There’s a great game at the core of Diablo: Immortal.
Diablo: Immortal Review - Sanctuary Lost
DreamHack Melbourne represents the first time the festival will hit our shores, and it’s on track to become Australia’s requisite gaming event of the year.
DreamHack Melbourne 2022 is Going to Be Huge
Thanks to the Bethesda ANZ, we've got an amazing custom The Elder Scrolls Online Xbox Series S console pack to giveaway in Australia!
Win This Amazing Elder Scrolls Online Xbox Series S Pack
Overwatch 2 is launching this October, and with a big reveal stream showcasing what's in store, we break it all down...
Overwatch 2 - Everything You Need To Know
Post by Steve Farrelly @ 11:33am 18/10/11 | 57 Comments
There's a lot of talk at the moment regarding the concept of developers and publishers implementing Online Pass Codes for specific in-game content as a measure to leverage the second-hand game market.

Batman: Arkham City, for example, gives first-time buyers a one-use Online Pass to access Catwoman from the outset, however, anyone buying the game second-hand will also need to purchase their own Online Pass for the same content. A Catwoman Online Pass will set you back 800 MS Points, or roughly AU$13.00, much to the chagrin of many gamers.

There's no denying that games are big business now, but from a development end, game dev budgets are also infinitely larger than those of yesteryear - a facet many use as defence against accusations of rorting consumers with the Online Pass model.

Naughty Dog's Justin Richmond (Game Director) has also come out on the side of the Online Pass, which will be implemented for the multiplayer portion of their forthcoming action adventure romp, Uncharted 3, which is due out exclusively on the PlayStation 3 this November 3rd.

"We give literally thousands of hours of content in our online stuff and on top of that we give you not just competitive, but an entire co-op experience as well," he argued in an interview with The Sixth Axis. "There's basically a whole alternate history, alternate version story in our co-op, and in this game they're actually all tied together.

"Part of the reason for the online pass is that when that stuff goes online, it isn't free. We have to pay for servers and all this different stuff to maintain it, and so at some point, you know, games have to make money."

It's definitely an interesting point, but in the end, it raises a question of who actually owns the game you bought - you or the publisher? Discuss...



naughty doguncharted 3online passdlcbatman arkham city
Buy now from Games 101 Only AUD$24.95!
(compare all prices)





Latest Comments
gamer
Posted 11:37am 18/10/11
Yeah I love this. These f*** wits cry that its hard to make games and then they cry that they don't get enough money.

That like Toyota saying whenever someone wants to drive a second hand car they will need to pay us a fee.

Makes me f*****g sick the bulls*** programmers/publishers ask for. It's completely out of line with reality.

If you need tens of millions of dollars to make a game and get a lot of money from it - YOUR DOING IT WRONG.
Pinky
Posted 11:41am 18/10/11
I love how emotional gamers (like gamer above me) get about these different business models.

I personally think it's great and shows a vibrant and progressive industry that is not afraid to try new business models.

Compare that, for example, to the movie picture industry or music industries which have been very hesitant and lethargic to try different models.

Ultimately what is clear is that the consumer does need to properly understand the particular details of what they are purchasing - and if they don't like it, then vote against it by keeping your plastic in your pocket.
Khel
Posted 11:43am 18/10/11
I buy all my games new anyway and dislike the second hand games market on principle, so I'm all for these online passes if it makes life more difficult for stores like EB/Gamestop and their used game racket.

I think its kind of stupid that the Naughty Dog guy is claiming it pays for servers though, I very much doubt that.
thermite
Posted 11:42am 18/10/11
That like Toyota saying whenever someone wants to drive a second hand car they will need to pay us a fee.


In that case you'd probably consider how that affects the resale value when you're deciding on a car.

It's much harder to compare two games like that, but maybe one day you'll be face with a choice of buying two racing car games, one that you can give to your friend or sell it, the other where you can't - and you may choose to buy the first one.

Eorl
Posted 11:43am 18/10/11
Meh, I either buy a game, or don't buy a game, simple as that. Well, when I get my 360, I'm going to do naughty stuff, but that is more to piss the console kids who scream PC pirates more.
Pinky
Posted 11:47am 18/10/11
I disagree with Khel about the second-hand games market.

While it's true their is no direct benefit for the publisher/devs it as important part of the games industry that creates jobs for many people and also makes gaming more accessible to a lot of different kinds of people managing different budgets.

I think it's selfish to 'dislike' the second-hand games market from a social perspective.
Khel
Posted 11:51am 18/10/11
Well, its more that I dislike the way that the big places like EB do it. How they'll actively push a second hand game over a new game because its more money in their pocket, or how they'll price their second hand games within $10 or $15 of the cost of a new one. Making gaming more accessible to people is a good idea, I agree with you on that Pinky, but selling second hand games the way EB does is not achieving that goal in the slightest, its just purely profiteering.

I don't really see how it creates jobs though, thats a bit of an odd claim.
DM
Posted 11:57am 18/10/11
I was in JB the other day looking to pick up Infamous 2 because it was going for $50. I couldn't find a copy though so got a guy to help me. We were looking and I found a 2nd hand copy for $65. How the f*** can they charge $15 more for a second hand copy of the game when you can buy it brand new for less? It's s*** like this bricks & mortar stores. Charging near, or over retail price for games that aren't even new.
Dan
Posted 12:26pm 18/10/11
I think its kind of stupid that the Naughty Dog guy is claiming it pays for servers though, I very much doubt that.
I actually find it pretty insulting when server and bandwith costs are used by publishers as justification for any anti-consumer practices.

There are plenty of third party companies (like this one) more than willing to use their bandwidth to help distribute your digital products and host your multiplayer servers, it's only the publishers recent transitions to closed distribution and gameserver systems that are preventing this.
Enska
Posted 12:01pm 18/10/11
Yeah I don't have an issue with it. The second hand games I buy, multiplayer/online dlc etc is usually at the back of my head anyway.
If I really wanted to get a game and play the mp extensively, I'd buy it new at launch most likely.
And yeah, this will make life harder for EB trying to flog second hands at near new prices.
greazy
Posted 12:05pm 18/10/11
What's the catwomen content? Is it a small part of the game? If it's a small part then I guess this sort of online pass could work.

++++ to Pinky. If you don't like it vote with your wallet.

Khel: There's nothing wrong, both ethically (imo) and legally, with what EB/Game/etc is doing. I put blame on the ignorant gamers who think $10 less is worth it.
deus
Posted 12:09pm 18/10/11
"Batman: Arkham City, for example... ...A Catwoman Online Pass will set you back 800 MS Points, or roughly AU$13.00..."

Not so bad really, an alternative freebie reward system for first time buyers in this case, and it's pre-downloaded DLC for second hand buyers - if they even want it, save $15 and get it second hand and ignore the Catwoman, or fork out the $13 and still save money.

"Online Pass, which will be implemented for the multiplayer portion of their forthcoming action adventure romp, Uncharted 3"

This is more solid content and core game experience however, and I still don't have a problem with this as long as these things are clearly worded on the packaging.

I'm not a big online gamer and I don't want to play a Batman game as a Catwoman, so viewing these as alternative options at the cash register is fine by me. If I want all the content I'll pay, if not, I'll save and get it second hand.

It isn't a big deal, it's an option.
carson
Posted 12:10pm 18/10/11
Less money for EB Games is better for everyone.
DM
Posted 12:10pm 18/10/11
I want to know if you can play the game entirely as her and nightwing. That would be real interesting but I somehow doubt it unfortunately.
Eorl
Posted 12:15pm 18/10/11
I want to know if you can play the game entirely as her and nightwing. That would be real interesting but I somehow doubt it unfortunately.

Well apparently they are fully playable, but not sure in the sense of actual story mode.
Enska
Posted 12:16pm 18/10/11
You can't DM, they have their own side-plots. well Catwoman does at least, haven't read about Nightwing.
copuis
Posted 12:17pm 18/10/11
MINECRAFT

cheap to make, cheap (ish) to by, great playablity made millions

duke nukem,

cost a butt load to start with, and got discounted pretty quick, then again so did civ v
Khel
Posted 12:19pm 18/10/11
Also, the Catwoman stuff you get when you input the code isn't actually on the disc, when I put my Catwoman code in I had to download a 250mb chunk of DLC.
Python
Posted 12:21pm 18/10/11
I'll never pre-order anymore, I'll "trial" games and purchase from there.
Tollaz0r!
Posted 12:24pm 18/10/11
That like Toyota saying whenever someone wants to drive a second hand car they will need to pay us a fee.


No it isn't, flawed logic.

Toyota do not pay any $'s to upkeep the services needed for you to drive a 2nd hand car.

Game dev's need to pay for the upkeep and running costs of servers for multiplayer (3rd party dedicated servers is another story), therefor it isn't unreasonable to charge a small portion for online use.
Dan
Posted 12:25pm 18/10/11
Game dev's need to pay for the upkeep and running costs of servers for multiplayer (3rd party dedicated servers is another story), therefor it isn't unreasonable to charge a small portion for online use.
Sigh. See my last post.
skythra
Posted 12:28pm 18/10/11
Second hand game market exists because of buyers remorse.
Hogfather
Posted 12:31pm 18/10/11
Shrug, it doesn't matter.

The next console generation will have digital distribution and the second hand games market will pretty much cease to exist.
copuis
Posted 12:31pm 18/10/11
Yeah I love this. These f*** wits cry that its hard to make games and then they cry that they don't get enough money.

That like Toyota saying whenever someone wants to drive a second hand car they will need to pay us a fee.

Makes me f*****g sick the bulls*** programmers/publishers ask for. It's completely out of line with reality.

If you need tens of millions of dollars to make a game and get a lot of money from it - YOUR DOING IT WRONG.



yeah, could you imagine toyota making money off a car once it is sold, i mean how many people would buy parts made from toyota like oil filters, hoses, coolant, air filters, etc,

oh wait
greazy
Posted 12:41pm 18/10/11
Second hand game market exists because of buyers remorse.

Nah. This is a fallacy. It exists for a number of reasons, one of which is buyer remorse another is they're done with the game don't want to keep it collecting dust.
ravn0s
Posted 12:41pm 18/10/11
at least they dont support single player dlc.
skythra
Posted 12:52pm 18/10/11
Nah. This is a fallacy. It exists for a number of reasons, one of which is buyer remorse another is they're done with the game don't want to keep it collecting dust.

Being done in the game meant they likely kept it longer than just after the release date though. Which is when it's worth the most. Which is also when they lose the most from second hand.
typo
Posted 01:21pm 18/10/11
If you need tens of millions of dollars to make a game and get a lot of money from it - YOUR DOING IT WRONG.


This probably just shows your general ignorance on how much any kind of technical project costs.

Pinky
Posted 01:29pm 18/10/11
Khel: There's nothing wrong, both ethically (imo) and legally, with what EB/Game/etc is doing. I put blame on the ignorant gamers who think $10 less is worth it.

Aye, that's where I'm at with it.
I was in JB the other day looking to pick up Infamous 2 because it was going for $50. I couldn't find a copy though so got a guy to help me. We were looking and I found a 2nd hand copy for $65.

So what did you do? Hopefully not buy the game. I would have guffawed and said, "You're f*****g kidding me, right?" and walked out. Or say, "Hang on. Australia has to know about this one!" and pull out your mobile phone...
paveway
Posted 01:33pm 18/10/11
yeah i don't have an issue with people selling their games

the money grubbing model that JB and EB use for it is just a c*** act and i've not bought any game second hand from them
Mosfxx
Posted 01:36pm 18/10/11
I was in JB the other day looking to pick up Infamous 2 because it was going for $50. I couldn't find a copy though so got a guy to help me. We were looking and I found a 2nd hand copy for $65. How the f*** can they charge $15 more for a second hand copy of the game when you can buy it brand new for less? It's s*** like this bricks & mortar stores. Charging near, or over retail price for games that aren't even new.


Luck of the special, no different then Coke 2L being cheaper than 1.25L
DM
Posted 01:37pm 18/10/11
So what did you do?

Hell no I didn't buy it. He found me a copy for the $50 advertised price. I said why is this one more and it's a second hand game? that's stupid. He just agreed with me and wandered off.
Tollaz0r!
Posted 01:39pm 18/10/11
Dan, does that include the console market?

ie, for console servers and bandwidth does ausgamers host any of that?
greazy
Posted 01:42pm 18/10/11
Probably not Toll but not because ausgamers doesn't want to. It's because they can't.

Does any console game exist that has dedicated server software that allows anyone to host?
infi
Posted 01:52pm 18/10/11
as if anyone would bother... they will just pirate it, or find another way to unlock it. all the fallout dlc was leaked out to the scene.

Dan
Posted 02:20pm 18/10/11
ie, for console servers and bandwidth does ausgamers host any of that?
What greazy said. We'd love to, but obviously none of them accommodate that. They want to retain absolute control over their closed systems.

How cool would it be if sites like us were able to provide download mirrors of neat little official packages of XBL/PSN demos that users could just chuck on a memory stick and let their console verify and install it. How easy would it be for Steam or Origin or Battlenet to similarly implement something like this -- to support redistributable packages of their games that only require minimal additional download to verify it before install?

I know you can kiiind of do this with the backup function in steam, but it's not neat and simple enough.

How awesome would it be to be able to have the same low-latency dedicated servers that PC is so accustomed to when you're playing CoD4 on a console?

Greazy, the only console game from the generation to offer dedicated server software that could be run on PCs (that I'm aware of) was Section 8 -- which was obviously not a significant enough title to make any difference. It wasn't advantageous at all for them because they didn't get that critical mass and for the followup -- Section 8: Prejudice -- they didn't offer that feature anymore.
Raven
Posted 02:28pm 18/10/11
I don't buy secondhand games simply because when I buy something, I don't want someone elses used rejected stuff that's been treated who knows how.
And yeah, it's screwed that secondhand games might cost $10 less than a new copy, even though they only give the person practically nothing for them.

However when it comes to software, I also take the stance that if I can't buy it, it's fair game when it comes to piracy - if the creator/distributor/whoever isn't going to give me a way to buy it, then they're not losing money. Seems only fair if they can try their piracy lies they like to spread.

If you need tens of millions of dollars to make a game and get a lot of money from it - YOUR DOING IT WRONG.

For someone who calls himself 'gamer', you really have little idea about the industry, do you?
Let's put the average salary at 80k - 60k for the lowly, testers, 100k for the mid level devs. I think that's a conservative average.
Let's also conservatively say you have 30 people on the project. Another 10 or so to cover marketing, payroll, legal, whatever.
And on average it's taking 3 years to pump out each game.
Hey look, we've very quickly come up close to $10m over 3 years!
Khel
Posted 02:32pm 18/10/11
30 people is extremely conservative, I would have said even 200 was conversative for some of the big triple A titles. Credits at the end of games these days roll for f*****g aaaaaaaaaaaaaaages with the amount of people that work on them.
WetWired
Posted 02:47pm 18/10/11
Yeah I believe we had over 30 on Happy Feet 2 and that was an extremely cheap to produce title, you're looking at about 10 times that for something like uncharted 3.

Salaries are loooow too. You're looking at around 35-40k for entry level positions and capping at 100k for your top levels, that's the ones that are well paid too.
Fixah
Posted 03:15pm 18/10/11
I don't buy second hand games any more cause well.. i don't buy as many games for personal use as i used to, plus they're cheap enough when imported new. When it comes to selling 2nd hand games then it becomes a problem. I sold a 2nd hand copy of MK9 for peanuts because I already used the online pass for it. It probably would have been better to keep. Having said that if EB are having the same problems then it's all for a good cause now innit.
ravn0s
Posted 03:16pm 18/10/11
Yeah I believe we had over 30 on Happy Feet 2 and that was an extremely cheap to produce title, you're looking at about 10 times that for something like uncharted 3.


naughty dog only has 90 or so employees.
WirlWind
Posted 03:32pm 18/10/11
I think people forget that, unlike a 2nd hand car, 2nd hand games don't really lose any quality.

The game will be just as playable as a brand new game. That's why EB and such can get away with charging $10 less.

If cars never broke down and didn't age, then they'd resell for a ton more than they do just like VG's.
Grundar
Posted 03:45pm 18/10/11
Ultimately the market is dictated by what people will pay for the product, be it full product or part of one.

If you look at distinct gouges such as those achieved under the banner of "regional pricing" you will find that no matter how much people huff and puff about it, the average gamer will still go and fork out that amount for a game they want. Not many publishers would willingly cut the cost of games as long as they are still making "great" returns on them. In those terms regional pricing is a tough nut to crack.

When you look at models such as these being touted by Naughty Dog that require additional money spent if you purchase a game second hand there are a couple of things to consider:

1) Will it really hamper the second hand game market? Will the average gamer suddenly decide that they need a particular "premium" feature? if so the developer makes their $$, and while not as much as a full game sale it is more then what they currently get from second hand games. If not they buy the second hand game as per usual and the developer sees nothing from the secondary sale

2) Will it divert that second hand game purchase and instead that gamer goes and buys a new copy? If so the second hand copy continues to sit on the shelf that bit longer and if those shops notorious for high priced second hand games want to make some money, then they need to start dropping prices (rather far one would think to offset additional costs for the second hand gamer) Of course the additional benefit of this second "option" is of course with a new and original copy the owner can register it etc.. (where as a second hand game may already have been) and receive associated benefits (arbitrary but benefits never-the-less) and potentially they will place more intrinsic value on it because they did buy it new at price and delve into the DLC market for the game.

In the end it will bring more money to the developers, which in the hands of developers allows them to do more with their games (even if that is "only" giving a payrise to staff etc.) Of course you will have your Bobby Kotick types who will simply see such a model as financial genius and start charging gamers $3.99 USD per letter to use constanants in character names for games etcetera and then post in premium access blogs about how generous it is that they allow resolutions greater than 1024 x 768, when the average monitor is still a death ray 3000 CRT and are going to have to start charging it as a premium service if you want higher! oh, and don't get him started on widescreen and 3d!

Yes! To some I am a rather bitter and long winded old time gamer, who thinks that new business model doesn't instantly mean AWESOME! for the gaming populace (but it can be) :P
WetWired
Posted 03:50pm 18/10/11
naughty dog only has 90 or so employees.


According to linkedin they have 197

Also their production times must be at least double what we had, we put Happy Feet 2 out in a year on 360, Wii and PS3, they do PS3 only in at least 2 years
ravn0s
Posted 04:31pm 18/10/11
According to linkedin they have 197


hmm i read it in a mag and it was a quote from one of the developers. maybe he was talking about people who actually work on the game and wasn't including admin etc.
Hogfather
Posted 04:38pm 18/10/11
90 production staff to 107 ancillary?!
skythra
Posted 04:40pm 18/10/11
Hell no I didn't buy it. He found me a copy for the $50 advertised price. I said why is this one more and it's a second hand game? that's stupid. He just agreed with me and wandered off.

Yes, because it's clearly worth pulling off every sticker every time they have a sale, and then reapplying them again at the end of every sale. *rolleyes*
Nathan
Posted 06:40pm 18/10/11
The next console generation will have digital distribution and the second hand games market will pretty much cease to exist.


Pretty much this, its hard to get too upset about this kind of "code" thing when before long the entire game will be protected by that kind of mechanism.
typo
Posted 06:53pm 18/10/11
Salaries are loooow too. You're looking at around 35-40k for entry level positions and capping at 100k for your top levels, that's the ones that are well paid too.


Also, for the people at home, salary cost doesn't factor in things like computers, software licences, insurance, office space, office supplies, blah blah blah. So, even with the wages being so low, you can effectively double the cost per person to get the actual operating cost to the business for having those employees.

maybe he was talking about people who actually work on the game and wasn't including admin etc.


Probably doesn't count freelance and casual employees who aren't on the books after projects finish. Just full time employees who need to be there from start to end of a project.

Also, let's just use 100, with the average cost to the company of 100k per year (office space, software licences, and stuff), That's $10m a year in operating costs right there, so even a AAA expansion/sequel is going to be a 10m+
Khel
Posted 07:33pm 18/10/11
They probably also outsource stuff like QA, maybe they use Sony's QA people, so you gotta include those in the cost. Plus the marketting department at Sony and the legal guys and all the other guys you don't think about. Sometimes they even pull in other studios to help with art, animation, cinematics, etc.

I was sitting there reading through the credits of Gears of War 3 the other day when I finished it and an astronomical number of people worked on that. The credits rolled for longer than some movies I've seen.
Boxhead
Posted 07:42pm 18/10/11
I would certainly hope that the catwoman portion (or whatever sections of single player games that are 'ON RELEASE DLC') would in no way effect the users enjoyment of the primary storyline.. Because that would be akin to 2nd handbook stores ripping out the final chapter of their books and charging extra for the privilege of gluing them back in (with the money going to publishers or whatever)
Mordecai
Posted 09:03pm 18/10/11
It's definitely an interesting point, but in the end, it raises a question of who actually owns the game you bought - you or the publisher? Discuss...

The person who has the copywrite owns the game, we as gamers have a license to use the copy we have. thats it. We own nothing except the physical media (if bought in physical form).

For me DLC via a code from a new game is a thank you from the maker for buying their game. Thats how I see it and thats why I buy new games. I don't buy second hand so I don't care that people who do fell like they "deserve the extra stuff as it is their right to have it".

I would certainly hope that the catwoman portion (or whatever sections of single player games that are 'ON RELEASE DLC') would in no way effect the users enjoyment of the primary storyline..

The Catwoman DLC is extra mission for Catwoman. Her main story lines are still there and playable.
Obes
Posted 11:11pm 18/10/11
There are plenty of third party companies (like this one) more than willing to use their bandwidth to help distribute your digital products and host your multiplayer servers, it's only the publishers recent transitions to closed distribution and gameserver systems that are preventing this.


However when it comes to regional pricing ... rape the aussie give games high scores ...

Reviews need to reflect not just the quality of the product but the relative value and community support (ie. server based not peer to peer bulls***).
It should be an auto 2 points off any game that regional prices by say more then 10%, 3 points for regional releasing, and say 2 points off anti reselling measures.

Think that'd make EA's Star wars mmo a max of 3.
Raven
Posted 08:34am 19/10/11
Also, for the people at home, salary cost doesn't factor in things like computers, software licences, insurance, office space, office supplies, blah blah blah. So, even with the wages being so low, you can effectively double the cost per person to get the actual operating cost to the business for having those employees.

Indeed. For those playing at home, how much do you think an annual license for Visual Studio costs, which is basically per-developer.
If you answered "$10,000 per annum" (MSDN w/VS Premium), you're about bang on (if you're paying $2k for Pro, err... just no, okay?). Yes, Microsoft charge that much for software licenses.

I think from memory it costs 40-60% more than a persons salary when you factor in superannuation, workcover etc etc, but in IT it costs more like 100% more due to software licenses etc. Don't ask me for a source on this. I don't like sauces.


I would certainly hope that the catwoman portion (or whatever sections of single player games that are 'ON RELEASE DLC') would in no way effect the users enjoyment of the primary storyline.. Because that would be akin to 2nd handbook stores ripping out the final chapter of their books and charging extra for the privilege of gluing them back in (with the money going to publishers or whatever)

I like this analogy, but with one difference:
It would be more like the distributor ripping these pages out. Or providing you with one of those magic pens that allow you to read it once (or with special, individually coded reading glasses that cost $599 each).
trog
Posted 12:49pm 19/10/11
The second hand market for software is rapidly on its way to becoming doomed anyway: https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/abridy/digital-death-copyrights-first-sale-doctrine

In addition to having these technical measures to prevent the sale of 2nd hand software, it's looking more and more like they're going to have the absolute legal right to say that, when you "sign" an EULA for a game, it is yours fo' life.
typo
Posted 02:57pm 19/10/11
They probably also outsource stuff like QA, maybe they use Sony's QA people, so you gotta include those in the cost. Plus the marketting department at Sony and the legal guys and all the other guys you don't think about. Sometimes they even pull in other studios to help with art, animation, cinematics, etc.


Sure, but even if you outsource all of those people, they still need to get paid. Maybe not directly, or maybe not as a full time employee, but they still qualify as a cost to a development studio.

Also, you'd have to be pretty retarded to have no QA in house. You don't need a huge amount, but you still need someone to go through at test the basic elements of your game and highlight bugs before you send out revisions to your publisher. If only to stop them going "holy f***, how amateur are you c****?".

I'd imagine that any company making AAA would also have someone who works with their publishers counter parts. Sure, you don't have a giant team of marketing f***wads, because you can outsource that, but you'll need someone clued on internally who understands what is happing, both internally and externally, and can keep everybody informed about what is happening.

Although, looking at the way that most game companies handle expectation management, nobody gives two flying f**** about keeping people informed.
Khel
Posted 08:11pm 19/10/11
Oh yeah, I wasn't implying that somehow makes the game cheaper, I was saying if anything the actual team working on it is far bigger than just the guys working directly at Naughty Dog or Epic or whatever developer is making the game
Commenting has been locked for this item.
57 Comments
Show