Oozi: Earth Adventure Ep. 4

September 7, 2012 3 Comments

And that’s a wrap on Oozi.  One game.  Four chapters.  $4 spent.  Four boss fights that made me question the existence of evil on this Earth.  Zero attempts at originality.  But is the overall experience worth it?  Kind of.  Let’s start by recapping the previous chapters.

Part One: AGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!  Well, that sucked.

Part Two: AGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!! Oh hey, wait a second, it stopped sucking.

Part Three: Not bad.

Part Four: Still not bad.  Oh wait, I have to feed this thing fruit?  AGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!  This is boring.

Best as I can see, this fucking thing has legs, so why do I have to feed him? I think this is what the Republicans have been warning us about.

Oozi’s problem is and always has been how unambitious it is.  It does the graphics thing really well, but does everything else so much by the book that the book is now claiming royalties on the series.  Oozi is the poster child for generic 90s platforming mascot.  Like Serpentor, its creators borrowed the DNA from such soulless, design-by-committee, me-too cash-ins as Aero the Acro-Bat, Bubsy the Bobcat, or Crash Bandicoot.  I was going keep that going all the way to Z, but I figured you guys would hire ninjas to insert burrowing cockroaches into my ear canal after I listed Donkey Kong Country and Earthworm Jim as soulless.  Which they are, but I probably shouldn’t say it.  Fans of those games take it too personal.

I’ll grant Oozi this: it’s not original, but it does what it does well.  Paint-by-numbers levels, almost too easy platforming, hop-on-heads cruelty to animals, double jumps, butt stomps, and every other stand-by of the genre.  If the subject is anything but sound effects, Oozi is decent.  Not spectacular.  Not memorable.  Not something you’ll enthusiastically tell your friends to try.  Just a good solid waste of 90 minutes per chapter.  All four chapters are more or less the same, with the same scaling of difficulty, same principles of level design, and a hugely tedious boss fight to cap it off.

That’s probably the thing that pisses me off the most about Oozi: so many of the tasks of the game are busy work.  In chapter four, there’s a couple of sections where you have to feed fruit to a monster.  To get the fruit, you have to butt-stomp the ground by the fruit.  Then, you have to carry the fruit, tossing it between enemies, over gaps, and up platforms.  You move slow when carrying the fruit, and you can’t jump.  If anything touches the fruit, you get to start over.  It’s sooooooo boring, not at all difficult, and takes way too long to accomplish.  But, and this is the thing that almost drove me towards taking up genocide, these sections don’t immediately place checkpoints after completing them.  So let’s say you spend ten minutes getting this entitled mother fucking critter its food.  Then, a random volcano spits up a fire-ball and you die.  Guess what you get to do?  That’s right, start all the way fucking over.  And that happened to me.  Twice.  After the first time, I almost rage quit.  The second time, I seriously wanted to personally strangle a species into extinction.  I don’t care which one, but something fluffy and adorable would have been swell.

“So my agent says to me “Bob, baby, we have a part for you in the next Simpsons Halloween Special.”  But nooooooo, I have to take the starring villain role in some dry ass independent video game.  Way to go, Bob!”

Oozi did end on a bright note: the very final boss was probably the least annoying of the series.  As a result, Oozi 4 finds a spot on the leaderboard.  It’s not as good as parts two or three, but it’s way better than part one.  Then again, so is gonorrhea, so that’s not saying much.  Ultimately though, if Oozi is remembered for anything, it will be for being the ultimate uncanny valley of XBLIGs.  Oozi is a game you’ll swear you played on your SNES back in the day.  Depending on your level of gibbering nostalgia, that might be a better thing than I experienced.  As a child of a different era, I would like to put out this challenge to Awesome Games Studio: you guys are better than this and you know it.  You created a series that is amazing to look at, but when it came to gameplay you settled for functional.  I’ve seen artwork made out of feces that is more inspired.  So next time, try something new and weird.  Think of every fucked up thing you ever thought of doing with a platform game and give it a shot.  The best case is you’ll have a game that people talk about as something other than a lifeless 90s platforming clone.  The worst case is, well, you end up with a pile of shit.  But hey, your mascot already looks like the bastard offspring of the Great Mighty Poo, so the status quo remains intact!

Oozi: Earth Adventure Episode 4 was developed by Awesome Games Studio

80 Microsoft Points don’t really think the final chapter takes place on Earth in the making of this review.  Well, maybe in Oakland.

Three out of four games in the Oozi series are ranked on the Indie Gamer Chick Leaderboard.  Where do they fall? 

Filed under XBLIG / Creators Collection Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Volley

September 5, 2012 4 Comments

Xbox Live Indie games release in streaks.  Whole weeks will go by with nothing coming out.  Then Zeus will declare “unleash the Crapan!” and a flood of sewage-saturated indies will hit.  Honestly, it’s not that bad.  It’s just always a little overwhelming in a “where do I begin?” sort of way.  Starting with a game like Volley seems like a good warm-up act, until I remember that well-meaning, not at all horrible games that have little in the way of gameplay can be just as soul-crushing for me to write about as a terrible game is to play.

Volley is the second game I’ve played this week that was created by students, only these ones come from Munich.  Smart people they have in Munich.  They all speak German fluently.  Crazy impressive, huh?  Volley is similar to a previous XBLIG I encountered: Bug Ball, a game that both myself and Brian really enjoyed.  Volley tries to play like an evolved version of it.  There’s more power-ups and you’re given more control over the ball.  So how come I didn’t like it as much as Bug Ball?  Perhaps the games are too similar.  Both are 2D, arcade-oriented versions of volleyball.  Both are pretty heavy on the glitchy side.  Both can be played with up to four-players, although Volley skimps on online play in favor of not having online play.

What makes Volley different is you play as a circle that grows a bulge in it when you fiddle with the stick.  And I just realized that did not come out right.  I meant to say that if you tug on the right stick, it grows an erect extension that can be used for smacking the balls that come at it.  I mean, you know what?  Fuck it, here’s the trailer.

Okay, see what I’m talking about?  It does that.  But honestly, that appendage thing isn’t that big a deal, as most of the time we just jumped up and bopped the ball without swinging at it.  You can use it to create  a power shot, but none of us could quite get the hang of it.  The physics of using the bulge seem to be lacking a bit of oomph.  Speaking of oomphless stuff, the power-ups are mostly worthless.  All one of them does is turn the lights out, which might make a difference if all the players and the ball didn’t suddenly light up like they were dipped in plutonium.  Other times, it will put up little water-fall blocks that you have to hit the ball over or under.  Or it will put a bomb on the table.  No clue what the point of that is, since it never once detonated anywhere near a player.  Finally, it will sometimes drop multiple balls onto the table.  This is fine for 2 v 2 play, but one-on-one it’s simply a dick move because you can’t possibly keep both balls alive.

Even with all the problems, Volley is perfectly decent waste of a one dollar, provided you haven’t already played Bug Ball.  Volley did make me wonder if I would have liked it more if I hadn’t already played such a similar game.  Nah, I don’t think that’s the case.  Bug Ball was also slightly more fast paced, had a bigger variety of courts, and the grab-mechanics were more fun than the appendage thing that Volley has.  Yea, this is really unfair.  Volley is a pretty fun and should be rated on its own.  But I can’t.  This is like trying to decide if Zack or Cody is hotter.  An absurd debate, by the way.  It’s clearly Cody.

Volley was developed by Glassbox Games

IGC_Approved80 Microsoft Points sprained their wrist twice trying to play volleyball in the making of this review. 

Volley is ranked on the Indie Gamer Chick Leaderboard.  Click here to see where it landed.

Filed under XBLIG / Creators Collection Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tales from the Dev Side: Greenlight, Red Light by Alex Jordan

September 4, 2012 18 Comments

Although I’ve sworn many times that Xbox Live Indie Games have a bright future, developers are treating the platform like a freshly pruned-by-iceberg Titanic.  For many, the brass ring for distribution is now Steam.  The problem with that is Steam is a tough nut to crack.  And then hope came in the form of Steam Greenlight.  But is it really hope, or is it all smoke and mirrors?  Cute Things Dying Violently developer and Greenlight hopeful Alex Jordan  has a few thoughts.

Greenlight, Red Light

by Alex Jordan

The life of an up-and-coming indie game developer sure is a great one. I mean, think of the perks!  Scant management, vast amounts of creative control, and great appreciation for the finer things in life, e.g. ramen noodles.

And, hey, there’s also the disproportionately huge share of revenue you command!  Unfortunately, 70% or 100% of shit is still shit (roughly “shi” if you’re using the 70% model, including the dot above the i, greedy bastards), so pretty much every last indie developer has had one nagging thing on their to-do list for the past four or five years: beg for distribution on Steam.  Because, let’s face it, it’d be super nice if people had actually heard about your game and maybe would deign to buy it.  If that were the case, you could consider quitting your day job, or at least consider having something for lunch other than rehydrated noodles in sodium water.

And because the only thing out there more in abundance than ramen noodles is desperate indie developers, the guys and gals at Valve who run Steam have had to fend off these Morlocks with a stick.

Pictured: Cute Things Dying Violently creator Alex Jordan and his fiancée.

For every indie game that manages to pass through the Pearly Gates, 100 get denied or ignored. Enter: Steam Greenlight, Valve’s way of saying, “Here! You look at shitty MS Paint art.  We’ll just sit here and make decorative pants out of $100 bills.”

Having had Cute Things Dying Violently rejected by Valve back in July, Greenlight (which was announced roughly three days after I got my rejection email) seemed like a juicy consolation prize.  A community indie games voting site for a large captive audience of Steam users, designed by a developer as canny and talented as Valve? Sign me up!

And I did. Pretty much the moment it went live, back on August 30.  And that’s when the horrible truth set in: Greenlight was. . . decent.  It wasn’t great, it wasn’t terrible, it was just. . . a filter.  Pure, exhausted convenience distilled into a website.

What’s Going Right?

My first 20 minutes with Greenlight were pretty blissful.  It was streamlined and easy to use, and I managed to register CTDV with trailer, screenshots, and description inside of ten minutes.  And pretty much the moment my page went live, the unique page views started pouring in.  The “large captive audience” I mentioned earlier is nothing to sneeze at.  Just by virtue of being on the platform, my game and others like it were getting a degree of attention that was unprecedented just hours earlier.

It’s also marvelously easy to provide feedback on games.  For each game page there’s an upvote button, a downvote button, and a Favorite button.  Additionally, Collections make it easier for third parties like gaming websites to promote a series of games.

What’s Going Wrong?

I’m not going to harp much on the reviewer’s experience, since most gaming journalism outfits have already beat me to it.  The short version is that discoverability is still a problem; talented developers with attractive games are unavoidably lumped together with complete crap; trying to cast several votes efficiently is a navigational cul-de-sac; and, unfortunately, the Greenlight community is full of slack-jawed retards.

“Gameplay looks like iphone appstore level trash” said Cletus Gumtooth of Pine Knot, Kentucky. Jed Toomanytoes of Camden, TN noted “looks like a boring, bad, lazy game thats just like a multitude of other terrible and boring games. also i want to fuk my sistah.”

How obnoxious can they be? Well, many of them didn’t know what Greenlight was for.  They thought it was a way to request their favorite AAA games getting on Steam as opposed to indie games.  Plenty of people who knew what the deal actually was were scarcely better, and each game’s comments thread began racking up scattershot feedback that many YouTube vets would cringe at.  One man’s Cthulhu Saves the World is another man’s crappy RPG Maker clone, and one man’s Cute Things Dying Violently is another man’s “stupid Flash game.”  Ouch.

I’m sure the majority of Steam accounts are held by lovely people, but you can only read so many variations on “Your game sucks” or “Get fucked m8” before the scales fall from your eyes.  After all, these are the people whose votes you need.

Oh my God, I turned out to be a politician anyway.

The Developer’s Experience

Anyway, such delicate interaction proved to be a wee bit of an eye-opener.  The rest of the developer experience on Greenlight isn’t much better.

The most notable aspect of the developer’s experience is one of confusion and withheld information.  Putting a game on Greenlight, with its studied silence from Valve and its schizophrenic community, is like being asked to stand in one place and alternatively receiving either kisses or kicks to the genitalia.

And those are the only two forms of feedback.  Initially, developers (and only developers) got to privately see their game’s percentage of upvotes to downvotes, but that disappeared after a few days when it became apparent to Valve that downvoting – either legitimate downvotes or those by trolls – served no other cause than to drag down a game’s up/down ratio.  Downvotes don’t subtract from upvotes, but, initially, we didn’t know that.  For reviewers, a downvote got the game off their to-review screen.  For developers, it was a sign of dislike for the game and perhaps even a negated upvote, as Valve hadn’t told us otherwise.  We got to suffer in silence for a few days, watching our numbers degrade, before Valve put us out of our misery and yanked that wonderful feature.

And then there’s the “% of Calculated Ratings So Far” bar that shows how far along your game is on upvotes before it gets submitted to Valve.  Well, the fine folks at Valve don’t quite know yet what level of participation the Greenlight community will have, so they’ve erred on the side of caution and set the number pretty damn high.  Even standout games on Greenlight like Project Zomboid have only gotten about 20% of the votes they need, while the rest of us plebes get to hang on to single digit approval percentages.  (Granted, it’s been less than a week, so take my whining with a grain of salt.)  And since developers don’t get to see how many upvotes their games have actually gotten, there’s nothing for us to extrapolate from.  We just get to sit, and wait.  And get kicked in the balls.

Hey, I’ve Done This Before. . .

Despite its shortcomings, Greenlight still presents a big opportunity for indie developers.  Whereas previously Valve would almost certainly take a look at your game and flat-out reject it in the same split second, now we have an opportunity to land a game on their laps with some sort of critical consensus and the understanding that Valve employees will review it with the time and attention it deserves.  Gone will be the days of instantaneous judgment leading to rejection and developer misery.

Thus, Greenlight becomes a plausible shortcut.  Sure, it’s an extra step in the process (you used to be able to just fill out a form on Valve’s website and send your game in), but if your game emerges intact on the other side, odds are you’ll soon be sitting pretty.

Cute Things Dying Violently has seen modest success on various platforms. Which is probably a good thing. If it did any better, you know a certain Silicon Valley mobile company would be right there with their “completely original” physics puzzler “Adorable Creatures Perishing Disturbingly.” Then they would probably sue him for stealing their idea before they thought of it.

But here’s the thing… Greenlight’s voting threshold and discoverability shortcomings mean that the developers still need to do quite a bit of hustle to gain attention and upvotes.  Which is. . . hey! I recognize that feeling!  That’s exasperation, having just realized that this is what we’ve always had to do, and will always have to do.  I don’t think any of us developers were naïve enough to think that Greenlight would be a straight ticket to success, but what we got instead was another chapter in the same story we’ve been reading for years upon years: capitalism is hard, and you gotta work for it, and in the end you still might get shafted for no fault of your own.

That means instead of spamming Kickstarter solicitation emails, now you’ll be spamming Greenlight solicitation emails.  (I’m sure gaming journos will be just as eager to read the latter!)  Developers will still be struggling to worm their way into bundles and promotions, desperate to practically give their game away just to get a little bit more recognition.  Networking will still be paramount and journalists will still need to be schmoozed at bars, but last I checked, I really like beer and I really like talking about myself, so that’s not a problem.

In the end, Greenlight represents yet another dance routine on the never-ending popularity contest that all obscure indie developers have to participate in.  It’s certainly not bad, and dare I say the vetting process still represents a good opportunity, it’s just that it’s underwhelming.  Greenlight’s another queue, another procedure, another form that needs to be filled out on the road to possible opportunity.

It is, in short, the perfect microcosm of the indie developer experience.  Does that look like a raw deal to you?   It shouldn’t.  It may seem like deferred, somewhat unlikely success, but it’s worth a shot, isn’t it?  If it wasn’t, we would’ve given up.  And judging by the growing number of games on Greenlight, that ain’t gonna happen.

Filed under Tales from the Dev Side Editorials Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

Warp Shooter

September 3, 2012 6 Comments

To make a game that is a local-only four player top-down 2D arena shooter on a market like Xbox Live Indie Games takes guts.  That’s because you’re making a game with the full knowledge that it will be a tougher sell than a steak house in the middle of Mumbai.  I’ve played a few multiplayer-only games on XBLIG and they tend to range from solid hit to complete miss.  Nothing so far has really found the middle ground.  Well that’s over with, because Warp Shooter stubbornly refuses to be either awesome or horrible.

Warp Shooter is the product of a group of students from Indiana.  Their story is a fascinating one that will be told in an upcoming edition of Tales from the Dev Side.  This is the third student project I’ve reviewed, following Mr. Gravity and Heroes of Hat, both out of the University of Utah.  The relatively simple puzzler Mr. Gravity, despite becoming impossibly difficult in later stages, was good enough to make the leaderboard.  Heroes of Hat, a more ambitious title, was plagued with various technical glitches, unfair level design, and bad control.  Obviously simpler works better for students.

This is what happens when George Lucas runs out of ideas: Rainbow Brite joins the Rebel Alliance.

I guess that’s why it’s weird to see a relatively simple concept turned so overly complex.  Warp Shooter plays like a modernized version of Combat.  I gathered three amigos (sadly not THE Three Amigos, although I hear Martin Short is insatiable) and asked them kindly to help me with my latest review.  When they refused to do it out of kindness, I offered to bribe them.  Finally, I had my goons take their families hostage.  Hey, I have a duty here, and they were fucking with it.

Things got off to a slow start when nobody could figure out how to move.  There’s no tutorial, so the four of us fumbled around, doing our best to pretend like we knew what we were doing.  Most firing was done from a stationary position, until Chevy figured out that movement was done by pressing the right trigger while pointing the right stick in the direction you want to go.  Mind you, the right stick also controls your firing.  Thrust is limited, so you’re never in full control of your vehicle.  You do have the ability to aim a little dot thingy that causes damage to an opponent if it touches them, or you can warp to the spot the dot is on.  It’s supposed to provide an alternate means of movement, but it’s slow and clunky and it doesn’t provide the element of being unpredictable that other movement means has.  You can see where the person is warping to.  It’s like drawing a diagram for your enemies.  “I’ll be moving here.  Take aim and fire at your leisure.”  It would be like the army replacing fatigues with tee shirts supplied by Target.

The best party games tend to be self-explanatory.  Warp Shooter is regrettably missing that.  We never did get the hang of it, but after about twenty to thirty minutes, it did provide moderate fun.  The absurd amount of options provided assures that you would have to be actively trying to not have fun to, well, not have fun.  When we turned on three asteroids and death rays, we were whooping and laughing and high-fiving each other, even though we could barely move.  It was like watching the Narcoleptic Olympics.  I can barely squeeze out something resembling a recommendation for Warp Shooter, but chances are when it only makes the Leaderboard on the grounds that “well, it’s playable!” that’s a sign that maybe some aspects of the game should be rethought.  Starting with the movement controls.  I can’t imagine anything that is more awkward or dangerous to use.  Maybe a B-52 which has their weapons mapped to their intercom button.

Warp Shooter was developed by Hoosier Games

IGC_Approved80 Microsoft Points reserve the right to murder the next person from Indiana who uses a lame “Hoosier Daddy” joke in the making of this review.  I’m looking at you, Kenneth.

Warp Shooter is ranked on the Indie Gamer Chick Leaderboard.  Click here to see where it landed.

Filed under XBLIG / Creators Collection Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

AvatAAAH!!!

September 1, 2012 5 Comments

I’m having trouble wrapping my head around how a game like AvatAAAH!!! comes into being.  It’s one of those games where the concept is too simplistic.  Don’t get me wrong: simplistic is good for gaming on a commercial scale.  It’s why Tetris was an international mega-hit the likes of which may never be seen again on this Earth, while Yoshi’s Cookie is all but forgotten.  My theory is the most successful games require the fewest words to explain.  Tetris can be summed up with “use blocks to build lines.”  Pong can be explained fully as “video table tennis.”  Angry Birds can be explained as “Knock over buildings to crush pigs.”

Get it?  Good.  Now watch as I burn down this theory and piss on its ashes.  AvatAAAH!!! can be explained as “let go of rope, land on platform.”  That fully explains the game, rules, and plot, and why the game sucks so hard that it could reverse the flow the of the tides with its sucking power.  You play as your avatar, you swing off a rope.  The rope sways back and forth without needing you to control it.  At the opportune time, you press A to let go of the rope in an attempt to land in the center of a stump below you.  Do this a few dozen times and that’s the game.

Really, a review of this is redundant. All you need is this screenshot and the trailer below to learn enough to know this game isn’t worth $1.

To be fair, AvatAAAH!!! throws twists at you in the form of altering the gravity physics or changing the size of the stump you’re landing on.  However, it doesn’t really make the game all that harder.  I was able to make it pretty dang far into the game and land a decent spot on the online leaderboard just by letting go of the rope at the very end of its swing.  I didn’t even need to wiggle the control stick to get “good” or “perfect” landings.  That’s really the problem here: AvatAAH!!! doesn’t ask enough of players.

But while the single player is minimalist, the multiplayer is just lazy.  All players swing at the same time, with the closest person to the bullseye getting points.  The only problem is it doesn’t really measure who is closest to the bullseye.  It just measures by zones.  Perfect, Good, OK, and Phew if you barely land on the stump are the only four scores.  That’s sooooo seven years ago.  The player who does the best gets a point, while the player who does the worst loses a point.  At least that’s how I think it goes.  But let’s say all players hit the large section that scores as “OK.”  And let’s say one player is clearly much more OK than everyone else on account of being closer to the center.  It doesn’t matter, because nobody gets a point.  Somehow, that just strikes me as lame.  It can also make games drag on and on, especially once players get the hang of the physics.  Even novice gamers can hit Good or Perfect with absurd consistency.  For what it’s worth, Brian didn’t have a problem with the scoring.  Brian also thinks Chronicles of Riddick was a good movie, so it shows how low his standards are.  Well, this is my obscure gaming blog and so I say that AvatAAAH! would have been better if it scored based on who actually got the closest to the bullseye, and that the game can feel free to tie the rope around its neck and swing away.

AvatAAAH! was developed by Milkstone Studios

80 Microsoft Points thought AvatAAAH! was the sound George Lucas made when he saw how much money Avatar grossed at the box office in the making of this review.

Filed under XBLIG / Creators Collection Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Developer Interview: Count to a Billion

August 30, 2012 Leave a comment

Count to a Billion is a bit of an anomaly in modern gaming.  It’s a pure button masher without apology.  Stand-alone button mashers have been a dead genre for decades.  Bringing out a new one in 2012 seemed almost brazen.  Developer RAWR! Interactive took it as a challenge to resurrect this style of game.  I spoke with their co-founder Mario Wunderlich about what went into creating Count to a Billion.

And yes, Count to a Billion is the official sponsor of the Leaderboard.  It doesn’t mean they’re getting all softball questions.  I enjoyed Count to a Billion, but I do have a bone or two to pick with it.

By the way, if you Tweet this interview, you’re entered into a chance to win a free copy of Count to a Billion.  Valid tweets must include the hashtag #IGCbillion fuck it, just tweet the damn interview.  We’ll be giving away not one, not two, but three copies!  Even if you can’t count to a billion, you can count to three.  Winners will be drawn on Saturday, September 1, 2012.

Kairi:  Button mashers are games that studios dress up and try to pretend they’re something else.  You guys outright embraced being a button masher and flaunt it.  How did this come about?

Mario: Count to a Billion, as a concept, was born from the desire to use the iPhone’s screen capabilities to the max. Most games use but 1 finger, sparingly, for everything. We wanted ta have players use all fingers (5 on iPhone, 10 on iPad) and do it in an intense fashion.

We worked it up from there to a pure button masher. There is no need for deceit, no need for disguise. We believe button mashers can be fun if the incentives and mechanics are well designed. And the iPhone/iPad screen is a perfect medium for it.

It is so simple, and yet it really is a lot of fun.  And exhausting.

By the way, the game was originally called Count to a Million… but we just kept escalating the game in intensity, and soon realized that big numbers accurately reflected this – and that’s how Count to a Billion came to be.

Kairi: It’s such a rarity that a game, even a small indie game, centers completely around button mashing.  I asked some gamers what was the last button masher they liked.  Most answered Track & Field, an early 80s arcade game that later got some home ports.  So it’s been a long time since this type of game resonated with gamers.  Why take the risk?

Mario: As a company, RAWR! Interactive’s vision is to explore new game mechanics for mobile platforms. Because of our vision, all our games will be risky investments by nature – but we think it’s well worth it, we might find something that players really love. Maybe it’s Count to a Billion, maybe it’ll be another game. But our mission is to find new ways to play with an iOS device.

With Count to a Billion, we wanted to get away from the super laid-back game mechanics that have been used over and over in 99% of mobile games – and explore intense game mechanisms. It this case, the intensity is quite physical. Sore arms. Numb fingers. And players have kept coming for more!

Kairi: The majority of gamers I know are super apprehensive about the potential of a button masher.  Straight honesty on my part: I thought Count to a Billion was going to suck.  I really did.  And in fact it’s very enjoyable.  So how do you go about convincing people that your button masher is different from any other button masher ever created?  Because, well, it is!

Mario: Thank you. And you’re right about that too. People have a preconceived notion of what a button masher is – the last one most gamers saw, like you noted, was probably in the 80s… and left it at that. So our job now is to show gamers what a button masher can be. It can be as fun and as involved as any other game.

So for Count to a Billion, making the game was just 50% of the journey. The other 50% is all about PR and marketing. And to keep on innovating. So yeah, Count to a Billion’s release was just the start – we have great new things planned for it. And we’re working around the clock in the hopes that it’ll be seen as more than just another “button masher.”

Kairi: As I touched on earlier, your game has no theme to it.  It’s just about smacking numbers.  Was there ever a point where you had something other than the minimalist look it has now?

Mario: The idea was always minimal, but making a game out of button mashing took a lot of experimenting. We went through 7 versions getting a feel of how best to get the gameplay mechanics, getting the look and feel right, creating a set of goals and achievements to give the game a sense of progress and of winning – it’s the details that make a game, and with a game as drastically different and minimalist as Count to a Billion, we really had to discover them from scratch.

Kairi: I’m ranked 53rd on the leaderboard, and I would be ranked better if it wasn’t for some of those damn sliders.  Especially the “C” slider.  The game is critically acclaimed, but also everyone is complaining about these.  How did this slip by?

Mario: Initially, we wanted the game to be not only fun, but also a tough, challenging experience. The “C” Slider is probably the toughest challenge in the game. After working on it for so long, however, we made the mistake of forgetting just how difficult some of these where. We even got used to the “quirks.” But we’ve listened to our players, and our next update addresses these.  The challenge will still remain, but it will be focused more on getting that high score, less on trying to avoid errors.

God Damn this fucking shape!! I officially declare war on all things that begin with the letter C! Well, except for things named Cathy. I can’t declare war on myself obviously, unless you count all the smoking and late nights spent watching Dana Carvey movies.

Kairi: The YouTube integration was a stroke of genius.  How come you guys didn’t include feature for tweeting scores?

Mario: Thanks! To be honest, we wanted to limit the number of options in exchange for a smoother User Experience. As part of this trade-off, we thought about all the available social options, and concluded that Facebook and YouTube where better platforms to brag about your skills. Twitter is a fantastic social tool, but unless you’re constantly tweeting or have a huge following, singled-out tweets simply won’t get noticed.  However, we listen to our users. If twitter is a big wish-list item for many, we’ll make room for it and include it.

Kairi: So far the game is doing well, at least critically.  Other than addressing complaints, do you have any features planned for addition?

Mario: We have many new features planned. This first release was just the beginning. One particular feature will be the addition of a 30 second blitz play-mode, where you’ll be able to create your own “decks” with challenges in a particular order so you can maximize your game. These are possible game-changers – but the core will always remain: intense tapping and sliding action for billions of points!

Kairi: Anything else you have to say to potential players who remain skeptical?

Mario: If playing an intense, challenging game that is quite different from anything else you’ve ever played isn’t enough, then how about trying to earn all 68 achievements!? And coming soon, we’ll have an in-game “store” where you’ll be able to trade in billions of points for cool, new playable stuff!

Check out Count to a Billion for sale now in the App Store.

Filed under Tales from the Dev Side Editorials Tagged with , ,

FAQ: Sponsoring the Indie Gamer Chick Leaderboard

August 29, 2012 3 Comments

It’s once again time for me to update my FAQ, and with that comes a question that needs a full-sized post to answer.  So here it goes.  Once my site starting picking up viewers, I started getting questions about putting paid advertisements on my site.  I wasn’t thrilled with the idea.  I’m not interested at all in trying to make money off my site, because once that happens it becomes a job.  I don’t want this to ever feel like work.  This is my hobby, and I plan to keep it feeling that way.  But I had so many people asking, I figured I could do something good with it.  Brian came up with the idea of donating the money to charity.  Once I decided to expand the leaderboard from ten members to “every game that I liked to some degree get ranked” we finally had the perfect item to sponsor.  Literally as soon as I confirmed “IndieGamerChick.com now is taking sponsors” I had the position through October snatched up within a day.  It went that quick.

As such, I haven’t really laid out what I require from potential future sponsors, nor have I explained fully what sponsorship gets, and what limitations it comes with, or what the cost is, or the duration of it, or several handfuls of inquires that I get constantly.  Frequently asked questions, if you will.  So, let’s lay it out here.  If you’re looking for typical Indie Gamer Chick snark, you won’t get it here.  Probably.

UPDATED February 13, 2013 to include more up-to-date stats.

Q: What does it cost?

A: Whatever you’re willing to pay, but I’ve set the minimum at $50 for a three-month period.

Q: Can I pay for more than three months?

A: I’ll work it out case by case, but as a bonus, if nobody claims sponsorship following you, your sponsorship stays on until someone else takes your place.

Q: What are the charities you’re looking to support?

A: That would be Autism Speaks and Epilepsy Foundation (also known as the EFA).  I know both of these charities are legitimate and worthy organizations because I have personally benefited from both.  I was diagnosed at age four with atypical autism and I developed epilepsy when I was sixteen.  Both have clear agendas that are relatively politics-free (as much as any medical-based foundation can be I suppose) and aim to learn more about these conditions, develop treatments for them (the optimistic point of view), but most importantly to me, improve the quality of life for those who live with these conditions.

Q: Of course you had to pick two.

A: That’s not a question.

Q: Well which one do you prefer?

A: Either/or is fine with me.  Or you could be an incredibly cool suck-up and donate to both!

Q: If I donate to one of those charities so that I can get sponsorship, does that still make it tax-deductible?

A: Absolutely.

Q: How do I pay you?

A: You don’t.  Instead, you donate directly to one of the two charities above.  All you do is send me a screenshot (or a picture of) the receipt confirming a donation was made.  Remove any credit card or banking information from that (I don’t believe they include those), leaving only a name (or e-mail) and the date, plus their “thank you for donating” statement.  A picture of you giving the thumbs up with a printout of the statement works too.  Once I have it, you’re good to go.  Each site keeps its own information on how you get your tax deduction from it.  DO NOT just make a donation with the intent of a sponsorship without discussing it with me first.

Q: What else do I need to provide Indie Gamer Chick for sponsorship?

A: You need to provide the banner for the Leaderboard.  The banner should have “Indie Gamer Chick Leaderboard sponsored by” on the top, large enough to clearly be visible and read.  The rest of the space can be used to promote your product.  You also can provide any promotional codes if you want to use me to run contests.

Q: What kind of stuff can I advertise with my sponsorship?

A: Independent video games or studios would probably be a good idea.

Q: What won’t you allow to be sponsored?

A: Non-gaming related businesses, Ebay retailers, etc.  You also can’t use my site to promote your Kickstarter.  This is mostly because the word “Kickstarter” makes me throw up.  I’m Kickstarter Bulimic.

Q: Can we promote our Xbox Live Indie Game with it?  I mean, you are an Xbox Live Indie Game site.

A: Brian and myself have debated this for months and we still have no definitive answer. We’ll have to go on a case-by-case basis.  It will have to be a game already released, and one that has received a positive review on my site, and made the leaderboard.  Remember, this is sponsorship, not an endorsement.

Q: I’m not a game developer, but I have a gaming site/blog.  Can I sponsor using that?

A: Again, we’ll go case by case on this.  I think this would be fine.  It depends on the site.

Q: What does my sponsorship get me, besides advertising on your leaderboard?

A: Catherine (aka Indie Gamer Chick) will promote your game’s release via Twitter and Facebook, assuming it happens after your sponsorship starts.  She will play your game, and tweet about her experience if it is a positive experience.  Indie Gamer Chick will run contests to promote your games (you must supply your own prizes and assume all legal responsibility for those contests).  Finally, if you wish she can do a developer interview with you that will be published on IndieGamerChick.com.  Plus, Cathy is known to just randomly tweet about games.  Who knows, she might plug your game long after your sponsorship has ended, especially if she liked it.

Q: What don’t I get from my sponsorship?

A: Again, this isn’t a paid endorsement.  Sponsorship at IndieGamerChick.com does not guarantee your game will receive positive press from Cathy.  Even if you are a sponsor, if she thinks your game sucks, she’ll say so.  She also won’t plug your Kickstarter or any other fundraising efforts.  This also means you can’t comment on your Kickstarter if she interviews you.  A sponsor also has no say in my site’s content.

Q: I want to make sure I get my money’s worth, so how much traffic does IndieGamerChick.com get?

A: The amount varies day by day, but on average IndieGamerChick.com receives between 1,100 and 2000 unique hits daily.  According to Alexa.com, this makes IndieGamerChick.com the most read Xbox Live Indie Game website in the world.  As of February of 2013, Indie Gamer Chick has drawn over 500,000 page views since opening on July 1, 2011.  Below is a screen grab of my views breakdown taken February 13, 2013.

Damn groundhog didn't see its shadow. That's my excuse for the slow month.

Damn groundhog didn’t see its shadow. That’s my excuse for the slow month.

The amount of views the leaderboard itself pulls in fluctuates wildly.  The leaderboard is updated with every new Xbox Live Indie Game review, regardless of whether the game makes the board or not.  If a game makes the leaderboard, the review directs the person to the board to see where it has landed.  We also direct attention to the board on Twitter if a milestone is reached, such as a game landing a high ranking on the board.  Hard numbers are deceptive (over the first sixty days, the board pulled in 3,482 views, for an average of 58 views a day.  However, some days the board pulls in several hundred views.  It just depends on whether a game makes the board or not.  As of August 29, 2012, only 43.93% of all games reviewed made the leaderboard.  Also, the strength of a game’s review makes a difference.  Games that only get mildly positive reviews generally don’t create a lot of traffic for the board.  Whereas a game like Spyleaks, which I tweeted had been the first game since the board’s creation to make the top 25, generated several hundred views to see where it ranked.  When a game doesn’t make the board, the percent of games ranked is still updated, for those dorks that would be interested in that type of thing.  Like me.

Q: Do you have information on your readership demographics?

A: I have location information.  Everything else is an educated guess.  My typical regular reader (someone who checks in at least weekly) is an adult male age 18 to 40, with the average age being around 30.  My readers are typically “hardcore” gamers, almost all of whom own an Xbox 360, and the majority of whom also own a PlayStation 3 and play PC games.  My readers are also enthusiastic buyers who are genuinely looking for inexpensive indie games across a wide variety of platforms they can spend spare change on.  Below is a screencap of the views-by-country breakdown, taken between February 25, 2012 (the furthest back it was counted) and February 13, 2013.

Country Stats

Q: My product is for a system other than Xbox Live Indie Games.  Can Indie Gamer Chick start to cover more games from that platform to make sure that my sponsorship reaches the right target?

A: I do limited coverage of iOS, Xbox Live Arcade, and PlayStation Network games.  Indie Gamer Chick is just my hobby, and I don’t have enough time to fully cover all systems.  However, all my reviews, no matter what platform they’re for, on average generate the same amount of page views.  It’s a pretty safe assumption that my readers are gamers looking for indie games in general, and you’ll find them receptive towards games across all platforms.

Q: In previous sponsorships, has the banner generated clicks to the sponsor’s website?

A: Unfortunately, getting readers to click links is difficult.  Most of my readers who purchase games off a recommendation do so from the system’s dashboard, not from the marketplace.  Thus, it’s impossible to calculate how much “awareness” of a product or total sales are generated from IndieGamerChick.com.  What you just read is me dancing around the hard numbers.  Pretty slick, eh?  In truth, the average is 1 in 60 views results in a marketplace click for an Xbox Live Indie Game review.  For the Sponsorship banner, between July 1, 2012 (the day it went up) and August 29, 2012, the banner was clicked only 45 times.  However, the developers of Count to a Billion have told me they are very happy with their sponsorship, which created product awareness and, in their belief, generated sales of their game.  I asked Mario Wunderlich, developer of Count to a Billion, if he would like to offer a testimonial of his experience as a sponsor.  Here’s what he sent.

Kairi’s been very supportive and great to work with. Since we sponsored Indie Gamer Chick’s Leaderboard with our latest game, Count to a Billion, we’ve seen more than just website traffic from the Indie Gamer Chick. She’s been very supportive in ways I’d never imagined. It’s been great working with The Chick, and I’d do it again without a second thought.

Q: If we sponsor the leaderboard, can we also do a Tales from the Dev Side editorial?

A: You do not need to sponsor me to do a Tales from the Dev Side editorial.  It’s an open platform for anyone with topical or motivational subject matter to talk about.

Q: Alright, I’m in!  How do we start?

A: You can e-mail me or contact me on Twitter or Facebook and we can talk about what your plans are and how best I can help you.

Filed under Editorials

Drinkards Beer Pong

August 29, 2012 Leave a comment

I’m not a drinker, and thus I’ve never indulged in the frat house pastime known as Beer Pong.  It’s a relatively uncomplicated game: all you need is some plastic cups, a ping-pong ball, and alcohol.  Total cost is, what, $5 + booze?  An 80MSP digital version of it might be more cost efficient, but isn’t something lost in translation when you take such a simple concept and convert it to a video game format?  I touched base on this in my review of Kick’n It, which was digital hacky sack.  Some things just don’t need to be video games.  I figured beer pong would be one of them.  Still, the extremely friendly developers of Drinkards Beer Pong assured me of two things.  First, unfamiliarity with the sport of beer pong wouldn’t be a problem because the game is pretty self-explanatory.  Second, you don’t have to be a drinker to enjoy beer pong.  Maybe that’s true, but I’m guessing you would have to be completely shit-faced to enjoy Drinkards Beer Pong because the game sucks.

To the developer’s credit, they loaded this version of beer pong down with plenty of options and house rules.  However, this is wasted on really fidgety aiming mechanics.  It’s hard to get a good perspective on depth and angles, even with a cursor that shows the entire trajectory of the ball.  This is hammered home by the fact that I was often throwing what looked like a perfect shot into one of the cups, only to watch the ball miss the cups completely and fly off the table.  The aiming rocks back and forth, but honestly the whole physics of it seem slightly tipsy.

Well, thank God that they gave us this shot of the menu. It’s good to know this isn’t one of those non-menu having games.

I was unable to try Drinkards Beer Pong online, which is probably fine seeing how the game outright warns you that many of its features won’t work on Xbox Live.  Instead, I arranged to try this using the local four player co-op.  The teams would be two people who have never played beer pong versus two beer pong veterans.  Representing the non-beer-pongers, my father and I.  Representing the veterans, two of our newest interns: Dustin and Ryan.  Hi guys!  I told you I was Indie Gamer Chick!

With the multitude of options the game offers, we left it to the vets to decide what rules would make for the most fun experience.  We played with six cups, unlimited re-racks, and a lot of other stuff that I’m still not clear on.  Despite what the developers insisted, their game is not going to be highly accessible to non-pongies.  Not that it matters, because why on Earth would someone that’s not a fan of it even want to play a digital version?  But we pressed on, and many shots were missed.  Even after almost an hour, nobody could get the hang of the aiming mechanics.  Sure, we made a shot or two, but as Dustin pointed out, you would actually have enough time to sober up between shots.  Which defeats the whole purpose of a game that’s designed to get you good and blitzed.

All four of us agreed that better, clearer aiming mechanics would greatly improve the game.  Also, we all agreed, and I can’t fucking believe I’m saying this,  that Drinkards Beer Pong is one of those extremely rare games that would be more fun to play with Wii-style motion controls.  But, my intensive review was not complete.  Like I did with Kick’n It, I wanted to compare the video game to the real thing.  So we actually played a couple of rounds of “real” beer pong.  Only without alcohol.  My excuse is I literally can’t drink, thanks to my seizure medications.  Also, we used Styrofoam cups instead of plastic, because that’s all we had handy.  I guess plastic is supposed to work better, but you have to make due with what you have.

Even our ghettoized, using water instead of alcohol and the wrong kind of cups brand of beer pong was so much more fun than the video game version.  I could see how this could be so popular among the college-going population.  And I don’t think anyone would choose the fake digital version over the real thing.  It’s something so fundamentally simple to set up that it doesn’t get the benefit of being more convenient to play on a console.  Even if Drinkards Beer Pong was absolutely perfect, it wouldn’t be better than the real thing.

For those of you looking to get drunk using this thing, I recommend moonshine. Anything lighter than that will result in not-getting drunk on account of it taking so many tries just to make one simple shot.

It’s not absolutely perfect though.  Even with pretty dang decent graphics, the sound effects are repetitive, the voice overs are annoying and repeat themselves too often, and the shooting mechanics are really brutal to get the hang of.  There is obvious talent on display here, but I would advise the developers to give up their plans on refining what they’ve built and move onto something else.  And that something else better be something that can only be done in a video game.  If you guys turn around and make Video Tetherball I’m going to saw your heads off and re-purpose them as jack-o’-lanterns.

Dude, two hands? How fucking big is this ping-pong ball? Or how fucking small is the guy playing?

Drinkards Beer Pong was developed by The Unallied

80 Microsoft Points have just been informed that there are versions of beer pong for Wii and that they are absolute shit in the making of this review.  Well, there goes that theory. 

Filed under XBLIG / Creators Collection Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Gaming Magazines

August 27, 2012 13 Comments

Back when I turned nine-years-old, the Birthday Badger was kind enough to bring me a Nintendo 64, along with Banjo Kazooie. Having fallen head-over-heels for the game while sampling a demo of it at Toys R Us, I just had to have it. And I got it, because I was (and still am) a spoiled rotten little brat. But the Birthday Badger still had some tricks up his sleeve, because I also got a strategy guide to Banjo and a subscription to Nintendo Power magazine. Oh, and a T-Shirt. I guess it was some kind of bundle the store my daddy bought the console from had to offer. Either way, I was the proud owner of an extremely wrinkly shirt and a Nintendo 64. I didn’t really put much thought into the Nintendo Power subscription until I got my first issue of that the following month. And then I did get it, and I didn’t care. Because I was already a subscriber of the Official PlayStation Magazine, and it had demo discs. Nintendo Power didn’t. It also offered nothing that I couldn’t find online. And it never did.

My first issue of Nintendo Power. It had the truly, truly awful Bomberman Hero as the cover game. It was an omen.

The recent news that Nintendo Power is ceasing publication has been met with universal sadness from bloggers and Twitterers. I’m not sure I’m capable of understanding it.  I didn’t grow up in an era where magazines were the only resource for getting news on gaming. GameSpot (or videogames.com as it was back then, at least if you wanted console news) and IGN were already up-and-running by time my gaming life began, plus dozens of other sites that offered breaking news and previews. Breaking news for a gaming magazine means you read it three months after it happened. Sometimes only two months later if the stars were lined up properly.

In a different era, I could understand why Nintendo Power, Gamepro, EGM, or other gaming magazines could be popular. But once the internet came around, wasn’t that the ball game? What could you get from those magazines at $6 an issue that you couldn’t get from the internet, for free? I guess the same argument applies to newspapers as well. I know that many people are leery (perhaps rightfully so) at the prospect of a world without newspapers, but that time is coming. It’s coming faster than you want.

But, this is about gaming magazines, and specifically Nintendo Power. Now even as a nine-year-old, I wouldn’t expect Nintendo to package a Nintendo 64 cartridge with every issue. That wouldn’t be cost efficient. But then, Nintendo consoles moved towards disc-based stuff. And yet, they still refused to get with the times and include the one feature they could do that websites couldn’t: demos. As a kid, every new issue of the official magazines for PlayStation, Dreamcast, and Xbox were practically events for me. And the demos actually worked towards selling me games that I probably wouldn’t have picked out of a line-up at Toys R Us if I had the choice. The Dreamcast magazine sold me on games like Chu Chu Rocket, Crazy Taxi, and Rush 2049. I played the demo of the stunt course on Rush 2049 so much that by time the game was released, I was already bored with it. That’s how much play value I got out of it. They also packed in a free “full” game, Sega Swirl, that I burned many hours playing against my father with. Without hyperbole, the Official Dreamcast Magazine was probably my favorite thing in the whole world.

And then the final issue hit. It had no demo disc. This was mostly because Sega had thrown in the towel for console development and had decided to quit supporting the Dreamcast. Still, not even getting a demo as a send off would be like not getting a final meal for an execution. Sure, by this point Xbox was on the horizon, and with it a new shiny magazine no doubt chalked full of demos. But at the time, I was inconsolable, like a friend had just died or something. No more Dreamcast demos. None. Gone.

Which brings me back to Nintendo Power. They never got with the times. No demos. Mediocre writing. Nintendo Power to me always felt more like a promotional brochure than a true, critically thinking publication. As a kid, that was fine with me. Gamepro was more or less the same way. Once I grew out of it, I only kept getting it because we never remembered to stop the auto-renewal of it. Incidentally, that’s the same reason I still get Highlights for Children.

When news hit that Nintendo Power was toast, people started reminiscing about the good times, like when they got a free copy of Dragon Quest (or Dragon Warrior, because questing is for weirdos or something) just by subscribing to the magazine. Or about features and comics in the magazine that are no longer a part of it and haven’t been for decades, such as Howard & Nester. Or about the batshit insane covers some of the early issues had. Like this one.

Jesus Christ! I mean.. Jesus Christ! Isn’t this supposed to be a children’s magazine?? That shit is going to give me nightmares.

That’s just the second issue! I mean, good lord! I can’t believe it made it another twenty-four years after that. And yet, it survived. I wonder why other kiddie mags never tried the “scare the ever-loving shit out of them” approach.

Turn to page 14 and try to find all nine dead teenagers in the hidden picture.  I would SO buy this issue.

Oddly enough, most of these things happened either before I was born or long before I was into gaming. To me, Nintendo Power was always that strange little magazine that I got for my birthday one year and it just kept coming, month after month, with stuff I had already read about online months earlier. The best stuff to come out of Nintendo Power was their strategy guides, but they discontinued them in 2007, with Prima Games taking over duties. Which was fine with me. The last time I really used a strategy guide was for Star Ocean: Till the End of Time. Fucking guide for that thing would rival mid-range city phone books in girth. But, by that point, GameFAQs had evolved to the point of being the more convenient means of getting help with a game.

Really, isn’t it just time to let this era go? Gamepro is dead. Nintendo Power is dead. EGM is back from the dead, but it’s not the same. Soon, all that will be left is, shudder, Game Informer, which I’m pretty sure you get a free subscription to just by parking your car at a GameStop. All the Nintendo Power stories I’ve been hearing are twenty or more years old. So it’s not really about the magazine, is it? It’s about nostalgia. So I pose this question: how does Nintendo Power shutting down affect your childhood memories of reading the magazine? People have taken my stance on this to mean that I’m against print media. I’m not really. I just don’t see what printed gaming magazines have to offer me. Crazy talk? No, paying $10 an issue to read shit I already know, now that is crazy talk.

Filed under Editorials Tagged with , , ,

Merger

August 24, 2012 Leave a comment

Just a quickie review here, as I don’t really have a ton to say about Merger.  It’s a grid-based puzzler where you have to merge slimeballs (that’s balls of slime, not lawyers) until only one remains.  The set-up is somewhat awkward and it takes a while to get the hang of what moves are allowed and what moves are not.  Some kind of visual tutorial would have gone a long ways towards fixing that, but instead all instructions are text-based.  This resulted in me not knowing whether or not to admit that, even after an hour of playing, I still wasn’t fully sure what the rules are.  But I decided not to admit that, because that would be embarrassing.

So, despite the fact that I fully had a grasp of the play mechanics, I wasn’t too excited by Merger.  I probably would like it more if I had, um, even better understanding of the mechanics.  Yea, that works.  But I didn’t.  Have a better grasp.  And yet I still managed to finish almost all of the 60 preset puzzles and play a couple 10,000+ point rounds of “endless” mode (which is just a few randomly generated puzzles that you tick off one at a time).

I can’t fully recommend Merger.  A better tutorial would help, but at best Merger could hope to be a somewhat dull puzzler that you’ll forget about as soon as you turn it off.   It’s crazy to say it, but the bar for what an XBLIG puzzler is capable of being is set pretty damn high.  Any new game on the platform will have to draw comparison to stuff like Escape Goat, Spyleaks, or even Asphalt Jungle 2.  By comparison to them, Merger is as boring as the World Series of Hopscotch.

Merger was developed by Fenrir Games

80 Microsoft Points said “it’s still a more successful merger than AOL and Time Warner” in the making of this review.

Filed under XBLIG / Creators Collection Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →