Jump to navigation
Advertisement

Quake 4 Review

Xbox 360 Review by Kristan Reed

8 December, 2005

There used to be a good excuse for console conversions of Quake games being a bit rubbish. Anyone who recalls the hapless early attempts on PlayStation and N64 might not wish to be reminded, but then no-one was exactly surprised, either. Porting cutting-edge PC shooters to ageing home systems is generally a one-way ticket to Jerksville - but the fact that we're still able to come to similar conclusions on a next generation system that's arguably more powerful than most people's PCs is pretty unforgivable.

Ok, so Quake 4 on 360 is hardly in the same league as the PSX Quake II, but as an example of a badly optimised, undernourished port, this is by far the worst example we've seen to date. Even in its full high definition glory, textures are far blurrier than you'd expect, the game chugs along unsatisfyingly even when there are no enemies on screen, and it even crashes from time to time - a pretty alarming state of affairs. It's not unplayably bad, though, and if you hadn't already played the PC version on a decent system you might be reasonably pleased with what's on show. But don't be fooled: that was no reason for id, Raven and Activision to allow this out of the door simply to make it for the system's launch.

Even if it was the sweetest, slickest conversion we'd ever seen, Quake 4 simply isn't up to scratch in any case. It fails to engage right from the beginning, being the kind of rigidly linear, underwhelming, undemanding, by-the-numbers sci-fi schlock that joins the dots with done-to-death gameplay. If, half an hour in, you feel like you've played Quake 4 before, that's because you probably have. In about 47 previous first-person shooters over the past 10 years.

Brown boy in the ring

Unlike the nameless, story-free efforts of the past, Quake 4 does at least try and lend a sense of purpose to the endless traversing of brown corridors. Having defeated the Makron at the end of Quake II, the clean-up operations goes a tad awry when Rhino squad's dropship is shot out of the sky, leaving you in charge of new recruit Matthew Kane battling through the ruins for survival.

With the Strogg base in disarray and the human forces equally disorganised, the opening sections blur past with a sense of uneasy panic on both sides, with several escort missions involving protecting medics, bomb defusal and demo specialists. Your role is of bodyguard and chief button-presser, essentially, making it pretty easy for Raven to design a straightforward run-and-gun with lots of brutish, gurning Strogg to mop up every time you turn a new corner.

The game essentially carries on in this plodding vein throughout, barely able to conceal its lack of ambition with one routine button-pressing task after another. In-between 'interacting' with consoles, flicking switches on or off and dispatching willing sentries one after the other, you get to engage with the odd on-rails section, or even saddle up inside a mech or pilot a beefy tank and dish out some death to equally enormous enemies. But, like much of the game, it's pretty undemanding stuff, giving you a recharging shield that makes it far, far too easy to just blast your way to unsatisfying victory. In a game dominated by such tight, confined environments it's practically impossible to get lost, with almost every pathway likely to lead you directly to your next button-pushing assignment. Tightly scripted action isn't the problem, though, it's just that Raven seems content to keep the script as uncomplicated as possible.

Brownian motion

'Quake 4' Screenshot 1

He never was a hit with the ladies.

If the idea was to create a back-to-basics, balls-out shooter, then it succeeds on a basic (read: very basic) level, but doesn't even get that right often enough. The familiar roster of weaponry is as much to blame as anything, either giving you super-powered weapons that take all the tension and fun out of the combat, or stupidly hamstrung weapons you won't want to use. To start off with you get a chargeable pistol you'll barely ever need or want to use, very quickly (as in: within a minute) followed by a machinegun with a zoom function that makes it too easy to kill everything from afar, a shotgun that's useful close up but takes too long to load, a powerful chaingun that takes too long to spin into action, a grenade launcher you have barely enough ammo for, and eventually the more powerful nailgun, hyperblaster, railgun, rocket launcher and the BFG-esque, all-consuming Dark Matter gun. Amusingly, you can still carry every single one, too, so there's not even any need to strategise in the heat of battle - it's just a case of unloading everything you've got until they're gone, and never really worrying too much about preserving ammo. It's as straightforward an FPS experience as we've played in, well, years, which isn't actually a compliment.

Even on the harder settings - where a few hits is enough to send you packing - the enemy AI is still dumb and inflexible, largely standing its ground and simply loosing off rounds for the sake of it. If they hit you, it's more likely because you strayed into their line of fire, rather than was the victim of a determined enemy that's stalking its prey. And why is it - still - that enemies are allowed to have infinite reserves of ammo and don't suffer the health concerns that you do? We want fire-fights that vaguely resemble a future war against an alien menace, not yet another dumb load of bots that provide us with duck shoot cannon fodder. The presence of semi-useful buddy AI colleagues is fairly useless too, never sticking around long enough for you to care enough for them, taking way too much damage to be credible, and full of sterile one-liners just to make their existence even less welcome. Why do FPS makers seem to always assume it's enough to make the corridors prettier, the lighting more atmospheric and the buddy AI more talkative? This sort of brainless retread of decade old game design isn't enough anymore.

A lot of the concerns people had about Doom III apply here, but without the tension or sense of the unexpected. Sure, some people hated the old-school 'it's behind you' mechanic, and fair enough, but anyone who played that game into hell and beyond will remember it for being a game that turns up the heat to an insane degree and really paced itself exceptionally well. Quake 4's cardiograph, on the other hand, blips along comfortably, never really threatening to do anything unexpected or out of the ordinary; in the sense of its combat, puzzles or narrative. In all three areas there's literally nothing going on that we haven't seen done far better elsewhere, which is the crushing realisation you'll probably come to after seeing it through. Second time around, it's even more apparent.

Brown frown

'Quake 4' Screenshot 2

It's tragic when tummy tucks go wrong.

Raven had a chance to do something amazing with Quake 4 about halfway through - and if you're one of the two people left that hasn't already heard the 'twist', then we won't ruin that for you - but suffice to say that nothing significant changes, and the game simply picks up from where it left off with the single, startling innovation being that you can use the wall-mounted units to recharge your health. Whoop-de-doo.

Up until now, we've not even been moved to talk about the amazing high definition visuals that use the groundbreaking Doom III engine, or anything of the sort - mainly because you've seen most of what the game has to offer within the first few gloomily lit corridors. On a basic level, yes, the game is built on an engine that's capable of great things, but we'd be damned if Raven has gone to any great lengths to find out what Jon Carmack's tech can do. We've said it before, but it really is the brown Doom. It's a brown planet, with a series of brown bases built on top of it, with brown pipes snaking around it, so whether you're fighting indoors or not, what you see doesn't vary a great deal. The fact that the enemies are highly detailed and that the wall texturing is relatively intricate won't feel of great consequence after the first few minutes, because you'll see much the same thing for the 12, 15 hours it'll take you to polish it all off. There's no real sense of interaction, no means of destroying your surroundings in any way, no physics implementation worth a damn, and your sense of frustrated boredom will creep in once the penny drops that the variety consists of brown pipes or brown rock.

On the positive side, the controls work pretty well, with all the default settings not requiring any meddling at all and the general look sensitivity seems spot-on. The aiming's possibly a little more forgiving than the PC original, making the game slightly easier than we remember it first time around, so be sure to ramp up the difficulty accordingly as it's just way, way too easy otherwise - especially given you can quicksave at any point. One niggle, though, is the irritating decision to map crouch to the left stick, as you'll forever find yourself ducking down when you don't want to, and feel uncomfortable trying to aim precisely with your thumb clamped down. It's not as if the 360 pad is lacking buttons.

Doomed

'Quake 4' Screenshot 3

Even Stroggs like to boogie.

As for multiplayer, it's all bad news. Not only has Raven been unable to match the 16-player support of the PC original (supporting a miserly eight here, but no four-player split-screen option, which is a surprising omission), we're subjected to a thoroughly out-moded selection of 'oh-my-god-is-that-it?' maps and modes that belong firmly in the past. It ticks the usual deathmatch/team deathmatch/Capture the Flag/Team CTF boxes, and throws in one-on-one Tourney (that's Tournament) rather apologetically. Bizarrely, the usual Xbox Live implementation is slightly borked, and searching for matches is an usually painful process, while in-game the frame rate is just as bad as the iffy single-player experience. Damn their eyes.

If you were generous, you'd be happy at the return to simplicity of the late '90s, complete with Quake III-style jump pads, some old fondly remembered maps and the booming commentator voice, but as we all know, nostalgia is fleeting at the best of times. Before long, you'll probably be hankering after something that looks forward, not back. Let's hope Quake Wars fills that particular role.

It says a lot about the excitement value of Quake 4 when the most exciting part of the package is the presence of Quake II on the making-of-laden bonus disk. Playing that particular classic on a whopping great screen does serve as a timely reminder of how far we've come in technical terms in the eight years that have elapsed since then, but also underlines how incredible it is that Quake 4 still manages to feel so unimpressive and irrelevant by comparison.

This eight-year gap between Quake single-player offerings gave Raven the perfect opportunity to deliver something very special that not only reinvigorated the brand, but showed off next generation FPS design. That Quake 4 is merely a glossy, standard, by-the-numbers trudge through past glories is an irresponsible way to treat such a revered franchise; to then cock up the conversion to the 360 subsequently and then charge extra for the privilege is bordering on scandalous.

6/10

Read our Scoring Policy

Advertisement

Are you excited about Quake 4 on Xbox 360?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-50 of 71 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
myiagros
08/12/05 @ 11:49
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Shame about the conversion, but i am enjoying it on the PC.
I think for 360 i'll be better off going for Call Of Duty 2 when i can afford a machine.
Stickman
08/12/05 @ 11:52
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Send in the tards...
rauper [staff]
08/12/05 @ 11:54
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
We had a (Alienware fuelled) Quake4 PC LAN party at EG HQ last night and it was awesome

*blushes*
morriss
08/12/05 @ 11:54
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Loads of High-scores eh?
jiveguy
08/12/05 @ 11:57
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So what you're saying is that we should go out and buy Alienware PCs to play these games on? ;D
morriss
08/12/05 @ 11:58
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So, look away from it's teh 360z07z, what score would it get as a standalone game?
Carlo
08/12/05 @ 11:58
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
*rolls eyes*.

*ANOTHER* crap 360 game?

/asplodedes!
myiagros
08/12/05 @ 12:00
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
how much are alienware paying EG these days for excesive promotion?
Stickman
08/12/05 @ 12:01
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"We had a (Alienware fuelled) Quake4 PC LAN party at EG HQ last night and it was awesome

*blushes* "

I should hope you bloody are blushing with that shameless plug!
Trip SkyWay
08/12/05 @ 12:03
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Just finished Doon 3 Xbox today. Glad to get to the end it was fraying my nerves, as I get scared easy. Doom 3 xbox was a pretty amazing achievment in terms of porting. Makes this seem even more of a shame.
rauper [staff]
08/12/05 @ 12:03
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
That comment was for free... :)
Bill Door
08/12/05 @ 12:04
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"*ANOTHER* crap 360 game?"

6/10 is above average n'es pa?
Carlo
08/12/05 @ 12:06
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So you'll be buying it then Bill?
morriss
08/12/05 @ 12:10
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@draven

He mentions HD res about 3 times in the review, so that pretty much answers your question for you.
speedjack
08/12/05 @ 12:10
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Shame... I'm a sucker for all the Quake games.

Can't beleive nothing significant happens after the twist. I had visions of you becoming part of a borg style 'hive mind' and getting the ability to download upgrades, schematics, control other strogg, access mini games... blah, blah blah

/wishes he was a game designer
Edited 1 times, most recently on 08/12/05 @ 12:18
sajtion
08/12/05 @ 12:15
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
6 is not too bad but the game to me is around 8 & 9. it sure has lag problems but nothing that an update couldn't fix
Dizzy
08/12/05 @ 12:18
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Apparently a lot of people are buying it for the "classic" multiplayer. Guess that style of deathmatch is still popular and might keep some people busy on Live untill we get some more advanced shooters (I even considered this, since I don't mind some mindless shooting action).

I played it on PC and a big "meh" again. It's just not a very good game on any platform.

Quick port? Future patch?

/remembers UT on XBox1
Edited 1 times, most recently on 08/12/05 @ 12:19
Eraser
08/12/05 @ 12:26
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I hate it when people rant about Quake 4's multiplayer being too simple. If that's your opinion, then you simply don't understand what Quake 4 (or Quake multiplayer in general) is about. It's about no-nonsense straight up man-to-man deathmatch. None of that stamina, reload, player class, vehicle nonsense you see in far too many games these days. It's about you, your gun and a bucket load of skill that, for a change, is not clouded by who has the vehicle with the biggest gun.

Loving Quake 4 MP is not about nostalgia, it's about craving a pure skill-based multiplayer game that is totally unforgiving to those who aren't sharp and on top of things every nanosecond of the match. Nothing gets the adrenaline pumping more than pure deathmatch like this.

Granted, Quake 3 Arena still is better than Quake 4, but Q4 is a pretty accurate reiteration of Quake 3's greatness.
Artemus
08/12/05 @ 12:34
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Quake 2 on PS1 was excellent. The N64 version was crap.
jlaakso
08/12/05 @ 12:36
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I don't see a problem with EG staff saying they're playing PC games on Alienware. I sure hope I could afford one.
karlidog
08/12/05 @ 12:36
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I quite enjoyed the single-player game on the PC, although you're absolutely right - the lack of any difference at all after the 'twist' is criminally unimaginative. It rushes through its single midpoint 'cutscene', as well, which completely removes the impact of what's supposed to be happening. The whole thing sort of smells of focus-groups - the almost embarrassed way it nips through the one narrative-heavy bit where you have no control, undoubtedly to get the more testosterone-dripping of its audience back to shooting things with big guns; the fact, as mentioned, that your character's abilities never change so there's no re-learning required at any point, and the awful, awful vehicle sections, which actually manage to make the player feel less well-armed and more vulnerable despite supposedly encasing them in twenty tons of stomping/hovering death machinery. Bah. It's good, no-nonsense fun when it's letting you explore, shoot monsters and revel in the horribleness of its setting, though.

Oh yeah, and the final boss and ending are the most utterly pathetic things I've ever encountered in a game. I mean, seriously. Holy crap. It's like the team just gave up 90% of the way through, and the office cleaners got embarrassed on their behalf and finished it for them, despite never having used the tools before. It's a shame that fear of spoilers (rightly) stops reviewers talking about the end of games in too much detail, because there's a lot to criticise there.
Jesskaah
08/12/05 @ 12:46
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Too true, the ending is spell bindingly rubbish!
jonnyreb
08/12/05 @ 12:48
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Before all the whining about low X360 scores starts, I just want to say that I REALLY enjoyed Quake 4 on the PC.......

However.........this PC -> Console conversion is shocking in it's quality.

I spent a some time at the weekend playing this and I would go so far as to say that this is the worst example I have seen of bad development.

However nice the graphics are the framerate is appalling.

I personally think a 6 is generous, IMHO if a game has not been properly 'finished' like this one, whatever the reasons (ie launch date targets, new X360 architecture) it shouldn't even make it to the shelves.

Shame on you Raven.
Eldritch
08/12/05 @ 12:59
#24
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Who did the port? Raven themselves? Hard to believe. Probably their B team. I like the PC version nevertheless. So sue me.
Eighthours
08/12/05 @ 13:04
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So.... still better than Kameo then? Methinks not.
kewny
08/12/05 @ 13:10
#26
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ive been playing this too and while its not up to the standard of COD2 et al, I am not disappointed that I got it. It looks good and the controls are almost spot on. Agree about the framerate issue though, but I didnt see many people complaining about the dodgy framerate on NFS: most wanted (which I also own and like). Overall its a half decent game and if people see it for what it is (a pretty unorginal but fun shoot em up) then i dont think they will consider suicide when they put it on ! :) Again I agree though, its a lazy port.

P.S. the quake 2 that comes with is still tops and is as smooth as silk.
pikemon
08/12/05 @ 13:12
#27
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Another X360 game gets a better score than what the review itself would indicate.
Eldritch
08/12/05 @ 13:14
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Kewny: I'm playing the Quake 2 that came with the Limited Edition PC game. Class. (C:
AgentCooper
08/12/05 @ 13:18
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Quake 2 on PS1 was excellent. The N64 version was crap."

@Artemus

You know I actually still have the N64 version in the house, needed the memory pack as I recall. The control setup just doesnae work....
drumbaby
08/12/05 @ 13:24
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Shame....this game was/ is ace on PC.
funkyd
08/12/05 @ 13:39
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Quake 2 on PS1 was excellent. The N64 version was crap.

what?!?!?!

Quake 2 was excellent on both th n64 and the ps1
Jesskaah
08/12/05 @ 13:41
#32
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
/methinks rose tinted spectacles are being donned.
3william56
08/12/05 @ 13:49
#33
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Quake II on the PS1 was streets ahead of anything similar on the ole grey box - sure, the 3 feet between loads was a pain - especially if you walked through a door, [load] got a fright then stepped backwards [load] and had to step forwards [load]. Fume. But the multiplayer was a blast.

Not great by modern standards, and I wouldn't want to play it again now, but a real achievement back then.
Artemus
08/12/05 @ 14:05
#34
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
What I like about the PS1 version was that they managed to port the whole game pretty much intact with a few concessions. Add to that the brilliant four player DM mode that made me miss several history lectures.

The N64 version had totally redesigned levels and the multiplayer wasn't as good.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 08/12/05 @ 14:06
DodgyPast
08/12/05 @ 14:05
#35
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
well I have been having a blast on Quake 4.

It's not the most challenging of games... but it is good clean fun when you need to blow shit up to relax.
Sometimes one too many corridors to get lost in is more than I can cope with.
Darren
08/12/05 @ 14:16
#36
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I've been playing 360 Quake 4 for a few days now and it's never crashed once...

... but it's a reasonably fair review I suppose. The framerate in the single player game is a little erratic but it's not so bad that it affects the gameplay (it's no worst than playing it on my PC infact which also suffers from slowdown on high settings). In multiplayer though the framerate was excellent in the few games I've played but then the levels are much smaller and there's less going on.

As for the graphics, the 360 ones are practically indistinguishable for the game running on my PC on high-settings at 1280x1024 as the PC game didn't have brilliant environmental textures either (just look at the ground at the start of the game to see what I mean).

All-in-all it's a solid if somewhat generic shooter thats a little too similar visually to Doom 3 but it's enjoyable enough. I'd give it 7/10.
smelly
08/12/05 @ 14:20
#37
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I bought quack 4 for the pc. Worst money I've spent in recent years.

Total crap. But at least it was better than doom 3.
Hufftur
08/12/05 @ 14:27
#38
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I haven't played the N64 version, but Quake 2 on the PSX was quite sublime. Still holds up today too.

When you complete the game on normal mode you get some extra multiplayer options, including game speed. So... you can play in graceful slowmo (railgunning around corners, zero G style) or frenzied fastmo (chaingunning!!!). It's all strangely surreal and EXTREMELY sexy, oh yes.

And 2 player deathmatch is even better if you sellotape a huge slice of cardboard (vertically, of course) against the TV screen. Splitscreen heaven.
Ryuken
08/12/05 @ 14:33
#39
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Framerate drops on a more powerful machine than the average PC is a big shame indeed. Ah well, the PC-version is satisfying anyhow. It's a bit of irony that the reviewer apparently did enjoy QII but not Q4, since the latter is more similar to QII than to the "smarter" shooters. It's actually a real joke that some want Q4 to be a fps with an interesting storyline or a big plottwist when the main motivation hasn't changed at all since QII, namely shoot and blow things up in a fun and entertaining way. Can you blame a fps for that now too?
Edited 1 times, most recently on 08/12/05 @ 14:34
gaijin
08/12/05 @ 14:38
#40
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
smelly:
I bought quack 4 for the pc.

Is that the waterfowl hunting game? Or Jonathan Ross trying to score some 'base?

/fetches overcoat
Feanor
08/12/05 @ 14:39
#41
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Another X360 game gets a better score than what the review itself would indicate."

What are the other ones? Not Kameo, hehe.
effinjamie
08/12/05 @ 15:00
#42
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So it does have 4 player splitscreen then?
'Cos damned if I can find it.

Edit: nope, you're right, it's not there. What a swizz!
Edited 1 times, most recently on 08/12/05 @ 15:11
Artemus
08/12/05 @ 15:05
#43
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
And 2 player deathmatch is even better if you sellotape a huge slice of cardboard (vertically, of course) against the TV screen. Splitscreen heaven.

Haha. Me and my mate used to do the same.
blizeH
08/12/05 @ 15:21
#44
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So yet another inferior PC port on the 360! How... great... \o/
ecureuil
08/12/05 @ 15:40
#45
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Quake II on the PS1 was brilliant, and an incredible technical achievement. It was the number 1 multiplayer game for me and my mates for quite a long time.
Artemus
08/12/05 @ 16:23
#46
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
You do realise, that all of us saying how good the old QII ports were has completely screwed Kristan's opening paragraph.
krudster [mod]
08/12/05 @ 16:40
#47
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Well, that kind of missed the point I was making. Of course they were pretty good technical acheivements and all that, but side by side with the PC originals they sucked salty balls. Which is kind of the point I was leading up to with this version :)
Mashum
08/12/05 @ 16:43
#48
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Aww... I just need one excuse to buy a 360, is that too much to ask?? :(
Artemus
08/12/05 @ 17:00
#49
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Of course they were pretty good technical acheivements and all that, but side by side with the PC originals they sucked salty balls.

I'd say thats pretty harsh. The PS1 version really isn't all that different, but I get the point you were trying to make.
Xerx3s
08/12/05 @ 17:16
#50
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So, does Q2 that comes with this support coop or not? 4p split screen would be nice. If it does, i might be tempted to shell out some money for this when it goes down in price....

Has anyone bought this and played the Q2 part?

Q2 on the ninty64 was ace, dunno about the ps version, never played it. But id recon that it should be just as good....

Comments: 1-50 of 71 in total | next 50 »

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

X View gallery