Anarchy Reigns(NA/EU) |OT| Sega, I wish I could hate you to de- *$30* I LOVE YOU SEGA

shidoshi said:
I'm starting to get really frustrated with Anarchy Reigns. When the game first hit, I was having a lot of fun, because everybody was new (and at the same skill level), so I felt like I always had a chance. But, it's weird—the more I play the game, the more I feel like I don't understand it. *heh*

I'm often the same way with proper fighting games, and I never like people who just proclaim "Character X/Move X is so cheap!", but that's how I've felt this weekend getting back to playing the game.

Sorry if these things were already covered, but I've got a few questions.

* Does level at all effect a player's power/defense/regeneration rate? Like, in the last game I just played, I was fighting somebody of a much higher level than I (they were like 45 to my 7), and I had the item that speeds up healing and they didn't. But, I'd swear that they were recovering health faster than I was in the down moments of our battle. I also had a level 50 Rin (can't remember which one) who was doing one-hit Killer Weapon kills on me when I'd swear I shouldn't have been low enough to die from the hit.
Click to expand...
You "level" up during the match (separate from the player level you see in the lobby) after kill streaks, you gain a longer life bar and more KW meters, but all of that goes away when you die. Could just be that he had more life than you did because he had a 3-kill killstreak already. Also, health regeneration takes a bit to kick in, like it does in FPS games, so if you were getting tagged sporadically in between and he had perfect defense, he'd be constantly regenerating while you wouldn't be.
* When you're being attacked by somebody in rage (forgot the exact name), can you just block all of those attacks? I've fought people who could just stand there and block all of the attacks if I was doing them, but on the other hand I'd swear that I can't block through all of those attacks.
Click to expand...
Guard master lets you block for a long time, which is really effective against rampages. With rampages you have to time your 360 attack for when the finisher for the barrage is supposed to hit, so you get knocked away and have a chance to dodge away from them. If he doesn't make you block a barrage, there's really no way for him to reliably catch you. That's why it's best to rampage when someone's committed to comboing you or if they're otherwise occupied, because 1-on-1 is just a waste of your rampage time.
* Speaking of blocks, other than throws, how do I get better at breaking blocks? I know there's also the charge attack, but I just can't get a handle yet on what to do for people who just keep blocking/dodging.
Click to expand...
Certain finishers and all KWH attacks break blocks, but those are easily telegraphed and dodged away, plus the throw break window is massive. Defense is king in this game, if someone is committing to pure defense you just have to let them be and move on. Since all matches are timed they're losing out on points by sitting idle, but you'll be losing even more because you're wasting time along with them, and with higher risk since you're initiating offense. 1-on-1s are almost always a bad idea.
 
I was also frustrated as hell until I realized that like the last poster said, defense is crucial in this game. The game at first glance seems like a mostly offensive game. Look closer and you will see the better players guarding a ton and jumping into fights at opportune moments to take (steal? lol) a kill.

I think they should make a followup to this game. For a first time go at this kind of multiplayer game I think they did really well. I would like to see the ability to practice / or mini matches while you wait in lobby's and a trial mode where you could learn combos would be a great fit for this game. If they do release a followup they should either wait until they can up the graphical fidelity(next gen) or if they go with the current consoles make sure the PC gets a version as well.
 
360 players - I'll be online hosting a Survival match under the gamertag "AaronSEGA" for the next 30 minutes or so.

Hop online if you'd like to team up! I'll be giving out some Bayonetta codes at random to those who join in. :)
 
I played through the game on Hard mode starting on White Side and all the way through the Black Side. How do I access Black Side Red Side? I cant access Black Stage 4 or Black Red in stage select. Do I have to play through the whole game again starting on Black to get the Black Red Side achievement? That would be pretty frustrating
 
Viewtify said:
I played through the game on Hard mode starting on White Side and all the way through the Black Side. How do I access Black Side Red Side? I cant access Black Stage 4 or Black Red in stage select. Do I have to play through the whole game again starting on Black to get the Black Red Side achievement? That would be pretty frustrating
Click to expand...
You do, you need to playthrough starting on both sides to get all the stages in stage select.
 
Viewtify said:
Ugh. I don't know if I'm up for that. The game is pretty frustrating on Hard Mode. Maybe in a couple months.
Click to expand...
Hard mode isn't necessary, you can mop them up another playthrough on normal or easy and it'll still let you pick it in stage select for hard if you wanna just play those missions later.
 
RubyEclipse said:
360 players - I'll be online hosting a Survival match under the gamertag "AaronSEGA" for the next 30 minutes or so.

Hop online if you'd like to team up! I'll be giving out some Bayonetta codes at random to those who join in. :)
Click to expand...

Look at this man biting my rhymes. LOL.

Hope you had fun, Aaron!

(P.S. Aaron is good peoples.)
 
Riposte said:
It really can't be said enough times: This game's netcode is shit.

Hard + no retries is a real good challenge.
Click to expand...

Shit is a bit harsh. When you play with people on fast, stable connections, it is pretty awesome.

Basically, our netcode is deprived of all the little tricks shooters can use to mask lag. The distance between players is incredibly beneficial to the netcode in shooters; however, the opposite is true with Anarchy. The closer you get to someone, the more packets they have to pass around to get information to everyone.
 
PlatinumGamesJP said:
Shit is a bit harsh. When you play with people on fast, stable connections, it is pretty awesome.

Basically, our netcode is deprived of all the little tricks shooters can use to mask lag. The distance between players is incredibly beneficial to the netcode in shooters; however, the opposite is true with Anarchy. The closer you get to someone, the more packets they have to pass around to get information to everyone.
Click to expand...

Sure, but it is hard to swallow when coming from something like VF5 for example. Nothing annoys me more than having a game where my attacks are not comboing for some inexplicable reason (e.g. getting my jump strong blocked after my game makes it look like i just hit with a launcher). Worse yet, sometimes I end up getting punished harshly for it. Combine this with how incredibly good defense (virtually unbeatable in 1 v 1 or even 2 v 1 situations) is and it isn't a very pleasant experience.

I've had games where things have been smooth on my end, but I'm not convinced that it is the same for the people I'm beating in that case. (So yeah, there are times when I'm extremely happy with what is going on the screen, but the doubt is there. Especially when things are looking a little too much in my favor (e.g. going 7+ and 0 in a deathmatch game, which someone also just did a deathmatch with me tonight where I found it impossible to punish anything he was doing)
 
If Japan didn't have that godlike internet I'm sure we'd see more Japanese games with good netcode, though it's turning around and the last FG with bad netcode was KOF13. Maybe GGPO should get Japanese documentation (if it would help with this kind of thing, I don't know if it would).

That said, when you connect to a lobby the number of bars you have with the hosting player is way more important. If I have less than 3 bars with the host, the game is probably not going to be worth playing.
 
Riposte said:
It really can't be said enough times: This game's netcode is shit.

Hard + no retries is a real good challenge.
Click to expand...

I think from now on, every time you post about how bad the netcode is, I'm going to post about how few problems I've had.

Because I've had very few laggy matches.
 
Yeah it's not like the game requires the precise inputs of arcade fighters to begin with

Even with lag I find it pretty easy to be consistent in the game
 
Roto13 said:
I think from now on, every time you post about how bad the netcode is, I'm going to post about how few problems I've had.

Because I've had very few laggy matches.
Click to expand...

It's not really any worse than a lot of games I've played that did peer to peer hosting. If anything, combos are easier a lot of the time (I can't really do Leo's H, L, jH, jKWL, H loop consistently on offline training, but I can do it for days online if nobody knocks me out of it) because it seems like lag gives a bit more room for error. The only thing that's a lot worse is judging attack animations or the increased leeway on throw hitboxes.
 
Retro_ said:
Yeah it's not like the game requires the precise inputs of arcade fighters to begin with

Even with lag I find it pretty easy to be consistent in the game
Click to expand...

It gives me trouble with reactions rather than combos. Sometimes it is pretty clear that what my game is showing me is a behind what is actually happening. This gives an insurmountable advantage to turtling players who really know how to capitalize on wiffs.

I hate it when I have to "run way" from a room after getting my ass kicked because the room is clearly bad for me. My stubbornness often means I give it another shot lol.
 
Haha sniping peoples kills with Rin Rin's fans is so fun

Dude mashing out rampage on someone else

I got that
 
Deathmatch with a Garuda and Gargoyle who likes to throw can get pretty crazy quickly.

I don't understand why I build rampage slow at times, even if I'm doing especially well or poor.

EDIT: Ai Rin jump killer weapon light is so silly lol. I've learned how to fight it pretty well (of course that goes out the window if I'm distracted), but basically no one else does and it means if I don't focus my attention on that player they will certainly win.
 
Which characters have super armor on their non-charge attacks? Douglas?


FACT: If I'm doing good then I will sing along with the music.
 
I'm confused by Baron. Is his melee so quick he is able to punish things that normally wouldn't be possible? His machine gun punch thing is able to hit me even after I hit him on a punish. He was also able to continue hitting me after a "clash" like nothing. Or was that just lag?

Had a good series of games going as host with (everyone was 4 bars) then people with 3 bars joined and the game got shitty again (lots of "Oh, you didn't actually launch him sorry, now eat this combo"). Who knows maybe the only reason I was winning because the bullshit was on my side.

EDIT: I think I need to turtle more when I have the lead. Seems like most of the times someone beats me in Deathmatch they are playing extremely defensively. (EDIT: See, they left, then I crushed the room. So clearly there is a level of player way beyond me.)

EDIT: lol just had a game where I got a sniper rifle, shot someone 5 times (saw blood and stuff), and they had full health.

EDIT: The guy who cleaned up the room real good before is near the top of the leaderboards for deathmatch if that means anything. At least I'm getting up there. Increased 2000 places since I last checked lol.
 
Anyone 3 bars or under is like a fucking ghost. Frustrating but still fun regardless. Hit level 50 tonight and had some epic matches.
 
Riposte said:
Sure, but it is hard to swallow when coming from something like VF5 for example. Nothing annoys me more than having a game where my attacks are not comboing for some inexplicable reason (e.g. getting my jump strong blocked after my game makes it look like i just hit with a launcher). Worse yet, sometimes I end up getting punished harshly for it. Combine this with how incredibly good defense (virtually unbeatable in 1 v 1 or even 2 v 1 situations) is and it isn't a very pleasant experience.

I've had games where things have been smooth on my end, but I'm not convinced that it is the same for the people I'm beating in that case. (So yeah, there are times when I'm extremely happy with what is going on the screen, but the doubt is there. Especially when things are looking a little too much in my favor (e.g. going 7+ and 0 in a deathmatch game, which someone also just did a deathmatch with me tonight where I found it impossible to punish anything he was doing)
Click to expand...

So you are comparing a one-vs-one fighting game is a small, confined space to something that has far more clients, spread across a huge area. It's apples to oranges. There is a reason that a game like Anarchy Reigns hasn't come around before, and part of that reason is that the netcode requires a whole plethora of creative thinking. Not saying that the challenges of a frame obsessed fighting game aren't difficult in netcode; they are just different and don't compare. Anarchy netcode could certainly improve, especially in high ping situations, but considering we have 16 people who can be fighting in close quarters at once, it is very stable for what is essentially an online game nightmare scenario.

As for the rest of your point, you are basically saying:

A) I don't like it when people block me, gain an advantage over me and I don't know why.
B) People defending themselves are impervious to my attacks.
C) When the netcode is good and I am winning, I am happy, but maybe the other guy isn't.

a) They are better than you.
b) Don't hit people when they are blocking. Find a way around their block.
c) They are not better than you.
 
Obviously it is easier for the VF to have better netcode, but that only excuses AR so much. It is possible to release something too ambitious for what the current environment will allow. Like, years ago we had dial-up and nobody liked online fighting games at all. Perhaps this is why there are so few games like Anarchy Reigns and we are only seeing an influx of them now (e.g. God of War Ascension, Ninja Gaiden 3). At the same time I admit as an American my experience is going to be different than a Japanese because of a poorer internet infrastructure (I do everything I can to minimalize this difference: Play only when the host has 4 bars, plug right into the PS3, etc.)

If you guys had included system-link play, then I probably wouldn't bother complaining because then there would be an out even if I couldn't easy use it. By tying the multiplayer to online (save for playing with bots) you've basically put that whole section of the game at the mercy of online. (This also brings up the question for how long the multiplayer of Anarchy Reigns will accessible to play. We are looking at another Phantom Dust here. Good thing I think the campaign is pretty good in itself, at least on Hard.)

I don't know why you think I'm trying to make excuses. Despite sometimes running into big problems I usually do pretty good, though I can see a level beyond me atm (e.g. the people are #1-10 on the Deathmatch leaderboard, which I saw one of them in action). The big problem is that I can't safely react to what I'm seeing on the screen sometimes and if I'm really serious that is deal-breaker. The game is pretty fun, so I'm pretty forgiving of it, but I can't just ignore when this stuff happens. It is flaw in my play that I can't do anything about, an unresolvable frustration.

And defense is extremely good, arguably good enough that it takes away from the game in most modes I think. As far as I know there are two ways to get beyond a block. 1) Grabs. However grabs have a huge break window, far greater than any fighting game anyway (which is not necessarily a bad thing, but this is basically the only real viable option). 2) Break their guard. This usually means doing a lot of very punishable moves and spending a lot of effort in performing risks (naturally defense players are a huge advantage in this situation, it is like jumping in on a DP-ready character in Street Fighter).

Neither of these options are going to work very well against someone who really doesn't want to be hit. In a deathmatch or battle royale people are not going to cooperate to break this one player's guard, they are going to fight each other and be easy pickings for the turtling player. Considering this there is: 1) No chip damage outside rampage (correct me if I'm wrong), 2) Very fast regen, 3) A dodge on top of this very powerful block (which makes me really wonder why there is no chip damage).

Obviously defense needs to be really good for situations where people are hitting you from multiple directions, but I think they should have spent more time refining it. First off you have the 4-player modes (which I think are actually the best in the game) which clearly don't demand that much defense. Second, defense is still too good in Battle Royales because people are fighting amongst themselves and this game is rewards kill-stealing at opportune times.

Also if you could tell Iwata I'll buy this for WiiU next time you see him that'd be great. (Then use that chance to add two player via gamepad and fix the messy and time-consuming interface between matches.)

EDIT: Oh yeah, this game has parries too. I haven't used them and I haven't seen other people use them on me, but that's yet another defensive option.
 
I actually think overwhelmingly favoring defense in this game is a smart design choice, especially in context of the offensive tools they've also provided. If there was a consistent way of breaking guards, or causing damage that couldn't be recovered from, it would make the game much more repetitive. As of now, if you don't kill someone as soon as you manage to touch them, it might as well be that you never hit them at all, all you've cost them is the time it takes to recover that health. Outside of a few cases like Rins or Bayo, there's no way to really get that damage outside of doing a launcher, delay strings, charged KWH or air KWH glitch, all of which are fairly risky. By that same token, all players need to take risks in order to get points, and the point hijack system means that it becomes increasingly hard to hold on to those points later on because more players should go after the leader.

It's not a system with a lot of finesse -- they basically took a couple of things that would be really broken in any other type of game and hoped they would provide enough symmetry to create interesting dynamics. The only obvious gripe I have is with the bombing raids and other explosion-based disasters because it drops the framerate to single digits and doesn't offer anything interesting.
 
Yeah I feel that if defense was any weaker, people would be complaining more about offense than they are now about D

I kind of like being able to properly defend against 3 people mindlessly mashing against me because I know what I'm doing.

I'm still at a huge disadvantage in that situation, but at least if the people I'm playing vs are stupid I have a chance to survive because I'm the more knowledgeable/skilled player.


There are some cases where it's really dumb. (team battle with leader infinite dodge glitching at a launching platform indefinitely for the entire round after getting the lead) but overall I'm pretty satisfied with the first attempt at this kind of game.
 
If there was a better way to break guards, people would not guard so much and mix it up a bit. So I wouldn't really call that repetitive.

IDK, I think they could have handled defense better. Like one or more of these things: no regen while blocking, chip damage on a couple of attacks, dodge drains your guard break meter(or w/e), guard break meter doesn't recover until you make an attack (even if it wiffs), and/or your ability to tech throws is removed if your guard break meter is low enough.

While it is nice to be able to defend against 3 people at once, that is only ever going to happen in Team Deathmatch and Team Battle (w/e the class one is called). Those two modes suck too. Meanwhile you hurt Deathmatch (the best mode I'd say), Battle Royale, Tag Deathmatch, etc etc. Cage Match simply isn't worth playing.

Oh yeah here is another thing wrong with defense: After hitting level 3, you gain so much health and punishing opportunities with killer weapon that it is extremely difficult for you to die if you actually care not to. This is mainly true for Battle Royale. Just slap on the guard or dodge skill and it is just pure silliness. (In TDM you usually get a scenario where half the other team is in a situation like this. Thus the 20 and 0-4 scoreboard is common.)
 
Riposte said:
If there was a better way to break guards, people would not guard so much and mix it up a bit. So I wouldn't really call that repetitive.

IDK, I think they could have handled defense better. Like one or more of these things: no regen while blocking, chip damage on a couple of attacks, dodge drains your guard break meter(or w/e), guard break meter doesn't recover until you make an attack (even if it wiffs), and/or your ability to tech throws is removed if your guard break meter is low enough.

While it is nice to be able to defend against 3 people at once, that is only ever going to happen in Team Deathmatch and Team Battle (w/e the class one is called). Those two modes suck too. Meanwhile you hurt Deathmatch (the best mode I'd say), Battle Royale, Tag Deathmatch, etc etc. Cage Match simply isn't worth playing.

Oh yeah here is another thing wrong with defense: After hitting level 3, you gain so much health and punishing opportunities with killer weapon that it is extremely difficult for you to die if you actually care not to. This is mainly true for Battle Royale. Just slap on the guard or dodge skill and it is just pure silliness. (In TDM you usually get a scenario where half the other team is in a situation like this. Thus the 20 and 0-4 scoreboard is common.)
Click to expand...

Having a defense that can be consistently penetrated, with how strong some of the offensive options in this game are, would indeed be very repetitive. You're only thinking about this from the perspective of an attacking player, in which case it would be less frustrating if you could do something to break someone's guard, but it would be equally dumb for someone to attack me and there'd be nothing I can do about it, which is the case with Bayo and Rins. The only defensive thing I don't think should be in this game is Master Evader, because it's so much better than everything else you can pick. Also, extra health for high-scoring players is a deliberate thing, because they have so much more to lose if they die. During the second half of the match you should always be going after the King because 20% of their point total is worth a whole lot more than just about every other player you can kill.

TDM, Deathmatch, and Tag Deathmatch are actually my 3 favorite modes. I don't think they're particularly imbalanced like Cage Match is. I've never seen a match be lopsided if the teams were of even remotely similar skill.
 
I don't know if we are talking about the same thing. Every good fighting game is built on the idea of "mix-ups". e.g. the relationship between blocking, throws, lows/overheads. I don't see how that is repetitive or consistent. The mix up game is not good here I've found and it makes reading your opponent and taking risks rather dull and unrewarding.

As for people aiming for the king, well, yeah. But in Battle Royale you are likely to run into a dozen players on the way to reach that king who all want to kill you. If its you, the king, and two other guys all fighting in the arena, then all the king has to do is go pure defense and steal some kills.

I halfway take back what I said about TDM and such sucking. I'm of course speaking from the perspective of someone who isn't familiar with two highly skilled teams clashing on any consistent basis. It could very well be entirely different with eight smart guys with headsets who not only know how to play the game but know how to play the mode. It is flawed in theory, but of course you can adapt to it and just wait and cooperate so that the odds are more even after the first few minutes. That would make this more of a "specialist mode" when most people treat it the norm (like Hardcore Search & Destroy vs Team Deathmatch in Call of Duty).

I really would like a sequel to this game, because I think if they fixed my issues with it a lot of people will say something along the lines "How the hell did we stand this before?" You see it a lot with fighting game expansions. Imbalance, infinites, lackluster netcode (I'm throwing things like the Baron glitch into here), weak mix-up game, etc, it is all here to be improved upon. Don't get me wrong, the game's multiplayer is really quite fun at times (I really do love Deathmatch), but I see a lot wrong with it. That's just looking within the battles and matches. Outside of it... the UI? fucking disaster.


Anyone who beat the campaign on Hard: How did you like the challenge?
 
Riposte said:
I don't know if we are talking about the same thing. Every good fighting game is built on the idea of "mix-ups". e.g. the relationship between blocking, throws, lows/overheads. I don't see how that is repetitive or consistent. The mix up game is not good here I've found and it makes reading your opponent and taking risks rather dull and unrewarding.

As for people aiming for the king, well, yeah. But in Battle Royale you are likely to run into a dozen players on the way to reach that king who all want to kill you. If its you, the king, and two other guys all fighting in the arena, then all the king has to do is go pure defense and steal some kills.

I halfway take back what I said about TDM and such sucking. I'm of course speaking from the perspective of someone who isn't familiar with two highly skilled teams clashing on any consistent basis. It could very well be entirely different with eight smart guys with headsets who not only know how to play the game but know how to play the mode. It is flawed in theory, but of course you can adapt to it and just wait and cooperate so that the odds are more even after the first few minutes. That would make this more of a "specialist mode" when most people treat it the norm (like Hardcore Search & Destroy vs Team Deathmatch in Call of Duty).

I really would like a sequel to this game, because I think if they fixed my issues with it a lot of people will say something along the lines "How the hell did we stand this before?" You see it a lot with fighting game expansions. Imbalance, infinites, lackluster netcode (I'm throwing things like the Baron glitch into here), weak mix-up game, etc, it is all here to be improved upon. Don't get me wrong, the game's multiplayer is really quite fun at times (I really do love Deathmatch), but I see a lot wrong with it. That's just looking within the battles and matches. Outside of it... the UI? fucking disaster.


Anyone who beat the campaign on Hard: How did you like the challenge?
Click to expand...

It's not a fighting game, though. The problem most people have with this game is either playing it like a fighting game or like Devil May Cry, but I contend that it's closer in style to something like a MOBA game in terms of how player characters interact. Trying to protect space or trying to outguess someone is pretty pointless, and would be equally pointless even with the suggestions you proposed. The game is about good awareness of the game state, being able to judge a situation, and having proper understanding of your character's tools in a given situation.

In any case, fighting games are superficially about mixups, but really they're about managing risk and limiting options, and in the current setup you can do it fine with solid defense, but pure defense is pointless without calculated risks on offense. You're creating hypothetical situations based on 1-vs-1 confrontations, which the game isn't designed around. I think if you judge all 1-on-1 situations in this game as a liability for both players and just leave it at that, it becomes much more interesting.
 
But I'm not judging it only on a 1 vs 1 basis. None of what you are saying is lost on me, but the overall game is still hurt by stuff that just happens to be more visible when looked at in a 1 vs 1 context. Defense is still too good in most multiplayer situations.
 
Riposte said:
Are you making a comparison to SNK bosses or something?
Click to expand...

No

Just that it's like playing vs a computer AI controlling a player character balanced for multiplayer.(designed to be controlled by a human being)

Rather than the more finely tuned single player experiences we're used to from Platinum, with enemies and encounters designed to specifically challenge a certain skillset.

I didn't get any satisfaction from completing it in contrast to pretty much anything else they've ever produced. Just like beating the hardest difficulty of SF4 arcade it felt like I was just exploiting a very basic AI that can't deal with what I'm doing because it can't think like a player
 
Riposte said:
But I'm not judging it only on a 1 vs 1 basis. None of what you are saying is lost on me, but the overall game is still hurt by stuff that just happens to be more visible when looked at in a 1 vs 1 context. Defense is still too good in most multiplayer situations.
Click to expand...

You're still working under the assumption that blocking should have a consistent counter and that if you know someone is going to block you should be able to leverage that into some sort of advantage, which is how it would be in a good 1v1 game. Blocking in this game doesn't work the same way it does in a fighting game, and forcing someone to block just means you aren't letting them do anything else, and the purpose of continued offense is to not let them disengage. That's why I compared it to a MOBA, where most of the time the contest isn't to see who manages to kill, but forcing someone out of a lane or denying someone else an advantage, and the most important objective is to not die.

Just about every design decision in this game would be awful in a fighting game. Easy 100% loops, easy (and sometimes safe) bursts, extremely strong dodge, massive throw break window, completely unfair items, totally random stage hazards, a ton of ridiculous moves, etc.. The interactions in this game aren't subtle, but I think the only way you can improve it is to add some other completely bonkers mechanic, not nerfing the existing ones. It isn't that kind of game.
 
Ran a train on Deathmatch. Too bad I dropped a little in the leaderboards though. What is it based on, cumulative points? I started caring slightly because I hit top 100 lol.


Keep forgetting to mention it but this game reminds me a bit of the anime "s-Cry-ed" lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I wish Turn 10 would make a rally game
14
3K
swagNextTuber replied
I’ve got 30 Euro to spend on the E.U. switch store help me choose a game.
3
1K
biglloyd37 replied
NieR: Automata |OT| "I wouldn't expect too much from this game if I were you."
397 398 399 400 401
20K
2M
RokkanStoned replied
TEKKEN 7 |OT| How I killed your mother
241 242 243 244 245
12K
1M
Life replied
FireWall Zero Hour |OT| VR Group Sex With Optional Toys Required
22
4K
Bullet Club replied
Top Bottom