Jump to content
Science Forums

Challenge for Thinkers, Designers and creative individuals.


Recommended Posts

I would indeed object to the moving of the conceptualization stage of the design process. What I call the General Purpose Statement of the Game Purposal Document.

 

Post 25 is intended to illicit thought towards the general purpose that the game will serve as a internationally aimed media product. I wouldn't however mind if you contributed something towards finding a general purpose.

 

thank you for your time and consideration and keep up the good moderation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would indeed Object to the moving of the Conceptualization stage of the Design process. What I call the General Purpose Statement of the Game Purposal Document.

 

Post 25 is intended to illicit thought towards the general purpose that the game will serve as a internationally aimed media product. I wouldn't however mind if you contributed something towards finding a general purpose.

Wow – this conceptualization is much deeper than I’d imagined!

 

Though I feel a bit pedestrian, I’ll throw in my thought on video game design, from a player, not a programmer perspective.

 

One of my favorite games in recent years is the 2003 console game Metal Arms, which, despite it’s cutesy, juvenile art theme (eg: idle enemy “milbots” periodically emit small jets of “exhaust gas” – robot fart humor), is IMHO a first-rate 3rd-person shooter, among the best of its genre. What I most like, however, is how the robot theme improves the game’s physical plausibility.

 

As anyone who’s attempted the running, jumping, and other coordinated activities of the typical 1/3PS when suffering from trauma as minor as a broken finger or a nail through the foot can attest, the “damage models” of these games are ridiculously unrealistic (the 1990 airplane combat game Red Barron, where injury caused periods of “redding out” increasing in duration until you either managed to land your plane, or lost consciousness and died in the resulting crash, while not precisely a 1PS, is a notable exception). By replacing human beings with robots with breakable, replaceable parts, MA:GitS avoids this implausibility.

 

So, if you intend to make a physically plausible video game, either force your biological characters to suffer realistic effects of trauma (a boring consequence being that even minor damage requires the character to seek prompt safety, first aid, and days or weeks or recovery), or don’t have your characters be normal-human biological.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see where you are coming from. I have played many games at both ends of the spectrum, some you can take a multiple machine gun burst's and keep going and others one shot in any part of the body cripples you. While the second is realistic and introduces the need for proper stratergy when playing, it can be boring at times.

 

I think halo got around this well, by introducing the mjolnir armour with a rechargeable shield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll try to throw something in here, but note I'm throwing the context in *after* responding to the immediate request....

What would you say, if you would say anything?

Stop hating other people simply for who you think they are. Think about why you're better off working with those you hate than annihilating them. Pick the person you hate the most and think of at least 5 ways that they're like you. Think of 5 things they're better than you at doing. Think about how you might respect their abilities and how, in doing so they might do the same in return.

Why would you say that, and if you wouldn't say anything then why not?
Survival. We're all worse off if we hate each other. I want people to get along because its good for me and good for them.
How would you get your message across? Movie, Music, Poem, Painting, Comic Book, Speech, or Written upon the moon temporarily?
Given an unlimited production budget, a multimedia extravaganza including all of the above and more. The medium IS NOT the message: it just helps it get the point across to people more effectively.

 

Okay, commentary: Although I think the above actually sounds like a variation of BD's quotation of John Galt, there's an interesting issue that was brought up by post 25: everything before (and some after) indicates you're designing a "boys game", but this existential question allows me to point out that you can go in directions that do not match any of the games mentioned so far. The vast majority of games out there--and by definition, all first-person-shooters--are agressive, hate mongering games that are *not* about people getting along. I sexistly call these "boys games": I know girls who like them, but the vast majority do not.

 

Lets take a look at what girls like to play:

 

My kid loves her Barbie games. Sure some of its just "dress up," but her absolute favorite is Barbie Fashion Show: yes you do the outfits and the makeup, but you also layout the cat walk, direct the lighting, motions, music: you manage the whole show. How empowering! The Ice Skating game similarly has choosing the outfits, but mainly its about doing all the coreography. Like her mom (more in a minute), she also likes driving games, but one in particular that's interesting: She really loves Midtown Madness which is all about--as played by most uh, boys--driving recklessly, crashing into other cars, running over simulated pedestrians and avoiding the police. Do you know what she does with it? The cool challenge for her is leaving the police presence at maximum, and then proceeding to stay below the speed limit, stop at all the stop lights, and not run into anything. She recently got a Nintendo and plays nothing on it except Nintendogs.

 

I don't like video games that much and really only do driving sims. These are competitive, but they punish you severely for not at least figuring out how to "cooperate" with your fellow drivers. Sure you can bump draft (at least for Nascar; don't try it in F1!), but do it too hard or too recklessly and you go to the end of the longest line at *best*. Winning is *skill* not mauling out your opponent. The only other things I've played in the past have really been Wil Wright's Sim programs, which as he says, aren't "games" they're "toys" and ones where cooperation (even if it might take risk-taking to get better results) is the only thing that's really rewarded.

 

Are we seing a pattern here?

 

I'm sensing you guys are gonna go build a shoot-em-up, but here's some food for thought if you want to sell it to the other 50% of the population....

 

Right-side only, half round down on the track bar,

Buffy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually buffy, my intention is to make a game which appeals to human nature, regardless of gender. However I highly appreciate your input on this particular aspect of it.

 

Listed in my all time favorite games is the entire Sim universe, that is to say, all the games/toys that Will Wright made. Also is the Creatures "game", which is more accurately a simulation or an elaborate experiment in Artificial life. Take Harvest Moon, the only game that I know of which was made by Mennonites. You own a farm which you develop into a highly successful enterprise. The most violent part of which that I can think of is neglecting your cows.

 

I am not interested in a shallow shooter. I am not interested in a quick build, 15 minutes of fame shoot out sim. Hence the depth of the purpose statement.

 

Though I do not discourage discussion on what is/was right about various games, I do wish to stay on topic regarding conceptualization, and technical details though important to verisimilitude, are trivial to concept and the purpose statement of the game.

 

If we section the game off into Why, What and How, technical details are in the how section which is occupied by Craft and Surface, the shallow aspects of an expression.

 

So continue on, just keep an idea in mind. Remember a game is an artistic expression and will inevitably comment on the nature of existence. Though this concept is neglected in many games made today, the best have always had this in mind, the games aforementioned being prime examples of what games can be.

 

Listening patiently,

a Foolish Clown in a Zoot Suit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my favorite games in recent years is the 2003 console game Metal Arms, which, despite it’s cutesy, juvenile art theme (eg: idle enemy “milbots” periodically emit small jets of “exhaust gas” – robot fart humor), is IMHO a first-rate 3rd-person shooter, among the best of its genre. What I most like, however, is how the robot theme improves the game’s physical plausibility.

 

Just a quick note on this. What this is in concearn to on the hierarchy of design is the Surface of the game or perhaps the craft. It is primarily in concearn to the how-to aspect, and concearned less with the overall purpose of the game.

 

Now onward. This maybe more than five minutes in length, but it is close enough I think. I have read through it several times and I think it is actually closer to seven minutes. The form this message would take is as an animation depicting cooperation of many prominent figures and the breakdown of classes, creeds, colors, ideaologies, and genders. It would be towards representational imagery that supports the ideas outlined in the speech.

 

The reason for my message is the great melancholy that I feel deep in my soul when I read the news paper, watch tv, see a movie, play a game. It is because of my awareness of the people of the world as suffering. My experience of terrified individuals, of the many converstations in which I have had regarding the futility of voicing your message, and of changing the world for the better.

 

I would say this because I hope that it would give people a purpose, a reason for existing. I would say it because it has long built up in my person, as sneeze or a terrible itch in a spot I can not reach. I would say it because I am compelled by my own purpose to help others find their own purpose, and lacking an existing purpose create one for themselves.

 

I would say it to give hope to those who have none, and to show the world that even a lowly peasant such as myself can say something to the world if I only try.

 

Dear world,

 

I bear a message which was meant for you. This message is for the whole of the world, and is not something to be squandered or bickered over. It is a message of truth and though it maybe harsh at moments, and you may wish to shy away from it, I implore you to bear it to the end.

 

The state of things is such that we as a whole are sick. We use the obsolete tools of eon's past and shy away from the light of truth and reason. We know that we are sick, there is simply no denying it. We feel it at the core of our beings and we cannot ignore it any longer. We should not have ignored it in the first place, but I understand why it is that we did. We are afraid of what we might find if we actually look.

 

I have seen it and I know what it is that afflicts us so. We are sick with war, famine, poverty, and oppression. We divide ourselves and we die ashamed and alone. We know the cure for this, but we fear that, perhaps more so than we fear the sickness itself...

 

We are afraid, hurt, frustrated, disappointed, ashamed, disillusioned, and alienated. We want to know that in the next breath, if we will live. It's about knowing that we are safe from outside harm. Being loved and loving in turn both ways. It's about knowing who we are, and what we're doing, not only that by why we are doing it. It's about what the grand idea is that we search for in our daily existence. This is not the American dream, this is the human dream. Us undivided here asking the same questions.

 

So here I sit, my pen weeping onto the page. I bear the message of truth. Freedom is ours as is life itself if but only we look a little beyond ourselves. There are no bad guys in this game we play. There are no losers or winners. There are only players and they all are searching after the very things we are searching for ourselves. Some make bad choices and others make worse but we are all just trying to live this life we are given and we are all doing our best to move right along. To fix all our problems. This my beautiful world is what I am proposing here.

 

Fear not success, know that though the path is long and rugged, what lies along it and at the end of it is worth while. Know that if you never take the harder path, you will never know what it is that you are missing. For to have lost something, one must have had it in the first place, and to miss something one must first lose it.

 

It is time then to switch our paradigm from produce at all costs, to maximize our potential. It comes time to socialize our economic systems, provide food to those who are hungery, shelter to those who have none, work for those who are without, education for those who do not understand, medicine to those who are not well, clothing to those who are cold and naked, and communications for those who have no voice.

 

It comes time also to flatten our hierarchies, distribute our powers and responsibilities evenly. Long ago direct representation was impossible, however now with our advances in communications we can say what we think from across the face of the planet. We can represent ourselves, and our own interests.

 

The focus then of this dissertation is of individual empowerment. For a technologically advanced civilization we must cultivate constructive, integrated, self-actualized individuals. We must set our agenda collectively. We must come to know our collective purpose, and intent. Then we must act on it.

 

We are the only ones who can cure ourselves of our melancholy, pull ourselves out of the holes that we have dug ourselves into and clear the venom from our veins. Stand and be who we are without fear.

 

We are with the power of choice, and with it we have the responsibility to make the right choices. I do not presume to instruct you in the way things must be done, but rather leave the power of choice where it belongs. In your hands.

 

All that I ask of us is that we walk a righteous path, search out the truth, and understand ourselves so that we may make the choices that need to be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The element that is always missing in games (IMVO) is the stratagy of supply chains. In most cases when a game has an "economic" element it is overly simplistic. Essentially just there to support building your war machine. There are some exceptions to this. I would note 1602 AD and Stronghold Cruisader as good examples of games that demonstrate proper stratagy of economics. But they are still at their heart war games where your economy is there to build your war machine.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember a game is an artistic expression and will inevitably comment on the nature of existence. Though this concept is neglected in many games made today, the best have always had this in mind, the games afforementioned being prime examples of what games can be.

 

I disagree - I think that the primary purpose of a game (be it video or otherwise) is fun. This is an aspect that is too often lost on game designers/programmers/hardcore players. They get lost in graphics, gameplay, ingenuity, open-endedness and don't focus on the primary reason for games. A game should, above all else, be fun. It can be a lot of things other than that, but if a game is not fun to play, it is not a good game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A game should, above all else, be fun. It can be a lot of things other than that, but if a game is not fun to play, it is not a good game.

 

I would challenge you then to define what makes a game fun. Though fun is a simple concept with which to discuss in everyday converstation, it is highly circumspect when it comes to definitions and not terribly useful in practical application.

 

What I mean is can you design fun? I think not. People have their own ideas of what is fun and what is not. It is not therefore my job to tell people what is fun and how to have it. It is my job as a designer to do my best, to attend to the issues that the many people of the world have with this or that circumstance.

 

All I am is but a messager, seeking to write a message for the world.

 

the purpose of the question that I have asked and put forth for others to answer is to seek a general purpose for the game. Everything in my book has a purpose and the purpose of games, of toys and of converstation is a greater understanding. They are excercises and tools in the pursuit of purpose. They are surely children's play, but they are not exclusive to children. They are important, fundamental aspects of the human nature and our exploration into the very nature of the soul.

 

So if you can define for me what fun is, and how I would include it as a guiding focus of the game design process, I would greatly appreciate it. otherwise it is a fickle term, subject to each and every person's individual whims and would not give the focus nessessary for the design and implementation of a deeply entertaining game. My research into the subject would indicate that in the pursuit to make a game "fun", one often ends up with the Kitchen Sink problem, where the focus is blurred and the game lacks direction.

 

To me fun is something that falls out of a good game, that is it appears without cohersion or implicit design.

 

Do correct me if you think me wrong, and do provide clarity if you think me confused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the ultimate game to look at in terms of simple fun is Tetris. It is simple, understandable, easy to learn and difficult to master, addicting, and fun! People like to play it, even if the experiance never changes.

 

Fun is very difficult to define. It is easier to define what makes games not fun.

 

1 - Too difficult too quickly. While the level of difficulty desired is different for every gamer, this is one which I see often in the casual gamer.

 

2 - Too long, ends up being boring or eating up too much time. Now, I have been known to play games for up to 15 hours at a time, but that doesn't mean that a game should ever require long playing sessions, especially in single player. As a general rule of thumb, 20-35 minutes per player is fun. Beyond that and it can become tedious. Now, people will most likely play a game for longer than that, but they should have the option, often, to save, or pause, and walk away from the game.

 

3 - Too complex. A game can become very complex, but at its core it should be simple. Tetris. SimCity. Myst. Super Mario Brothers. All of these games are very simple at their core, but they can become complex with simple ideas. Tetris has seven different shapes that need to fit togeather. SimCity is a very simple design, but the interaction of the different elements causes a lot of comples nuances within your city. Myst is incredibly basic - you just walk around, but the enjoyment of exploring (and actually feeling like you're exploring) is great. Super Mario Brothers is a game where you run and jump - that's it (well, you shoot fireballs sometimes). And out of that simplicity comes a lot of different challenges to overcome. Also with simplicity is ease of use. A game should be simple to pick up and understand the controls.

 

I'm sure there are others that I'll think of, but I think that it is important that if at any point during a game's creation the game doesn't seem like it would be fun to play, then that needs to be fixed somehow.

 

EDIT: I forgot the most important one! The game needs to seem fair, above all else. The player, whether he or she wins or loses, needs to feel that they got a fair game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you have just put forth here, prgmdave, is what is called a performance specification. It says what the game should do without saying exactly how to go about doing it. It is related to though usually lower tier, that is form following function of, than concept.

 

Concept is developing the core purpose, premise or idea that is the content of the medium, in our case a game.

 

Form, which is part of what you have laid out here is of the second step of the design process. You lay out what the specific purpose of the game is, in a wide and decidedly abstract way. Allowing for creative endevours to still sweep in and fill in the blanks.

 

That being said, would anyone like to comment further on what the game should not be? What the more specific purpose of the game should be? Given what has been presented here so far?

 

Right now we are still only particularly interested in what the general and specific purpose of the game is. We are still developing the content of the game, without knowing the general or specific what or how of the game.

 

This process is one of developing focus, by taking what is and limiting it down to a manageable level. That is resolving the scope of the project by deduction.

 

Once we have both the general and specific purpose statements of the game we will then know more percisely the details that the design will need to address. So we start wide and narrow down as we go.

 

Know first why, from that what and how follow intuitively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fun is very difficult to define. It is easier to define what makes games not fun. …
Good observations, especially about fairness.

 

It’s also easier to explain why fun – or, for that matter, shallowness - is so difficult to define: these qualities are subjective, and highly so.

 

Buffy mentions that her “Barbie Fashion Show” is a favorite of her daughter. I’ve not played it, but suspect I wouldn’t find it fun, no matter how well conceived, designed, and implemented it is. Buffy, her daughter, and I all like realistic driving simulators where the object of the game is to drive clean lines and not hit anything. My son (23 years old) finds these games frustrating to the point that he can rarely finish a race. Pgrmdave digs Tetris. I did too, but after a period of interest in the 1990, haven’t felt much desire to play it or its variants. I like games with elaborate, soap opera-ish background stories established by frequent cutscenes. Many people find these irritating (even more so when they fail to pay attention, and are clueless as to how to succeed in subsequent gameplay!).

 

In following game rating polls, I’ve observed that games with many very high ratings usually have more very low ratings than ones that don’t, suggesting that for a game to be much liked by many, it must also be much disliked by many. (If you find a poll where this isn’t true, it’s evidence that the poll is a fabricated promotion of the game) This isn’t unique to video games, but appears to hold true for books, movies, and other non-interactive entertainments as well.

 

In short, “fun”, “good”, “deep”, “light”, etc. are very subjective.

 

So, I’d suggest that, before even conceptualizing a game, one needs to identify a target audience. Without a model of the person you intend will find the game enjoyable, you’re “conceptualizing in the dark”.

 

PS: Designing for a target audience doesn’t mean pandering to it. As Goethe wrote, art should “entertain, edify, enlighten, and uplift” - a tall order that one can’t meet purely by giving the audience what it wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I’d suggest that, before even conceptualizing a game, one needs to identify a target audience. Without a model of the person you intend will find the game enjoyable, you’re “conceptualizing in the dark”.

 

Indeed this is my intention. Though I may not have directly noted the relationship of the general proposition, intended to establish a direction, narrow the scope who we are speaking to, and to search out the target for our next set of questions. It is the implicit intention with the world message to identify the scope of our audiance. Obviously if one has a message of hope and purpose, then we are not speaking to the people who have these qualities already and our game need not appeal to this people, though perhaps it still will.

 

Furthermore it should be noted that it matters not if you have programming experience, or not. This is design of a game, and though the medium is specific to computers the overall concept is platform independent.

 

This is something anyone, from any walk of life can do. There is some useful lingo, and some established concepts, but they are only ment to guide. I've provided a great deal of information regarding the subject, so I highly encourage any kind of participation.

 

I know that we are going to seem extreamely off topic occasionally, and it won't be immediately obvious how one part connects to the other, but in the end it will make sense. Games are extreamely complex forms.

 

If those who are participating would like, we can move to the next step and find our specific concepts, and in doing so go about identifying our specific audiance. If we are to do this, we will need to figure out from our collected General Purpose Statements who specificly we are looking to deliver the message to and what the collective message is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

who specificly we are looking to deliver the message to and what the collective message is.

 

I think that it is this idea, that a game should tell a message, that I tend to think doesn't work well. A game is many things, but I don't think that the majority of games tell a message. To start out wanting to tell a message already leaps into a lot of different concepts, and runs the risk of seeming like a preaching game. Some games have clear messages, some have possible messages, and some have none. There was no clear message in Pong - it was just a game. In fact, I don't believe there are clear messages in the majority of sports games. The Sims has no clear message. There are some games with clear messages that are good, and some which aren't. Rather than start there, why not try to come up with an idea for a game that seems like it would be fun to play? It might be better to actually start with a basic genre, so as to limit what you are looking for (it seems like you're thinking of a FPS of some sort, rather than say a sports game, or an arcade game, or a driving game, or a strategy game).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ohh I hope we remember

the lessons we learned,

and instill in our children

the rights they have earned,

but until that time

when we start again,

until that moment,

that I call you friend...

 

I am asking you as a human being to serously think of one thing that is going to make this planet a better place to live in. Now, ask yourself why you can't do it, what is stopping you from doing it.

 

"Love the neighbor as thyself" - Jesus

"Desire is suffering" - Bhudda

"Never go up against a Sicilian when death is on the line!" - Wallace Shaun

 

Do not let your fire go out, spark by irreplaceable spark, in the hopeless swamps of the approximate, the not-quite, the not-yet, the not-at-all. Do not let the hero in your soul perish, in lonely frustration for the life you deserved, but have never been able to reach. Check your road and the nature of you battle. The world you desired can be won, it exists, it is real, it is possible, it's yours.

 

"But to win it requires your total dedication and a total break with the world of your past, with the doctrine that man is a sacrificial animal who exists for the pleasure of others. Fight for the value of your person. Fight for the value of your pride. Fight for the essence of that which is man: for his sovereign rational mind. Fight with the radiant certainty and the absolute rectitude of knowing that yours is the Morality of Life and that yours is the battle for any achievement, any value, any grandeur, any goodness, any joy that has ever existed on this earth.

Fear not success, know that though the path is long and rugged, what lies along it and at the end of it is worth while. Know that if you never take the harder path, you will never know what it is that you are missing. For to have lost something, one must have had it in the first place, and to miss something one must first lose it.

 

..........................................

 

We are with the power of choice, and with it we have the responsibility to make the right choices. I do not presume to instruct you in the way things must be done, but rather leave the power of choice where it belongs. In your hands.

 

All that I ask of us is that we walk a righteous path, search out the truth, and understand ourselves so that we may make the choices that need to be made.

 

Stop hating other people simply for who you think they are. Think about why you're better off working with those you hate than annihilating them. Pick the person you hate the most and think of at least 5 ways that they're like you. Think of 5 things they're better than you at doing. Think about how you might respect their abilities and how, in doing so they might do the same in return.

 

Our overall message would seem to me to be one of positive nature, with critism of the negatives, and apathetics of the world. It would seem to be a message of hope and of moral basis. Of certainty of self, and reflection, and inflection of others.

 

I would venture to say that our audiance is not those who are certain of themselves, whom treat others with respect, compassion, honesty, and concideration. We are looking at speaking straight to those who are stuck in a negative thinking mode.

 

I would ask what tools will we need to deliver this message in an interactive medium?

 

How would we go about building a game around this message?

What specificly are we trying to say and who are we saying it to?

 

While I wait for the rest of the replies to come in to the world message question, I'll dissect a few of the afforementioned games.

 

I welcome the dissection of other games but encourage the focus of the dissection to the core concepts, ideas, and purposes of the game and the niche(s) that the game fills.

 

The first game I would like to discuss as it's germain to my NPC AI concept is that of Creatures.

 

In the game you have a limited side scrolling world that loops back on itself. There are no transitions to other "levels" or anything like that. You have an incubator, Teaching Machine, toys, food, tools, and a few other things. You get a limited number of generic eggs from which to hatch Norns from.

 

Norns are the point of the game, your purpose is to nuture, educate, and protect your Norns so that they may grow up and eventually start families. Done right, your first Generation of Norns raises your second generation of Norns and so on.

 

The message that this game/experiement/toy has for me is one of the difficulty of raising an inquisitive being and the care with which one must take for new life, and old life.

 

What amazes me about the game is that you can actually teach your little artificial life forms language, and teach them what is good for them and what is bad. Done right you can teach them the name of things and what they're for. Take for instance the poisonious plants of Albia. Left unattended and uneducated, your norns will likely eat one of these, become sick, and possibly even die. Some will figure out these kind of things on their own but in general it is more adaptive to teach them what is good for them and what is not.

 

Which reminds me. Each Norn has vitals. They have needs and drives. They get hungery, sick, tired, happy, sad, lonely and a myriad of others status. This is the important part as it was what inspired me for the scheme of AI that I intend to use.

 

On top of having Vitals, each Norn has a Digital Genetic code which they can pass on to their children. They have the ability to mutate and develop both adaptive and maladaptive traits.

 

Then there is the subject of their personalities. I would never suggest beating your norn senselessly. It makes them withdrawn, timid and prone to harm. Also excessive negative enforcement results in a Norn that is violent and anti-social. Yes, you heard me, these poor little creatures not only learn language they learn behaviors. They develop and remember personalities. In Creatures 2 you can monitor their mental conditions, and see what areas of their "brains" they are using at a given time. I do believe you can even use a plugin tool to fire portions of their brains and give them biofeedback.

 

The game is deceptively simple, but extreamely nuanced. An amazing little game if you have the time to sit down and really examine how it all works. What I have discussed here is not the whole, it is but a scratch on the surface of this revolutionary game.

 

For more check out these links:

Creatures, Wiki

Creature Labs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...