Hands On: Arma 3 Wasteland

You zigged when you should have zagged.

Deep breath… *boom*. The little dot in my sights zigs to the left. *Crack*. He zags to the right. I have no hope of hitting him at this distance, as I’m only aiming in his general direction, but it’s enough to make him think he could die at any moment. He’s taking decisive, military action, but with a hilarious, half-ducking run. I give up shooting, because hunting for more bullets is a pain, but he carries on running and dodging without any more shots from me. My goal has been fulfilled: to make him run like John Gordon Sinclair in Gregory’s Girl.

Strange? Yes, but it’s the only way I can have fun in this game. One morning in Wasteland, a sandbox survival Arma 3 multiplayer mod, has changed me. The Craig you knew pre-Wastelend would say “Hi! How are you? May I say, what a smashing blouse you have on,” if we were to casually meet. Post-Wasteland Craig is different. He’d flinch at the first sight of you, dive into a bush, and make bird noises until you passed. He might take a pot-shot or two, but only out of a misplaced sense of justice, and only if you’re really far away. I have died many times in Wasteland. My corpses are shrines to every tactical folly you can make.

Wasteland isn’t quite DayZ without the zombies, but it’s a good enough touchstone. It’s a game of survival and death, but under the Greek sun instead of dreich Bohemian forests. You’re also not quite as lonely as you are in DayZ: at the beginning of the map you’re asked to select a team. Blu or Green binds you to that particular faction, meaning you can hope for some level of backup and teamwork. I always select the third faction: Independent. This means I am a target for everyone, including the other players under the Independent banner. I’m placed between a collision of goals that makes it feel like I’m playing a very slow game of deathmatch in the middle of a game of territory control. There are missions that send people scrambling across the map, to fight for a helicopter or a weapons stash, but they don’t interest me. There’s also water and food meters, but I haven’t lasted long enough to figure out what impact they have.

The compact landmass of Stratis means it’s easy to find people. My first death was in Agia Marina. There was a corpse near the middle of the waterfront. Corpses have weapons and money, the two most helpful things in the game. Guns can be found, either on bodies or in vehicles, and you can also buy them at weapon stations. Money is found on bodies, or in the bags a body has left behind. So a corpse could be a bounty. Agia Marina is the biggest town on Stratis, with plenty of little buildings to hide in. From my vantage point, a slope to the south, it seemed like the corpse was the only resident. Population: one corpse.

He is looting my corpse.

I spent a few minutes crawling down the hill. I pushed up against every wall. I darted and dodged, and even doubled-back to try and catch out anyone that was following me. Nothing. I spotted a butterfly, noted with pride that I could see its shadow, and carried on. There was a truck near the corpse that gave me the confidence to dash out into the open, knowing that if I could get to the truck I could have it as cover on one side, while there was mostly water on the other. Tactics! Stealth! Exactly what the guy in the building behind me knew I’d do!

Shit. Lesson learned: there’s always somewhere for someone to hide. I was shot in the back and spawned in the middle of nowhere.

If you see someone beside a vehicle, you can be pretty sure they’re attempting to swap whatever its carrying into their backpack. It’s a clunky interface that leaves the player vulnerable, and sometimes it bugs out so you need to drag the contents to the ground before placing them into your inventory. That’s why it’s worth camping out near them: some idiot might run from the top of the hill, stop to roly-poly down (lie on the ground and press q or e), and then run up to a van and stand there in full view of everyone, humming the bacon pancakes to himself. And that’s how I died the second time. I’ve yet to come across another player in Wasteland who doesn’t operate on the notion that survival means being an awful human being to people like me. How can you kill someone you watched roly-polying? Survival of the fittest? Survival of the fuckiest, more like!

I died a third time because I hesitated. I stumbled across a guy in one of the abandoned bases. We were both on a hilltop on a spit of land, and I spotted him before he noticed me. He had chosen a medic class, or as the game calls it: “combat lifesaver”. There’s something off-putting about seeing “lifesaver” appear over someone you’re pointing a gun at. It’s disarming. I had chosen the medic class, too. Here we were, two people bonded over our care for other huma – goddamnit. He unsaved my life.

I spawned elsewhere, not too far from another player that hadn’t spotted me. I had a brief moment of ‘no more mister nice guy’ and shot him, only to find he’d just spawned and had nothing on him of any value. And he was a lifesaver. I felt sad. It was worse when I found a screenshot of the exact moment I snuffed him out.

I killed this guy then fell into a deep depression.

That moment was decisive. I decided that I wasn’t here to kill-or-be-killed. The island-wide fight that’s taking place over the 20 km2 of Stratis was never too far away. The engine’s view-distance enables you to see movement kilometers away, bursts of gun-play rattle around the valleys, there’s a constant thud on the air from the helicopter that people are fighting over. I could observe and survive, if I was careful. I found someone to watch back at Agia Marina, where I first died.

I was on a hill to the south when I caught movement down below, a man sneaking through town, heading towards the waterfront. Amazingly, that corpse was still there. I think the person that died had left their PC on in that state, drawing people towards the body whenever they enter the town. Either that, or it’s just one body in a line of corpses that have died and died at that spot. By then I’d found a pair of binoculars, a rifle, and a gun scope. I was lying in the shadow of a rock, watching him sneak through the streets. I looked around: while I’d found a comfortable spot to hide, another guy was watching him from the ridge of the hill. He had a gun trained on him. Below us, the little figure looked pretty pathetic as it was scavenging. I settled my gun, took aim to left of him, and fired. He zigged. I fired right. He zagged. I stopped shooting and he carried on up the hill. I could see the puffs the other sniper’s bullets were making, but I could already tell I’d saved this one. He made it to the top of the slope on the opposite side of the town and hopped into a van. He circled around the lip of the hill, probably celebrating life and all it had to offer.

Then he swerved back down the hill, straight into town and deliberately ran another player over.


Top comments

  1. Lobster9 says:

    it is worth remembering that with an open ended game such as this, a lot of people will view the goal of the game differently.

    For example with DayZ, a lot of people see it as a cooperative game that should exist as a utopian paradise of selfless sharing, and that people who choose to subvert this dream, are evil minded dicks bent on ruining everyone else's fun for their own sick pleasure.

    In reality though, many people simply view the game as survival of the fittest. Their personal victory condition is remaining alive by any means necessary, and that anyone who has chosen to join the arena is fair consenting game. As valid a target as any NPC zombie.

    By joining the server you have to accept that you are entering a free and open sandbox, where another person's way of playing is just as valid as your own. Being a ruthless asshole in the game doesn't automatically make you a ruthless asshole in real life.
  1. LionsPhil says:

    I love how gaming, like the Internet, allows us to see just to what extent People Are Bastards is true.

    • lowprices says:

      Arma mods in particular seem to attract a few decent people that are lost in an endless ocean of bastardry. Maybe that’s what makes them special?

      • bstard says:

        Untill they have an opportunity to nick their fathers land and concubines, what happens then?!

    • HerrKohlrabi says:

      The internet lets us see how people draw conclusions regarding offline life, based on how people play computer games. Or did I get that wrong?

      • DXN says:

        Actually no-one’s really making that distinction or cares what you’re like offline. You don’t stop being a person when you start playing a game. If you act like bastard while playing a game, you are still a person who is being a bastard when you could have chosen to not be a bastard.

        Having said that, it’s pretty much par for the course for Wasteland because what else is there to do? Even in DayZ I don’t mind PKing per se. It’s just the people who hop in and just run around shooting people because it’s a video game and that’s what you do in a videogame and have no interest in doing anything else with it or exploring the unique sort of connection you can form with another person in Day Z if you give it a chance. Griefing, all that. You can say all you like about how it’s The Internet and anything goes but that behaviour still deliberately makes the game much less fun for a lot of people. Which is a dick move!

      • dE says:

        Well you got it almost right. The internet allows us to see humanity with all social safety guards removed. It also happens to be very indicative of the person behind the screen, which is also why there are entire branches in the sciences focused on researching that very space.

    • Lobster9 says:

      it is worth remembering that with an open ended game such as this, a lot of people will view the goal of the game differently.

      For example with DayZ, a lot of people see it as a cooperative game that should exist as a utopian paradise of selfless sharing, and that people who choose to subvert this dream, are evil minded dicks bent on ruining everyone else’s fun for their own sick pleasure.

      In reality though, many people simply view the game as survival of the fittest. Their personal victory condition is remaining alive by any means necessary, and that anyone who has chosen to join the arena is fair consenting game. As valid a target as any NPC zombie.

      By joining the server you have to accept that you are entering a free and open sandbox, where another person’s way of playing is just as valid as your own. Being a ruthless asshole in the game doesn’t automatically make you a ruthless asshole in real life.

      • Misnomer says:

        I find it amusing when people try to make this sort of behavior sound noble. It isn’t. It takes minimal effort for the most reward.

        This is what is known as the lowest common denominator.

        The complaint of many people is that the lowest common denominator determines the entire course of the game because it immediately becomes the most popular (most players will follow the path of least resistance). As such, these few are always looking for games that raise the lowest common denominator so entire games don’t become the whim of the person most willing to destroy gameplay simply because being a self-obsessed punk is a “valid” way to play.

        • Synesthesia says:

          I like you, sir. I always pictured those kind of players as those kids that couldnt take losing in any game, and just looked up the cheats, ending the game inmediatly. Remember those boring to-the-street mansions in the sims?

        • niasyn says:

          This is why a reward system, no matter how trivial, is needed for “good” behavior.

        • DrGonzo says:

          Its the purpose of the game. You somehow think the way someone plays days reflects on them.in reality and isn’t just roleplay in a game?

          • Leb says:

            I agree.. but the problem in DayZ became those guys who would kill for the sake of killing would not loot for food, water, equipment – would just kill

            And then the honorable RPer among us would fight back against them and they would Alt-F4

            Thankfully, no progression in wasteland means less of this nonsense.

        • The Random One says:

          Psht. Allowing this kind of before behavior means that the decision not to engage in this kind of behavior is actually meaningful. As long as the game is designed with that kind of behavior in mind it’s all good.

        • Nogo says:

          A soldier simulator seems like a bad place to make friends.

          But really, right now the only reward for teaming up is better murder-ness, so where exactly is this whole cooperation thing supposed to end? Ratifying a constitution at a town-hall meeting?

      • AndrewC says:

        Being able to so strictly compartmentalise your life is a pretty good sign of nascent sociopathy.

        • DrGonzo says:

          Not being able to tell the difference between fiction and real life is a bit more of a concern.

          • AndrewC says:

            And thinking there are strict delineations is a concern again. See elderman below, and the fact that there are other real humans spending their time playing this game, and the fact that you do not *have* to act in a dickish way.

            ‘It’s just a game’ defences are always attempts at silencing.

      • elderman says:

        Being a ruthless asshole in a game makes you a ruthless asshole in at least one thing you do during your life.

        • Leb says:

          Precisely, being a dick in an RP engine is no different than the kid who was a dick on the playground as a kid.

          Sure the behaviour is allowed in the realm of a sandbox, but it doesn’t change the fact they are assholes

          • Wisq says:

            being a dick in an RP engine is no different than the kid who was a dick on the playground as a kid.

            I take some exception to this statement, because it’s not true for all RP environemnts.

            I played several roleplaying MUSHes back in the 90s. In these, we had a very clear definition between In-Character (IC) and Out-Of-Character (OOC) behaviour. The overriding goal was to make sure everyone was enjoying themselves and having a good time. The secondary goal was to play our characters as closely to their defined persona as possible.

            In order to have conflict, we of course needed to have both heroes and villains (and also some neutral and/or “everyman” characters). The villains (and some of the heroes!) might well be anywhere on the spectrum between “bit of a jerk” and “ruthless monster”, but it was always very clear that they were just acting. In fact, the more nasty the IC conflicts, the more OOC discussion there would be to ensure that everyone was okay with things going in the direction they were.

            And if they weren’t, well … the rules said that no matter how committed we were to a particular path, if any of the affected players didn’t agree, we couldn’t go any further down that path. Perhaps our character has a sudden change of mind or a momentary lapse, or perhaps some external factors appear and resolve things amicably. Or perhaps, if it’s agreed that things have become irreconcilable or were just a bad idea to begin with, we’d retcon the whole thing.

            It was a form of cooperative storytelling of the purest degree — no dice, no stats. And it required that some people be willing to play as jerks, even if they were the nicest people in real life. These people were in fact somewhat cherished, because so many more people want to be the heroes than the villains.

            I guess my point is, you don’t have to be a jerk in real life to play a jerk in a game. As long as people are still having fun, you’re doing it just fine. Really, the problem with DayZ (and OWPvP MMOs in general) is that there’s no way to communicate and ensure that, because they’ve reduced everything down to cold, hard rules rather than communication and cooperative fun.

            (As an aside: I briefly tried an OWPvP MMO and was somewhat disappointed in the experience. I know a lot of people who like PvP MMOs precisely because they can be ambushed and killed at any time, so it keeps them on their toes and keeps things interesting. But I was hoping that the system would be taken to its logical conclusion — roving bands of enforcers, taking out anyone marked with the outlaw tag, “keeping the streets clean”. It didn’t happen, in large part because there was zero reward for doing so. Instead, you’d just get max-level people hanging out in low-level areas and one-shotting everyone. Kinda boring and disruptive to the already-slow levelling grind.)

          • dE says:

            You specifically checked each others stance on the matter. That’s curating IC with OOC knowledge and an important pillar of roleplay. But the asshat in a game would not have bothered checking with you. He’d punch your character dead, loot you clean, set fire to your house while dropping some oneliners crafted to piss you off and roflcopter away to annoy someone else.
            And quite frankly, that does reflect onto the kind of player behind the character. The dogma of roleplaying to never blend IC and OOC is wishful thinking at best. And here is the funny thing, it’s not healthy either. It’s crazy to try to create a seperate persona and disconnect it entirely from who you are. Although the existence of the Dogma is an immediate reaction to all the “lost touch with reality” accusations that floated around in the early days of RPGs. Still, in all my years of Roleplay, Online and Offline, meeting literally thousands of players through running a server myself, no one has ever achieved that disconnect. There were some that could fake it for a while, but they were just bombs waiting for their personal trigger.

          • Wisq says:

            I realise there are obvious differences, but I guess my point is that I don’t think you can generalise things to the point of saying that playing a dick in a game (or any other media) means you’re a dick in real life. There can be a distinction. Otherwise we wouldn’t have movie actors and book authors and whatnot.

            I also think we’ve become too dependent on rules, at the expense of communication, consideration, and morals. There’s little thought about what’s right, or fair; the rules say you can kill him, so go ahead and kill him. If he didn’t want to be killed, he wouldn’t be playing the game, right? Nobody stops to think “I’ve killed this guy enough already, let’s leave him be this time”, etc.

          • The Random One says:

            In the specific case of this and DayZ, the large game communities preclude such OoC conversations. Conversely, the fact that the game specifically allows such things to happen (it would be trivial to disable friendly fire in DayZ, where the zombies are the stated enemies) is, to me, indication that such behaviour is appropriate. There as asshats who want to ruin your game and there are normal folk who want to roleplay asshats. You take the fact that roleplaying as an asshat is a failure of the game and of the players. However, the legitimate asshats (griefers) would find any way to ruin the game for you that they can make happen. If a game is set up in such a way that the griefer ends up playing the game in the same way as a legitimate player, (and incorpoates this fact in its design in such a way that it’s possible to defend from such strategy), then it has effectively neutralized griefing.

            The ur-example, as I mentioned below, is EVE, in which Something Awful (who usually join MMOs only to grief) found their primary efforts to grief stopped because the game allowed for what they were trying to do and therefore other players were prepared, and it took them such preparations to grief in a manner that they found acceptable that they become part of the game. At that point, they were powerless as griefers, because the griefer’s advantadge is that he does not care about the game. Something Awful was forced to start caring.

      • TaylanK says:

        I suspect part of it is that there is very little else to do other than shooting people, which you don’t even get to do very often.The map is huge, it takes forever to get somewhere unless you happen to find a working vehicle, and it is not uncommon to travel for 15 minutes with zero action, only to be shot in the back by some bush-dwelling sniper in the middle of nowhere. So when the game gives you a chance to use the left mouse button, you take it.

      • Carbonated Dan says:

        a lot of people playing DayZ for the first time associate ‘multiplayer’, ‘sandbox’ and ‘open world’ with minecraft, where griefing dicks get banned by admins

        • The Random One says:

          And I’m sure a lot of people playing EVE for the first time associate “MMO” with hand-holding quest arrows. Your point?

  2. grundus says:

    I played some Wasteland the other day but couldn’t stand it because it totally killed my normally borderline acceptable framerate, we’re talking normally 20fps down to about 13. I’ll try again every now and then but it’s not something I want to spend all my Arma 3 time on, I much prefer the co-op missions.

    • communisthamster says:

      Yeah, co-op is much better. Wasteland is an excruciatingly slow Battlefield. The only thing it has going for it is population. Organised TVT games blow it out the water.

    • Masterpwny says:

      Wasteland by Sa-matra is a game that has a very acceptable FPS compared to the others. Especially the UK servers, ~45 players and a very low ping.

  3. analydilatedcorporatestyle says:

    Wow, I have seen a game that means I need to upgrade.

    What’s ARMA 3 like with crossfire?

    • grundus says:

      I’ve heard it doesn’t work too well with SLI, Crossfire might be the same. It’s up to the manufacturer to add support (at least it is when it comes to SLI) and Arma 3 isn’t finished yet, so.

    • SuicideKing says:

      Arma is CPU bound. Severely. Whichever core’s tasked with handling rendering isn’t utilized fully. No point upgrading for this game till its final.

      See this ticket/thread.

      I want to play wasteland, but i fear an even greater perf hit.

      • analydilatedcorporatestyle says:

        Cheers, noted!

      • PrinceofBees says:

        You can reduce the extent to which it is limited by the processor by setting all the graphics settings to high or greater, though. All settings beneath high put the calculations on the processor, rather than the gpu.

      • Stuart Walton says:

        The more you have happening in a game of ARMA, the more it has to sync between players. Each client PC then has to process all that. I don’t have the greatest CPU but in an empty map I will get 60fps (In both ARMA2 and ARMA3). Start adding units and it degrades from there.

  4. Lygus says:

    Wasteland would be great in a STALKER-like Soviet desolated environment.

    But, right now, Stratis?… a sunny holiday island? Sucks.

    • Craig Pearson says:

      I’ve been playing Stalker and Jim’s game, so I’m quite enjoying the sun.

    • analydilatedcorporatestyle says:

      To be fair to the Devs if they had gone around photographing military bases in the Eastern Block…..well put it this way Greek justice or………..

      • Aaax says:

        But they are already in the Eastern block…

        • analydilatedcorporatestyle says:

          Yeah!, local knowledge goes a long way to retaining your liberty!

    • MrEclectic says:

      Ai-Stratis (Saint Eustratios) from the late ’20s up until the mid ’50s was the site of one of the many concentration camps for anti-royalists, left-wings, communists, unionised workers, dissidents and sympathisers.

    • Stuart Walton says:

      You mean like the ARMA2 version of Wasteland. I suggest playing the SaMatra variant, the weapons available are much more balanced. In the other versions you can find weapons that allow you to find (using FLIR) and shoot people over a kilometer away. The higher tier stuff in SaMatra is either very rare, very expensive or not in the game at all. A much less frustrating experience.

  5. Drake Sigar says:

    Come with me, to the Polo lounge!

  6. Syra says:

    I like to watch.

    I would probably have taken out that other sniper to save the carmageddon player. Take a life to save a life!

  7. TheMick says:

    I don’t mind at all that games like this have an element of survival of the fittest and that many people have a shoot first and ask questions later mind set. Without that I believe that these games would be worse off because of it.

    What bothers me is that fucking nearly all players do. When I was full on in day z the only way to survive was to play like a scared rabbit. Every attempt to interact with a player ended in frustration. Again by no means should we all join hands and sing kumbaya in the apocalypse, I just wish there was incentive to team up once in awhile too. I stopped short of pre arranging teams via the forums, I guess I still had the naive hope that these interactions could be spontaneous.

    • TaylanK says:

      Survival multiplayer games generally fail in player cooperation for the same reason: there are not enough reasons to cooperate. In the real world, our survival depends on other human being in a way that has never quite been simulated to the same extent by video games. Sure it helps to have a buddy watching your back on DayZ, but it’s a nice-to-have, not a hard necessity. The game is built to accommodate the lone wolf just too well.

      Another problem is that players need to be invested in their characters enough to care for the benefits of cooperation. If they keep dying left and right, they will start seeing the characters as fodder, and any survival benefit from cooperation will not be fully appreciated. The way it is with Wasteland, once you die, you start from scratch. And you start from scratch often.

      I wonder what it would be like if you could resurrect with full inventory and everything a set number of times before perma-death kicked in.

  8. Synesthesia says:

    The hivemind should seriously come and play with us at one of the folk sessions. Organised ARMA is the absolute best. Maybe on the release of arma 3 we could have a big mission!

  9. engion3 says:

    I was tricked into buying arma2 for DayZ and all I got was a laggy, constantly updating, non intuitive, fake building infested island of a game that took me 3 days to figure out basic inventory management. Don’t get me wrong I love the concept, but I definitely did not enjoy the arma engine.

    Is arma3 different? The screens look interesting and I imagine after the success of DayZ they would be addressing and improving on the issues.

  10. Leb says:

    Que Arma 1 Vets complaining that Wasteland & DayZ have ruined arma community

    • elderman says:

      Queue them up! No kidding, spelling that word correctly feels wrong. I looked it up to make sure I had in fact added one ‘e’ too many, and I hadn’t.

      • Chris D says:

        Good spelling is always to be applauded. Unfortunately in this context it’s cue, as in “Cue the music” not “Queue for the bus”

        • elderman says:

          Good point. I was thinking in terms of computer science rather than DJing or urban transport, but I don’t even know if queeuueu…e is colloquially used as a verb in that context or if it is if I could use it correctly in a sentence, so for now I should just spell it: ‘oops’.

          [Edit:] You’d think by now I’d have learned that engaging in amateur copy-editing on the internet never goes well.

          • iucounu says:

            It’s called ‘Muphry’s Law’ – any comment criticising proof-reading etc will itself contain an error. Muphry is the ancient enemy of my people.

    • Leb says:

      Queueueueueueeu *

    • Deadly Habit says:

      I wouldn’t say ruined, I would say diluted, especially with some of the idiotic suggestions they make trying to make it more like CoD or Battlefield.
      Thankfully they don’t populate the BI forums, but for the lowest common denominator look at the Steam forums. The ArmA 2 boards are particularly enlightening, in spite of DayZ having it’s own boards they continue to post about it on all the other normal ArmA boards for example.
      It’s a double edge sword for those that love the base game, BI is seeing a lot more revenue due to it, but DayZ and Wasteland servers have taken over the server browser.
      Both are fun in their own way, hell I play DayZ quite a bit and Wasteland time to time, but neither compare to normal ArmA or some of the other mods, missions, and game modes available.
      Trying to get the influx of players to attracted to ArmA just because of DayZ and Wasteland is increasingly difficult when all popular streamers and gaming websites cover about ArmA in depth is DayZ or Wasteland as well.
      It’d be cool to see Craig cover say CTI in ArmA 3 like this.

      • Leb says:

        The server browser really needs to be more friendly.

        I’m new to the Arma series with A3 but sometimes I’d just like to click “not Wastland/DayZ/Citylife” and see what is available.

        I’ve been playing around in the CTI realm the past few nights and it’s been a blast.

        What’s unfortunate are the new players who put 0 effort into learning the game. While I consider myself a noobie, I make all due diligence to ensure I am NOT shooting a friendly using the tools available to me. I know how the teams look, where my team is, if in doubt, check the map.

        I left a CTI server out of frustration last night due to constant “sorry I thought you 5 dudes were enemies so I shot at you with my rockets” and “HEY DUDE ON THE HILL. IF YOU ARE A FRIEND SAY HELLO.”

        A friend of mine kindly piped in at one point “hey guys, can we limit radio traffic to important information?”

        to which one of said clued out players responded “what does that mean.” Sigh.

      • Wisq says:

        I seem to recall ArmA 1 had the same issue with the “Evolution” series of missions (hours-long co-op “take over the entire island” maps with purchasable weapons and vehicles).

        The server I ran on was run by some of the same people who ran our awesome Operation Flashpoint server back in the day, and they could choose any map they wanted, but they still pretty much had to run Evolution if they ever wanted any people to show up. And they did, because they wanted to recruit more people for their virtual outfit.

        Unfortunately, it’s also my impression that this drove out anyone who wasn’t interested in playing Evolution 24-7 (myself included) … such that they now had no choice but to keep running it 24-7. Oops.

    • The Random One says:

      Ay ay ay, ¡que ArmA vets!

  11. El_MUERkO says:

    Just as long as all the muppets stay on the 404 variants of wastelands and stay away from the good one {name redacted} I’ll not get too grumpy about RPS spoiling my corner of the internet.

  12. Masterpwny says:

    Discovered Wasteland last weekend. Highlights, fun really starts at 21:00.