Demigod Piracy Running High

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4
 

Baby Tea:

A good company with respect for the consumer leaves itself open and get slammed because people are selfish pricks.
THIS is why there is DRM.
THIS is why there is copy protection that pisses people off.

It has been pretty clearly shown that DRM is dicky developers attempts to use piracy as an excuse to destroy the second hand game market. Writing something to a disk that prevents it from being installed more than three times does nothing to effect an ISO file.

This is...disheartening to read. As has been said, so much for protests via piracy.

thats too bad. it sounded like it would be a great game (i dont think im gonna buy it, but it sounds very interesting indeed), and then only 1/10 buyers have done it legally. a bad premiere for a good game.

Ragdrazi:
It has been pretty clearly shown that DRM is dicky developers attempts to use piracy as an excuse to destroy the second hand game market.

If there wasn't piracy, then we could expose those companies for what they are.
But no, people are selfish pricks, and they basically hand over the excuse with a neat bow.
Way to go.

That's pretty much it,

Basically what happened was Stardock entered an Arena that interested pirates more than their "Sins Of A Solar Empire" game did (which I purchused legitimatly, even if I haven't played it recently. I believe I did so under the username "Therumancer" as well, it's been a while so <waves> to Stardock).

It also seems like it's a server issue more than a game issue, I mean most pirated games I've heard about won't work with Multiplayer because of 1 time registration codes or whatever.

At any rate, all DRM does is going to do is encourage things more. Understand that people pirate for all kinds of reasons, and the DRM arguements do not nessicarly apply to EVERYONE who is pirating. There is no way to track who say only pirates games to avoid crippleware or whatever.

Speaking soley for myself, the biggest temptation to get me to pirate would be a copy of say Space Rangers 2 (or Reboot) without that starguard/protection thing on it. I've got a copy of the original SR 2 right next to my computer right now that I feel I got ripped off on because I will NOT install that crap on my computer.

Another one is Sacred 2, I'm waiting for a 360 version despite preferring to play on a PC (meaning I'm going to be POed anyway) because of the fact that it limits the number of installs you can do and other things. It's also allegedly chock full of what amounts to spyware/tracking. Ironic because it strikes me that if they spent half that effort into fixing the game glitches it might have gone over better. Also they wouldn't have upset me by making me wait bloody months before getting a console version. With that game I'm pretty much cheering "Gogo pirates" as well.

>>>----Therumancer--->

unangbangkay:

http://draginol.joeuser.com/article/303512/Piracy_PC_Gaming

I got to say that was quite a nice read. It makes sense from a purely business stand point, but at the same time it's so very true. It drives me up the wall that PC game makers are backing themselves into a corner relying on the most powerful of tech to sell their product when you have a chance that this costly development plan of pushing for the most powerful machines don't always breed the most fun games. Hell Sins was a great game. Granted I spent a half hour looking for the campaign, but other then that I was amazed that my cruddy computer at the time ran the game rather well actually.

I was aware of Stardock's philosophy in the past, but it's good that even though this situation happened the likelihood that this would negatively impact Stardock seems slim. DRM needs to die and I do believe Stardock is one of those studios that really is our only hope. I kinda wish other companies would take a scaling back on their PC games so it can be a more viable gaming platform like it was in the past. Oh well that's my small rant on this whole subject. Thanks for the link and all that fun stuff.

I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the pirates are Brazillian/South American or Chinese. There are plenty of North American pirates, mind you, but in my experience it seems like those countries (and poorer countries in general) have a much easier time justifying their piracy.

Baby Tea:

Ragdrazi:
It has been pretty clearly shown that DRM is dicky developers attempts to use piracy as an excuse to destroy the second hand game market.

If there wasn't piracy, then we could expose those companies for what they are.
But no, people are selfish pricks, and they basically hand over the excuse with a neat bow.
Way to go.

That's a really simplistic way of looking at something very complex. If there wasn't piracy I'm sure they'd find some other excuse.

More than that, you should never assume someone's intentions. Do you think I'm a selfish prick. Well... do you think I'm selfish?

Ragdrazi:
That's a really simplistic way of looking at something very complex. If there wasn't piracy I'm sure they'd find some other excuse.

More than that, you should never assume someone's intentions. Do you think I'm a selfish prick. Well... do you think I'm selfish?

Why would they find an excuse to screw over the customers? That doesn't make sense.
As much as I may not like some developers and publishers, I'm not sure they'd do something like DRM if there was no rationale for it.

And I'll certainly think you're selfish if you're pirating games because you can't afford them, or because you don't like the publisher, or because you don't think it's worth what they're charging. Absolutely.

Piracy isn't some profound protest of some evil corporation.
It's the selfish, illegal acquisition of a product or data.

And it's also the perfect excuse for companies to screw over real, legitimate customers with intrusive or annoying measures to make sure that they get the money they are owed for their work.
I don't get mad at the company, that's their right.
I get mad at the pricks who give the companies the excuse.
Especially those who hammer a good, trusting, understanding company like Stardock.
No excuse.

Baby Tea:

Why would they find an excuse to screw over the customers? That doesn't make sense.

I don't know. I don't think it makes any more sense then you do. You'd really have to ask them why they're doing it.

Baby Tea:
As much as I may not like some developers and publishers, I'm not sure they'd do something like DRM if there was no rationale for it.

Pirates download a super high resolution image of a disk, an ISO file, and then mount that in a virtual drive. The drive itself cannot write the DRM information to the ISO image, and even if it could, the ISO image is easily replaceable. So what rationale is possible here, save that they're trying to make the disk useable by only one owner.

Baby Tea:
And I'll certainly think you're selfish if you're pirating games because you can't afford them, or because you don't like the publisher, or because you don't think it's worth what they're charging. Absolutely.

And when I go to a library and check out a book and read it for free, am I selfish then?

Baby Tea:
Piracy isn't some profound protest of some evil corporation.
It's the selfish, illegal acquisition of a product or data.

You were on the other thread, you know I'm a former WTO protester, and that Napster was one of the issues we protested in support of. You may not agree with the issue, but you cannot define it as something we did not physically protest for.

Baby Tea:

Especially those who hammer a good, trusting, understanding company like Stardock.
No excuse.

Well, now you're stepping out of the legality of the issue and stepping into the morality. That's a different argument entirely, and one we can have.

But first you should probably stop ignoring and excusing immoral and frequently illegal tactics such as DRM, and examine piracy rationally and against current legal standards.

Baby Tea:

Why would they find an excuse to screw over the customers? That doesn't make sense.
As much as I may not like some developers and publishers, I'm not sure they'd do something like DRM if there was no rationale for it.

And I'll certainly think you're selfish if you're pirating games because you can't afford them, or because you don't like the publisher, or because you don't think it's worth what they're charging. Absolutely.

Piracy isn't some profound protest of some evil corporation.
It's the selfish, illegal acquisition of a product or data.

And it's also the perfect excuse for companies to screw over real, legitimate customers with intrusive or annoying measures to make sure that they get the money they are owed for their work.
I don't get mad at the company, that's their right.
I get mad at the pricks who give the companies the excuse.
Especially those who hammer a good, trusting, understanding company like Stardock.
No excuse.

http://draginol.joeuser.com/article/303512/Piracy_PC_Gaming

I highly recommend people read this from the person that is being pirated so badly that this article is about them. He basically says that the big developers (Going to say EA because it's short and I'm lazy, plus they have some pretty bad DRM) market to everyone pirates included. While his whole approach is marketing to regular consumers. A pirate gets no votes in what they desire in the content and Sins (a small relatively unknown game compared to others) outsold some of the more well named titles. Why would that be? If the epic piracy is so bad that we need DRM then why is this little no budget title (1 million isn't really a whole lot now a days) selling more then those big boys? Of course it got pirated, but then again Stardock expected it to be pirated and they tailored their sales figures accordingly. You didn't hear them complain, you didn't see them put DRM all over their next title. DRM is a wholly unnecessary piece of software that has messed up more computers then anyone would like to think. Plus the idea you have to authenticate to a server in order to play your game. Which basically means that no EA no gaming unless you want to turn to the very pirates that you hate so much. It's kind of ironic that the people the DRM is for can find a way around it. No piece of protection is perfect and it is always a futile arms race in the end. If EA marketed the game to a more mainstream PC audiance then they would probably see better results in terms of sales. Not everyone can run Crysis and that is what is killing PC gaming. It's getting too powerful for it's own good. Well like I said read the article. It's a good read and brings to light the points I am hamfisted attempting to make.

Nothing excuses DRM that trashes computers. A hacker can always find a way through any security measure it only takes time. That goes true with networks and it goes true with games.

scarbunny:

CantFaketheFunk:
This makes me very, very sad.

Me to.

This is just the fuel DRM companies and advocates need, they can hold Demigod up and say "look no DRM and a piracy rate of around 5 times the purchase rate"

Im not that bothered when things like Spore or Bioshock get ripped off as you end up getting the shitty end of the stick if you buy the game, but when a company is trying to do whats best for the consumer it takes several types of piss.

But you have to admit, they did kind off ask for it, no DRM, no problem, for pirates that is. I don't mind little DRM but having none is just stupid.

There's no demo for one. And two, how many units were sold? If you want a good read on piracy, though LONG, it's here:

http://insomnia.ac/commentary/pc_game_piracy/

"...But the gist here is that immediately after bitching about a user pirating the game, citing righteous indignation at this piracy being a lost sale, Tom replies "If you don't ''like not being able to play a demo, here's an idea, Richard: don't buy the game!"

In other words, if you pirated the game to try it out because there wasn't a demo, it cost developers money due to a potentially lost sale. But if you decide to not buy it because you can't try it out, the developers are too stupid to care, so that potentially lost sale is immaterial. The ultimate question here - which the PC game industry avoids like the plague - is "Look, do you want me to buy your game or what?". The usual response is to inform the consumer that games are non-essential, and then subsequently complain about the dwindling sales in the PC game market when people who already know that games are non-essential decide to stop buying them because of all this bullshit. For all the hot air about piracy, people in the industry are remarkably prone to telling people to fuck off if they don't like it, as though the industry doesn't mind losing a customer anywhere near as much as they mind not being able to force people to give them money.

This is a large part of why the discussion on the matter is fruitless. Instead of actually looking at what the consumer wants (a demo) and going "Maybe we should've worked harder at giving players a way to evaluate the game we want them to drop $50 on", the response is "If you don't want to buy a game at full price sight unseen, then tough shit!" as if the consumers are suddenly the ones damaged the most by that lost sale. Way to score one for the health of the industry..."

As I prospective Software Developer/Engineer, I currently have no plans to make PC and more specifically Windows software. The best way to stop piracy so far is having a Vice like grip on the system. Shown by Apple, Sony and Nintendo. Imagine if we had Linux as the gaming platform? A more verbose and open system. Yes Im quite aware that pirates exist and wont go away with DRM. I also dont deny I pirated software before I became a programmer. But most people will pirate because of skewed ethics and loopholes. This has never changed since the Apple 2e era.

Baby Tea:

Ragdrazi:
That's a really simplistic way of looking at something very complex. If there wasn't piracy I'm sure they'd find some other excuse.

More than that, you should never assume someone's intentions. Do you think I'm a selfish prick. Well... do you think I'm selfish?

Why would they find an excuse to screw over the customers? That doesn't make sense.
As much as I may not like some developers and publishers, I'm not sure they'd do something like DRM if there was no rationale for it.

And I'll certainly think you're selfish if you're pirating games because you can't afford them, or because you don't like the publisher, or because you don't think it's worth what they're charging. Absolutely.

Piracy isn't some profound protest of some evil corporation.
It's the selfish, illegal acquisition of a product or data.

And it's also the perfect excuse for companies to screw over real, legitimate customers with intrusive or annoying measures to make sure that they get the money they are owed for their work.
I don't get mad at the company, that's their right.
I get mad at the pricks who give the companies the excuse.
Especially those who hammer a good, trusting, understanding company like Stardock.
No excuse.

You sir are a dime a dozen.

I also dont like how people think us Devs dont understand. We have other responsibilities. We dont have mountains of cash. The only people that have mountains of money are the senior project managers and the distributors. By all means pirate somebody's software, knowing really you just lose respect from software devs. You people(pirates) made the games industry what it is now, its too late to protest. Prospective devs are more interested developing either in a GNU/GPL liberations sense, or in a closed system such as Apple or Consoles. Anyway, dont you think having no sales from a bad game sends a bigger message than no sales from pirates. If you really want to send a Message, Either buy it or dont. No Pirating.

Ragdrazi:

Baby Tea:
And I'll certainly think you're selfish if you're pirating games because you can't afford them, or because you don't like the publisher, or because you don't think it's worth what they're charging. Absolutely.

And when I go to a library and check out a book and read it for free, am I selfish then?

What a sad argument.
A Library is licensed to lend out books. They actually pay for the books, and are legally allowed to lend them out for small periods of time. They are the same as a video store, except the store is a private business trying to make money so they charge you. A library is the same but it's a public service, payed usually by the local municipality.

NOT the same. Poor argument.

Baby Tea:
Piracy isn't some profound protest of some evil corporation.
It's the selfish, illegal acquisition of a product or data.

You were on the other thread, you know I'm a former WTO protester, and that Napster was one of the issues we protested in support of. You may not agree with the issue, but you cannot define it as something we did not physically protest for.

Well I didn't say you didn't or can't protest for it. I'm just saying it's selfish greed under the guise of a protest. The only pirates who claim it's a protest are the self-righteous ones who think they have some moral duty to stand up to the 'big bad corporations', but really they just want their stuff for free. The only one you're fooling is yourself.

You should probably stop ignoring and excusing immoral and frequently illegal tactics such as DRM, and examine piracy rationally and against current legal standards.

I am examining piracy rationally. DRM is a result of piracy, not the other way around. You seem to have this romanticized idea of being some digital freedom fighter, when it's your actions, and actions of those like you, that are causing any sort of 'digital oppression'.
You're the cause of any worse anti-piracy measures.
If people were to stop being so selfish, and were to stop piracy all together, then any company that continued the anti-piracy measures wouldn't have a leg to stand on in defense of it.
But every time a game like this comes out where it's pirated at a rate of 5 to 1, you just give more statistics and more reasons for companies like EA to put on more and more intrusive DRM and anti-piracy measures.
Whose to blame?
You. You and anyone else who pirates for whatever reason. The more it happens, the worse it's going to get. Do you think the companies give a shit whether you're doing for some misguided protest, or because you're some snot-nosed little 15 year old wanted a game for free because his allowance didn't cover it? No. All they see is one more illegal copy of their work.

I need to look at piracy rationally?
You need to step off that pedestal you've put yourself on.
You aren't Robin Hood.
You're a punk with an internet connection.
Grow up.

What I don't understand about it is:
Demigod has a huge online part. Why don't they let people create an account and check it each time they want to play online? Then allow pirates to play the game offline as much as they like. Easiest, safest and most non-invasive way of DRM I know.

Baby Tea:

Ragdrazi:

Baby Tea:
And I'll certainly think you're selfish if you're pirating games because you can't afford them, or because you don't like the publisher, or because you don't think it's worth what they're charging. Absolutely.

And when I go to a library and check out a book and read it for free, am I selfish then?

What a sad argument.

Well, thank you!

Baby Tea:
A Library is licensed to lend out books. They actually pay for the books, and are legally allowed to lend them out for small periods of time.

And ~why~? What is the difference here that makes the library so good and so worth its licensed and legal distribution but torrents so bad? They pay for the items they distribute? So do the people who torrent. They only lend them for a small period of time? Not if you renew. There are nuts and bolts differences due to dealing in physical objects, but the point is the same. I can get the title from the library for free and keep it as long as I deem worthy. So where exactly is the difference.

Baby Tea:

Ragdrazi:

You were on the other thread, you know I'm a former WTO protester, and that Napster was one of the issues we protested in support of. You may not agree with the issue, but you cannot define it as something we did not physically protest for.

Well I didn't say you didn't or can't protest for it. I'm just saying it's selfish greed under the guise of a protest.

Well, thank you!

Baby Tea:
The only pirates who claim it's a protest are the self-righteous ones who think they have some moral duty to stand up to the 'big bad corporations', but really they just want their stuff for free. The only one you're fooling is yourself.

When I faced down riot cops standing in rows five deep with the rain falling on them like the fucking legions of Saruman you'd better believe I knew exactly why I was standing there. If you asked me at that moment why I supported Napster I would have told you that I support the decommoditifcation of experience; I would have pointed out the amazing double standard here that was not applied to home taping and mix tapes; I would have mentioned how, as an aspiring author, I am very aware that all of my writing will be available for free, and that I cannot understand a creative person who would not be comfortable with that; and I would have said that this was an important battleground in the fight with big money rights holders.

Baby Tea:

I am examining piracy rationally. DRM is a result of piracy, not the other way around.

Well, it's well documented that DRM has created a mass explosion in piracy, while being so ineffectual against it as to be highly suspect.

Baby Tea:
You seem to have this romanticized idea of being some digital freedom fighter

I know! I do! I have a hat. It's like a captain's hat, and I've written the words "DIGITAL FREEDOM FIGHTER" across the front of it in sharpie.

Baby Tea:
it's your actions, and actions of those like you, that are causing any sort of 'digital oppression'.
You're the cause of any worse anti-piracy measures.

Actually, this "digital oppression" is much much older than me. Much older than "digital." This fight has been going on since the mid-16th century. These companies started out buying out the printed word from artists, making it their exclusive domain, and then censoring it so that it wouldn't offend the king. These companies have always stood against freedom of ideas, against artists, and for their own greed. It hasn't gotten much better, and in many ways it's gotten much much worse.

Baby Tea:
If people were to stop being so selfish, and were to stop piracy all together, then any company that continued the anti-piracy measures wouldn't have a leg to stand on in defense of it.
But every time a game like this comes out where it's pirated at a rate of 5 to 1, you just give more statistics and more reasons for companies like EA to put on more and more intrusive DRM and anti-piracy measures.

If a person uses a crowd to murder someone, can you blame the crowd for their crime? Now you don't like this crowd, and I can appreciate that. That's something we can talk about. But DRM is wrong no matter your opinion on piracy and should be opposed.

Baby Tea:
you're some snot-nosed little 15 year old

If I were 15, I would have been 5 at the time of the WTO protests.

Baby Tea:
I need to look at piracy rationally?

Yes.

Baby Tea:
You need to step off that pedestal you've put yourself on.
You aren't Robin Hood.
You're a punk with an internet connection.

Well, thank you! I am a punk with an internet connection! I'm actually in two bands. Here's one of them:

http://www.myspace.com/seattlerabble

(I'm the blur in front.) You want our catalog on MP3? God is Your Santa Claus is my favorite.

Baby Tea:
Grow up.

Uh-huh. You know, out of everyone I've talked to about this on this message board, you're the one who has given me the most vitriol. Why? You act very much like all this effects you in a very personal way. I just want to know why. It'd really help me understand how to approach you. What about this issue is making you react in such a personal manner?

Please people, try getting some news directly from the source. We still live in the day-and-age of freedom of access to information (mostly) and Stardock is a company more open than most. Check these posts by Frogboy/Draginol/Brad Wardell out that describe the actual reason their infrastructure failed before mouthing off.

Clarifications and the path forward (Demigod: Weekend Status, 17 April 2009)

Demigod: So much for piracy (29 April 2009 -- OK you're forgiven for not having read this one yet ;-D)

Basically those of you that think Stardock "had it coming" or "were asking for it" or elsewise think that pirates can somehow play via Stardock/GPS's servers are wrong. What brought Demigod's multiplayer matchmaking system to it's knees was a seemingly innocuous call to the server to find out if an update was available. When that call started to be made by warez versions of Demigod it overwhelmed the update server and for some reason had a domino effect onto the rest of the server infrastructure.

Yegargeburble:
This is...disheartening to read. As has been said, so much for protests via piracy.

The actions of some can not be generalised to apply to all. Most people are hypocrites, yes, but most pirates are also people who just don't buy games/software. There are precious few that pirate to protest DRM I reckon. Most pirate simply because they can. Can you unequivocally link those that were vocal about "protest-pirating" games like Spore and Bioshock due to SecuROM 7 to the piracy of Demigod?

MorphingDragon:
As I prospective Software Developer/Engineer, I currently have no plans to make PC and more specifically Windows software. The best way to stop piracy so far is having a Vice like grip on the system. Shown by Apple, Sony and Nintendo.

By this you're implying Microsoft does not have a vice-like grip on the Xbox360 system? There is also significant piracy on consoles *and* Mac, it just doesn't get nearly so much press. Just a few days ago there was an article on Slashdot about the 'first' Mac botnet with zombies performing a DoS attack on an undisclosed site - apparently they were zombified by a trojan included in warez copies of iWork and Photoshop CS4.

Well then maybe next time work on making a multiplayer that NEEDS original CD-Keys. Diablo 2 did it, Neverwinter Nights did it.

Abedeus:
Well then maybe next time work on making a multiplayer that NEEDS original CD-Keys. Diablo 2 did it, Neverwinter Nights did it.

I refer you to my post just above yours... You may have missed it since your reply was posted but two minutes after mine.

I do think some form of anti-piracy is needed, as this story shows - but the current forms of DRM are not the way to go. Doesn't DoW 2 make you log on with a account that is compatible with your cd-key only to play online? surely that would be enough, without all this limited installation bullshit we're being fed.

Kushan101:
I do think some form of anti-piracy is needed, as this story shows - but the current forms of DRM are not the way to go. Doesn't DoW 2 make you log on with a account that is compatible with your cd-key only to play online?

Please, I beg of you, read the articles at the links I posted not 5 hours prior to your post (here's the permalink for your convenience). If you don't want to read all that then just read the second paragraph of proper text in my post.

Its a shame this is happening. I've heard some good things about this game.

Game companies employ people who make a living through investment and game sales. Pirated games are not sales. Piracy is, at best, useless to companies and developers, and it is, at worst, directly detrimental.

Think of it as a value calculation. If you distribute 1000 copies for $10,000, the value of your product is $10 per copy. If you distribute 10,000 copies for $10,000, the value of your product is $1 a copy. It is a hell of a lot easier to keep making games if the value of your product is higher, even if the total sales revenues are the same. Ignoring, for a moment, the fact that it ultimately costs more to provide good customer support (or, in this case, to balance server load) for a larger number of users, people will look at your prior sales to justify investing in your company, which helps pay your people until that next big release. If you can't pay your people, they leave (or starve), your products suck, and you go under - despite any potentially awesome ideas you might have had. Investment makes the world go 'round.

Anyhow, even if that argument doesn't appeal to you, consider that a game is essentially the collaborative effort and creativity of a group of individuals trying to monetize their labors. Do you really feel right NOT paying for something like that? Even if you aren't really "stealing" a physical object that can't be replaced, you're profiting from the work of others and using that work in a manner in which it was not intended. Those developers intend for people to buy their product, which you aren't doing. Even assuming the game isn't very good, there's no justification. That's why we have reviewers, game videos, message boards, demo consoles, and friends. If you have access to the internet (as you likely would to pirate something), you can find plenty of informative sources on a game. At this point in my life, I have a pretty darned good idea of what games I'll like and what games I won't - it's not hard. Anyone should be able to discern whether or not they should buy a game before actually ever playing it.

Game developers should be gaining from people playing their games. Even if they simply don't lose anything (sales, a physical copy, whatever), it's not good enough. That's not the point of commercial video games.

Well then maybe next time work on making a multiplayer that NEEDS original CD-Keys. Diablo 2 did it

Diablo 2 runs multiplayer games serverside, the client just displays the graphics. This is okay for RPGs where the server just needs to move around units (which attack about twice a second at most) and calculate drops. For a game like this, much more processing power would be required.

But yes, all future PC games should be mainly about multiplayer with little or no single player, and they should be simple enough (ie. no physics) to ensure the servers are cheap enough to not require a monthly fee. This, luckily, is exactly what the people want. (Nobody actually HAS a gaming pc)

You guys half-necroed a thread to talk about piracy? Why bother doing that when the Sims 3 thread had a talk going on already? Did someone post a link to this and you didn't see it the first time round?

Just saying, seeing as there is another thread with a active piracy discussion going on in the news section.

OK to clear up a few things...
For the record the head of the game company finds that the pirating constitutes further success. By having on licensed copy to play over a LAN means that at least one copy has been purchased. When you purchase the game it gives you a serial to register and receive updates. The first update allows online play for "one copy" or LAN play for as many are on the network. Having a friend who bought the game and installed a copy on my computer so we could play LAN has convinced me to buy the game. Thus all the pirates who illegally downloaded this will either decide 1 of 3 things: The game is worth purchasing (ploy worked)... The game is not worth purchasing (ploy didn't work no loss to sales)... or I like it enough to keep the game without the extra features or bug fixes ( again no loss of sales but might encourage the viral promotion through showing off too or sharing with someone who will buy)!!!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here