| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Acleacius
King of the Realms
Joined: 24 Dec 2002
Posts: 453
|
I have debated about putting this up as I fear the onslaught of fan fury will be unleased 
I have found in U9 that absolutly worst quest I have ever experienced in a RPG.
Now I dont claim to have played more RPGs than anyone or even close, thou I have been a fan of RPGs for about 6 years and other PC games for about 15 years, so I have a few to compared it against and others may have other worst quest, but this is mine.
Near the end about 3/4s or so when you go etheral/time travel (its been awhile I forgot) and you must convence a man whom stole food to feed his child, that what he did was so terrible and wrong to land him in this terrible place of totured souls.
He sounded like he would have glady work if he could have found work, yet he seen to refuse to become a killer/priate and do so for personal gain.
No he stole to feed his staving child.
Now this from a city of compassion?
I saw no effort by the city to help its poor and starving children or try to provide even a small job enough to pay for food, by the King.
I dont think I have ever seen a more arrogent, condesending and cruel quest in a game.
If you want to list yours please do
Appoligies to any toes |
Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:00 am |
|
|
Withstand the Fury
Head Merchant
Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 50
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada |
| Re: The worst quest ever? |
|
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
I have debated about putting this up as I fear the onslaught of fan fury will be unleased
Criticism of Ultima 9 cause an onslaught? Maybe a few cheers...
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
I have found in U9 that absolutly worst quest I have ever experienced in a RPG.
Now I dont claim to have played more RPGs than anyone or even close, thou I have been a fan of RPGs for about 6 years and other PC games for about 15 years, so I have a few to compared it against and others may have other worst quest, but this is mine.
Ultima 9 had some major plot holes (and numerous inconsistencies in regard to the established plot-line of the preceeding entries in the series). Also, it had obscene numbers of in-game bugs, and even after 18 patches, plus one fan-made patch that expanded on the version 1.18 patch, it continued to occasionally throw game-stoppers at you.
But somehow, I don't think that's your complaint...
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
Near the end about 3/4s or so when you go etheral/time travel (its been awhile I forgot) and you must convence a man whom stole food to feed his child, that what he did was so terrible and wrong to land him in this terrible place of totured souls.
He sounded like he would have glady work if he could have found work, yet he seen to refuse to become a killer/priate and do so for personal gain.
No he stole to feed his staving child.
Now this from a city of compassion?
I saw no effort by the city to help its poor and starving children or try to provide even a small job enough to pay for food, by the King.
I dont think I have ever seen a more arrogent, condesending and cruel quest in a game.
If you want to list yours please do
Appoligies to any toes
Hmmm...now I suppose I will have to play U9 again, because for the life of me I don't remember that, nor can I find mention of it in any walkthrough. Although...hmmm...oh, okay, I found some information about it. Until I play the game again, I won't be able to do anything more than conjecture...
I guess the important thing to remember here is that even noble motives do not excuse wrong actions. Even if it is to feed his child, the fact remains that he resorted to theft. It isn't arrogant or condescending of the game to suggest that this is wrong, because under no circumstances can stealing be justified, and those who attempt to do so are in grave error.
Relativistic morality doesn't apply itself well outside of philosophical dissertations. If I punch you in the nose and break your nose, I've done wrong and hurt you. If I later reveal that I did so only to get a cathartic release from some anger you caused me, and that given a second more to think about it I would have instead murdered you, that's no excuse for punching you, even if in doing so I was able to resist the urge to take it a step further. I still broke your nose, I still caused you harm, I'm still in the wrong.
I'm getting into a morality monologue here, and I apologize, but in essence what the game is recognizing (again, conjecture on my part) is that even though his motives were noble, his actions were wrong...and further, the game is recognizing that he attempted to justify his actions as right in spite of the fact that they were wrong.
If I steal, I know it is wrong. If I steal to provide for someone, it's all well and good that my intentions are noble, but that doesn't change the fact that I stole. Even if I stole so that I didn't have to resort to armed robbery, the lesser wrong is still a wrong done. What is worse, it could be argued that if I try to justify that wrong I have done with the intentions I had, I commit a further wrong, because I turn a blind eye to the wrongness of theft in general. And in the assumption of a consequential system, such as in Ultima 9 with its karmic philosophy, a wrong done must be answered for.
If you find this condescending or arrogant, try steal something one day and use the same reason to justify it. See how well that works in court. It's not arrogant or condescending - it's the way concepts of right and wrong actually work.
 WtFD
_________________
-==(UDIC)==-
Project Lead: Worlds of Ultima: Lost Sosaria
Editor-in-Chief: Ultima: Aiera
Administrator: The Orphanage |
|
Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:09 pm |
|
|
El Poco
Village Dweller
Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 2
Location: France |
I'm not here to put up a new debate about the quality of Ultima 9, but let me tell you this :
I bought Ultima 9 as soon as it came out in France, and played it on a computer that already had troubles playing new games.
With good settings, the framerate was high enough, I've never had any bug (except once, after a movie the colors were messed up).
Sure, at the end of the game you feel that this part was rushed out and that they had a hard time pulling everything together, but overall I had a great time playing this game. (More than I did playing the 1-2 and 3 afterwards  )
I do remember the etheral place with the ghosts, but I can't remember a story like this. Anyway if that's the case, I totally agree with Withstand the Fury.
But if I had to list my worst quest ever, I'll think it'll be the kind of quest you see in a lot of CRPG and especially MMORPG :
"Kill x goblins" (or replace goblins with any race you want)
Pure genocide, without much of a reason and without any fun... |
|
Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:34 pm |
|
|
Acleacius
King of the Realms
Joined: 24 Dec 2002
Posts: 453
|
"I guess the important thing to remember here is that even noble motives do not excuse wrong actions"
So what you saying is that every RPG you have played where you constatnly steal from NPCs, is immoral and wrong even thou without that you could never therortically save them and their worlds?
The guy stole bread or meat (I cant remember exactly) to feed his child, so by you condeming this guy you are suggesting that he let the child starve to death?
That is that the continuity of your conceptual philosophical dissertation?
Maybe since you cant recall the quest your just confused
So no offense or anything but does this mean you live in a country that maybe imprisons people for life or executes people for stealing food to feed their families?
"Relativistic morality"
I dont think this has anything to do with causing violent harm to someone, not sure why you would suggest they are the same.
We must have completely different cultures/spiritual beliefs, thats the most generous thing I can think of |
|
Sun Mar 27, 2005 3:57 am |
|
|
Val
Risen From Ashes
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 14724
Location: Utah, USA |
That's ridiculous. The only game I've played where it's required for you to steal is Thief. That's because stealing is the point of that game. Any other game can be won without stealing. Stealing just makes it easier and quicker.
Stealing is wrong, whether you do it for a noble cause or not. What if this person had stolen some family's last loaf of bread? Now he's endangered those people with his selfish action. Two wrongs never make a right. It just compounds the problem. Because what's the thief going to do after the stolen food is gone? Is he going to get an honest job? Probably not. He's going to steal again, and again, and again using the same excuse until he's caught and thrown in jail. Then his kid will really starve.
There are other solutions to his problem, like getting a job, learning to hunt or fish, etc. All he did was make the problem worse.
_________________
Freeeeeeedom! Thank heavens it's summer!
What do I have to show for my hard work? A piece of paper! Wee!
=Guardian, Moderator, UltimaDot Newshound=  |
|
Sun Mar 27, 2005 4:08 pm |
|
|
Acleacius
King of the Realms
Joined: 24 Dec 2002
Posts: 453
|
As I stated in the first post it is hard to believe that I am the only one whom finds this iroic coming from the City of Compassion 
"That's ridiculous."
Well maybe OR you are just reading more into the quest to justify your point.
As there is nothing in the spoken dialogue (I recall) that even hinted at his action of taking food caused harm in any way shape or form.
The mere fact you have to inject that harm was caused without any evidence kind shows it is acceptable yet you seem to want to condemn it.
Other than the society he inhabits was more interested in using taxes to arrest/prosecute actions based on very human (He seemed human and was played as human) survival of someone whom was not capable of self survival, than creating jobs or safty for it citizens so they do not have to steal food to live..
"Any other game can be won without stealing"
Not only was I not aware of that, I am not sure that is true and I am guessing you have some qualifiers that you have not mentioned.
As an example if you kill instead of incapacitate and arrest/incarcerate are you just a murderer?
If you have murdered this criminal by your standards/oppinion (since 99% of quest to kill do Not involve trials of peers) are his possessions now yours since you are his killer or are you possibly robbing his innocent wife and children for possessions that were really theirs?
How can you know?
Does this mean you think any RPG game can be won by not ever taking any food or money to win the game and save their society from evil?
No offense but I just can not agree
It seems clear to me, most games take place in time of devistation, war and every worst case senerio and U9 is no exception.
Which means the worlds, governments, socities and cities are falling apart unalbe to protect its citizens YET lets condem this people whom just need a little food to eat.
Hey while we are at it lets condem them to some sort of Ethereal Purgatory Prisons for daring to need to eat, how dare they |
|
Sun Mar 27, 2005 9:22 pm |
|
|
Val
Risen From Ashes
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 14724
Location: Utah, USA |
Did you even bother to read my post or did you just decide to ignore the parts you couldn't argue with and just misinterpret it?
My "That's ridiculous" comment is clearly aimed at your assertion that you are required to steal in order to win. That is not true. If you had bothered to read my post, then you'd know that. Next time I advise reading the post, then understanding it, then posting a reply. 
But as to your point, sure, I'll go ahead and call it ridiculous. You never have the right to take something that is not yours. To take it is to deprive the other person who rightfully has it. It does cause harm. To assume that it doesn't is ignorant. It causes harm to that person and the thief. Simply because the thief in this case didn't stick around to find out what harm he caused by stealing does not absolve him of responsiblility.
As for the role of his government, it's role is to protect and preserve the peace. It protects people from having their rights trampled on, like having their food stolen for instance. It is the individual's responisibility to provide for themselves. It's their life and they are the only one's responsible for their actions. Blaming his government is a cop-out.
You want some examples of games that I've won without stealing? Here:
Quest for Glory 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Paladins don't steal.
Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Again, Paladins don't steal.
Diablo 1 and 2. You can't even steal in those games.
Fallout 1 and 2. It was tough, but it was quite rewarding.
Kotor 1 and 2. It's so easy, you'd have to be pretty pathetic to have to steal to win.
The Ultimas. Sure, stealing made some of the games easier, but I found that not stealing certainly made Ultima 4 more easy. And I have won these games without having to steal.
Icewind Dale 1 and 2. TOEE. NWN. Dungeon Siege. Heck, I even won the Gothic games without stealing. Shall I go on? I'm quite sure that the only game I own where I was required to steal in order to advance the plot is Thief 3 (I don't have the previous two).
As for your question about being a "murderer", that depends entirely on context. If you walked into some innocent's house, stole their food and then killed them, then yes, you're a murderer.
If someone attacks you with intent to kill you and you have done nothing to harm them, then you have the right to respond in kind. They give up their rights the moment they attempt to take away yours. If this person were actually concerned with their family (assuming that they had one), then they wouldn't be out trying to kill my character when I'm just walking down the road minding my own business.
Any RPG can be won by completing quests and defeating monsters. You get paid for completing quests and gain experience and levels by doing those things. I've won numerous RPGs that way.
The thief was not condemned to that fate for eating, he was condemned to that fate for taking what he had no right to take. As I said before, there were other solutions to the problem. He decided to take the quick and easy path. A path that leads no where. A path that won't solve his problem.
_________________
Freeeeeeedom! Thank heavens it's summer!
What do I have to show for my hard work? A piece of paper! Wee!
=Guardian, Moderator, UltimaDot Newshound= |
|
Sun Mar 27, 2005 11:07 pm |
|
|
Acleacius
King of the Realms
Joined: 24 Dec 2002
Posts: 453
|
"Did you even bother to read my post or did you just decide to ignore the parts you couldn't argue with and just misinterpret it?
My "That's ridiculous" comment is clearly aimed at your assertion that you are required to steal in order to win. That is not true. If you had bothered to read my post, then you'd know that. Next time I advise reading the post, then understanding it, then posting a reply."
Of course I read your post, which is why it did not make sence, since I never said that or intended it.
I will reread my post to look for grammer and spelling errors thou since I often make them it certianly could have caused you to think that, I guess.
(editing I see this above response doesnt belong as I did mean that, I was rushing out the door, appoligies. I did read your post I think we might just disagree or we are talking about different things )
Well best I can tell I read your post and responed to you if I missed something you think is important I will try to cover it here.
I can see how one sentence could lead you to that possible conclusion, thou in my response I clearly stated depending on what qualifiers are used, ie in killing instead of capturing.
It all depends on your defention of stealing as I mentioned, have you ever taken money from a chest, an apple of a tree, plant on the ground or a gemstone from a cave that was not your property in a game?
While it seems you have played several what I call, Adventure games I dont play them much yet I seem to recall often you are required to take items that dont belong to you to progress or solve puzzles
So you saying you never took anything that didnt bleong to you in Fallout, a sword, a gun or some plant?
Or are you using the rationalzation that if you kill someone it becomes yours and it is not stealing ? 
"It's their life and they are the only one's responsible for their actions. Blaming his government is a cop-out"
Is that so? A government free from responsablity for the state of the social structure which is funded by the taxes paid by citzens.
What do you think a government is for just throwing people in jail?
Of course your example of killing an innocent is murder, yet as I mentioned and you are possibley avoiding is the constant forced killing in many games.
"then they wouldn't be out trying to kill my character when I'm just walking down the road minding my own business. "
What about when you wander off the road say near their camp, cave or hut .
You think its possile they are threatened by some one carrying lows of swords maybe blood dripping off of them?
"The thief was not condemned to that fate for eating"
You are correct he was condimed for his child needing eat.
So you saying each person is responible for themselves then if a child (lets say 5 or 6) cant fend for himself he should go to prison?
Or is just for people you dont know?
I can only hope you dont treat your freinds or family like that
You must have lead a very difficult life to feel no social responiblity to the sociaity you live and profit off of.
The idea that people are only responible for themselves is odd, can you name one person whom existed without help?
It is impossible to play a game without taking things that dont belong to you, at least that I can recall at the moment.
All those games you listed, best I can recall, start you with nothing.
So it is based on your individual rationalizations isnt it?
And if you choose to apply different ones to yourself that is your choice, best I can tell.
Last edited by Acleacius on Mon Mar 28, 2005 1:34 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:14 am |
|
|
Val
Risen From Ashes
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 14724
Location: Utah, USA |
Whatever.
_________________
Freeeeeeedom! Thank heavens it's summer!
What do I have to show for my hard work? A piece of paper! Wee!
=Guardian, Moderator, UltimaDot Newshound= |
|
Mon Mar 28, 2005 1:03 am |
|
|
Acleacius
King of the Realms
Joined: 24 Dec 2002
Posts: 453
|
Ok |
|
Mon Mar 28, 2005 1:35 am |
|
|
Val
Risen From Ashes
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 14724
Location: Utah, USA |
Good lord. Troll alert.
I'll reply to this nonsense when I have more than two minutes. Goodnight.
_________________
Freeeeeeedom! Thank heavens it's summer!
What do I have to show for my hard work? A piece of paper! Wee!
=Guardian, Moderator, UltimaDot Newshound= |
|
Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:12 am |
|
|
Withstand the Fury
Head Merchant
Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 50
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada |
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
So what you saying is that every RPG you have played where you constatnly steal from NPCs, is immoral and wrong even thou without that you could never therortically save them and their worlds?
Seconding what Val said, the only game I can recall in which stealing is necessary to pass is Thief, and of course the various continuations to that series. But we are speaking of Ultima, and it is possible to pass an Ultima without ever resorting to theft or other immoral actions. Heck, you can pass Ultima 6 without having to kill more than 3 monsters (this is where Val teases me about being a masochist).
However, assuming that it is only through immoral actions, such as theft, that I could save a world, or even a life, or in some other way pass the game, I would argue two things:
- This is a game, we're talking about -- the assumption that it reflects in any realistic way the way things work in real-life is, well, far-fetched at best. A game necessarily limits your options, as far as actions are concerned, as a plot device.
- Even if we assume a real-life situation in which an immoral act is the only way to secure a good outcome, the act itself is still immoral. That is a fixed, finite, absolute quantification of the action: it is immoral. Even if the outcomes are, in the end, good, the action is still immoral, and therefore a wrong has been committed.
For an example (and please, let us NOT start a lengthy debate over this), consider the recent invasion of Iraq. The war itself, I would contend, was ultimately immoral because it was started under false pretenses (the fallacy of WMDs). However, its outcomes are moving toward positive -- the Iraqi people have taken part in elections, the usual regional practice of the local strongman has been abandoned in favour of a burgeoning political system, and the effects of this are trickling into neighbouring nations as well (Jordan is adapting aspects of Iraq's new political system into its own, for example).
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
The guy stole bread or meat (I cant remember exactly) to feed his child, so by you condeming this guy you are suggesting that he let the child starve to death?
That is that the continuity of your conceptual philosophical dissertation?
Maybe since you cant recall the quest your just confused
I don't hesitate to acknowledge that the outcome of his theft was that his child ate. As I stated above, immoral actions can have good outcomes, although my ability to explain as such requires me to launch into a theological dissertation that for the time I will refrain from until I have made a further statement below and viewed your response to it.
However, good outcomes or not, the action of theft is immoral. The immorality of the action is not nullified by the good outcome.
Yes, I would agree that the child deserves to eat. But even in the context of that, I cannot condone an immoral action, even to bring about a good event. Consider again my example of Iraq. Yes, I think Saddam was an inhumane crackpot (for lack of a more delicate term, assuming I could use one and not somehow insult the many people he persecuted and/or murdered) and I think that his removal from power can, in the end, only benefit the region. But I cannot in any way condone the military action that led to his fall from power, because it was founded on an immoral pretense -- a lie about WMDs.
But let us again consider the framework of context here: this is an Ultima game. Precisely how hard is it to come by food in an Ultima game, as a player, without resorting to immoral actions or the use of money? Try it for yourself - it should take you about one day, game-time. And this for a stranger to the land. Surely it is easier for a denizen of Britannia, so why this man had to resort to stealing is questionable. Val is right - there are always other options.
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
So no offense or anything but does this mean you live in a country that maybe imprisons people for life or executes people for stealing food to feed their families?
No, but that doesn't mean I can't think, nay, believe stealing is wrong. Because it is, under all times and all circumstances. As is murder. And that, in turn, does not mean I equate the two to be equal crimes, except in that both are immoral.
Mind you, I am also speaking of morality, which is quite a different thing than legal distinctions and the human system of crime and punishment.
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
I dont think this has anything to do with causing violent harm to someone, not sure why you would suggest they are the same.
One of three things seems now to be true. Either my ability to make example is impaired, or else my example's ability to be understood is impaired, or...well, we'll leave the third one unspoken for now in the hope that others are able to catch subtle implications. But just to be sure, I'll mention that a subtle implication is being made in the previous sentence.
My point was that in both cases, the actions are immoral and no amount of reason or excuse can justify the action, even if the outcome is good. But I've elaborated on this point twice now, and I'm hoping you're the intelligent sort, so I'm not going to spend another ten minutes making elaboration a third time.
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
We must have completely different cultures/spiritual beliefs, thats the most generous thing I can think of
Well, you're French, and that's historically a very Catholic nation. I happen to be Catholic. That means I believe in absolute truth and moral absolutes.
WtFD
_________________
-==(UDIC)==-
Project Lead: Worlds of Ultima: Lost Sosaria
Editor-in-Chief: Ultima: Aiera
Administrator: The Orphanage |
|
Wed Mar 30, 2005 8:51 pm |
|
|
Withstand the Fury
Head Merchant
Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 50
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada |
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
You are correct he was condimed for his child needing eat.
And you, in turn, are incorrect -- he was condemned for the act of theft.
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
So you saying each person is responible for themselves then if a child (lets say 5 or 6) cant fend for himself he should go to prison?
Or is just for people you dont know?
I can only hope you dont treat your freinds or family like that
No, no, no, you've clearly taken a left turn at "making sense" and wound up in "confusedville".
Obviously, a child aged 5 or 6 shouldn't be left to fend for itself (the fact that it happens all too often today nonwithstanding -- and 5 or 6 year olds can be quite resourceful in taking care of their own needs. If you don't believe me, lead a youth group of some sort in an area with a large poor community). However, because a child aged 5 or 6 shouldn't be left to fend for itself does not give licence to the child's parent, whatever his/her age, to engage in illegal/immoral activities in order to support that child (prostitution laws in Germany nonwithstanding).
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
You must have lead a very difficult life to feel no social responiblity to the sociaity you live and profit off of.
The idea that people are only responible for themselves is odd, can you name one person whom existed without help?
Of course people need community, need help through the day and with different aspects of life. That is not the issue here, however. The issue is whether the man should have been punished for stealing. And stealing is not the same as getting help from the community -- stealing is involuntary assistance from the community, and is wrong, and even though the outcomes were good the act of stealing was wrong.
quote:
Originally posted by Acleacius
It is impossible to play a game without taking things that dont belong to you, at least that I can recall at the moment.
All those games you listed, best I can recall, start you with nothing.
So it is based on your individual rationalizations isnt it?
And if you choose to apply different ones to yourself that is your choice, best I can tell.
True, but in real life there are some distinctions and rationalizations that you can't make, because they are illegal or immoral. Games, of course, allow us to step beyond those constraints, but in my experience the only reason I ever bothered to take advantage of that allowance was precisely because I knew is was the "bad" thing to do, and it's better to unleash my naughty side on some digital citizens of a game-world that temporarily ceases to exist when I turn the computer off at night than on my next-door neighbours.
You can play Ultima without ever having to steal — you are given some items by the king at the start, and these will last you a fair decent while. There are certainly plenty of opportunities to slay monsters (note: this falls under Val's self-defence example, since monsters in Ultima almost always start the encounter) and collect whatever treasures or equipment they hold, and if you know where to look there's some pirate treasure to be found.
But even that's optional. Coming back to my Ultima 6 example, you can pass the game without ever slaying more than three monsters. Three. You're not going to get very rich off of three monsters. And considering some of Val's examples, the only time in and Quest For Glory (unless you play the thief character), the only time you take something that "isn't yours" is when you collect the 6 pieces of silver off of the goblin that just jumped you (and was summarily dispatched by your longsword/magic spell). Not sure if that constitutes stealing.
WtFD
_________________
-==(UDIC)==-
Project Lead: Worlds of Ultima: Lost Sosaria
Editor-in-Chief: Ultima: Aiera
Administrator: The Orphanage |
|
Thu Mar 31, 2005 7:28 pm |
|
|
Withstand the Fury
Head Merchant
Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 50
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada |
| Consider this to be your hermeneutical bitch-slap for today |
|
It's suddenly very quiet around here.
WtFD
_________________
-==(UDIC)==-
Project Lead: Worlds of Ultima: Lost Sosaria
Editor-in-Chief: Ultima: Aiera
Administrator: The Orphanage |
|
Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:16 am |
|
|
Val
Risen From Ashes
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 14724
Location: Utah, USA |
Perhaps Acleacius realized he was championing a lost cause.
_________________
Freeeeeeedom! Thank heavens it's summer!
What do I have to show for my hard work? A piece of paper! Wee!
=Guardian, Moderator, UltimaDot Newshound= |
|
Sat Apr 02, 2005 11:12 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Mon Apr 08, 2019 8:41 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
