 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Platforms PCXboxPlayStationNintendoGames ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games |
Game Forum / Action Games / Grand Theft Auto / May 2007Fate of the PS2?
I see that places like Target and Bestbuy are now selling PS2s for $130 (and eBay apparently has them for less). How long are (new) PS2s likely to remain available (how long were PS1s available once the PS2 came out)? I can't believe my PS2 is still truckin' with all the GTAing and Tombraidering I've done on it. Wondering if I should consider a back-up -- 'cause Cleve AIN'T jumping on the latest PS wagon this time. (I may not buy a PS3 till the PS FOUR comes out and I can get the PS3 for $130.) --cleve > I see that places like Target and Bestbuy are now selling PS2s for $130 (and > eBay apparently has them for less). How long are (new) PS2s likely to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > --cleve Still $130? You'd think they wouldn't be able to give PS2 away any more. I certainly haven't touched mine since getting a 360. =P (That's mostly due to the Live service on the 360 though - can't imagine doing without it any more.) Dunno how much longer PS2 will be supported. MS have all but dropped XBox support off the face of the planet (not that I care, as I never bought an original Xbox). I'd expect Sony to support the PS2 for longer though, as the price gap between the PS2 and PS3 is so HUGE. My advice for Cleve: Get a 360. Yeah they're pricey, yeah they >will< break, but at the moment it's the best choice IMO. I also don't need to mention GTA4, now do I. =) > My advice for Cleve: Get a 360. Yeah they're pricey, yeah they >will< > break, but at the moment it's the best choice IMO. I also don't need > to mention GTA4, now do I. =) <snippy snip> I decided a long time ago not to buy an XBox in any form.....and then Terry Donovan of Rockstar announced exclusive content for the XBox360's version of GTAIV. I'd *really* like to know just what they when by "special episodes", it doesn't seem right to have a game that will happily run on the XBox360 and PS3 but give one version more gameplay things. It's The Kinks' "Money-Go-Round" all over again :o( Cheers, Rob  Signature.__ __ |__ |__ .|__ __ | Rob White, Half Man Half Biscuit. | / \| \ | | || ||| /__\ | robthemod@googlemail.com | \__/|__/ |_|_|| |||__\___ | Wimbledon, London, England. "Do sugar cubes have dots or is that a dice I just put in my tea?" To the world you are somebody, but to somebody you are the world. >I'd *really* like to know just what they when by "special episodes", it >doesn't seem right to have a game that will happily run on the XBox360 >and PS3 but give one version more gameplay things. It's not right, no. I think it's Microsoft trying to get something back from all the years that the GTA series has had PS2 exclusivity, with the XBOX and PC version following very late. I think Microsoft would have tried their best to reverse the situation completely, but the episode content was the best result they could have realistically got. > I decided a long time ago not to buy an XBox in any form.....and then > Terry Donovan of Rockstar announced exclusive content for the XBox360's > version of GTAIV. Last I heard, the PS3 version will be getting exlcusive downloadable content of its own. Signature"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." - George W. Bush [August 5th, 2004] >> I decided a long time ago not to buy an XBox in any form.....and then >> Terry Donovan of Rockstar announced exclusive content for the XBox360's >> version of GTAIV. > > Last I heard, the PS3 version will be getting exlcusive downloadable > content of its own. I hope it's the same content for both systems. It would be assinine to lock out people from doing things because of what system they bought. (though in an ideal world the PC version would have both sets...) Anyone got a link for the original announcement of downloadable content? > My advice for Cleve: Get a 360. Yeah they're pricey, yeah they >will< > break, but at the moment it's the best choice IMO. I also don't need > to mention GTA4, now do I. =) Yeah, but I'm too heavily invested in PS games. And I'm really in a foul mood about pricey systems, these days. There's a limit, and this time Sony has surpassed it, for me (and so has any other system in a similar price range). I'm gonna join the "poor people" and wait until the PS3 price takes a major dive. --cleve >> My advice for Cleve: Get a 360. Yeah they're pricey, yeah they >will< >> break, but at the moment it's the best choice IMO. I also don't need [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >--cleve why, exactly, does being 'heavily invested in PS games" stop you buying a 360? you'll still have your ps2 and i'd hardly call the 360 a pricey system these days. Signaturegamertag: Chrisflynnuk http://live.xbox.com/member/Chrisflynnuk Current eBay auctions: http://tinyurl.com/hutcb 360, DS, PS2 and Saturn Games For Auction. >>> My advice for Cleve: Get a 360. Yeah they're pricey, yeah they >>> >will< break, but at the moment it's the best choice IMO. I also [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > you'll still have your ps2 and i'd hardly call the 360 a pricey system > these days. The 360 isn't pricey...when compared to the ps3. (perhaps the best use for a ps3, making a 360 look affordable ;-) However, it's still $400 for the decent system, and another $100 if you want wireless networking, and another $200 if you wanna play HD-dvd's (not my choice, but the ps3 does have blue ray built in as I understand it). Come to think of it, if you were to outfit a 360 to match the capabilities of a ps3 you'd wind up at about the same price. Doesn't the ps3 have wireless built in? and the blue ray support built in? One way or another $400 is still a lot of money for some people. (myself included) > why, exactly, does being 'heavily invested in PS games" stop you > buying a 360? > > you'll still have your ps2 and i'd hardly call the 360 a pricey system > these days. Well, my PS2 has a lot of miles on it. Ideally, I'd like a machine that can replace it and continue to play my PS2 (and One) games. --cleve > > why, exactly, does being 'heavily invested in PS games" stop you > > buying a 360? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > --cleve Yea you've got a point, but there's no guarantee the PS3 will be able to run all your PS2 games (certainly not the PSX ones imo). But what are you gonna do when GTA4 comes out? When the next proper (not TR1 v2) Tomb Raider comes out? If you get a 360, you'll still have your PS2 to play stuff on. Money aside, seems the best solution really. >Yea you've got a point, but there's no guarantee the PS3 will be able >to run all your PS2 games (certainly not the PSX ones imo). Isn't the PS3 stating backwards compatability via the memory card adaptor? Thought it was supposed to be an adaptor, for PS1 and PS2 memory cards. Still too expensive for me anyway, just for GTA:IV. > On 15 Apr 2007 22:38:08 -0700, "Bondi (Class-1)" > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Still too expensive for me anyway, just for GTA:IV. Dunno exactly - as I really don't care for the PS3 - but it's not the memory cards that are the issue. It's what games are supported that matters. And there I'm not sure you'll get 100% backwards compatibility with all PSX & PS2 games... Backwards compatibility is certainly not a given on the 360. But hey, my 2 PS2s ensure I've got 100% PS2/PSX compatibility! =) > Still too expensive for me anyway, just for GTA:IV. This reminds me of the idea I had to just get a Gamecube for the Resident Evil remake (And RE0). I never bothered really looking in to the games available, and was very surprised at the amount of decent, affordable games. Here's hoping the PS3 sorta follows suit. Cheers, Rob Signature.__ __ |__ |__ .|__ __ | Rob White, Half Man Half Biscuit. | / \| \ | | || ||| /__\ | robthemod@googlemail.com | \__/|__/ |_|_|| |||__\___ | Wimbledon, London, England. "Do sugar cubes have dots or is that a dice I just put in my tea?" To the world you are somebody, but to somebody you are the world. > But what are you gonna do when GTA4 comes out? > When the next proper (not TR1 v2) Tomb Raider comes out? Ignore the GTA4 threads. Play SA on my PS2. Seriously. Ain't bored yet. Maybe go back and play some VC, too (if I can stand a character that can't use his arms to climb or swim, after playing CJ). Go back and play the original TR1 again -- which is STILL fun. (It's amazing how little the pixely, low resolution matters; you re-adapt in minutes and then don't even notice. The importance of resolution is over-hyped. The real secret to a game is the game play.) Maybe join the PCers for GTA4, eventually (if my system meets the requirements). Life will go on. --cleve > > But what are you gonna do when GTA4 comes out? > > When the next proper (not TR1 v2) Tomb Raider comes out? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > --cleve Oh well OK, fair enough. At least you've still got a PC to run GTA and TR on. Though that might get costly too, seeing as h/w requirements continually increase and more games will be tied to Vista in the future (DX10 etc). Don't get that with consoles. I didn't recommend you the 360 for nuffink you know! =) > Oh well OK, fair enough. At least you've still got a PC to run GTA and > TR on. Though that might get costly too, seeing as h/w requirements > continually increase and more games will be tied to Vista in the > future (DX10 etc). Don't get that with consoles. I didn't recommend > you the 360 for nuffink you know! =) That seems like a daft thing to say. It's been rare (so far) that a game has been tied to o/s - typically games need a minimum hardware spec and it's that which is the limiting factor, for both PCs and consoles. Even so - with PCs, you can reduce the settings for most games so that they will play smoothly on the hardware you have. Not so with consoles. It's ridiculous to argue that a PC is a bad choice because the hardware requirements for games keeps increasing. Would you like to try and run GTA4 on your PS2? Is the "minimum spec" of a PS3 for that game any less of an upgrade than meeting the minimum spec on a PC? Updating a PC's hardware so that it will play a new game (e.g. GTA4) is _far_ cheaper than replacing your current console with a next-gen console. Don't get me wrong - I'm completely ambivalent about platform arguments - we have both PC and PS2 versions of GTA:SA in this house. I just find it hilarious that some people think that the PC upgrade argument means consoles are better. If you want Halo2 on your xbox, you're out of luck - you need to upgrade to a 360. If you want Halo2 to run on your PC, you'll need Vista and a shaders 4 capable video card. What's the difference? >> Oh well OK, fair enough. At least you've still got a PC to run GTA and >> TR on. Though that might get costly too, seeing as h/w requirements [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >upgrade to a 360. If you want Halo2 to run on your PC, you'll need Vista and >a shaders 4 capable video card. What's the difference? i presume you meant you'd need an xbox360 to run Halo3, not 2. anyway, a 4 year old console will still run new games. a 4 year old PC rarely would, certainly not at a high enough quality to be comparable to the console output, and chances are that more than just the graphics card would need to be upgraded. that's the difference, and that's the argument for console over pc really. to stay at the blleding edge of PC gaming, you'll need to be upgrading the hardware on a fairly regular basis, whereas with a console, it's a single outlay once ever 3 or 4 years. Signaturegamertag: Chrisflynnuk http://live.xbox.com/member/Chrisflynnuk Current eBay auctions: http://tinyurl.com/hutcb 360, DS, PS2 and Saturn Games For Auction. >>> Oh well OK, fair enough. At least you've still got a PC to run GTA >>> and TR on. Though that might get costly too, seeing as h/w [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > upgrading the hardware on a fairly regular basis, whereas with a > console, it's a single outlay once ever 3 or 4 years. To an extent, yes. However, I have kept my system able to run the latest games with only minor upgrades along the way (mostly unrelated to how they play games, more related to other things I am doing with it), and one major overhaul every 4ish years. Yes, to stay on the absolute cutting edge of technology you would have to be spending thousands of dollars a year on upgrades. But if you invest wisely at upgrade time you won't need to do anything for several years to keep up with the games that are coming out. And typically if you are willing to pop for another $200-$300 video card at the 3-4 year mark, you can get at least another 2-3 years out of a single machine. Naturally when Mickeysoft decides to drop another bloatware, sorry, new OS on us that changes the rules of the game a bit. The same thing happened to us when XP came out, there were all kinds of stories on how you weren't going to be able to use this hardware anymore and you needed that kind of hardware to even run XP. But, unless you were a really behind the times already then you had enough horsepower to run it. The only major difference with Vista is that dx10 needs a new kind of video card. Ultimately you don't really need a dx10 card to run Vista, just to run some of the newer games that are coming out for it. Personally I will switch to Vista at the same point that I changed to XP, when there is a compelling enough piece of software to justify the change. Same thing with consoles. I haven't really thought about getting a 360 or a ps3 yet because there hasn't been a game that I *had* to have that was only available on those systems. With the way prices are going on consoles anyway they are going to start offering upgrades to keep them current rather than making us buy a whole new system. Really a 360 or ps3 is only a fixed hardware PC anyway. With the ps3 going for around $700 it is already more expensive than the really cheap- o PC's, and only a few hundred behind a competative system. If you have a monitor to recycle I can put together a kick a.s gaming system for about $1000, if I skimped a bit on a few things I could probably do it for $700. At least for PC's the monitors are cheaper, a really good monitor will only set you back $300-$500. The cheapest HD tv's I have seen typically start at $500 and get ugly from there. Personally I see a good reason for both forms of gaming to exist side by side. It would be difficult for me to untangle my PC from my desk enough to stick it in the RV and use it while I am camping (done that with the ps2). It would be really difficult for me to do my taxes with a controller on my ps2-3-4-whatever. A fixed hardware platform *has* to be easier to develop for, you know exactly what kind of horsepower you are dealing with and you can push your game to the very edge of that in terms of performance. Ideally this also allows you to optimize your game to the very best possible performance. But, it would be much easier to truly break new ground and come up with a novel way of doing things if you don't really have any limitations on what power you have on tap. (John Carmack at id certainly isn't developing for the PC of today, he's aiming at the PC of 5 or 10 years from now). Controllers offer a lot of options right at your fingertips, but there is no real contest on whether that little analog stick or a mouse is a better aiming device (not to mention there are what, a dozen buttons on a controller and up to 100+ you could use on a keyboard). I guess I'm weird, I like to play GTA on both. I loved playing SA on the ps2, I enjoyed myself for months (and still go back to it on occasions). But oh lord I was happy to get the PC version so I could use a mouse for my aiming (made Zero's missions a snap, on the ps2 I found them nigh- impossible). Arguements can be made for both, and I am happy to have both kinds of gaming system in my life. Now if I could just figure out which console to get to play IV on... ;-) [his thoughts about PCs vs. consoles] Good thoughts about both. Thanks. --cleve > Yes, to stay on the absolute cutting edge of technology you would have to > be spending thousands of dollars a year on upgrades. But if you invest > wisely at upgrade time you won't need to do anything for several years to > keep up with the games that are coming out. And typically if you are > willing to pop for another $200-$300 video card at the 3-4 year mark, you > can get at least another 2-3 years out of a single machine. Reminds me of one of my Grandmother's favourite sayings: "I've had this broom 20 years, and in that time I've only needed to replace the head four times and the handle three times." (Only when she said it, there were the suitably inserted stereotypical Lancashire dialect modifications.) I hadn't bothered contibuting any more to the thread because while you put my point across more eloquently than I could, it's quite hard to argue a case if it's not what you do yourself. I'm nearly 40, so I don't "play" as much as I'd like - real life keeps getting in the way. That gives me the luxury of upgrading less frequently, with cheaper components, and playing older games that have been "shelved" for 12 months. Good example is SWAT4 - I bought it because it was ultra-cheap, installed it, but my GPU wasn't up to the job. It had to be played on the lowest possible settings, and even then there were failings (like the sniper dummy in the training area being invisible). Now, two years after it first came out, I've started playing it on a machine that does it justice but (relative to prices two years ago) is really cheap. That's the nice thing about being old. You don't have to impress anyone, so you can wait for the technology to catch up with your wallet rather than the other way around. Not being a console jock, I don't know whether I'd do the same thing (or similar) with non-PC games. Although the eye candy is nice, good gameplay will beat photo realism any day. It's one of the reasons Counter Strike: Source has never passed Counter Strike 1.6 in terms of volume of people playing online. I'd probably end up with a Wii or XBox or PS3 when the boxes are being sold off cheap and the games are ultra-cheap on eBay. > Although the eye candy is nice, good gameplay will beat photo realism any > day. Absolutely. I still love the first two Tomb Raiders. A few minutes of play, and I forget all about those big pixels. Don't even see 'em. --cleve > Oh well OK, fair enough. At least you've still got a PC to run GTA and > TR on. Though that might get costly too, seeing as h/w requirements > continually increase and more games will be tied to Vista in the > future (DX10 etc). Don't get that with consoles. I didn't recommend > you the 360 for nuffink you know! =) Thanks for the advice. I DO prefer a console, when it's within what I consider reason. I like the PS controller, and I like playing in the living room, on the TV. It feels more relaxing than sitting at my PC (if you can call holding stand-offs and fighting Ballas "relaxing"!). --cleve >I see that places like Target and Bestbuy are now selling PS2s for $130 (and >eBay apparently has them for less). How long are (new) PS2s likely to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >--cleve Both PS2 and XBox are reduced price now, at the GameSpot by my house, since Wii, XB360, PS3 out. Both around $100, refurbed below $100. Also, there are still games coming out, multi-format. Mercenaries 2 due out, same time as GTA:IV, will be multi-platform, PS2 included. Awesome. I'll be on my PS2 for years to come. L§ > Both PS2 and XBox are reduced price now, > at the GameSpot by my house, since Wii, XB360, PS3 out. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > will be multi-platform, PS2 included. > Awesome. I'll be on my PS2 for years to come. Me, too, I'm sure. Someone in the Tomb Raider group pointed out that Sony stopped producing PS _ONE_ units only last year! That's encouraging. I'm just worried about my PS2 dying and becoming irreplaceable in a couple of years. Sounds like maybe there's not much danger. --cleve >> Both PS2 and XBox are reduced price now, >> at the GameSpot by my house, since Wii, XB360, PS3 out. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > --cleve There are so many PS2's out there right now that it'll be a long time before they become even valuable, let alone irreplacable. I don't think it's something you need to worry about in the next couple of years... -- Bob >> Both PS2 and XBox are reduced price now, >> at the GameSpot by my house, since Wii, XB360, PS3 out. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >--cleve Well, I just pre-ordered Manhunt 2 for the PS2. Mercs 2 will be out on PS2 later this year. I saw a few others, but am not fanatical about those titles/manufacturers like I am for Rockstar, Pandemic, Konami, etc. I haven't tried GTAlll, VC, or SA on XBox, but that is primarily why I bought one, under $100. To practice the controller for XB360. MAN does Halo and Half-Life 2 suck on that console. Vehicle control, worst ever in the history of gaming. But my PS2 won't be retired anytime soon. No one else touches it, no kids, no problemo. So it's up to us to just maintain normal ops. Also, for whatever it's worth, and this is strange because I'm old and old fashioned..... I never use mine for DVD's or CD's. That is what my DVD player and CD player are for. :D > I never use mine for DVD's or CD's. I did. That was a big reason I jumped on the PS2 right away: it was my first DVD player. A couple of years ago, it began to get finicky about what movie and TV show DVDs it would play -- but it still plays the games faultlessly. --cleve > I did. That was a big reason I jumped on the PS2 right away: it was my > first DVD player. A couple of years ago, it began to get finicky about what > movie and TV show DVDs it would play -- but it still plays the games > faultlessly. Oddly enough, I still use my PS1 for playing music CDs. The PS2 refuses to play most of the albums I have which are on CDRs, the PS1 plays them without any hassle. CHeers, Rob Signature.__ __ |__ |__ .|__ __ | Rob White, Half Man Half Biscuit. | / \| \ | | || ||| /__\ | robthemod@googlemail.com | \__/|__/ |_|_|| |||__\___ | Wimbledon, London, England. "Do sugar cubes have dots or is that a dice I just put in my tea?" To the world you are somebody, but to somebody you are the world. >> I did. That was a big reason I jumped on the PS2 right away: it was >> my first DVD player. A couple of years ago, it began to get finicky [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > CHeers, > Rob I'd bet that's on purpose. I know the Dreamcast was simple to burn games for, I'd expect the ps1 to be similar (given the relative scarcity of burner drives when they first came out). It would be a logical step for Sony to arrange it that the ps2 doesn't play burnable media so they eliminate (or at least delay) some of the piracy of games and whatnot. > I'd bet that's on purpose. I know the Dreamcast was simple to burn games > for, I'd expect the ps1 to be similar (given the relative scarcity of > burner drives when they first came out). It would be a logical step for > Sony to arrange it that the ps2 doesn't play burnable media so they > eliminate (or at least delay) some of the piracy of games and whatnot. Maybe they did that for games, but my PS2 plays burned DVD's easily. They show up in black and white but if you record it on to a VHS tape it magically turns in to colour when you play it back from the tape! Cheers, Rob Signature.__ __ |__ |__ .|__ __ | Rob White, Half Man Half Biscuit. | / \| \ | | || ||| /__\ | robthemod@googlemail.com | \__/|__/ |_|_|| |||__\___ | Wimbledon, London, England. "Do sugar cubes have dots or is that a dice I just put in my tea?" To the world you are somebody, but to somebody you are the world. >> I'd bet that's on purpose. I know the Dreamcast was simple to burn games >> for, I'd expect the ps1 to be similar (given the relative scarcity of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >They show up in black and white but if you record it on to a VHS tape >it magically turns in to colour when you play it back from the tape! i guess that's because theyre ntsc dvd's? not got an rgb cable? (not sure if the rgb greenscreen only comes into effect with 'proper' dvds and not on burned ones, since they wont have macrovision or whatever on them) Signaturegamertag: Chrisflynnuk http://live.xbox.com/member/Chrisflynnuk Current eBay auctions: http://tinyurl.com/hutcb 360, DS, PS2 and Saturn Games For Auction. > i guess that's because theyre ntsc dvd's? I very much doubt it. The DVDs in question were burned on a Mac in this country, plus I'm not sure NTSC DVDs would play at all on a PAL system. > not got an rgb cable? (not sure if the rgb greenscreen only comes into > effect with 'proper' dvds and not on burned ones, since they wont have > macrovision or whatever on them) I've got the standard RGB component cable that came with the PS2. I really need to get a switcher as then I can have my Gamecube, PS1 and PS2 plugged in to the TV and the stereo for sound at the same time. I might try and make one actually, I've seen a guy on GameFAQs mention them in a few of his guides. Cheers, Rob Signature.__ __ |__ |__ .|__ __ | Rob White, Half Man Half Biscuit. | / \| \ | | || ||| /__\ | robthemod@googlemail.com | \__/|__/ |_|_|| |||__\___ | Wimbledon, London, England. "Do sugar cubes have dots or is that a dice I just put in my tea?" To the world you are somebody, but to somebody you are the world. >> i guess that's because theyre ntsc dvd's? > >I very much doubt it. The DVDs in question were burned on a Mac in this >country, plus I'm not sure NTSC DVDs would play at all on a PAL system. course they would. if the video is encoded at 29.97fps/60hz, it will be in ntsc format. the only reason a dvd player won't play a 'foreign' disc is if it's region locked. burned discs aren't, however, so they only time you;d find problems would be in how your tv decodes the signal. >> not got an rgb cable? (not sure if the rgb greenscreen only comes into >> effect with 'proper' dvds and not on burned ones, since they wont have [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >really need to get a switcher as then I can have my Gamecube, PS1 and >PS2 plugged in to the TV and the stereo for sound at the same time. er, the PS2 comes with a composite lead, not component. and it sure as heck isn't RGB. composite is the shittiest signal you'll get out of anything, other than bog-standard RF (normal aerial socket) >I might try and make one actually, I've seen a guy on GameFAQs mention >them in a few of his guides. more hassle than it's worth, you can buy a proper one for next to nowt these days. Signaturegamertag: Chrisflynnuk http://live.xbox.com/member/Chrisflynnuk Current eBay auctions: http://tinyurl.com/hutcb 360, DS, PS2 and Saturn Games For Auction. actually, after having just tested it, and RGB scart cable wouldnt solve your dvd problem as the PS2 dreaded greenscreen does come into effect, even with a dvdr. i'd still reccommend you getting one though, as the picture quality in your games will be noticeably better than the crappy blur-o-vision through composite. Signaturegamertag: Chrisflynnuk http://live.xbox.com/member/Chrisflynnuk Current eBay auctions: http://tinyurl.com/hutcb 360, DS, PS2 and Saturn Games For Auction. > Oddly enough, I still use my PS1 for playing music CDs. The PS2 refuses > to play most of the albums I have which are on CDRs, the PS1 plays them > without any hassle. ...which is, of course, the exact reason why the PS2 doesn't. :) Signature"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." - George W. Bush [August 5th, 2004] |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.