[QUOTE=MadPro119;51432705]Were talking about authenticity but we can't talk about what you are told to do and expected to do in these cities? Thats part of what makes an authentic experience, not just looking for a food source.[/QUOTE]
what was authentic about FO3 in that regards though? Like really? I remember that game pretty vividly, and pretty fondly, I have probably 300+ hours in it from Xbox 360 to my PC, it was literally my favourite game until FNV came out.
It was heavily flawed and lacked a lot of "authenticty". Fallout 4 was a decent game that lacked the RPG and story that the previous games enjoyed, but it did have it's own good things going for it, which world design and the "How does the world work" were part of.
Fallout 3 had the "How does this world work" thing completely absent from huge swathes of the game, and for me personally, that's why FNV beats the shit out of FO3. FO3 doesn't even attempt that. FNV, and FO4 both do.
Please respectfully retire the head writer. I know he's like a friend of the company or whatever and he's probably a genuinely great person but it's slowly killing the overall quality of all Beth original titles.
[editline]26th November 2016[/editline]
Something is clearly wrong internally though, not just writing. Bethesda games have this weird overall feeling of "Hey, this world and game-systems are engrossing and vastly entertaining to the player", while yet at the same time having the feeling of "I need about 21 mods minimum to make the game remotely playable and fun because it's bare on it's own."
[editline]26th November 2016[/editline]
No idea how Beth made both of those feelings happen at the same time, but that's a Beth game pretty much if you've gone this long without playing an ES or Fallout 3+.
It seems Bethesda's writer has big daddy issues, if FO3 and FO4's stories are anything to go by.
EDIT:
Also, he takes the lazy, terrible shortcut to "emotional storytelling" by having your character's child in distress. I don't care about Shaun, no matter how emphatic my voiced character might be about the matter. I'm more attached to a stray dog I found by a gas station.
Both Fallout 4 and Skyrim have this weird phenomena where you just don't want to actually explore because there's not actually anything to see.
The 'worldbuilding' really just amounts to an audiolog/note here and there next to a posed skeleton, pretty much everything else is the same identical looking dungeons filled with generic ghouls/bandits/raiders/falmer whatever
The falmer dungeons in skyrim were so exhausting to get through because there's zero variety and almost nothing of interest besides not-goblins to fight
Bethesda always had some management problems, throw in poor tools and engine into the mix, a weak writer, handful of bad decisions or lack of communication and that's what we get.
[editline]27th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Blooper Reel;51432814]Both Fallout 4 and Skyrim have this weird phenomena where you just don't want to actually explore because there's not actually anything to see.
The 'worldbuilding' really just amounts to an audiolog/note here and there next to a posed skeleton, pretty much everything else is the same identical looking dungeons filled with generic ghouls/bandits/raiders/falmer whatever
The falmer dungeons in skyrim were so exhausting to get through because there's zero variety and almost nothing of interest besides not-goblins to fight[/QUOTE]
The problem with dungeons in all games is simply how lazily designed they are, they are designed along the path, you run from chest to chest, open a lock here and there, it's all along corridors with nothing interesting going on, there are no vertical elements, you practically run through a loop or from point A to point B. There were small exceptions sometimes, but not much else.
[QUOTE=Simplemac3;51432573]i remember i immediately drew the concern from the news of the voiced protagonist that there'd be less choice and i was called paranoid
lel[/QUOTE]
Voiced protag and dialog wheels have been the absolute death of RPGs.
[QUOTE=27X;51432200]The takeaways are:
BGS is so insulated and PC that teams don't even fucking communicate between leads.
There is no such thing as criticism or hard feedback during or after the hardening phase at BGS.
The notion they rely on the community to literally fix their shit is literally true, not just a smarmy truism.
The Design Leads are not remotely hands on at all, despite being Leads.
They don't see railroading characters or players as a flaw despite the fact their signature products are [i]open world[/i].
They have the money to spend on VAs and iterate quest overlap until the cows come home for everything, they don't have the money to sublicense the tools they use so modders can make the best use of their framework, and thereby enhance their product exponentially for years to come; and somehow the modders stay with them anyway.
As a design lead all I can say to that is :rolleyes:
Sounds like some princesses need to step out of the ivory corner offices and get their elbows dirty again.[/QUOTE]
Where did you get any of this from the actual written interview? Especially the comment about PC teams?
The thing that really killed this game for me, was the focus on settlement building. We only got two and a half quest based DLCs. The rest were settlement building crap.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;51432396]Don't get me started on the world design for Fallout 4. Its such utter garbage compared to Fallout New Vegas and IMO even FO3. Lack of cities, lack of logistics, lack of towns, lack of memorability, lack of authenticity, etc.[/QUOTE]
[video=youtube;wvwlt4FqmS0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvwlt4FqmS0[/video]
The Settlement building would have been good if it didn't have such a fucking shit UI and wasn't so mind blowingly slow and boring to do.
[QUOTE=27X;51432200]
They have the money to spend on VAs and iterate quest overlap until the cows come home for everything, they don't have the money to sublicense the tools they use so modders can make the best use of their framework, and thereby enhance their product exponentially for years to come; and somehow the modders stay with them anyway.
As a design lead all I can say to that is :rolleyes:
Sounds like some princesses need to step out of the ivory corner offices and get their elbows dirty again.[/QUOTE]
Sub-licensing is not an option for many tools, or if they do then it's a pure % cut from game sales. Those tools and their contracts are fucking terrible (most you can't even just 'buy' -- you have to talk to a sales rep and they do a per-case pricing model) and already cost tens-or-hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The problem with a voiced protagonist is that it only works in RPGs that are focused on the protagonist. With Fallout the series usually focuses on the world instead. New Vegas was excellent because you didn't need to focus on yourself, just the world and the conflicts within. On the other hand the Witcher series is fantastic because Geralt is well written and you actually want to be him.
And as we all know Bethesda can't exactly write too well anymore, so making a voiced protagonist in the first place was already a bad idea. If they want to regain the respect and trust of their fans Bethesda needs to seriously reevaluate how they run things. If axing a few people means a better product then perhaps that is something they need to do.
Also they need to make things more user friendly if they insist on having the community bug test and patch the game for them. Or they could actually hire some QA and at least try to make a solid product.
[QUOTE=mooman1080;51432935]Voiced protag and dialog wheels have been the absolute death of RPGs.[/QUOTE]
I think it works in some games, like Mass Effect, where Shepherd has his own personality, which you tweak a little bit to make nicer/meaner.
But in a game like FO4, it makes no sense.
After having experienced a voiced protagonist, I can say that while it wasn't perfect, I feel like something would be missing without it now, it would just seem strange going back to silence because the conversation is audibly one-sided.
Though, I would say if it came down to it, it's not going to ruin the game for me one way or another. I'm not vehemently opposed to it like some other people are.
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;51432297]Fallout 4 was fantastic in my opinion. It's honestly my favorite and I feel alone.[/QUOTE]
You're not alone, dissent just happens to be very vocal about it. I spent more time playing it than I did all other Fallout games, and I don't make any apologies for that time spent. I like just about every Fallout game, but Fallout 4 is probably the one I've enjoyed the most to date. It's not perfect by any measure, but it was still enjoyable.
[QUOTE=Notanything;51433460]After having experienced a voiced protagonist, I can say that while it wasn't perfect, I feel like something would be missing without it now, it would just seem strange going back to silence because the conversation is audibly one-sided.
Though, I would say if it came down to it, it's not going to ruin the game for me one way or another. I'm not vehemently opposed to it like some other people are.
You're not alone, dissent just happens to be very vocal about it. I spent more time playing it than I did all other Fallout games, and I don't make any apologies for that time spent. I like just about every Fallout game, but Fallout 4 is probably the one I've enjoyed the most to date. It's not perfect by any measure, but it was still enjoyable.[/QUOTE]
Giving up the option for skill based checks and being able to to my character as I want then to be kinda ruins it for me.
I felt the better gunplay was a step in the right direction in fallout 4. But the melee is fucking awful, it's that same awkward sluggish combat from Skyrim, but even worse seeing as melee hits can stagger you if you're not wearing power armor.
Plus all suspension of disbelief and immersion went out the window for me when I tried smashing an unarmed bandit with my super sledge while I was wearing power armor, and he blocked it with his bare hands. Like what the hell guys
Honestly. The gunplay is better in that it feels like gunplay. After that though I'd place it in the same floaty island of ARMA.
Is better, but its still shit compared to better shooters.
I gotta say, while I like Fallout 4 I don't love it the way I did New Vegas. I feel that since New Vegas had Obsidian, a veteran and much beloved development team who also worked on the original Fallout franchise, it was worlds better than Fallout 4. Furthermore the DLC didn't just tack on some additional workshop items or a handful of new quests, they added a whole new side story to the game and brought you to unique lands offering a totally new experience. While I will admit Nuka-World and Far Harbor were somewhat of a return to this theme, they still fell short of the quality of the New Vegas DLCs in my opinion. Overall I don't think the game is bad, but it is certainly below the average quality you would expect in critical areas, which you wouldn't expect from Bethesda whose bread and butter are open world RPGs. All in all I would say my final verdict for Fallout 4 is a C, It did more than just barely pass, but it didn't feel as though Bethesda did their best.
The whole of Fallout 4 feels like it landed in a completely different [I]genre[/I] than they intended. It feels and plays more like a FPS with light RPG elements. Like Far Cry. They made good shooter mechanics then that was all they focused on the entire development cycle, and what do you know, they were left with what is in spirit an FPS.
The voice acting was a fucking travesty that ruined the dialogue and roleplaying. A voiced player character works for a character less defined by the player. Geralt for instance will always be a separate character. He can't be rewritten and the player merely controls what he does and what aspects of his personality are dominant.
Bethesda protagonists are [I]supposed[/I] to be blank slates. You give a minimum of context, ("You are a prisoner"), and let that context serve as a jumping off point for the player's own imagination. You are a prisoner is an end point to a million possible stories and it doesn't cage you at all. When it's no longer feasible for me to roleplay even another nationality, and my character comes pre-packaged with a generic white man voice and a "I am literally always talking like I just woke up" personality, as well as a military background and a wife and a child, you're really starting to put some unneeded clamps on me.
Speaking of roleplaying, the skill system also felt like it's succumbing to the encroaching blandness that began with Skyrim. My characters don't really feel unique to one another. Maybe it's because they will always talk in the same coffee needing white man voice no matter what I do, but I also feel like it's because the perk system is so unfocused. Your character in these two doesn't really seem to be bad at anything and will eventually become a god at everything. It feels counter-intuitive but yes, sometimes you [I]should[/I] give your player some limitations. I liked the class system in Oblivion because I knew if I picked a mage I was a better mage than a thief could be, and even if they started pushing to be a mage I was still going to get better at it faster.
Not to mention, the quests were fucking boring railroads. I never felt like I was changing much in terms of outcome, just experiencing a little theme park ride where I shoot stuff again and again and again. I was never called upon to have any particular skills. I went the speech route my first time around because dialogue in RPGs is always the main draw to me, only to find a speech system that sucked dick and mostly involved asking people for more money rather than learning about the world or changing people's minds. I hear it's better in Far Harbor but in the game proper, rarely if ever did my perks and abilities have an effect on [I]anything.[/I]
The settlement building was just awkward. I do love that it was included, but it takes up too much of the game while also not having enough depth to it. It's a really simplistic city sim game within a game and it suffers for both that and it's clunky interface and controls that make it really hard to build anything, especially anything that looks good. I've put several hours in to it and I'm not really sure I know how to make a simple building. It needed, I dunno, an isometric perspective, more fine placement, an interface that didn't make me want to stab my eyes out.
I dunno, Fallout 4 just frustrates me endlessly. It's not a bad game, but it's one of the biggest disappointments I've ever had in a game.
Fallout 4 is a weird case for me because I played the shit out of Skyrim, I played the shit out of New Vegas, I played the shit out of Fallout 3, and I played the shit out of Oblivion. Like, I usually get into all this shit. Hell, I've been playing a lot of Skyrim SE ever since that came out. I'm usually able to look past the games' flaws.
But I just couldn't with Fallout 4. I think that ironically by making such a strong story-focused experience like they intended, it just drove me away. Even at the start they my guy said "Nuka-Cola, my favorite," like what the fuck, you don't know that, your favorite is what I say it is. "I love my son," again, you don't know that.
I feel like by giving the protagonist a voice it ruined the magic of the game. I was no longer who I wanted to be, I had to be that specific guy or that specific girl. Which confuses me because I loved the hell out of Deus Ex and Human Revolution, games where you're playing as a specific character. I don't know why it bugs me here and now but it does.
On the plus side they did a lot to remove some of their trademark jank. Not all of it, but some. Gunplay felt right. Movement felt slightly better. Visuals weren't stellar but they finally looked almost contemporary for once.
Controversial, but I think that the perk and skill system overhaul was a step in the right direction. Having to arbitrarily dump points into things each level really didn't add anything in my opinion, especially when you want specific perks and you gotta keep track of each perk's level and skill requirements with a wiki page or something, oh and I hope you made the right skill allocation one level ago otherwise you aren't getting that perk you wanted and you are ostensibly forced to waste your perk, a limited resource, on something you'll never use. In 3 or New Vegas I put two points into the (Small) Guns skill and I become vaguely better at guns in an obscure way that is abstracted away to some invisible formula hidden in the game code. In Fallout 4 I put a perk point into Gunslinger and I know that I'm getting exactly 20% more damage with pistols. In 3 and New Vegas Hacking and Lockpicking only matters every 25 levels; every point in-between feels wasted. In 4 you just take the respective perk and it feels as though nothing is wasted. Progression isn't broken; there are still level locks. Build planning is still important; It is possible to get every perk in the game but most players aren't going to play long enough to get to that point so specialization is still critical, especially for 90% of your playtime.
That said I kinda hope they don't go in that direction for future Elder Scrolls releases because TES progression actually still makes sense; you actually have to perform the action to get better. It's abstract, sure, but it at least makes more sense and Skyrim's perk system still gives that sense of immediacy and specialization.
[QUOTE=mooman1080;51432935]Voiced protag and dialog wheels have been the absolute death of RPGs.[/QUOTE]
Witcher
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;51434299]Fallout 4 is a weird case for me because I played the shit out of Skyrim, I played the shit out of New Vegas, I played the shit out of Fallout 3, and I played the shit out of Oblivion. Like, I usually get into all this shit. Hell, I've been playing a lot of Skyrim SE ever since that came out. I'm usually able to look past the games' flaws.
But I just couldn't with Fallout 4. I think that ironically by making such a strong story-focused experience like they intended, it just drove me away. Even at the start they my guy said "Nuka-Cola, my favorite," like what the fuck, you don't know that, your favorite is what I say it is. "I love my son," again, you don't know that.
I feel like by giving the protagonist a voice it ruined the magic of the game. I was no longer who I wanted to be, I had to be that specific guy or that specific girl. Which confuses me because I loved the hell out of Deus Ex and Human Revolution, games where you're playing as a specific character. I don't know why it bugs me here and now but it does.
On the plus side they did a lot to remove some of their trademark jank. Not all of it, but some. Gunplay felt right. Movement felt slightly better. Visuals weren't stellar but they finally looked almost contemporary for once.
Controversial, but I think that the perk and skill system overhaul was a step in the right direction. Having to arbitrarily dump points into things each level really didn't add anything in my opinion, especially when you want specific perks and you gotta keep track of each perk's level and skill requirements with a wiki page or something, oh and I hope you made the right skill allocation one level ago otherwise you aren't getting that perk you wanted and you are ostensibly forced to waste your perk, a limited resource, on something you'll never use. In 3 or New Vegas I put two points into the (Small) Guns skill and I become vaguely better at guns in an obscure way that is abstracted away to some invisible formula hidden in the game code. In Fallout 4 I put a perk point into Gunslinger and I know that I'm getting exactly 20% more damage with pistols. In 3 and New Vegas Hacking and Lockpicking only matters every 25 levels; every point in-between feels wasted. In 4 you just take the respective perk and it feels as though nothing is wasted. Progression isn't broken; there are still level locks. Build planning is still important; It is possible to get every perk in the game but most players aren't going to play long enough to get to that point so specialization is still critical, especially for 90% of your playtime.
That said I kinda hope they don't go in that direction for future Elder Scrolls releases because TES progression actually still makes sense; you actually have to perform the action to get better. It's abstract, sure, but it at least makes more sense and Skyrim's perk system still gives that sense of immediacy and specialization.[/QUOTE]
I liked the pen an paper elements, it needed balancing and five tuning but it allowed for a broader control of your character verses the same bullshit your complaining about with the flat perks.
Also what, you could easily see every perk in the game on your first level.
[QUOTE=Kegan;51433602]I felt the better gunplay was a step in the right direction in fallout 4. But the melee is fucking awful, it's that same awkward sluggish combat from Skyrim, but even worse seeing as melee hits can stagger you if you're not wearing power armor.
Plus all suspension of disbelief and immersion went out the window for me when I tried smashing an unarmed bandit with my super sledge while I was wearing power armor, and he blocked it with his bare hands. Like what the hell guys[/QUOTE]
Melee isn't too horrible once you pretty much get the hang of how you need to play to make it work, unfortunately, since enemies tend to be a lot more competent, it pretty much means you either need to be in power armor 24/7, or pack lots of stimpacks and ensure you've got high endurance as the expected scenario tends to occur when you, a lone person with a melee weapon goes against dozens of [B]armed[/B] enemies. Moreso than in previous games.
I also feel melee isn't too bad on the basis that [B]unarmed got it worse.[/B] They seemed to pay more attention to melee and it's almost like they forgot unarmed was a thing and then they hurriedly created enough unarmed weapons you can count on one hand. To make it worse, none of those weapons work with power armor. It's a shame too, because unarmed is actually really fun when you get the hang of the counter system that only works in third person, but in sheer damage and combat viability, melee beats it.
But yeah, something about the hit detection for melee and unarmed is more awkward than it was in 3 and NV. Every once in a while in 3 and NV, you'd swing at somebody's face, and you'd end up hitting their arm or leg somehow, but in 4, that happens like 50% of the time if you're not completely up in their face tracking their every move. And if you're in third person, it's even harder to manage. Certainly makes stunning mods very useful so you can get plenty of free head shots.
[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;51433268]I think it works in some games, like Mass Effect, where Shepherd has his own personality, which you tweak a little bit to make nicer/meaner.[/QUOTE]
Shepard hardly has any personality though. Aside from Hale's outstanding performance as a renegade Shepard throughout all three games, Sheps are really just... blanks. And it kind of works most of the time because the game is world-driven so Shepard mostly just reacts to the events. It gives the player the ability to sort of construct PC's character by indirect means, that's very good. One major blow to possible Shepard's character arc is, well, them dying and never having any means of expressing what they feel about this unfortunate chain of events.
It could've worked in Fo4, in theory, if Bethesda has gone through with turning it into Mass Effect-style narrative-driven game, but instead these hacks decided to go for a personal story and eat a bag of dicks again. "The mysterious person named [i]Father[/i] (for no reason at all) is actually your [i]son[/i], get it? CLEVER!"
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;51434299]In Fallout 4 I put a perk point into Gunslinger and I know that I'm getting exactly 20% more damage with pistols. In 3 and New Vegas Hacking and Lockpicking only matters every 25 levels; every point in-between feels wasted. In 4 you just take the respective perk and it feels as though nothing is wasted.
[/QUOTE]
The entire level is wasted instead. In Fo3 and FoNV you took +20% more damage with a pistol by filling the bar [b]and[/b] a potentially interesting perk on top of it (in FoNV every two levels). Now you feel up your SPECIAL stat (which makes [b]zero fucking sense[/b] and devalues the SPECIAL to the level of skills in previous titles, gj Beth) and get access to the ability to make more damage with a particular gun and a feature every two perk levels.
[QUOTE=MightyLOLZOR;51433164]The thing that really killed this game for me, was the focus on settlement building. We only got two and a half quest based DLCs. The rest were settlement building crap.[/QUOTE]
Forget having a few interesting small towns with kooky cultures or a unique quest, you're stuck with fifty billion settlements with no personality
[QUOTE=Swilly;51434404]I liked the pen an paper elements, it needed balancing and five tuning but it allowed for a broader control of your character verses the same bullshit your complaining about with the flat perks.
Also what, you could easily see every perk in the game on your first level.[/QUOTE]
That's fine, but I feel like it's just an extra step. You dump a bunch of points into guns and some into sneak, or you dump a lot of perks into guns and some into sneak. It's the same damn thing in the end, just without the middle man. That broader sense of control always felt like a nebulous illusion to me. To me and, I wager, many other players, functionally the skill system was 90% just a method to ensure that perks could be purchased because the incremental changes in between levels for most skills were so small as to be virtually unnoticeable in practice, except for maybe certain weapon requirements, some speech checks, and lockpicking and hacking, stuff that FO4's perk system handles mostly identically.
Of course you can see all the perks at the start, which has nothing to do with my point. Now you're scrolling through a list of 88 perks at the start of the game and saying "Oh, let's see what perks unlock at every level, and let me just at level 1 quickly calculate how many points I need to spend in each level in order to make my projected path through the perks while also not being useless thanks to certain early investments."
Now, like I said, I played the shit out of these games. These systems are fine, truthfully. But Fallout 4 is a lot simpler and I appreciate that, and I feel like its design makes a lot more sense because putting 20 points or whatever into guns or getting a gun perk is the same damn thing. Simple isn't always a bad thing; it's easier to examine and take in all at once. Investing points in each level and being unsure if investments matched up with my perk plan, and being totally unable to decline the dialogue for later always made me uneasy. Especially when you can't refer to the perk list in New Vegas every other level up.
[editline]27th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=gudman;51434409]The entire level is wasted instead. In Fo3 and FoNV you took +20% more damage with a pistol by filling the bar [b]and[/b] a potentially interesting perk on top of it (in FoNV every two levels). Now you feel up your SPECIAL stat (which makes [b]zero fucking sense[/b] and devalues the SPECIAL to the level of skills in previous titles, gj Beth) and get access to the ability to make more damage with a particular gun and a feature every two perk levels.[/QUOTE]
I feel like the limit on the SPECIAL stats (which is not unlike Intense Training and SPECIAL requirements from perks in previous entries, mind you, in fact it's the same exact thing), serves as an intelligent limiting factor on your character's build. It forces specialization, and if you want to branch out you can choose to invest in a trait that you aren't specialized in, at the opportunity cost of not having some more useful, perhaps more immediately beneficial, perks immediately. This makes total sense to me and I think it's reasonable. Of course, in time you can build the perfect or nearly perfect character with most or all 10s kinda like in Fallout 3 and New Vegas, but that requires an absurd time sink.
[QUOTE=27X;51432200]...they don't have the money to sublicense the tools they use so modders can make the best use of their framework, and thereby enhance their product exponentially for years to come; and somehow the modders stay with them anyway.[/QUOTE]
Yeah good luck sub-licensing without cutting profits in half because the contracts are so terrible.
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;51434468]
I feel like the limit on the SPECIAL stats ([b]which is not unlike Intense Training and SPECIAL requirements from perks in previous entries, mind you, in fact it's the same exact thing[/b]), serves as an intelligent limiting factor on your character's build. It forces specialization, and if you want to branch out you can choose to invest in a trait that you aren't specialized in, at the opportunity cost of not having some more useful, perhaps more immediately beneficial, perks immediately. This makes total sense to me and I think it's reasonable. Of course, in time you can build the perfect or nearly perfect character with most or all 10s kinda like in Fallout 3 and New Vegas, but that requires an absurd time sink.[/QUOTE]
Exactly the same thing, yes. Except that you couldn't take that one more than 10 times (who would correct their SPECIAL in Fo4 this much anyway, but at least it has a limit) and considering that there's always more interesting perks (that mostly don't require progression in SPECIAL, just skills) it's much more of a consideration, esp. in New Vegas where you can only take the perk once every two levels. Fo3 and FoNV also had hard level caps, adding to the perceived meaningfulness of the decision.
"Perk-based" system does get rid of the middle man, but that was never the main problem with RPG mechanics to begin with. The worst offenders are still there (it being nonsensical and arbitrary), you just have less options per-level.
[QUOTE=SuperDuprKyle;51434316]Witcher[/QUOTE]
Witcher has a much more defined character. In that sense there isn't a problem, but for games like the elderscrolls series or fallout as it is, the player creates then acts out a character of their choosing. In this context limited choices and voice acting will always fail.
[QUOTE=mooman1080;51432935]Voiced protag and dialog wheels have been the absolute death of RPGs.[/QUOTE]
I categorically disagree with Mass Effect and Inquisition.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
