure if it'd shake up the AAA industry more or less than the Kickstarters (my guess would be more so), but my goal isn't to get revenge against AAA games. If good games are coming out at a steady rate, then I'm happy.

And why do you think that indies right now are minuscule? There's been a huge shift happening over the past ten years towards indie games and smaller studios, and I think supporting that is going to be much more important than supporting larger development studios on Kickstarter. Again, that doesn't mean I think Kickstarter is bad - hell, I think it can be great for smaller developers that already have something to show, and not bad for some (trustworthy) larger ones with just ideas. But seeing Kickstarter as the only way to get away from AAA publishers seems incredibly myopic.

 

[skuphundaku]

Now, this isn't saying PA is going to suck, but rather that I don't think we know much more about how it, or Wasteland 2, will actually play than we do about Project Eternity. What we saw looks cool, but don't confuse that with actual gameplay.

What we saw was coreographed, of course, but it was much more than what many (if not most) KS projects show. This, combined with the previous TA/SupCom experience, gives us a much clearer idea of what gameplay will be like than the "we have an idea"/"we have a setting"/"we have a brand name" type of KS project, or, at least, it gives me a much cleared idea of what gameplay will be like.

And why do you think that indies right now are minuscule? There's been a huge shift happening over the past ten years towards indie games and smaller studios, and I think supporting that is going to be much more important than supporting larger development studios on Kickstarter. Again, that doesn't mean I think Kickstarter is bad - hell, I think it can be great for smaller developers that already have something to show, and not bad for some (trustworthy) larger ones with just ideas. But seeing Kickstarter as the only way to get away from AAA publishers seems incredibly myopic.

I'm not saying that the indie games environment, as a whole, is minuscule. You are right to say that in the last few years (I would say at least since 2007-2008), the indies have become a significant force when considered as a whole. However, very few of them were break out hits that gained widespread fame. Another issue is that, lately (last couple of years), a lot of indies have started to become dependent on Steam, which is just escaping the gatekeepers that were the old-school publishers and getting captured by the new-style gatekeeper that is Steam.

Both these issues can be traced back to the indies' lack of funds. The lack of funds mean that they need to get to market as soon as possible, which, most of the time means lack of polish, lack of content etc., all of which can put off potential customers. The dependence of Steam has financial reasons too: many indies, if they don't make it on Steam, they are unable to get customers because a huge number of hipsters do all their gaming on Steam, so, if it's not on Steam, they won't even consider the game.

In this context, I see KS (and crowd-funding in general) as the next evolutionary step of the indie game development world. With crowd-funding, the indie developers can get the necessary funds to realize their vision while not having to hurry too much and make a hash of it. Also, with crowd-funding, the indies don't have to worry anymore with breaking even, so they can have more independence from Steam and other gatekeepers. This doesn't mean that all of them can convince enough people to fund them on crowd-sourcing platforms, or that all of them should even try going that route. KS is just another option, a very powerful option, mind you, if they can pull it off, but still just an option.

P.S. I think that Steam Greenlight is a direct reaction to KS, and it's a subtle way of saying "Fuck you!" to the indies. Until the KS revolution, a lot, if not most, of the games on Steam were indies, and which game made it on Steam and which didn't was entirely up to Valve. Basically, Valve had the power of life and death over the vast majority of indies because they were well aware that the indies on Steam were making orders of magnitude more money than most of those who weren't. When KS exploded into the headlines, Steam lost most of that power over the indies. At that point, I suppose Gaben (or some bean counter) said something along the lines "Now that they don't depend on us anymore, why waste all those resources going through all that shit being submitted for review? Fuck them! Let's automate or outsource the process someway.". The result of that is Greenlight. Now all non-publisher backed games (i.e. all non-AAA games) have to go through Greenlight, no way around it, and Valve just gets to pick the ones that have the potential of selling a lot, which now is much easier to estimate by way of Greenlight. This loss of influence is, probably, one of the reasons Valve is now trying to expand in other directions, like Steam for Linux, Steam on the TV, Steam periperhals etc.

 

[Infinitron]

I think you're overestimating how useful Kickstarter is to anonymous indies. Besides, all of these big Kickstarter games end up on Steam anyway.

 

[skuphundaku]

I think you're overestimating how useful Kickstarter is to anonymous indies. Besides, all of these big Kickstarter games end up on Steam anyway.

That depends on multiple factors, among which development stage, funding goals etc. As for Steam, I don't care if they're on Steam or not, as long as they have a non-Steam, DRM-free version. If that's not the case, see my raging from a week, or so, ago.

 

[tuluse]

I don't think greenlight was a fuck you, but more of a "oh shit they don't need us with ks and gog we need to do something to keep up our mind share"

 

[almondblight]

I'm not saying that the indie games environment, as a whole, is minuscule. You are right to say that in the last few years (I would say at least since 2007-2008), the indies have become a significant force when considered as a whole. However, very few of them were break out hits that gained widespread fame. Another issue is that, lately (last couple of years), a lot of indies have started to become dependent on Steam, which is just escaping the gatekeepers that were the old-school publishers and getting captured by the new-style gatekeeper that is Steam.

That's certainly true, but it's also why GoG and Desura are growing. Steam has to be careful, because it's not without competition. Buying an Indie game is common now, and people are going to use the service that gives them what they want. If GoG picks up popular indies that don't make it onto Steam (and that's exactly what they should be looking for), Valve's going to start losing customers.

Both these issues can be traced back to the indies' lack of funds. The lack of funds mean that they need to get to market as soon as possible, which, most of the time means lack of polish, lack of content etc., all of which can put off potential customers. The dependence of Steam has financial reasons too: many indies, if they don't make it on Steam, they are unable to get customers because a huge number of hipsters do all their gaming on Steam, so, if it's not on Steam, they won't even consider the game.

Funds certainly help, but I think the key is exposure. Funds will help to a certain extent with that, but getting in to a popular distribution service like Steam or getting positive press helps more. Competition from other services will help the former; the latter would be helped by better gaming media. I think most people here agree that the major gaming sites have been a huge drag on the industry for a long time.

In this context, I see KS (and crowd-funding in general) as the next evolutionary step of the indie game development world. With crowd-funding, the indie developers can get the necessary funds to realize their vision while not having to hurry too much and make a hash of it. Also, with crowd-funding, the indies don't have to worry anymore with breaking even, so they can have more independence from Steam and other gatekeepers. This doesn't mean that all of them can convince enough people to fund them on crowd-sourcing platforms, or that all of them should even try going that route. KS is just another option, a very powerful option, mind you, if they can pull it off, but still just an option.

But you still have gatekeepers. In this case it changes to the gaming media and personalities, which mostly are horrible. It's the reason that Republique and Hardcore Tactical Shooter got a ton of money. Of course communities (like the Codex) come into play too (like they do for all Indies), and one advantage of Kickstarter is it encourages people who want to to pay more to support the developers.

P.S. I think that Steam Greenlight is a direct reaction to KS, and it's a subtle way of saying "Fuck you!" to the indies. Until the KS revolution, a lot, if not most, of the games on Steam were indies, and which game made it on Steam and which didn't was entirely up to Valve. Basically, Valve had the power of life and death over the vast majority of indies because they were well aware that the indies on Steam were making orders of magnitude more money than most of those who weren't. When KS exploded into the headlines, Steam lost most of that power over the indies. At that point, I suppose Gaben (or some bean counter) said something along the lines "Now that they don't depend on us anymore, why waste all those resources going through all that shit being submitted for review? Fuck them! Let's automate or outsource the process someway.". The result of that is Greenlight. Now all non-publisher backed games (i.e. all non-AAA games) have to go through Greenlight, no way around it, and Valve just gets to pick the ones that have the potential of selling a lot, which now is much easier to estimate by way of Greenlight. This loss of influence is, probably, one of the reasons Valve is now trying to expand in other directions, like Steam for Linux, Steam on the TV, Steam periperhals etc.

I agree with tuluse that this was more about fear of competition. For instance, Armageddon Empires was a minor hit that didn't get released on Steam. If that happened today and GoG or Desura picked it up, you'd get more people using those services. Probably the biggest obstacle for anyone using any service is signing up for the first time. Once they do that, they're much more likely to use the service again (at least, from my experience). Greenlight was a way, I think, to get in on the crowd sourcing train and also try to make sure that popular games get in.

 

[almondblight]

Those stretch goals don't really give me that vibe (they are just too general and keyword focused). See what tuluse wrote.

The guess you are making is even less probable than "the Age of Exploration" thing - at least there are some grounds for the latter.

And even if it is somehow planned from the start with the job they are doing, they are not going to collect enough funds to secure their goals. If they had a plan - like you said - they could reveal more amount of detail at the beginning and progressively spice things up. How about that Novella? That would be a very strong opening of the campaign and something substantial. But I guess the world is not ready yet so there's nothing to write about... bugger.

Except we know that this was the case with at least two of the planned stretch goals - Mac and Linux support. We don't know for certain that it was the case with other stretch goals, but it wouldn't surprise me, especially given the initial number of companions they had for a 6-person party.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

I've updated the list of donors. There are currently 3 Trolls. If your name (or part of your e-mail) is not on the list and you've donated, then we haven't got it.

Also, the Wasteland 2 KickStarter raised $4k in 1 day, $7k in 2 and $10k by the end of the week. Dead State struggled miserably to reach $1k but then managed to tip over when it seemed the KickStarter would be successful.

I think it's pretty clear from previous patterns - and the fact P:E is already guaranteed to get its funding - that we will fail to reach the $5k NPC party mark. I doubt at this stage we'll raise much passed $2k. I propose we aim to split that in two and go for an Epic Item and an NPC. Alternatively, we convince Chris Avellone to pinch the Codex Statue art asset from Wasteland 2 and dump that in somewhere. It would be fitting.

 

[Infinitron]

I blame P:E's too-expensive box tiers. People got nothing left to donate to the Codex.

 

[villain of the story]

I've updated the list of donors. There are currently 3 Trolls. If your name (or part of your e-mail) is not on the list and you've donated, then we haven't got it.

Also, the Wasteland 2 KickStarter raised $4k in 1 day, $7k in 2 and $10k by the end of the week. Dead State struggled miserably to reach $1k but then managed to tip over when it seemed the KickStarter would be successful.

I think it's pretty clear from previous patterns - and the fact P:E is already guaranteed to get its funding - that we will fail to reach the $5k NPC party mark. I doubt at this stage we'll raise much passed $2k. I propose we aim to split that in two and go for an Epic Item and an NPC. Alternatively, we convince Chris Avellone to pinch the Codex Statue art asset from Wasteland 2 and dump that in somewhere. It would be fitting.

I trust that all the cocksuckers who voted to donate something but didn't will be dealt with accordingly. At the moment, the poll adds up to at least $3275.

At least if peopel go for an NPC+,item, we might convince Obsidian to do a unique NPC creature resembling the Codex troll and an item fitting with its theme. Still not bad as far Codexian preferences go.

 

[EG]

I've updated the list of donors. There are currently 3 Trolls. If your name (or part of your e-mail) is not on the list and you've donated, then we haven't got it.

Also, the Wasteland 2 KickStarter raised $4k in 1 day, $7k in 2 and $10k by the end of the week. Dead State struggled miserably to reach $1k but then managed to tip over when it seemed the KickStarter would be successful.

I think it's pretty clear from previous patterns - and the fact P:E is already guaranteed to get its funding - that we will fail to reach the $5k NPC party mark. I doubt at this stage we'll raise much passed $2k. I propose we aim to split that in two and go for an Epic Item and an NPC. Alternatively, we convince Chris Avellone to pinch the Codex Statue art asset from Wasteland 2 and dump that in somewhere. It would be fitting.

I trust that all the cocksuckers who voted to donate something but didn't will be dealt with accordingly. At the moment, the poll adds up to at least $3275.

To them, it was a poll. To Villain of the Story, it was a contract.

You'll make Jaesun blush if you keep sucking Obsidian's cock like this.

 

[villain of the story]

LOL. That's just sad.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

I've updated the list of donors. There are currently 3 Trolls. If your name (or part of your e-mail) is not on the list and you've donated, then we haven't got it.

Also, the Wasteland 2 KickStarter raised $4k in 1 day, $7k in 2 and $10k by the end of the week. Dead State struggled miserably to reach $1k but then managed to tip over when it seemed the KickStarter would be successful.

I think it's pretty clear from previous patterns - and the fact P:E is already guaranteed to get its funding - that we will fail to reach the $5k NPC party mark. I doubt at this stage we'll raise much passed $2k. I propose we aim to split that in two and go for an Epic Item and an NPC. Alternatively, we convince Chris Avellone to pinch the Codex Statue art asset from Wasteland 2 and dump that in somewhere. It would be fitting.

I trust that all the cocksuckers who voted to donate something but didn't will be dealt with accordingly. At the moment, the poll adds up to at least $3275.

To them, it was a poll. To Villain of the Story, it was a contract.

And yet people wonder why I ignore polls.

 

[Infinitron]

To them, it was a poll. To Villain of the Story, it was a contract.

You'll make Jaesun blush if you keep sucking Obsidian's cock like this.

He's not sucking it, he's biting it.