An inconvenient game?
by Mark Frohnmayer · 06/13/2007 (4:52 pm) · 42 comments
Looks like Microsoft teamed up with Games For Change to create a game design contest that steps beyond just good mechanics -- check it out. Brought to mind a conversation I had with Andy Schatz (of Pocketwatch fame) at GDC and the environmentally aware messages he's putting into his games.
How cool would it be to see a Torque X global warming game on XBLA? Hmm...
How cool would it be to see a Torque X global warming game on XBLA? Hmm...
About the author
#22
06/14/2007 (4:42 am)
I agree with Dallman. Poorly Xeroxed bullshit leaflet's are proven to be the best way to raise public awareness. This contest will result in nothing but useless fun and community-building. Damn the man!
#23
06/14/2007 (6:44 am)
I am 100% with Joshua and Chris. IMHO, Indie games should reflect and promote indie thoughts. We have enought corporations building capitalist games.
#24
Yes, I do think we all need to take care of the environment. But blaming it on cooperations and capitalism just tells me you are a socialist and should be in Sweden, not that your worried about the environment. Because some of the strongest powers that are fighting for the environment are cooperations. There are even those that do nothing but try and protect the environment (I think they went to far in my state but what the heck).
And about the global warming game thing. I just don't see how something that politically charged would be fun.
06/14/2007 (12:53 pm)
If you all think that capitalism and huge cooperations are so bad, please, stand up for what you believe, move to a third world country that has safe emittions and get back to me. (that is if you have internet)Yes, I do think we all need to take care of the environment. But blaming it on cooperations and capitalism just tells me you are a socialist and should be in Sweden, not that your worried about the environment. Because some of the strongest powers that are fighting for the environment are cooperations. There are even those that do nothing but try and protect the environment (I think they went to far in my state but what the heck).
And about the global warming game thing. I just don't see how something that politically charged would be fun.
#25
Now, let's dispense with the BS of companies being inherently evil. Companies are driven by people, and people may or may not have good intentions. If corporations are evil, then what does that say about Garage Games, which is a corporation? Am I evil because I own an LLC, which is a corporation? You may or may not be able to tell the intentions of the people in the company by the actions of the company, and the act of being a company does not automatically make one bad.
Microsoft is not a monolithic, single-celled organism (neither is any other collective group of people), and it is wrong to refer to them (or any other group) in such a way, as it promotes fear while discouraging understanding. Microsoft has thousands of employees, many of whom probably disagree with it's own policies, with some of those working to change things. And inside that subset there is inevitably a portion of people that are talented enough in their skillset to rise to positions of authority and responsibility. Microsoft also has many departments, and in those departments, people change position. So it goes to reason that, despite the past, there may be people in Microsoft who truly want to make a difference with the world by hosting this contest and trying to reach people who would otherwise not care about the issues.
Polarizing this to be something of "good vs evil" helps absolutely noone, and hurts many who would otherwise have been helped by the few individuals who, having been enlightened by seeing this game, have been inspired to action.
06/14/2007 (1:01 pm)
If GG is a corporation (which it is), and develops products for sale at a profit (which it does, however small the margin is), and aims to expand (which is does and has, what with the addition of members and the expansion of engine options), then does that make GG capitalist? I would say even moreso than larger companies, because GG is probably pressured not to waste resources as other companies can. Does that make GG evil? No, and I'm sure everyone here (hopefully) can agree with that.Now, let's dispense with the BS of companies being inherently evil. Companies are driven by people, and people may or may not have good intentions. If corporations are evil, then what does that say about Garage Games, which is a corporation? Am I evil because I own an LLC, which is a corporation? You may or may not be able to tell the intentions of the people in the company by the actions of the company, and the act of being a company does not automatically make one bad.
Microsoft is not a monolithic, single-celled organism (neither is any other collective group of people), and it is wrong to refer to them (or any other group) in such a way, as it promotes fear while discouraging understanding. Microsoft has thousands of employees, many of whom probably disagree with it's own policies, with some of those working to change things. And inside that subset there is inevitably a portion of people that are talented enough in their skillset to rise to positions of authority and responsibility. Microsoft also has many departments, and in those departments, people change position. So it goes to reason that, despite the past, there may be people in Microsoft who truly want to make a difference with the world by hosting this contest and trying to reach people who would otherwise not care about the issues.
Polarizing this to be something of "good vs evil" helps absolutely noone, and hurts many who would otherwise have been helped by the few individuals who, having been enlightened by seeing this game, have been inspired to action.
#26
You're evil because you're you! :)
06/14/2007 (1:52 pm)
You're not evil because you own an LLC, Ted.You're evil because you're you! :)
#27
Exactly my point ;)
06/14/2007 (2:01 pm)
Quote:You're not evil because you own an LLC, Ted.
You're evil because you're you! :)
Exactly my point ;)
#28
I remember when people pitched in to buy our bus driver / guard a bicycle, and later a water filter. It was amazing to see how much a little appropriate technology was able to make life better for him and his family -- I think that small companies enabling things like that are what Darian is trying to promote with Village: The Game. You may know more about it than I do, but from what I know, top-down corporate ventures often fail in 3rd world places like Africa -- I've seen some of the best success when things are grass-roots, but they often need enabling (education and materials) from outside sources.
You just seemed to slam them pretty hard, but from what I've seen first-hand, it really seems like what Village is trying to do is much more than just greenwashing.
Edit: Ted -- very well put. I think those are wise things to keep in mind.
06/14/2007 (2:35 pm)
Quote:As an aside, check out the politics behind another social problem video game called Village: The Game. That's another one loaded with irony. You have third world impoverishment that's driven by capitalism, and the solution the game offers to this problem? More capitalism! Build up industry in third world countries to solve the problems created by industry in wealthier countires! Brilliant.I dunno'. When my wife and I were in Africa last summer, it was really neat to see low-level capitalism at work. Anyone with a cell phone could set up a table and chair and make their own little payphone booth (they call those things "space to space") -- you could hardly walk two hundred yards without coming to one of those things -- it was a great way for people to make money on a small scale and help support themselves. The cellular phone has opened up a lot of doors in Africa, and is a wonderful example of appropriate technology helping people out, and making their lives better.
I remember when people pitched in to buy our bus driver / guard a bicycle, and later a water filter. It was amazing to see how much a little appropriate technology was able to make life better for him and his family -- I think that small companies enabling things like that are what Darian is trying to promote with Village: The Game. You may know more about it than I do, but from what I know, top-down corporate ventures often fail in 3rd world places like Africa -- I've seen some of the best success when things are grass-roots, but they often need enabling (education and materials) from outside sources.
You just seemed to slam them pretty hard, but from what I've seen first-hand, it really seems like what Village is trying to do is much more than just greenwashing.
Edit: Ted -- very well put. I think those are wise things to keep in mind.
#29
Well said.
@Joshua
Don't take this wrong, it is not a criticisim at all. But while you are talking anti-corp you work PR for GG and most of what you say about indie games on this website is to push sales and promote GG and GG Tech. And you do a wonderful job in my opinion. But, in this I think you are slightly missing the trees for the forest.
I agree with most of what you are saying, but I don't come to the final conclusion that we should pick a side. I grew up in church and went to seminary and volunteered as a minister for 2 years and I lived and breathed 'us against them' until one day I realised that 'them' is 'us' too. The worst thing in the world that anyone can do is 'demonise' or 'dehumanise' other people. It's simple and it allows people to justify slavery and genocide and racism and classism and sexism and even abuse of the environment. I agree that you can't stand by and let people bullshit uncontested but I don't think it's a good idea to just point a finger and say 'they are the bad guys'. Unless it's EA of course. :P
06/14/2007 (2:41 pm)
@Ted Southard Well said.
@Joshua
Don't take this wrong, it is not a criticisim at all. But while you are talking anti-corp you work PR for GG and most of what you say about indie games on this website is to push sales and promote GG and GG Tech. And you do a wonderful job in my opinion. But, in this I think you are slightly missing the trees for the forest.
I agree with most of what you are saying, but I don't come to the final conclusion that we should pick a side. I grew up in church and went to seminary and volunteered as a minister for 2 years and I lived and breathed 'us against them' until one day I realised that 'them' is 'us' too. The worst thing in the world that anyone can do is 'demonise' or 'dehumanise' other people. It's simple and it allows people to justify slavery and genocide and racism and classism and sexism and even abuse of the environment. I agree that you can't stand by and let people bullshit uncontested but I don't think it's a good idea to just point a finger and say 'they are the bad guys'. Unless it's EA of course. :P
#30
My original point was, and remains, that this contest is greenwashing by Microsoft to take advantage of a current hot topic and co-opt it. I've seen Microsoft from the inside and they do not care about the environment, they care about profit alone, and that is fine, that's what they were built to do.
I am not against capitalism in concept, I am against capitalism as it is practiced today, i.e. unchecked capitalism where the corporations line the pockets of politicians, get them elected, then have free reign to abuse the environment then turn around and spend millions on PR to cover it up. I am not against corporations, I am against corporate abuse and corporate control over everything including functions that should be served by our government. I am not against profit, I am against profit at the expense of the environment and human happiness. I am not "us against them," but your failure to understand the complexity of my position has you putting that position onto me. I'm not looking to convert anyone, I know my beliefs are considered radical, I just encourage you to think about motives and the bigger picture when corporations suddenly have environmental concerns and not have a zero-analysis kneejerk reaction of "oh, it's for the environment so it must be good." I believe this contest does more harm than good and there are those that disagree. That's fine but please don't twist my words. Further disclaimer, it goes without saying that any opinion expressed by a GG employee is not that of GG. And I would further add that GG's mission always was and has been to help indies, just like Andy Schatz's mission is to raise awareness of the environment, that both companies profit (necessarily just to survive) in no way makes them evil or changes the sincerity of their original mission, to suggest otherwise is absolutely insulting.
Again, all I'm saying is that this contest reeks of greenwashing, insincere concern for the sole purpose of corporate image gain.
06/14/2007 (7:24 pm)
Please don't drag GG into this, it's completely beside the point and you're grasping for straws at that point.My original point was, and remains, that this contest is greenwashing by Microsoft to take advantage of a current hot topic and co-opt it. I've seen Microsoft from the inside and they do not care about the environment, they care about profit alone, and that is fine, that's what they were built to do.
I am not against capitalism in concept, I am against capitalism as it is practiced today, i.e. unchecked capitalism where the corporations line the pockets of politicians, get them elected, then have free reign to abuse the environment then turn around and spend millions on PR to cover it up. I am not against corporations, I am against corporate abuse and corporate control over everything including functions that should be served by our government. I am not against profit, I am against profit at the expense of the environment and human happiness. I am not "us against them," but your failure to understand the complexity of my position has you putting that position onto me. I'm not looking to convert anyone, I know my beliefs are considered radical, I just encourage you to think about motives and the bigger picture when corporations suddenly have environmental concerns and not have a zero-analysis kneejerk reaction of "oh, it's for the environment so it must be good." I believe this contest does more harm than good and there are those that disagree. That's fine but please don't twist my words. Further disclaimer, it goes without saying that any opinion expressed by a GG employee is not that of GG. And I would further add that GG's mission always was and has been to help indies, just like Andy Schatz's mission is to raise awareness of the environment, that both companies profit (necessarily just to survive) in no way makes them evil or changes the sincerity of their original mission, to suggest otherwise is absolutely insulting.
Again, all I'm saying is that this contest reeks of greenwashing, insincere concern for the sole purpose of corporate image gain.
#31
It's hard, because the vote of the dollar is almost worth more than a vote in the polling booth.
[hypothetical] A customer is at the store, and there is a lamp made in a country that cares nothing for the environment, and not much more about human rights. Right next to it is a nearly identical lamp made in a country that is leading the way for emissions and human rights. The second lamp costs $30, and the first costs $25 (lower prices possible through exploitation of the environment and people).
On average, which will people buy? [/hypothetical]
There's a reason why Walmart is stocked so full of things made in China.
There's a reason why I don't shop at Walmart.
But who is driving Walmart's policies?
Is it the company?
Or is the customers?
If people wanted to buy things made in such a way as to support the environment and to fight human rights atrocities, stores would stock them -- stores stock what sell. To do otherwise is to put your employees on the unemployment line.
Until paying customers stop shouting "give me the cheapest possible thing and the world be damned!" then I see corporations as having their hands largely tied.
I see what you're saying about this contest smelling very tellingly like a greenwashing -- I think I would agree with you there. But perhaps the silver lining to this cloud is that customers can be educated a little bit, and learn more how their small purchase decisions have monumental effects.
Maybe I could enter a game about that. :)
--clint
06/14/2007 (7:48 pm)
Quote:Corporations are fictional entities that exist only as a legal construct on paper, they cannot care about the environment, and doing so is in opposition of what they were engineered for (profit).I think I would agree with you on this, Josh.
It's hard, because the vote of the dollar is almost worth more than a vote in the polling booth.
[hypothetical] A customer is at the store, and there is a lamp made in a country that cares nothing for the environment, and not much more about human rights. Right next to it is a nearly identical lamp made in a country that is leading the way for emissions and human rights. The second lamp costs $30, and the first costs $25 (lower prices possible through exploitation of the environment and people).
On average, which will people buy? [/hypothetical]
There's a reason why Walmart is stocked so full of things made in China.
There's a reason why I don't shop at Walmart.
But who is driving Walmart's policies?
Is it the company?
Or is the customers?
If people wanted to buy things made in such a way as to support the environment and to fight human rights atrocities, stores would stock them -- stores stock what sell. To do otherwise is to put your employees on the unemployment line.
Until paying customers stop shouting "give me the cheapest possible thing and the world be damned!" then I see corporations as having their hands largely tied.
I see what you're saying about this contest smelling very tellingly like a greenwashing -- I think I would agree with you there. But perhaps the silver lining to this cloud is that customers can be educated a little bit, and learn more how their small purchase decisions have monumental effects.
Maybe I could enter a game about that. :)
--clint
#32
You used to work for Microsoft. I see why this makes you sick now. Yeah, I've had my bad experiences working with certain companies too and seeing them act like Saints makes me sick as well.
I only been stiffed twice in my programming career. Both by charities. One worked for the goverment and the other was religous. Both decided they couldn't afford to pay me after they spent too much money traveling and promoting their causes at golf courses and beaches and parties and fine resteraunts. I will never work with another charity. That burned me hard. Especially since I had worked extra hard for both because I thought it was for a good cause.
06/14/2007 (8:22 pm)
@JoshuaYou used to work for Microsoft. I see why this makes you sick now. Yeah, I've had my bad experiences working with certain companies too and seeing them act like Saints makes me sick as well.
I only been stiffed twice in my programming career. Both by charities. One worked for the goverment and the other was religous. Both decided they couldn't afford to pay me after they spent too much money traveling and promoting their causes at golf courses and beaches and parties and fine resteraunts. I will never work with another charity. That burned me hard. Especially since I had worked extra hard for both because I thought it was for a good cause.
#33
06/14/2007 (9:13 pm)
@Clint, again my instinct is to question the bigger picture, and in your hypothetical example the question is, why is it that the person making the purchase decision has to "vote" with price as their primary decision factor rather than social responsibility? It's because on the hierarchy of needs, survival comes before feeling good about yourself. Millions of Americans work full-time, year-round, for poverty-level wages that force them to consider only the bottom dollar when making purchasing decisions as a matter of survival, not free choice. Somone with three jobs making ends meet isn't going to purchase fair-trade coffee, someone with enough money to not have the price difference impact them is. Wal-Mart is as successful as it has been because there's such a huge segment of our population to which every penny counts because they are in poverty despite working full time. They are not free to chose to purchase things elsewhere. And the irony is that very support of that company saving them money in the end only keeps them in poverty. Bit of a tangent from the greenwashing discussion, but warranted response.
#34
I lived in "communism" for a short while of my life. Got the impression it doesn`t work too well :)
06/14/2007 (11:25 pm)
I`m kind of interested what is the economic/political system that you propose as a capitalism replacement. Until you actually name one, I`m afraid, this all sounds like conversations in highschool dorms.I lived in "communism" for a short while of my life. Got the impression it doesn`t work too well :)
#35
That's the crux of it right there, as well as a possible solution, from my POV: If these companies want to do something that makes them out to be good guys, and there's a chance to educate a consumer group with some disposable money to a subject that they can then use to pressure said company into changing for the better, then why not utilize that very tool in order to effect change against itself?
That's my 2 cents.
Edit: Because some days I can't friggin' spell.
06/15/2007 (12:06 am)
@Josh: Really good point, and I'm glad you brought it up:Quote:Somone with three jobs making ends meet isn't going to purchase fair-trade coffee, someone with enough money to not have the price difference impact them is.
That's the crux of it right there, as well as a possible solution, from my POV: If these companies want to do something that makes them out to be good guys, and there's a chance to educate a consumer group with some disposable money to a subject that they can then use to pressure said company into changing for the better, then why not utilize that very tool in order to effect change against itself?
That's my 2 cents.
Edit: Because some days I can't friggin' spell.
#36
Although I do see the point that Josh is making I can't help but feeling that it's a good thing for MS and Games for Change to team up on this. Perhaps in the end it is mostly a marketing/PR ploy but it doesn't matter because they are supporting a seperate entity in Games for Change. That organization really is in this to make a difference in the world even if Microsoft is in it to make money.
The whole poverty discussion is a bit moot too. If you want to make it bigger than working for Wal-Mart in your life then push yourself to create something useful or take student loans out and go back to school so you can work for a better career. You make it sound like capitalism is holding people back when it has opened more doors than any financial structure in history. I don't think it's the end all be all but I fail to see how this contest is negative, even with that in mind. Furthermore, something to keep in mind is that there have always been class distictions in society, kings, queens, etc... In modern times we have filthy rich CEO's but that doesn't stop us from living the highest quality of life ever does it? To top it off you don't even have to have birthrights these days to become a filthy rich CEO ;)
Aside from all that people reserve the right at any time to make purchasing decisions, management decisions, and all lifestyle decisions with the best in mind for the greater good. That has always been the case and I don't think that you should even suggest or let people think for one second that a capitalists society should be any excuse from doing the right thing. To suggest such a thing is to state that the world is deterministic and that free will is an illusion. It's an excuse that has been used far to often in the past.
Regardless of your job, country, race, class, whatever ... you are always responsible for the greater good.
06/15/2007 (6:09 am)
I had to post on this!Although I do see the point that Josh is making I can't help but feeling that it's a good thing for MS and Games for Change to team up on this. Perhaps in the end it is mostly a marketing/PR ploy but it doesn't matter because they are supporting a seperate entity in Games for Change. That organization really is in this to make a difference in the world even if Microsoft is in it to make money.
The whole poverty discussion is a bit moot too. If you want to make it bigger than working for Wal-Mart in your life then push yourself to create something useful or take student loans out and go back to school so you can work for a better career. You make it sound like capitalism is holding people back when it has opened more doors than any financial structure in history. I don't think it's the end all be all but I fail to see how this contest is negative, even with that in mind. Furthermore, something to keep in mind is that there have always been class distictions in society, kings, queens, etc... In modern times we have filthy rich CEO's but that doesn't stop us from living the highest quality of life ever does it? To top it off you don't even have to have birthrights these days to become a filthy rich CEO ;)
Aside from all that people reserve the right at any time to make purchasing decisions, management decisions, and all lifestyle decisions with the best in mind for the greater good. That has always been the case and I don't think that you should even suggest or let people think for one second that a capitalists society should be any excuse from doing the right thing. To suggest such a thing is to state that the world is deterministic and that free will is an illusion. It's an excuse that has been used far to often in the past.
Regardless of your job, country, race, class, whatever ... you are always responsible for the greater good.
#37
06/15/2007 (7:41 am)
I saw "all natural" Cheetos at the grocery store the other day. Not some upstart organic brand either, actual Cheetos brand All Natural Cheddar Puffs. I couldn't believe my eyes.
#38
Some random thoughts that may or may not represent what I believe:
1. Corporations are people too. Or at least made up of people, many of whom probably honestly think that spreading the word about Global Climate Change is a good idea and are trying to do their part. One good way gamers can reduce their carbon footprint is to use less energy, either by using more energy-efficient devices (see this comparison of "next-gen" power consumption), or by playing less total time per day (for example, play 5 action-packed minutes of Marble Blast Ultra on the XBox 360 versus an hour of wii bowling) or by going on a bike ride.
2. It seems that most people, most of the time, generally speaking want themselves and their fellow people to live happily and in a fulfilled fashion, free of unnecessary suffering. Some even go so far as to declare such to be god-given rights.
3. If you think of laws as gameplay, is the semi-regulated globalized capitalist system the best "game" we as humans are capable of coming up with? What makes this kind of game "good". Is it when most of the "players" are having "fun"? Or is it a multiplayer game good when a small number of the players get to "win" and have "fun" and everyone else is a loser? Are global semi-regulated market capitalism and national centralized communism the only two possible ways we can organize the whole stuff-for-work game?
4. When a company is "BAD", should we hate them more if they try to become less bad? Like when Wal Mart encourages the purchase of energy-efficient bulbs (that have poisonous mercury in them, but A for effort! (ever heard of LEDs?) ). If they have a good message, people will like them more and therefore shop there and therefore they will get more business, which is BAD because Wal Mart is BAD, so Wal Mart doing anything remarkably in the direction of good must therefore be BAD. Wicked!
5. I'm not sure why I number my thoughts.
06/15/2007 (7:47 am)
Wow, who knew such a short .plan would generate such commentary?Some random thoughts that may or may not represent what I believe:
1. Corporations are people too. Or at least made up of people, many of whom probably honestly think that spreading the word about Global Climate Change is a good idea and are trying to do their part. One good way gamers can reduce their carbon footprint is to use less energy, either by using more energy-efficient devices (see this comparison of "next-gen" power consumption), or by playing less total time per day (for example, play 5 action-packed minutes of Marble Blast Ultra on the XBox 360 versus an hour of wii bowling) or by going on a bike ride.
2. It seems that most people, most of the time, generally speaking want themselves and their fellow people to live happily and in a fulfilled fashion, free of unnecessary suffering. Some even go so far as to declare such to be god-given rights.
3. If you think of laws as gameplay, is the semi-regulated globalized capitalist system the best "game" we as humans are capable of coming up with? What makes this kind of game "good". Is it when most of the "players" are having "fun"? Or is it a multiplayer game good when a small number of the players get to "win" and have "fun" and everyone else is a loser? Are global semi-regulated market capitalism and national centralized communism the only two possible ways we can organize the whole stuff-for-work game?
4. When a company is "BAD", should we hate them more if they try to become less bad? Like when Wal Mart encourages the purchase of energy-efficient bulbs (that have poisonous mercury in them, but A for effort! (ever heard of LEDs?) ). If they have a good message, people will like them more and therefore shop there and therefore they will get more business, which is BAD because Wal Mart is BAD, so Wal Mart doing anything remarkably in the direction of good must therefore be BAD. Wicked!
5. I'm not sure why I number my thoughts.
#39
That's pretty much what I think about this. I think that Games for a Change is probably doing a good thing and getting sponsered by Microsoft in exchange for Microsoft getting good PR. It's like local businesses sponsering little league in exchange for advertising.
The world is full of good and bad and sometimes you just gotta take the bad with the good. It's certainly a hell of a lot better than it's ever been in the history of humanity. The world has never been as good a place to live as it is now. Women are more free today than any time in history. Tell me that isn't by itself an amazing fucking giant leap forward for humanity. The idea that race shouldn't determine whether someone is your fried or enemy. Children not being allowed to work as laborers. Slavery is not legal. We're making great progress. If you look at the big picture you can see how things are getting better and better. Yeah, we take steps backwards sometimes, but for the most part, the world is growing.
06/15/2007 (3:47 pm)
Quote:...I can't help but feeling that it's a good thing for MS and Games for Change to team up on this. Perhaps in the end it is mostly a marketing/PR ploy but it doesn't matter because they are supporting a seperate entity in Games for Change. That organization really is in this to make a difference in the world even if Microsoft is in it to make money.
Quote:Corporations are people too. Or at least made up of people, many of whom probably honestly think that spreading the word about Global Climate Change is a good idea and are trying to do their part.
That's pretty much what I think about this. I think that Games for a Change is probably doing a good thing and getting sponsered by Microsoft in exchange for Microsoft getting good PR. It's like local businesses sponsering little league in exchange for advertising.
The world is full of good and bad and sometimes you just gotta take the bad with the good. It's certainly a hell of a lot better than it's ever been in the history of humanity. The world has never been as good a place to live as it is now. Women are more free today than any time in history. Tell me that isn't by itself an amazing fucking giant leap forward for humanity. The idea that race shouldn't determine whether someone is your fried or enemy. Children not being allowed to work as laborers. Slavery is not legal. We're making great progress. If you look at the big picture you can see how things are getting better and better. Yeah, we take steps backwards sometimes, but for the most part, the world is growing.
#40
Something Aweful: Photoshop Phriday -- Green Games
06/15/2007 (5:15 pm)
Blah blah...whatever...let me know when you all get to making some of these...Something Aweful: Photoshop Phriday -- Green Games
Torque 3D Owner Alan James
Won't bother beating my head against the wall any longer, but I'll leave you with two words and hope that some day you'll understand...
Friedrich Hayek
Good luck...