Giant Bomb Review

142 Comments

Rage Review

4
  • PS3
  • PC
  • X360

Rage won't set new standards for game design, but if you want to drive and shoot in an incredible-looking wasteland, this is your game.

The shooting has a heavy, hard-hitting feel.

There's not a lot of depth in Rage's bone-dry wasteland, but there's plenty of variety. Coming from id Software, the company that's brought you two decades' worth of first-person shooter after straight-ahead first-person shooter, that's worth noting. The core shooting in Rage isn't especially original, but it is highly entertaining, and the shooting intermingles with arcade-style racing action and a thin layer of quasi-role-playing hooks to give you plenty to do in between the main story levels. This is meat-and-potatoes action game design with a few antiquated quirks, but it does what it does well enough--and looks legitimately stunning while doing it--to deliver a satisfying experience, all told.

It's impossible not to compare Rage to Fallout 3, not least because both games share the same publisher. But either way, the premise here is awfully familiar: Just prior to a global catastrophe, humanity buries a few lucky survivors in underground capsules, to emerge some time later and rebuild society. Sound familiar? Credit at least goes to id for coming up with an original apocalypse, in this case the real-life asteroid Apophis that may actually strike the Earth in 2036. A century after the asteroid strike, you're a cybernetically enhanced member of that program who emerges to find a world that's been rebuilt out of scrap and duct tape, with various bandit clans controlling different parts of the wasteland, a few good-hearted folks trying to eke out a hard-scrabble existence in between, and a cliched, mechanized regime keeping oppressive watch over the whole thing.

There's a staggering amount of detail packed into the game's environments.

There's room even in a familiar premise like this to explore new dramatic ideas, but Rage plays it as straight as possible with its story elements. Every character wears his or her intentions on their sleeves, and there's only one minor wrinkle in the plot that seems like it might go somewhere interesting, but then only seems to set up a potential sequel. The voice cast, featuring John Goodman leading a legion of familiar-sounding voiceover pros, at least does an admirable job bringing character to the people you interact with, and even if the things they're saying are usually bare justification to get you to the next action stage, it's at least a joy to watch them say it. Every line of dialogue in the game has a unique animation routine attached to it; the characters gesticulate and emote with the kind of detail that suggests a bunch of animators poring over every dialogue recording and mimicking the final output in a mirror to get those subtle human movements just right. Oddly enough, that detail actually goes a long way toward bringing the world to life and drawing you in. It's a minor point, but it also helps that the small number of characters in each friendly town have a habit of moving around a lot between missions. You don't really notice how odd it is that most video game characters stand in the exact same spot for the duration of an entire game until you see them break free and actually go stand in a different place once in a while.

Rage's driving combat is loose and fast-paced.

Anyway, aside from the initial setup, Rage is not Fallout. In fact, it's almost Fallout's direct opposite, strong in the areas where Fallout falters--fast action, lush visuals--and weak at doing what Fallout does well, which is character customization, exploration, and storytelling. You get the first hint of this the second you step out of your capsule and into the wasteland. Remember exiting Vault 101 and slowly panning across the vast landscape, and all the potential for adventure it held? Here, you're not outside 30 seconds before John Goodman is shooting a mutant off of you and yelling at you to get in his buggy so he can whisk you away to your first proper mission. The game takes a similarly fast-paced, streamlined approach to the weapon lineup (essentially the same one you've come to expect from all id games) and the crafting and looting, which respectively have you building useful combat items out of the component parts that are useful, and selling all the junk that isn't. It's not a bad thing these systems are so simplified, it's just the focus of the game to keep things moving expediently from one action sequence to the next without leaving you bogged down in menus.

Nearly all of id's games have just been shooters--run forward, blast everything that gets in your way, repeat in next level--and that sequence of events still forms the backbone of Rage. But instead of merely presenting a linear chain of levels joined end to end with loading screens, those levels are now connected more dynamically with a wasteland hub environment that you traverse in your Mad Max-style dilapidated vehicles. In between the story levels--which still roll out in one specific order--you can do some quick circuit races to earn upgrades for your cars, pick up some mercenary jobs from a bulletin board, or play a diverse little assortment of cash-generating minigames that includes a surprisingly complex, Magic: The Gathering-style card battler that ties into cards you collect throughout the game. Out in the wasteland, there's not much to discover outside of the places the main and side missions send you, though there's satisfying combat to be done with the local bandits, and there are a few trick jumps to hit here and there. Many, though not nearly all, of the side missions yield benefits like new item recipes that help flesh out the gameplay a bit.

Would you believe the minigames are actually a lot of fun?

I'm glad these diversionary activities are there, because they're all just entertaining enough to cleanse your palate if you want a break from the shooting missions. But still, shooting stuff is your primary activity, so it's a good thing Rage's combat hits as hard as it does. Par for an id game, all the weapons have a heavy, powerful feel, made a lot more pronounced by the varied, over-the-top ways enemies react to getting hit by them. The game has some of the best ragdoll physics in recent memory; the spindly lesser mutants will flip head over heels from a squarely placed shotgun blast, while the human enemies will believably go flying over a rail or slam face first into a wall if you hit them right. It's all kind of silly, action-movie stuff that probably won't do much for you if you aren't in the mood for a traditional shooter, but if you are, it's immensely satisfying. I got a lot of entertainment value out of the combat since all the weapons have multiple ammo types that are especially effective in specific situations, and engineering items like stationary turrets, a spider robot straight out of Doom 3, and the boomerang-like bladed wingstick give you a lot of options to play with. A lot of thought clearly went into the best interface to manage all of these weapons, ammo types, and gadgets. If I told you that you use both shoulder buttons, both analog sticks, and the d-pad to do so, you'd be justified in thinking it might be unwieldy. But it's actually quick and elegant. Most of the missions ultimately boil down to you shooting your way to the end of a map to hit a switch or pick up an item, but at least getting there is a lot of fun.

It's good at what it does, but Rage isn't without flaws. It lacks a modern checkpoint system, and only creates an auto-save the last time you loaded into a level, meaning you'll replay an entire mission if you die without saving in the middle. You'll probably only get burned by that system once before you learn to start making hard saves frequently, but man is it frustrating when it happens. Some of the enemy groups are also kind of ridiculous. Each clan of bandits is composed of two or three of the exact same guy, and all of them use exactly one voice actor per group, so you get the same silly British or Russian accent coming from a big mass of enemies that all look the same. The game has the sensibilities of a comic book or, you know, a video game, so that's not really worth getting hung up on, but it stood out to me initially.

Alternate ammo types and engineering doohickeys give you a lot of combat options.

Even if Rage were the worst game to come out in a long while, it would still arguably be the best-looking one. The sheer complexity of texture and detail packed into every one of the game's environments is nothing short of staggering, especially in the two town hubs that you'll return to again and again between missions. The vast richness of the wasteland also can't be overstated. This is one of the best-looking games available on consoles, as good-looking as most any Unreal Engine game, yet it runs at double the frame rate of those games. Seeing a game on aging console hardware that looks this good and runs this smoothly is almost surreal. To be fair, in all three versions, there's a noticeable amount of detailed texture pop-in when you quickly look in different directions, but it's only something you really notice when you look for it and try to make it appear; it doesn't stand out much when you're playing the game like you normally would. Setting that one quirk aside, you really need to see this game in motion, in person, to appreciate just how good it actually looks.

All three versions of the game have some sort of technical quirk, unfortunately. The 360 version looks better than the PS3 one and runs at a rock-solid 60 frames per second, but it ships on three discs and dropped me to the dashboard with an error every time I tried to swap them, requiring me to start the new disc back up and load a save to continue. The one-disc PS3 version suffers from a slightly lower (though still fully acceptable) frame rate at times, and the texture pop-in is slower and thus more prominent there. And, mindbogglingly, the PC version launched in a miserable state that rendered it unplayable on ATI cards, though a matter of hours later an emergency set of drivers seems to have things working fine on both brands of GPU. The PC version is naturally the sharpest one (though I saw an inordinate amount of tearing on our office PC setup), and it plays fine with the good old keyboard and mouse, though it's a testament to how good the console versions look and how well they play on a gamepad that the PC version is only marginally better in general.

Seriously, just look at this game.

You'll probably spend between 10 and 15 hours on the campaign here if you try to do everything there is to do; I ended up on the high end of that range due to obsessively looking for collectibles and, honestly, gawking repeatedly at how damn pretty everything is. There's also a decent two-player co-op mode that mostly repurposes levels from the story mode but changes the enemy distribution and tries to give the missions some context by couching them in light back story from the main game. (One mission tells how three giant stuffed mutant heads came to adorn the wall of the local watering hole, for instance.) There's also a four-player driving mode with a variety of objectives that lets you rank up and unlock new weapons and better cars. Though I had a good time with the driving combat in the campaign, I didn't have much desire to keep doing it against human players, so I didn't spend much time there. The co-op is a bigger draw, at least until you play through the handful of missions available.

Over the first couple of hours, you may find yourself coming to terms with the style of game Rage actually is, rather than the type of game you may have expected it to be based on some of its peripheral design elements. A deep and sprawling experience it's not, but as a focused, directed shooter with a few other things to do between the shooting, it hits the right notes. And damn does it look good doing it.

Brad Shoemaker on Google+
142 Comments
  • 142 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Posted by EthanielRain

I've been enjoying the game as a rental. Glad I didn't buy it though, can't really see ever playing through it more than once.

Posted by GiveUpNed

@afrofools said:

Who should I believe, you guys or ARS? After the last few times you guys screwed me over with your reviews I'll go with what they said. But it's funny how they said the characters stand still like cardboard cutouts and you say that they move around. I think reviews are not good guides when buying, and people should be able to work out whether a game is good or not without reading a review. At the same time I understand that people expect you to do reviews and would turn to other sources for them if you did not do them. I still enjoy some of the content on this site, and want you to know this is not a hateful rant. I think the underlying structure of the site is quite impressive, with your uses of web technologies etc. Also I would like to thank you for offering RSS feeds that enable me to get your premium video content through iTunes. Lastly, thank you Whiskey Media for pushing for a premium web over an ad-plastered one. But no thanks for expiring cookies ;)

|| END OF MY REVIEW OF YOU

Watch the quick look then...

Posted by EgoCheck616

@afrofools: If it helps I've played the game and the characters do actually move around. However it is clear that you refuse to listen to reason.

Posted by Cold_Wolven

I'll be waiting early next week to get my copy (that's what I get for wanting it cheaper). The disc swapping issue for the 360 version has me concerned, I'm hoping there's a fix for that.

Posted by StingingVelvet

More awesome 2011 textures!

Posted by EgoCheck616

@StingingVelvet said:

More awesome 2011 textures!

Upgrade your specs, bro. Looks nothing like that on my end.

Posted by StingingVelvet

@LordCmdrStryker said:

I can't believe people are bitching about a texture on some minor thing in the environment that people never look at. Good God, what has the world come to.

Those are just examples. The texture work is bad all around. As soon as I left the Ark in the opening that entire scene was filled with flat textures sporting no detail. If items don't convince you look at the ground:

Posted by StingingVelvet

@EgoCheck616 said:

Upgrade your specs, bro. Looks nothing like that on my end.

My "specs" are perfectly fine. This is how the game looks, you just haven't noticed. The game is made to look good when you're running through and not paying much attention. For a gamer like me who plays slow and looks around these low-res textures are everywhere.

Edited by Sackmanjones

Good lord you'd think this game was called Call of Duty with all the Rage attacking it.
 
Ya said rage, what of it..

Edited by jNerd

I love Brad's reviews. I can't wait to dig deeper into Rage.

P.S. It can't be understated how pretty this damn game is.

Posted by EgoCheck616

@StingingVelvet said:

@Xeirus said:

But you posted a phone.............. how could anyone take your serious?

I don't understand the issue. It was an example of the items strewn across the game world that look like crap.

It's people like you who make me hate myself for being a PC fan.

Posted by Chumm

Awful lot of chatter about the graphics, both in the review and in the comments. When did that become the standard by which we judge whether a game is worth buying and playing? I've not played Rage, but wow that quick look was a snoozer. If anything, good visuals in a boring game only make the boring less acceptable: It shows that considerable money and effort went into some part of the production of the game, while the rest of it plays like a broke ass Borderlands.

Posted by Sooty

The lack of depth is what puts me off playing it. I don't really want another mindless shooter, even if it does have some variation.

Posted by StingingVelvet

@EgoCheck616 said:

It's people like you who make me hate myself for being a PC fan.

I'm not a graphics whore man, but everything looking straight out of 1999 is a little disconcerting don't you think? It distracts me a lot, I'm sorry if that bothers you. Running up to a fence door in my mission only to see a big grey blob takes me right out of the game when the surrounding scenery looks more decent.

Just as an example I think relatively old looking games like Fallout New Vegas and Deus Ex Human Revolution look fine. I never complained about their graphics and I never made an issue of it. With this game being so praised for its visuals though, and with me thinking it looks terrible, I'm going to point it out. If you don't like it feel free to ignore me, rather than make snarky little internet machismo posts.

Posted by Xeirus

@RockyRaccoon37 said:

@StingingVelvet said:

There is a hilarious thread on the Steam forums showcasing the worst textures and the amazingly compressed looking floors and walls.

Yeah, that sounds like a real hoot.

Seems like every game that is touted as being pretty is always going to have lunatics who make it their mission to walk right up to everything in the game looking for blurry textures.

"YO DIS MOUND OF DIRT IN THE CORNER HERE LOOKS LIKE SUMTHIN FROM THE PS2. FAIL"

I approve this comment; Made my day.

Posted by dezvous

I find it quite insane that id would ship this game with the texture pop-in issues. I know it's apart of the engine and how it does it's thing, but that doesn't make it any better. How they didn't come up with a better way to do it, or better settings for it, is beyond me. It's a beautiful game without a doubt, but only when all the textures are fully loaded and that is rare. I'm just really quite surprised a team of professionals, highly regarded ones at that, felt it was okay to ship the game like this. Especially on the PS3. Figure something out.

Posted by MeatSim

Gotta play this at some point but I got lots of other games to play right now.

Posted by Marokai

Good review. I'm glad Brad takes a pretty balanced view on this game. Beneath all the projections of what people hoped this game would be, it seems it's just a shooter in the end. A good shooter, a pretty shooter, but still, just that.

Posted by FoxMulder

On the edge of buying this...but $60 and Batman and Uncharted coming out soon....I don't know what to do! I wish there was a demo!

Posted by PresidentOfJellybeans

Id of all companies, can't their pc game to work..... This is funny. I like how blame is being put on drivers for the pc version not working. Did ati or nvidia make the game? Why doesn't id do something to make the game work?

Posted by bybeach

UPS finally showed up. I'll install it tomorrow and see what kind of grief I'm facing. 2 570's sli.

Posted by lockwoodx

The best review I've seen Brad give in a long while.

Posted by EthanielRain

@FoxMulder said:

On the edge of buying this...but $60 and Batman and Uncharted coming out soon....I don't know what to do! I wish there was a demo!

Assuming $60 is a decent chunk of change to you, I'd strongly suggest renting it/borrowing it from a friend/waiting for the next "game drought" and buying it cheap. It's a perfectly fine game - perhaps even a great one - but doesn't have much depth to it. I expect to finish the campaign and co-op, get my fill of the multiplayer and return it within 3 days (for a cost of $4).

It's your call, but yeah...is one I would recommend playing, but wouldn't recommend buying at full price. Worst case scenario you fall in love with it and end up paying $64 (or whatever rentals are in your area) :)

Posted by Ktargo

Excellent review, Brad.

That last line in particular is such a perfect summary for someone trying to decide if the game is for them.

Giant Bomb's coverage of this game has been awesome. Between this review, the Quick Look, and the podcast talk, I don't think any of my questions were left unanswered. It looks great, I can't wait to play it.

Posted by Captain_Insano

@StingingVelvet said:

@LordCmdrStryker said:

I can't believe people are bitching about a texture on some minor thing in the environment that people never look at. Good God, what has the world come to.

Those are just examples. The texture work is bad all around. As soon as I left the Ark in the opening that entire scene was filled with flat textures sporting no detail. If items don't convince you look at the ground:

You're right....

That gun and arm DO look incredibly detailed.

Posted by gorkamorkaorka

Remember everyone, a post-apocalyptic setting wasn't invented until Fallout 3 came out.

Posted by TheHBK

Feels like they went for detail in some place and sacrificed in others. Still it looks like a great game to play. Not epic but smooth and so worth a buy when it hits the bargain bin and it probably will. I don't see too many people hyped because the multiplayer is not its main selling point. That is just business today.

Posted by Frumpa

@Xeirus said:

@StingingVelvet said:

I mean look at the textures in this supposedly impressive looking game:

I don't get it, are you mad the phone doesn't look better?

I get the feeling you're trolling, I don't know why.

I think he is trolling - from what I saw in the QL it looks awesome.

Posted by TorMasturba

Ah well, I don't have the money either way right now.

And not to be self-righteous or anything but I will possibly end up buying it on a Steam sale next summer.

Sorry id...

Posted by GiantF

To give this broken product anything more than 1/5 stars is BS. Seriously, I thought you guys were a little bit different, actually looking out for the consumer. I can see that I was wrong, just a bunch of fluff coming from your end. Watching that quick look even where you are all saying "oh yeah it looks great and keeps a steady 60 fps" when there is obviously a lot of problems going on there. I somehow doubt this review is for the PC too... given all the GLARING issues it's having. Id failed and GiantBomb failed by supporting this broken product. Probably doesn't mean much to you since I'm just some jack-off on the internet, but I would never pay a review site just to be taken for an idiot. GiantFluff.

Posted by Jayross

After reading this, Ars' and IGN's review of RAGE, I think I will take a pass.

Posted by Vodun

@GiantF: Bye bye! You won't be missed!

Posted by MaddProdigy

@StingingVelvet said:

The PC version only looks marginally better because it is a basement level PC port. Low-res textures, no graphics options, low FOV. It's not a testament to how good the console versions look, it's a testament to how much id let the PC fanbase down with a basic console port.

Also I can't believe this game gets such praise for its graphics. The textures are so extremely low res it looks like something from 2002. There is a hilarious thread on the Steam forums showcasing the worst textures and the amazingly compressed looking floors and walls. I guess when you play on a distant TV and run through the game all you see are pretty character models and canyons, but for those taking their time the game looks REALLY bad. Crysis 2, another console focused title in comparison, blows Rage away. Carmack got trounced in a big way.

lol taking PC fanboy-ing so seriously

Posted by RecallBerserk

The quick look and this review contradict each other. The same thing happened with Deus Ex too. Just what the fuck is going on?

Posted by ptys

It's a shame it's more shooter focused as many where hoping for a ground breaking RPG. If Id spent so much time on the pushing the visuals of this game on an Xbox, don't you think it's time we skipped all the clever tricks and visual sacrifices and just jumped into the next generation? I'm ready!

Posted by Korwin

@MaddProdigy said:

@StingingVelvet said:

The PC version only looks marginally better because it is a basement level PC port. Low-res textures, no graphics options, low FOV. It's not a testament to how good the console versions look, it's a testament to how much id let the PC fanbase down with a basic console port.

Also I can't believe this game gets such praise for its graphics. The textures are so extremely low res it looks like something from 2002. There is a hilarious thread on the Steam forums showcasing the worst textures and the amazingly compressed looking floors and walls. I guess when you play on a distant TV and run through the game all you see are pretty character models and canyons, but for those taking their time the game looks REALLY bad. Crysis 2, another console focused title in comparison, blows Rage away. Carmack got trounced in a big way.

lol taking PC fanboy-ing so seriously

Maybe, but he's also not wrong. The game cheats a lot to achieve it's frame rate on the console platforms and the signs of this become a lot more obvious when your playing at a much higher resolution. For instance quiet a good chunk of the objects in the environment are simply painted on, and the model detail on most things that aren't character is really quite low when compared to a number of other titles (normally a PC title would provided some level of model poly count scaling option, but it's not the case here). The game also forgo's a number of other modern rendering techniques such as dynamic lighting and HDR for some more old school methods such as pre-baked light maps to squeeze more out of the aging console hardware, it's a shame these sort of features couldn't be added for the PC release where those kind of trade off's aren't really necessary in a lot of cases.

From a technical standpoint this game is quite an achievement on the Xbox/PS3 and to be honest I would expect nothing less from iD's technology team, it's just rather disappointing that their traditional lead platform took a pretty large slug to get there.

Posted by Nefhril

On Friday I'm getting Rage! Thanks for mentioning the difference between 360 an Ps3, great review Brad!

Edited by atomic_dumpling
@PresidentOfJellybeans said:

Id of all companies, can't their pc game to work..... This is funny. I like how blame is being put on drivers for the pc version not working. Did ati or nvidia make the game? Why doesn't id do something to make the game work?

Well, it looks like AMD is to blame for this one, seing how they released not one, but two fixed drivers. AMD always sucked when it comes to their OpenGL support and now they finally hit a wall.
Posted by Eyz

This looks like yet another great fun and beautiful game from iD! Awesome! Can't wait to try it out!

Posted by xbob42

Yes, Brad, the game can be pretty, why is that the biggest point of the review, though?

Posted by Kartana

Please don't let Brad review games!

Edited by StingingVelvet

@Korwin said:

From a technical standpoint this game is quite an achievement on the Xbox/PS3 and to be honest I would expect nothing less from iD's technology team, it's just rather disappointing that their traditional lead platform took a pretty large slug to get there.

Exactly. And like I said in the quote, other multiplatform engines have done much better like Cryengine 3, which looks fantastic on all platforms including the PC. If the goal of Rage was to make a multiplatform engine that looks good everywhere they failed on the PC side (and the PS3 side from what I am hearing), which is especially a bummer considering id was a PC developer. This is nothing new though, Gearbox, Bethesda, Bioware... they have all gone to consoles as the main platform, and I don't even blame them; that's where the money is.

In any event using several tweaks really enhances the game. Not only do I have the FOV turned up but I now have 16xAF that actually looks right and I killed all the mouse smoothing. It's all launch options and its all on Steam forums, so take a gander. Once the game opens into larger areas the texture work becomes a lot less noticeable as well. It's all still really low-res for the most part, but in the bigger towns and canyons it's not nearly as noticeable.

Enjoying the game a lot more now with proper mouse control and paying less attention to the crappy textures.

Posted by CptBedlam

Great review, Brad. Score fits perfectly.

Posted by Astiaks

Seems the PS3 version has problems with loading textures 'n stuff like that. No problem, I'll put my dough aside for Dark Souls.

Posted by Antihippy

@RecallBerserk: What? Did you watch the quick look? Brad very clearly liked the game.

Posted by ChosenOne

It's disappointing to learn that the storytelling is weak. Then again, the same was true about Mirror's Edge but I got through that game because I really enjoyed the gameplay and visual style. So, I think I'll still give Rage a shot. So far this year I've only gotten great stories from Portal 2 and Deus EX: HR. There's still Uncharted 3, Skyrim, and Batman: Arkham City (I didn't play Witcher 2 and waiting for LA Noire to come to PC). Plus early next year there's Mass Effect 3 and Bioshock Ininifite, so I think I'm still in good shape.

Posted by Tennmuerti

I give the text of this review 5/5 , well done Brad, it was easy to read and informative.
 
@RecallBerserk said:

The quick look and this review contradict each other. The same thing happened with Deus Ex too. Just what the fuck is going on?

Where do you get that from? I didn't really see any contradiction, if anything both the QLs and the reviews raised the same points cons/pros, respectively.
Posted by Nardak

Otherwise it was an excellent review but I really dont understand Brad´s point about having to make "hard saves". Are those really the thing that prevents the game from being an enjoyable experience?

In PC based games "hard saves" are a natural part of the gameplay. In fact in my mind the so called automatic save points are the things that sometimes cause a lot of frustration for players. Especially if the save game points are far away from each other.

Posted by OldGuy
@Astiaks said:

Seems the PS3 version has problems with loading textures 'n stuff like that. No problem, I'll put my dough aside for Dark Souls.

And DS has some major frame rate problems...
 
Now if we're going with Rage=15ish hours, DS=80ish hours then you have something.
Edited by lordofultima

@GiantF said:

To give this broken product anything more than 1/5 stars is BS. Seriously, I thought you guys were a little bit different, actually looking out for the consumer. I can see that I was wrong, just a bunch of fluff coming from your end. Watching that quick look even where you are all saying "oh yeah it looks great and keeps a steady 60 fps" when there is obviously a lot of problems going on there. I somehow doubt this review is for the PC too... given all the GLARING issues it's having. Id failed and GiantBomb failed by supporting this broken product. Probably doesn't mean much to you since I'm just some jack-off on the internet, but I would never pay a review site just to be taken for an idiot. GiantFluff.

Game is not broken, the gameplay is fluid and really solid, it has double the length of your average campaign, looks fantastic on the 360, runs 60fps. Even the PC version, some people don't have problems with it at all...which is how all PC games work. Explain broken to me. GiantDouche.

  • 142 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3