Thursday, February 28, 2008

The Problem with Games Journalism is All of Us

Every few months we get another screed from another writer decrying the lack of journalistic value or critical merit in either online or print games writing. In the past few years we’ve seen a broad spectrum of views, from Klosterman’s infamous “Lester Bangs of Video Games” piece in Esquire, to stuff like this most recent essay, “Game Criticism, Why We Need It, and Why Reviews Aren’t It” which appears on Play This Thing. Before I go on, I want to make it clear that this isn’t another rebuttal, or counter argument to the usually very intelligently argued points that are made. No, instead I want to raise an issue that is never discussed. Something all games writers, reviewers, editors, and publishers think about, but rarely express for fear of the wrath it may incur. I don’t pose it as fact, but more as a topic of debate. A new element to consider when implying that the talent does not exist to provide this whimsical, mythical, artistic pontification that these editorials demand (because it does.)

Are you ready? Here goes.

The audience just doesn’t want it.

Or care about it, for that matter.

In the grand scheme of things, games are an unusual animal. Lots of people play games, but I would argue that the level of engagement across the spectrum of the audience is quite different than you find with, say, movies. Or television. On one hand you have the “mainstream” gamers who can barely remember the name of the system they’re playing on at any given moment, let alone give two shits about whether the game they’re playing has any artistic merit. On the other, you have the super-hardcore. The enthusiasts. The guys that express every thought they have about video games, every moment that they have them, in some kind of public forum. There’s a lot of stuff in between – but these are the extremes. All are consumers of games, but all have different requirements of the media that supports the pastime.

Let’s tackle the easy ones first. The “mainstream” guys. At best, they want to know what games are coming out, and they occasionally want to know if specific games are good or not. For them, service journalism is all they need, if any. “Hey, Madden’s out.” Bingo. They do not need “criticism” nor do they have the inclination to read anything into the symbolism of the banana-shaped cursor in Donkey Kong Barrel Blast, or the social metaphors explored in Mario Galaxy.

Now what about the hardcore? There’s a good number of them, they’re super-engaged, super-vocal, and super-opinionated. Ask a lot of them about games coverage, and they’ll call it “crap.” They’re plugged into so many different sources of information that they have no need for any single, definitive source. They identify with brands on a personal level, and will often irrationally see praise of one thing as disparagement of another. For years, they have been the engine that drives the games industry, and have been the meat of the audience for games writing.

What is becoming increasingly evident though (and this is the reason I raise this whole point to start with) is that when this group is given what it frequently claims to want – it doesn’t seem to want that either. There is no doubt much evidence that could be raised to back this point up, and plenty to counter it…so I assert again that this is raised as a topic of a debate, not vilification of the audience. However – I’d like to point to a few very specific examples, and get the conversation going;

A few years ago, Computer Gaming World editor in chief Jeff Green and I spent a lot of time scratching our heads and musing on how best to serve the magazine’s readers with our editorial product. We frequently spent money on research against the audience, and had a very clear view of the demographics, the spending power, and the playing habits of the audience. From responses to blogs, message boards, and articles, and letters to the editor we felt we had a good handle on what the readership wanted. They constantly complained about games media treating them “like children” (and we had the data that showed that they really weren’t…they were predominantly dudes over 35. Who’d have guessed?) and that they demanded writing that credited them with maturity and intelligence. So, much in the vein of the Play This Thing editorial we chose to completely blow up the reviews section. Instead of “reviews” we would provide criticism, and context. We would embrace the fact that print was invariably late to the reviews party, and instead of banging out 400 words and a score to add to all the others that got sucked into MetaCritic, we’d discuss the way games were received by the audience, discuss other reviews, and talk to developers about how they would be addressing problems. We’d tackle the need for patches, ask questions of the visionaries, and summarize the way the audience had received a game.

The result? The audience hated it. I mean they really fucking hated it. They responded, almost as one, with the comment that they “don’t care what other people think” and that they “want to know what score CGW would give it.” Far from wanting an “essay” about a game – they wanted an at-a-glance indication of quality. Despite being enthusiasts (they spend $5 to get games information printed on paper...how much more enthusiastic could they possibly be?) they still wanted their taste vindicated with a simple number, rather than something more obtuse.

The second example is more recent, and concerns a recent NeoGAF thread about Newsweek writer (and occasional 1UP Yours buddy) N’Gai Croal. My personal opinion is that much of what N’Gai writes about video games is very squarely in the wheelhouse of what the vocal gamers say they want to read. He exists outside the “enthusiast” press, and is able to mull over a broad spectrum of issues, and tackle them in an intelligent fashion. He, along with a number of others, represents the coming-of-age of games coverage.

So you’d think the enthusiasts that decry the “garbage” they read in the games media would embrace him, right? You’d be surprised. Now, admittedly, NeoGAF provides but a snapshot of the gaming audience, but as a barometer of the feelings of the hardcore or “enthusiast” set, it’s arguably the most reliable source. On the subject of N’Gai’s games writing, a conversation on the conversation was kicked off with a post that stated, “Reading this guy's blog is an exercise in pretension. I do not consider myself stupid, but his use of obscure vocabulary that completely disregards his reader demographic is insulting.” The ensuing (currently seven-page) thread is quite a roller coaster of emotional response, that should be read to be believed. Personally, I was quite surprised by the term "completely disregards his reader demographic," but then I was also equally surprised at the annoyance expressed at the fact that N'Gai's name has an apostrophe in it.

My final example concerns the wonderful British games magazine, Edge. Long held in the highest regard by many as the epitome of intelligent games coverage, and often cited as something to which all games writers should aspire to mimic, it’s current circulation is just over 35,000 copies a month. To the best of my knowledge, this number has ever blipped much higher than 50,000 over the course of its long life. There are several video games magazines in Edge’s home market with double, triple, and quadruple the circulation. Bottom line? Edge goes deep, the others don't.

So here’s my point, I guess. In a long-winded, roundabout fashion; The media produced about video games is a direct reflection of the audience it’s produced for. It’s not that editors and writers are unable or unwilling to wax poetic on the art of video games (there are plenty of examples to the contrary); it’s that in the present climate the majority of the audience just doesn’t care to read that. Media is not produced in a vacuum. Editors don’t just throw the dumbest things they can come up with at the wall to see what sticks. Publishers research their audience, and produce a product that is intended to appeal to the largest possible number of people, so in turn that audience can be monetized with advertising. This is why crap like TMZ exists, and why the AP (of all people) is adding 20 "entertainment journalists" to its staff while the New York Times is laying 100 people off from its newsroom.

As enthusiasts, if the energy we all spent constantly complaining about games media were put into drawing attention to the excellent examples of intelligent criticism and journalism that are produced, then the rising tide would, perhaps, raise all ships.

And there you go. I just wasted 1400 words on the subject, instead of telling you to go read The Escapist, or subscribe to Edge, or read the essays on GameStudies.org. What a jerk.

22 comments:

Greg Mulert said...

First of all, I think that Gamers With Jobs is also worth a mention.

As for your argument: "...the majority of the audience just doesn’t care to read [editorials/essays/non-review material]" -- I think that's a little extreme. My feeling is that there has to be a balance between reviews and other, more in-depth material. They each serve a purpose, and simply removing one of them from the picture is (predictably) met with uproar. To put it another way: Do you think the CGW readers would have responded any less violently if the magazine had been filled cover-to-cover with nothing but reviews?

I guess I'm part of the minority, since I enjoy having a smorgasbord of game coverage to peruse. If I'm debating the purchase of a new game, reviews are of course invaluable, but in general I find the in-depth articles to be much more rewarding.

N'Gai said...

John,

Good post, and a very astute analysis of the situation that would-be videogame critics face. At the same time, I think it's important for us would-be game critics--as well as those among us who want to both broaden the boundaries of videogame journalism--to cultivate the audience that we want to have.

I'm fortunate in that the financial health of Newsweek doesn't rise or fall based on the traffic that my Level Up blog generates; by comparison to the audience that you had at the 1UP Network, Level Up is a niche site. But what I did from the start--partially by accident, partially by design--was to simply pursue only the topics that interested me in a way that I personally found compelling, in the hope that an audience would follow, however large or small. I wasn't aspiring to be comprehensive, because that would be a fool's errand for a one-man outfit. But by being selective and distinctive, by embracing the niche-ness of my endeavor, my hope was to be at least somewhat influential.

I realize that creating a business model around pursuing niche interests is challenging, which is why, as you put it, "The media produced about video games is a direct reflection of the audience it’s produced for." But one of the great things about the Internet is that it allows niches to survive and, if carefully nurtured, grow. In some ways, I find it liberating that so many outlets take care of the mass audience, whether it's EGM or Game Informer; IGN or GameSpot; Kotaku or Joystiq. Because it frees me to pursue the niche(s) I'm interested and to invent the audience that I'd like to have, rather than chase the audience that's already defined. You're pursuing parents here at What They Play, and from the conversations you and I have had, that's opened up certain editorial possibilities that you didn't have before. The more of us that find ways to go after interesting and underserved niches, the more vibrant videogame journalism--and its readership--will be.

jeffk said...

John,

In the CGW example, you and Jeff decided to replace reviews with criticism, but I don't know if anyone would want that (and they obviously didn't). For me, criticism and reviews should complement each other, as they're very different ways of looking at the same content. I think reviews should be what they are--timely thoughts on new releases that can act as a buying guide for your readers. Criticism seems more suited to games whose place in history is a little more firmly placed, as an innovative game's impact usually isn't felt until later titles have absorbed its lessons. (Say, examining the influence of early early open-world games on GTA, GTA's influence on Crackdown and Assassin's Creed, and those games' influence on future titles.)

The N'Gai/GAF thing...I appreciate the mini-disclaimer, but using GAF as a barometer for anything is kind of nuts. I'm serious about gaming, and I read a ton of blogs and forums, but GAF is a relatively small community that exists in its own bubble. N'Gai has become a major figure in the gaming industry in a very short time: his columns are widely discussed, his opinions seem to matter to a large percentage of the online community, and he's a popular guest on 1UP Yours, a show you know a little something about. Put that against a dozen or so forum trolls, and see which way the scale tips.

As far as Edge goes, I don't know enough about it to speak with any kind of authority (I bought my first issue about two months ago), but I'm impressed by its scope and tone. You say there's a small audience for it, but that's true of most exceptional things. Would this world be a better place if things like Psychonauts, Arrested Development, and Firefly never existed? Nobody buys jazz CDs, but does that mean John Coltrane never should have bothered? Do you wish Tim Schafer had just gone into sitcom writing, cranking out lame gags for Charlie Sheen or Jim Belush?

You say the audience doesn't want it, but that's an oversimplification. And sure, maybe the majority of the audience doesn't want it. But the really meaningful, influential stuff almost always appeals to a smaller audience. It sounds like you've already surrendered to the halfwits, and if that's true, it sucks, because I've been a fan of yours for a while now. But gaming journalism will grow up as gamers continue to do the same. Edge may not ever have 5 million subscribers, but I'll bet one of those current subscribers starts a pretty awesome magazine of his or her own someday.

(Sorry about the rant, but my magazine just finished a monster deadline yesterday and there's nothing left to do but pontifamicate on the internet today.)

John Davison said...

To address a few points...yes, I was oversimplifying for effect. Perhaps I should have stated that.

Jeff, I think you're perhaps missing the point I was trying to make about games coverage in general. Far from giving in to the "halfwits" my argument was intended to be more focused on the fact that coverage is currently the way it is, as a reflection of what is needed to appeal to the broadest possible audience and get the numbers needed for $$$. Far from surrendering to the idiocy, I think everyone should spend more time celebrating the "jazz" (superb simile, incidentally) rather than constantly complaining about the "pop" - hence the "rising tide" cliche at the end. Perhaps I didn't make it clear as my argument began to meander a bit there!

Devon said...

John,

Well done, although this is no surprise coming from you. I agree that the audience is a large part of the problem. I'm sure you know all too well from your former life how small the really dedicated market is. And obviously within that market there are further splinters, points you make in your piece. The N'Gais of the world likely won't ever feel mainstream praise, because honestly the mainstream isn't going to enjoy or even always understand them. We love to think of ourselves as smart people, us gamers, but there are plenty of idiots who play video games and plenty of people who are wonderfully intelligent but content with games being a simple diversion. Honestly, I'm not sure that reviews of any pop culture really serve as much more than a buyer's guide. Sure the language of film review is such that we can be given a academic examination of a film and still receive a thumbs up or down, but honestly how many average people read reviews for the content and don't just sail to the scores? Or, even worse, how many don't read reviews at all but go to see Norbitt because they like them some Eddie Murphy?

The hardcore game critic, and by critic I mean ones who wish to examine games critically, is still a very rare bird, so most of the audience has no desire to read their pontification. I've been called a snob many times for my tastes in pop culture, an accurate tab if I'm being honest, but one that derides what I consider a critical eye. Games are the same way, N'Gai will probably never be the favorite of your average gamer, but he will be loved by those of us in the industry who care deeply about all this stuff. And for those of us, I salute you and say keep up the awesomeness!

Chi Kong Lui said...

In my experience on running a dedicated review site,GameCritics.com, since 1999, I'd say John is dead-on. Despite having links to our reviews featured in metacritic and gamerankings, I've never once considered quiting my day job. Our dedicated readership remains a very small niche audience with floods of occasional random folks when we give a bad review to a beloved game like Halo 3.

jeffk, its funny to read your thoughts on reviews and critique complementing each other because we separate our reviews/critiques and our consumer guides into separate pieces. However, it would appear this distinction is largely ignored as hardcore gamers treat our reviews as Consumer Guides and parents go straight for the Consumer stuff.

N'gai, I'm surprised to hear that you're a one-man operation, since you so often refer to yourself as "we" on Level Up. Sorry, I couldn't resist. ;-)

Kate B said...

Interesting to read this take on the declining sales of British magazine, Edge. Until recent years, Edge had no real competition over here, all the other magazines being either tied to a platform or aimed at the lowest common denominator. Now there's also GamesTM, an intelligent magazine if not as highbrow as Edge, and one with a pretty nice design - something else that used to mark Edge out as different. I'm not involved with either publication, by the way!

Daniel Purvis said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Daniel Purvis said...

Now that's an article to mull over.

From the boards I've read, the discussions I've had with players and games journalists and other gaming enthusiasts, I'd say that those who want to read and discuss in depth games and the industry are those already established in it or wanting to break in.

Game devs, designers, artists, journalists, the enthusiast press and even bloggers that only occasionally write about games. It seems to me those that already contribute to the industry are the ones who give a toss about it's health and well-being - that kind of makes me sad.

jeffk said...

But really, how much of a market is there for serious criticism or analysis in any medium? Just because someone likes to read John Grisham books--hell, even if they read Tolstoy or Proust--doesn't mean they're rushing out to buy Seven Types of Ambiguity or whatever grad students use for wanking material these days. That sort of focused study will generally only appeal to academics and a small, inquisitive minority.

If you're serious about your subject matter and really want to affect the way people perceive games and game writing, you probably also need to accept that you're writing for a niche within a niche. It's valuable work in a big-picture kind of way, but if you're trying to support a family or pay off your diamond-encrusted teeth, you might want to think about some secondary income.

ColbyCheese said...

"but as a barometer of the feelings of the hardcore or “enthusiast” set, it’s arguably the most reliable source."

I really do hope you were kidding. You were, right? I stopped reading right there because if you really meant that, then, well, I'll just say that I disagree with your whole thought process on principle.

I will agree with you one one thing: gamings unwashed masses are indeed very unwashed and very massive in number, but largely, these people's opinions don't count.

At first glance that seems rather harsh, until you realize that very large portions of our population don't really KNOW what they want and are perfectly willing to "want" whatever you tell them to want. Your opinion can't count if you don't have one.

If you need a reminder that we are a society of professional consumers, then take a look at prime time TV. Even without writers, the major networks were still making money hand over fist with high quality shows like "the lie-detector show". Americans love to consume. American Idol for president!

THESE are the people you are referring to in your article as "hardcore gamers", and I take exception to you lumping them into a category my friends and I have lived in for close to 20 years.

If you and your editors were using them as a basis for your demographic data, then I'm sorry to say that you were duped. Plain and simple.

As for N'Gai, he's the ONLY "talking head" in gaming worth listening to anymore. Just about anything or anyone else is amateur nonsense. He's the only real professional around when it comes to games journalism. Nobody else seems to even have any professional integrity. (Yes, that even includes everybody at Kotaku).

As a counter example to N'Gai, I present the EGM editor. I really like how people want to applaud how "insightful" and "professional" people like Dan Hsu are because he supposedly made some sort of moral stand against the game companies. Bullshit.

When I think of the typical "games journalist", all I can think of is the video of Mr. Dan "Editor" Hsu telling penis jokes or whatever on camera with the Epic guys for some GoW interview.

People like him are typical in games journalism and they're even more troublesome in real life. These are the same kinds of people who wouldn't vote for a president based on the observation that the candidate seemed "too stuffy" or "too smart" or "His tie was teh ghey. Hur! Hur! Hur!".

Or, to put it in a vernacular YOUR "hardcore gamers" might be more comfortable with: When I read your post,
-I "LOLed in RL"
-I can has Lulz??"

XIX said...

There are two types of gamers

the morons who only use small words

and

the morons who try and use big words

now, put your little thinking cap on and ponder this

a serious blog post make take an entire afternoon to write followed by almost random love/hate from these mouth breathing retards

a game is going to take weeks / months / years followed by almost random love/hate from the morons augmented by hahahah the morons hate you if I hate you too they will love me by you fucktards

that is all

James M said...

Gamers as a subculture, I think, suffer from the same delusions that all previously niche groups do when the thing that defines them and sets them apart gains widespread acceptance. As the audience becomes larger, the niche-ness of the culture is diluted. The output of culture comes under the scrutiny of any number of outside observers, all of whom will take from it what they perceive as its inherent value. This opens the doors for new perspectives and different forms of analysis.

I think gamers rail against the kind of work that N’gai does because it attaches a cultural significance to games that implies that they are no longer the property of people who inhabit boards like GAF and read GamePro. In this sense, “the Hardcore” are sort of like punk rock kids who love punk with every fiber of their being but insist that nobody else should.

The fact that gaming is incrementally becoming such a huge part of the cultural landscape only means that there will be not just a demand, but a need for differing perspectives that N’gai, 1UP and others bring to the table. That may lead to more scholarly and cultural analysis or simply to 30 second preview segments on CNN.

To me, arguing that philosophical discussions of gaming are somehow less valuable than screenshots and 10 point scoring systems is just silly. If someone is thinking that much about it, it’s probably worth talking about.

jeffk said...

Nicely put, James M. It's a strange situation we're in right now. Gaming is getting more mainstream, which annoys a certain subset of gamers, but I think we also run into problems because we're actually also less mainstream than we think. I've seen a few writers at major publications get crucified on message boards for writing about major franchises in very simple, general terms - basically, in a manner that assumes the reader couldn't tell you who Master Chief or Link is. There's a strange belief among a lot of us that these people don't exist, but even among my friends here in New York (most in their late twenties and early thirties), those names would be met with a blank stare eight times out of ten.

We need smart, eloquent people writing about games for those people too. N'Gai probably isn't going to reach them, at least not through Level Up, although I think he certainly has the chops. For me, right now, Clive Thompson is probably the best (and least appreciated) writer around when it comes to gaming. He's able to communicate some pretty complex ideas about the actual experience of playing a game, and he does it in a way that even non-gamers can kind of identify with. If we could clone him and pass him out to newspapers and magazines across the country, I think we'd see a lot fewer articles about how games are destroying our children's minds and a lot more about how they're engaging them.

Troy Goodfellow said...

Great post, John, and one editor I worked with has been making this argument for years. He tried to create an environment for good, thoughtful writing and succeeded most of the time, but subscriptions didn't follow a magazine that was heavy on features, text and coverage of niche games - the sort of stuff that readers say they want until they are asked to pay for it.

The GAF thread is frightening, but typical since, as James M says, gamers are stuck in some sort of neverworld where they want to be taken seriously, but not too seriously. Try to raise questions about race or gender in games and watch the forums explode with "It's just a game, dude." Try to challenge the conventions of genres that have been too long stuck in the same ruts, and you're dismissed as a "hater."

Ultimately, many gamers see themselves as consumers (What should I buy?) or cheerleaders (Which system is best?) and therefore are interested only in coverage as consumer advice or horse race console war articles.

Mind you, I don't buy the dichotomy between criticism and reviews; I think you can do both in the same piece but it requires writers able to do it. Game writing has been stuck in the software evaluation phase for so long that there isn't a lot of incentive for the writers to perfect skills beyond that.

James M said...

Jeffk: Reading your comment I was struck by something that I’d noticed anecdotally but hadn’t been able to put my finger on. Around my office (which is neither gaming, nor journalism related), I’ve developed a bit of a reputation as the resident “game guy.” This has always been the case, but generally, people never really had much to say about it. Over the past year or so this has changed. Not a day goes by without my coworkers approaching me with questions about gaming. “Should I get a 360 or a PS3?” “I bought PS3, what games should I get?” And most commonly, “where the hell do I get a Wii?”

These are people who are definitely not what many would consider typical gamers. In the past I doubt any of them would even considered investing time or, let’s face it, considerable sums of money in playing video games. They’re not “casual” players in the PopCap sense of the word. They’re certainly not “hardcore” in the GAF sense of the word.

Seemingly, when we talk about the mainstreaming of videogames, it’s really the idea of gaming that’s gaining traction. Not so much the games themselves. These people are open to the possibility of jumping in, they just need to be pointed at the pool. This is where, I think, the different levels of discourse in gaming coverage helps.

My girlfriend has always seen games as a hobby of mine. She always supported it, but never felt that there was anything there for her to become engaged in. All it took push her from infinitely patient observer to “casually hardcore” gamer was for the discussion to speak to her in a way she was comfortable with. What finally brought her in wasn’t Nintendogs or Bejeweled… It was 1UP Yours (Thanks, John!).

All it took was people discussing games in a language that fit her own, with a level of passion and excitement that was infectious. This is why the work of serious games journalists matters so much to me. For her it was the 1UP guys, for someone else it may be N’gai or GameCritics.

But, then again, there will always be those who just need a really kick-ass Halo screenshot.

Raydancer said...

Of course video games has a Lester Bangs...it's .

Anonymous said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,按摩棒,跳蛋,充氣娃娃,情境坊歡愉用品,情趣用品,情人節禮物,情惑用品性易購,A片,視訊聊天室

A片,aio,av女優,av,av片,aio交友愛情館,ut聊天室,聊天室,豆豆聊天室,色情聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,080聊天室,視訊聊天室,080苗栗人聊天室,上班族聊天室,成人聊天室,中部人聊天室,一夜情聊天室,情色聊天室,情色視訊,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,視訊,免費視訊,美女交友,成人交友,聊天室交友,微風論壇,微風成人,sex,成人,情色,情色貼圖,色情,微風,聊天室尋夢園,交友,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊辣妹,一夜情

AV女優,A片,A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,SEX,情趣用品,A片,AV女優,情趣用品,A片,,成人電影,成人成人影城,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊

av,情趣用品,a片,成人電影,成人,色情,aio,av女優,AV,情趣用品.A片,情色,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色電影,色情遊戲,色情網站,聊天室,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,av女優,av,成人,自拍,尋夢園聊天室

Anonymous said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣用品,A片,A片,情色,A片,A片,情色,情趣用品,情趣用品

A片,A片,A片下載,做愛,成人電影,.18成人,日本A片,情色小說,情色電影,成人影城,自拍,情色論壇,成人論壇,情色貼圖,情色,免費A片,成人,成人網站,成人圖片,AV女優,成人光碟,色情,色情影片,免費A片下載,SEX,AV,色情網站,本土自拍,性愛,成人影片,情色文學,成人文章,成人圖片區,成人貼圖

情色視訊,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,視訊交友90739,視訊,免費視訊,情人視訊網,視訊辣妹,影音視訊聊天室,視訊交友,視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,成人視訊,UT聊天室,聊天室,豆豆聊天室,色情聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,聊天室尋夢園,080聊天室,080苗栗人聊天室,上班族聊天室,小高聊天室

6K聊天室,080中部人聊天室,聊天室交友,成人聊天室,中部人聊天室,情色聊天室,AV女優,AV,A片,情人薇珍妮,愛情公寓,情色,情色貼圖

Anonymous said...

A片,A片,情色,情色,A片,A片,情色,情色,A片,A片,A片下載,做愛,成人電影,.18成人,日本A片,情色小說,情色電影,成人影城,自拍,情色論壇,成人論壇,情色貼圖,情色,免費A片,成人,成人網站,成人圖片,AV女優,成人光碟,色情,色情影片,免費A片下載,SEX,AV,色情網站,本土自拍,性愛,成人影片,情色文學,成人文章,成人圖片區,成人貼圖

美女交友,AIO交友愛情館,AIO,成人交友,視訊交友網,視訊交友,拓網交友,PC交友,視訊交友90739,交友,情色交友,聊天室交友,辣妹視訊,視訊辣妹,美女視訊,視訊美女,情色視訊,日本AV,免費視訊聊天,視訊聊天,AV女優,AV,視訊聊天室,視訊,免費視訊,情人視訊網,本土自拍,自拍,AVDVD,SEX,微風成人,微風論壇,微風成人區,成人網站,成人,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人貼圖,成人影片,成人圖片區,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人影城,成人文章,成人論壇,愛情公寓,情色論壇,情色,色情聊天室,色情,情色貼圖,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,寄情築園小遊戲,色情遊戲,情色電影,情色網,做愛,UT聊天室,聊天室,聊天,哈拉聊天室,豆豆聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,聊天室尋夢園,080苗栗人聊天室,苗栗人聊天室,080中部人聊天室,080聊天室,中部人聊天室,柔情聊天網,6K聊天室,小高聊天室,上班族聊天室,免費A片,A片,成人聊天室,一夜情聊天室,情色聊天室,色色網,免費AV

Anonymous said...

..............................................................................................................................................................................................................

Anonymous said...

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,

,