MLB 2K11 Demo Impressions Roundtable

Feature Article

Submitted on: 03/04/2011 by Chris Sanner, Chase Becotte, Caley Roark, Christian McLeod

What are you impressions of the MLB 2K11 demo?

Chase Becotte: Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in.

Most of my initial thoughts about MLB 2K11 can be found in the preview I wrote a couple days ago, but this demo basically serves to cement a lot of those impressions.

I gave up on MLB 2K10 shortly after picking it up last year, but right now I don't foresee the same thing happening this year. The big three of fielding, hitting and pitching all feel improved, and the subtraction of rocket-armed outfielders and the addition of more defined skill levels for fielders helps to extinguish a lot of the fielding criticisms I had last year. I'm also liking that the AI pitchers are actually walking batters, and when I'm on the mound, I feel like I can unintentionally walk batters as well.

To keep it simple, while I don't think this game is shaping up to be a masterpiece, it does feel like the folks working on the series are finally going downhill rather than uphill.

Christian McLeod: For once, I'm with Chase. If you can look past some of its rough graphical and animation edges, the MLB 2K11 demo plays a very solid game of hardball.

Based on multiple games with the 2K11 demo, it's great to see that the game's development team took many of 2K10's biggest issues to heart. Fielding is still not as enjoyable as it should be in a baseball game -- still a bit too automatic feeling for my liking -- but I am loving the new throw meter. To be honest, I think it may be the best throw meter I have used in a baseball game to date.

On the hitting side of things, one thing that immediately jumped out to me was the hit variety, displayed beautifully via the new camera angle. In all the time I spent with the demo, I don't think I witnessed the same hit more than a few times. I was most impressed with some of the ball physics I saw, particularly one where a ball flew into center field after it rocketed off the pitcher's mound.

Yes, Miguel Tejada's face looks like a potato, and yes, I was scratching my head when my players refused to deviate from their 90-degree angled route while rounding the bases. Even so, I quite enjoyed my time with the 2K11 demo. Let's just say I would not be completely surprised if this game sells well -- I think it's going to be a lot of fun to play.

Caley Roark: I'm with you guys: I think there is a fun game of baseball buried somewhere in 2K11. However, I'm not sure the demo reflects that. I saw too many flaws in the demo to truly say that 2K11 has improved a great deal over 2K10. (For the record, I thought 2K10 was much better than 2K9.)

First, we have to look past the crazy graphics to enjoy the way it plays. Normally, I'm ok with that, but, for me, the demo just had way too many graphical oddities. The aforementioned 90-degree turns on the basepaths; the alien hybrid that is Josh Hamilton; the slowdown every time I hit a ball deep; the way players sort of "jump" between animations as if they just remembered they had something important to do; and recycled animations, like the seemingly fast-forwarded stare down after an inside pitch.

I would not say these are deal breakers, but they are hard to overlook, at least in a demo. I'm hoping that they are fixed, or at least become less noticeable, in the final build.

Beyond that, I love the presentation graphics and can't wait to hear the dynamic commentary layered on top of them. I'm getting used to the batting camera, which does a good job of letting you track the pitch all the way to the catcher's mitt. Unlike Christian, I'm not digging the in-play "hit" camera. I'd rather use a regular broadcast camera, but that's just me.

I did notice some incorrect base-running AI as well. With no outs and a man on first and third, the computer decided not to score as I turned a double play (in a scoreless game). During the instant replay, it looked like the runner just sort of froze in his secondary lead.

Simply put, I'm not seeing, at least from the demo, the jump in quality that made me appreciate 2K10.

Chris Sanner: If you are not as into realism as a hardcore baseball guy is, and if you are willing to overlook some pretty dumb AI moves, I think MLB 2K11 is going to be your type of baseball game. The Show can be a bit overwhelming to the casual baseball player, and I think 2K has wisely tried not to copy The Show's success verbatim.

However, there are problems with the game that hardcore baseball types will not be able to overlook. For instance, the Giants pulled Lincecum in the second inning when I scored two quick runs -- though this may have had something to do with the shortened game. I also found hitting to be easy, but a bump up in skill levels will fix that. Nevertheless, the meat and potatoes of the game are improved over last year in every way. As my cohorts have pointed out, fielding, hitting and pitching are all different and improved in several little nuanced ways.

In short, the casual baseball fan who just wants a fun game of hardball will face an interesting decision for once this spring. MLB 2K11 is quite fun, and a lot of the issues from last year have been ironed out. While others will pop up I'm sure -- it's the series' mantra at this point -- MLB 2K11 should be a solid option for those who just want to play a fun game of baseball.

Major League Baseball 2K11 Videos

Member Comments

# 41 ARMORALLL @ 03/04/11 05:15 PM

The guys at the roundtable must be on some kind or drugs. In The Show roundtable they talk about how they think its the same game as last year and after playing the 2K11 demo I thought these guys would atleast be able to tell that after minor improvements 2K11 still is not even close to The Show!

# 42 econoodle @ 03/04/11 05:39 PM

Why all the Show bashing/talk?
This is a roundtable about 2k's demo.

As usual, these articles are top notch.

There is something unique about 2k11 this year.
Still trying to put my finger on it.

# 43 pdawg17 @ 03/04/11 05:44 PM

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of course...I've tried to play the 2k11 demo 5-6 times now and I still don't see it...I only end up irritated with animations that slow me down or the fact that every other at-bat ends up as a soft line drive to an infielder...

I guess when a game is so bad (2k8-9), any improvements create excitement...

# 44 bigfnjoe96 @ 03/04/11 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by econoodle


	Why all the Show bashing/talk? This is a roundtable about 2k's demo. As usual, these articles are top notch. There is something unique about 2k11 this year. Still trying to put my finger on it.

It's uniqueness still lies in the way VC implements certain aspects of the game.

That is something no one can deny.

Sent from my Awesome Phone via tapatalk

# 45 ryan36 @ 03/04/11 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdawg17


	Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of course...I've tried to play the 2k11 demo 5-6 times now and I still don't see it...I only end up irritated with animations that slow me down or the fact that every other at-bat ends up as a soft line drive to an infielder... I guess when a game is so bad (2k8-9), any improvements create excitement...

Well 2k10 was a HUGE step. I really do think they spent this cycle perfecting 2k10- that's why there's no huge game changing features...those things you mentioned still frustrate me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigfnjoe96


	It's uniqueness still lies in the way VC implements certain aspects of the game. That is something no one can deny. Sent from my Awesome Phone via tapatalk

They do an EXCELLENT job in some areas...it is a very unique , fun game. The things that detract from the way they do certain things bug me...(all the meters , flashes, etc. for one) I think this will be a better title than 2k10. But 2k10 not having errors didn't bug me, lol. The progression was not an issue because I'd never get to free agency...I'd play 1 , 2,3 games at a time or so.

That's probably similar to how I'll play 2k11. It's not a day 1 purchase for me

# 46 ryan36 @ 03/04/11 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayhawker


	You might have wanted to mention that to Chris Sanner who instead of talking about the demo decided to use his opportunity to slam 2K11 as a casual game. He just felt the need to let us know that The Show was for the hardcore baseball fans. What did Sanner use support this opinion? the lifting of a starting pitcher in a three inning demo in which he admitted affected the AI. He doesn't believe that this is something we would see in the final product, and was not something we've seen before. It was completely outside the bounds of responsible editorial. And it directly led to all of the Show vs. 2K talk that ensured. I thought the other three did a great job summing up their opinions about the demo, and what it might mean in terms of a final product. But their work was undercut by someone that used the roundtable to promote Sony's PR spin.

Chris doesn't have a reason to support Sony's "PR spin" man. Come on. And if the game really is weighted that way -that the AI treats the 3rd like ninth- why aren't closers coming in for the 3rd?

I think you're right...the game probably saw the game as 2/3 done somehow, but if the game is measuring pitch counts this year, then that wouldn't necessarily matter. I think that it is fair to bring up a possible wonkiness with the AI to which that may or may not point- it's conjecture.

I DO think 2k has traditionally gone more casual, it's their flavor. It doesn't mean that imbeciles play 2k- it's just a design decision

# 47 stlstudios189 @ 03/04/11 06:00 PM

Man I dont know what it is but 2k9 was fun, 2k10 was 5xs better and 2k11 has me pumped

# 48 econoodle @ 03/04/11 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigfnjoe96


	It's uniqueness still lies in the way VC implements certain aspects of the game. That is something no one can deny. Sent from my Awesome Phone via tapatalk

yep.

the demo, even tho it's an old build, is solid if not unspectacular but keeps pulling me back to it.
having big fun.

# 49 ryan36 @ 03/04/11 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayhawker


	First, he admits that the shortened game probably affected that, just like everybody else that has played the demo. And if it was an actual concern, it still doesn't relate to this notion that 2K is a casual game. It would just be a broken element in a bad game. But no one believes that to be the case, including Sanner, since he dismissed it in the same sentence. He also claimed, and then dismissed the idea that hitting was kind of easy. But he admitted that bumping the difficulty would probably fix that, which has already been shown by folks that figured out how to play it on Hard. But his first and third paragraph were not about the demo at all. It was just him waxing on about how The show is overwhelming for the casual fan, but they may really appreciate 2K's casual style. It was a complete hatchet job, regardless of his motivations. It wasn't about the demo. It was about a need to call 2K a casual game, and The Show a more serious game. We never saw comments about 2K's game being casual until VC rolled out new ways to differentiate players and keep rating accurate in close to real time. Suddenly 2K is a casual game becasue it got more realistic? Sanner's take was not just poor, but it was disingenuous. He didn't support his backhanded attack on 2K with anything.

I said last year that 2k was a casual game. I think it's a mindshift over time from 2k7-2k9 where they were just obviously not sim in nearly any respect. Last year was a well-done game, that I think a casual fan , or someone who is looking for a new take on baseball gaming enjoyed.

I personally am not making the claim that this year's offering is less sim. I didn't see that claim made. It is more sim than last year. Everyone wants to tell the difference between players, hardcore OR casual.

I do not think however if you had to put 2k into a category "simulation" would be it. At least last year's. For my definition of "sim," it has to do with gameplay, trade AI , simulation engine, progression, etc...

None of which anyone has seen in action. I reserve judgement on the "simness" of 2k11. I refer to how hard people tried and tried to get 2k10 to be sim as an indication many gamers didn't think it was last year.

# 50 jeffy777 @ 03/04/11 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryan36


	Well 2k10 was a HUGE step. I really do think they spent this cycle perfecting 2k10- that's why there's no huge game changing features...those things you mentioned still frustrate me. They do an EXCELLENT job in some areas...it is a very unique , fun game. The things that detract from the way they do certain things bug me...(all the meters , flashes, etc. for one) I think this will be a better title than 2k10. But 2k10 not having errors didn't bug me, lol. The progression was not an issue because I'd never get to free agency...I'd play 1 , 2,3 games at a time or so. That's probably similar to how I'll play 2k11. It's not a day 1 purchase for me

I hear you on the meters and flashes.....But really all the recent baseball video games have arcadey looking meters. And for me personally if that's the most annoying part of the game, I'll be pretty happy. I'm glad VC/2K focused on gameplay first over graphics and visuals.

As for there being no huge game changing features, I'd say the new fielding, Dynamic player ratings, and reoccurring/nagging injuries are all pretty big.

Would it have been nice if VC had given the graphics and visuals a big overhaul this year? Sure, but if they could only focus on gameplay or visuals, I'd take gameplay every time.

# 51 BA2929 @ 03/04/11 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryan36


	And if the game really is weighted that way -that the AI treats the 3rd like ninth- why aren't closers coming in for the 3rd?

Brian Wilson came in for the Giants in a few games against me in the 3rd.

# 52 The Gamer @ 03/04/11 07:20 PM

I think its pretty interesting the thought that if you play the 2k series that you're not as hardcore, diehard baseball fan as those who play the Show. I'd be troubled to find a more ridiculous thought process.

# 53 jeffy777 @ 03/04/11 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryan36


	I do not think however if you had to put 2k into a category "simulation" would be it. At least last year's. For my definition of "sim," it has to do with gameplay, trade AI , simulation engine, progression, etc... None of which anyone has seen in action. I reserve judgement on the "simness" of 2k11. I refer to how hard people tried and tried to get 2k10 to be sim as an indication many gamers didn't think it was last year.

I'm not sure how much time you put in to 2K10, but I played 6 seasons of My Player, and the results were pretty sim, especially the hitting. For me, it had the best hitter vs. pitcher battles that I've seen in a baseball game (and I've played them all)....and the AI pitching was quite realistic (if you turn the pitch speed up). The fielding in My Player was pretty good too because it didnt have the assist that regular modes did. The simulation engine wasn't too bad either, though not perfect. But overall, I certainly get a decent sim experience from 2K10, and with changes I've seen in 2K11, it's looking and feeling like it will be even more sim this year.

# 54 SoxFan01605 @ 03/04/11 07:26 PM

Not the deepest roundtable IMO...I didn't feel like anything was added to the discussions that have already taken place in the demo impressions (and honestly, I felt this lacked some of the detail some guys provided there as well).

That said, I don't know that there is one specific thing you can point to that makes 2K11 feel better than 2K10, so maybe that's part of it. What I mean is, that the improvements in each area aren't overwhelming on their own, but FINALLY when I play the demo, the sum of it's parts seem to add up to baseball a lot more accurately than previous years (albeit based on a small and incomplete sample). For me at least, that's about as good a sign as any that VC has gotten things turned around (or at the very least, are well on their way) as previous games felt less cohesive.

As for the whom 2K caters too thing, I can kind of see how one would think the way it was brought up in the article, though I disagree with the conclusion. The "casual game" comment about 2K is nothing new and the game has more of a "loose" feel to it than it's competition. I don't think "hardcore baseball" vs "casual baseball" is the disconnect though. I thinks it's more in line with the type of experience you're looking for from a video game and how each game approaches drawing people in.

I think as a video game, 2K plays at a faster, more action-oriented clip. I hesitate to label it "arcade" because it's not an over-the-top caricature of the sport like an NBA Jam or The Bigs. It has not to this point, however, been presented as a strong sim, but more a "pick up and play" experience. Now, that's not to say it can't be a good simulation experience, and I feel with many of the fixes for 2K11, we might see just that (and even in 2K10, with some tweaking, you could get a solid base going). It has certainly made a steady move back in that direction over the last few years.

2K baseball engages you through it's control scheme in a way that can draw you in on it's own merits. It plays more like a video game first, baseball second. Again, that's not to say it can't or doesn't represent the sport (and it's also not to say that certain baseball aspects like stat tracking or scouting, for example, aren't better represented)...just that it's appeal isn't primarily how the sport is represented, but how you, as a gamer/baseball fan, interact with it.

The gripe people usually have with The Show is that it plays at a slower, more deliberate pace. It tries to get your attention as a baseball fan first and not so much by how you interact with it. A lot of it's features are designed to immerse you in the details and nuance of the sport rather than create excitement through a secondary experience or via control scheme. It's kind of like it's operating under the premise of the sport being the draw, when 2K/VC's focus appears to be trying to draw the user to the sport. One could fairly argue a good case for either approach (innovation vs consistency; control vs derivation, etc), but that's kind of the point-it's not really about one being better suited to "hardcore" baseball fans than the other as that's 100% subjective. It's more about the differences in how the games each attempt to draw in their respective fans.

# 55 thundergatti @ 03/04/11 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryan36


	I said last year that 2k was a casual game. I think it's a mindshift over time from 2k7-2k9 where they were just obviously not sim in nearly any respect. Last year was a well-done game, that I think a casual fan , or someone who is looking for a new take on baseball gaming enjoyed. I personally am not making the claim that this year's offering is less sim. I didn't see that claim made. It is more sim than last year. Everyone wants to tell the difference between players, hardcore OR casual. I do not think however if you had to put 2k into a category "simulation" would be it. At least last year's. For my definition of "sim," it has to do with gameplay, trade AI , simulation engine, progression, etc... None of which anyone has seen in action. I reserve judgement on the "simness" of 2k11. I refer to how hard people tried and tried to get 2k10 to be sim as an indication many gamers didn't think it was last year.

I'm beginning to think that, just like politics, the voices at the extremes have commandeered and have come to dominate the discussion.

There are partisans on both sides, professing their cause is more "sim." In my opinion, however, as long as both games have ball "physics" that regularly lead to outside fastballs being pulled for HRs, or inside pitches blasted and skied for opposite field HRs, "more sim" is basically a self-appointed title without any real substance.

# 56 jeffy777 @ 03/04/11 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoxFan01605


	Not the deepest roundtable IMO...I didn't feel like anything was added to the discussions that have already taken place in the demo impressions (and honestly, I felt this lacked some of the detail some guys provided there as well). That said, I don't know that there is one specific thing you can point to that makes 2K11 feel better than 2K10, so maybe that's part of it. What I mean is, that the improvements in each area aren't overwhelming on their own, but FINALLY when I play the demo, the sum of it's parts seem to add up to baseball a lot more accurately than previous years (albeit based on a small and incomplete sample). For me at least, that's about as good a sign as any that VC has gotten things turned around (or at the very least, are well on their way) as previous games felt less cohesive. As for the whom 2K caters too thing, I can kind of see how one would think the way it was brought up in the article, though I disagree with the conclusion. The "casual game" comment about 2K is nothing new and the game has more of a "loose" feel to it than it's competition. I don't think "hardcore baseball" vs "casual baseball" is the disconnect though. I thinks it's more in line with the type of experience you're looking for from a video game and how each game approaches drawing people in. I think as a video game, 2K plays at a faster, more action-oriented clip. I hesitate to label it "arcade" because it's not an over-the-top caricature of the sport like an NBA Jam or The Bigs. It has not to this point, however, been presented as a strong sim, but more a "pick up and play" experience. Now, that's not to say it can't be a good simulation experience, and I feel with many of the fixes for 2K11, we might see just that (and even in 2K10, with some tweaking, you could get a solid base going). It has certainly made a steady move back in that direction over the last few years. 2K baseball engages you through it's control scheme in a way that can draw you in on it's own merits. It plays more like a video game first, baseball second. Again, that's not to say it can't or doesn't represent the sport (and it's also not to say that certain baseball aspects like stat tracking or scouting, for example, aren't better represented)...just that it's appeal isn't primarily how the sport is represented, but how you, as a gamer/baseball fan, interact with it. The gripe people usually have with The Show is that it plays at a slower, more deliberate pace. It tries to get your attention as a baseball fan first and not so much by how you interact with it. A lot of it's features are designed to immerse you in the details and nuance of the sport rather than create excitement through a secondary experience or via control scheme. It's kind of like it's operating under the premise of the sport being the draw, when 2K/VC's focus appears to be trying to draw the user to the sport. One could fairly argue a good case for either approach (innovation vs consistency; control vs derivation, etc), but that's kind of the point-it's not really about one being better suited to "hardcore" baseball fans than the other as that's 100% subjective. It's more about the differences in how the games each attempt to draw in their respective fans.

Good post man.

# 57 walhalla @ 03/04/11 08:19 PM

Okay dear reviewers, how much did they (2K sports) pay you? To be honest, this game IS BAD!

# 58 rheth @ 03/04/11 08:50 PM

MVP Baseball 2005 is still the game I judge all other baseball games by. I have been playing the show since The Show 07 on PS3 as there was really no other option. I have liked The Show and its progression but last year it started to get stale. I decided to try MLB 2k10, and although it had many flaws, i really enjoyed the game. The pitching interface is challenging and I acutally looked forward to pitching rather than it being just something to get through before I could hit again. Loved the camera angle for batting and the hitters eye was along the lines of MVP 05( no colors of course). I have downloaded both demos and I really prefer MLB 2k11. There is no doubt The Show looks better, but I prefer the gameplay of MLB 2k11 and I will live with the graphics. Here's to hoping 2k continues to improve their baseball game going forward or give up the exclusive license and let EA have a crack again.

# 59 elimack @ 03/04/11 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by destructocid


	I can't believe people are actually defending 2k. This is a company that hasn't put out a quality baseball game since 2007. They then released 2k8 without even bothering to finish it. It seems each year 2k just changes the number on the box, from 2k8 to 2k9 to2k10. That's the biggest change from year to year. I feel 2k has simply coasted the last few years, putting almost zero effort or money into their product. I really feel like they're ripping their customers off, and that's not right. I'm not bashing 2k fans, I was a 2k fan, until 2k8. Idk, if some people enjoy the game, that's great. I just feel that 2k has been very deceptive and disingenuous. I a. A fan of the show now, but believe me, I would love nothing more than some serious competition. I would love to have to decide between two great games every year, but I don't see that happening anytime soon

I see where 2K has missed the marks in their games. Graphically/Animation wise, however to ignore their efforts to enhance the on field experience of the player from a game play perspective isn't right. They had no reason to implement analog controls or the new camera perspectives if this was the case.

We ignore the fact The Show has given us the exact same animations and in game commentary since it's last gen versions. They've taken more of the Madden NFL approach, when compared to 2K IMO.

# 60 ryan36 @ 03/04/11 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gamer


	I think its pretty interesting the thought that if you play the 2k series that you're not as hardcore, diehard baseball fan as those who play the Show. I'd be troubled to find a more ridiculous thought process.

Not true. If you play only on a 360, you play 2k. If you enjoy a game that doesn't take FOREVER to finish, you play 2k (I fast forward to the 5th inning in the show). The logic as you present it is flawed... my point is not that hardcore gamers don't play 2k, or that they would not choose 2k over the Show. My point was that 2k does not seem to be presenting their game in such a fashion as to appeal to the "intellectual" side of gamers. I enjoyed 2k10 this year. With both games, I'm waiting for impressions to decide on what I buy, if either. Money is tighter, and neither has made HUGE strides.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffy777


	I'm not sure how much time you put in to 2K10, but I played 6 seasons of My Player, and the results were pretty sim, especially the hitting. For me, it had the best hitter vs. pitcher battles that I've seen in a baseball game (and I've played them all)....and the AI pitching was quite realistic (if you turn the pitch speed up). The fielding in My Player was pretty good too because it didnt have the assist that regular modes did. The simulation engine wasn't too bad either, though not perfect. But overall, I certainly get a decent sim experience from 2K10, and with changes I've seen in 2K11, it's looking and feeling like it will be even more sim this year.

I'm a franchise guy. That's where I spend most of my time. The game with sliders PLAYED somewhat sim, but to say the entirety of the game was an accurate sim, was a stretch, IMO. I say this about The Show as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thundergatti


	I'm beginning to think that, just like politics, the voices at the extremes have commandeered and have come to dominate the discussion. There are partisans on both sides, professing their cause is more "sim." In my opinion, however, as long as both games have ball "physics" that regularly lead to outside fastballs being pulled for HRs, or inside pitches blasted and skied for opposite field HRs, "more sim" is basically a self-appointed title without any real substance.

Sim is just "how close to results kinda sorta mimic real life" I'm a gamer who likes things "sim enough." Madden, for instance, to me, is almost "sim enough." I don't want a video game to take 2:15 min to complete although that's sim. I want to basically feel like the players have an identity on the field, and for the game to be free from glitches.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rheth


	MVP Baseball 2005 is still the game I judge all other baseball games by. I have been playing the show since The Show 07 on PS3 as there was really no other option. I have liked The Show and its progression but last year it started to get stale. I decided to try MLB 2k10, and although it had many flaws, i really enjoyed the game. The pitching interface is challenging and I acutally looked forward to pitching rather than it being just something to get through before I could hit again. Loved the camera angle for batting and the hitters eye was along the lines of MVP 05( no colors of course). I have downloaded both demos and I really prefer MLB 2k11. There is no doubt The Show looks better, but I prefer the gameplay of MLB 2k11 and I will live with the graphics. Here's to hoping 2k continues to improve their baseball game going forward or give up the exclusive license and let EA have a crack again.

I think MVP hit that point between "arcade/sim" that was fun for most gamers. Even though if you held 'up' with Shea Hillenbrand and waited for high pitch almost every at bat, the game was fun...the presentation was good, etc.

I feel like 2k is moving closer to MVP as opposed to say ASB. Finding the point on the spectrum between sim and arcade or casual etc...is going to be the key to success in a sports world where titles are dwindling

« Previous 1 234 5 6 7 Next »

More Links