Jump to content

Your opinions on modern and classic Fire Emblem?


Marz
 Share

Recommended Posts

I will say that Awakening is still my favorite.

But there are so many other better FE games {FE7,FE9,FE10,FE4,FE8 and FE6}

After playing through FE7 [chapter 15 in Eliwood's story still] I realized that the game was rather interesting and had some very unique characters and had a very diverse cast which is the seperating feature that Fire Emblem has from some other games of the genre.

FE7 may very well be my favorite after I finish it.

What are your opinions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I owe a lot to Awakening. If I hadn't played it back in late 2014, I wouldn't be in love with the series as much as I am today. It used to be my favorite as well but I played the rest and now it is around my 8th/7th favorite behind games like FE4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 and maybe 2. I however have more amidable feelings towards games before FE11 for the most part, after SD the quality kinda became unstable a tiny bit. Just reminding that I am saying this as someone who hasn't played FE5 and 14.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say they're all good in their own way. I played most of them (except FE2, 5, 9 and 12 but it's a remake anyway) and there's no "best Fire Emblem" because I like each of them for different reasons. A game is a whole, not a sum of different aspects, each one has its assets and flaws that contribute to define the experience they provide. I tend to appreciate the modernity, improved ergonomics, the quality of the OST (and voice acting), the freedom (brought from the huge content they provide) of the latest games, when the classic one had good stories, like Radiant Dawn's (the way the Part III was handled was wonderful, they depict a nice portrait of politics and how the war became a WW), and many other qualities (they're classical). I'm not even sure which one is my favorite, overall I could say Conquest, but close to others (I love how Fates' mechanics improved the concept of the Fire Emblem experience). But because I think pure nostalgia is meaningless, I'm not ashamed to say that I love the modern games too.

Edited by Brand_Of_The_Exalt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really know precisely what you're asking for, but I guess I can give my two cents on classic versus modern Fire Emblem, if that qualifies as an answer to this.

I think that the biggest difference is probably a game design philosophy one, which is itself due to a general shift in game design philosophy over the years. It's a pretty nebulous thing, so I'm not sure how easy it would be to describe, but I can give a few examples of it.

In Fire Emblem Awakening and Fates, for example, a pretty big chunk of the game's recruitable characters are either simply handed to you (literally everyone prior to Gaius with the half-exceptions of Kellam and Donnel, all the royal siblings, and many more), or are so easy to recruit that they might as well have been (Gaius, Nyx, etc.).

Meanwhile, in, say, Binding Blade or FE7, you'd have characters like Gonzales, or Echidna, or Guy, or Geitz, who you actually have to kinda go out of your way to recruit. You still do get a good number of units just handed to you, but a much larger percentage are characters who you have to make at least some sort of deliberate effort to get.

It's a similar situation with Villages. In Awakening and Fates, Villages aren't generally all that hard to reach, and there's rarely any danger of them being ransacked, especially in Awakening. Inversely, previous Fire Emblem games often had many villages in significant danger of being razed if you didn't hop to it and get to them quickly.

I guess the tl;dr version is that newer Fire Emblem games seem to have taken a lot more cues from standard RPGs in terms of how they set things up. While they aren't totally devoid of significant things that the player has to exert conscious effort to get, those things are much fewer, and there's almost always some alternative, easier method to get the things that are potentially missed.

The way Skills have changed also reflects this. For example, in the Jugdral and Tellius games, while you did have a little wiggle room through Rings/Skill Manuals, Skills were largely predetermined for each character, and there was no Reclassing, either. Awakening's and Fates' system, on the other hand, is much more akin to a Fire Emblemization of the sort of Job System you'd see in a game like Final Fantasy V, or the Final Fantasy Tactics and Bravely series. Not that this is a bad thing, of course—Job Systems are really cool and fun—but it does definitely change the dynamic between units and their Skills, just as Reclassing changes the dynamic between units and their classes.

But, I guess whether this is a good or a bad thing depends on how you look at it. For some, it might be more fun to be relieved of the pressure of needing to work for so many characters and rare items, while others (like myself) might enjoy those characters and items more for the fact that they did require work to get. Neither philosophy is really right or wrong, but there's definitely been a shift on that axis in terms of how the games are designed.

Without getting into it too much, since I know the horse has been beaten into a liquid state at this point, the stories have also been trending more towards standard shonen/JRPG fantasy-style stories, as opposed to having somewhat more of a political focus to them like older Fire Emblem installments did. As with the previous shift, it's totally a matter of personal preference whether this is a good or a bad thing, but, also like before, there has definitely been a shift in direction.

As for myself, I tend to prefer the user interface controls and setup of the newer installments (as well as kids inheriting their non-fixed parent's hair color; that's really cool), but in all other aspects, my preferences tend to lean towards the way the older games did things.

Edited by Topaz Light
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Binding Blade and Sacred Stones era were my favorite. Unless I'm playing Conquest, Fates' gameplay doesn't feel the same. Even then, Conquest's story is unsatisfying to me. I like Awakening, but I'd rather get to make my own Chrom than make my own Robin. I think I just miss feeling like a believable Lord protagonist. Conquest Corrin is too mopey and I wish it felt like you accepted being a Nohrian rather than whining about killing Hoshidans. Azura is a more believable protagonist than Corrin, and I wish he developed an attitude about his choices similar to hers rather than accepting that he made the choice he wanted to make. Birthright I prefer storywise, because I like that Corrin makes it very clear as to whose side he's on. Revelation I like too. But even then, This game feels pretty crappy compared to some of the old ones. Fates' Lunatic mode is to easy, and the addition of Phoenix mode, plus the decrease in difficulty kills the game's integrity as a real Fire Emblem game.

Edited by Edgy Kamui
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Post-Awakening FE is different from pre-Awakening, but I think they both have their merits. I generally like the art and the stories of the older games more, but the newer games run a lot smoother and faster (which is good as Fire Emblem's gameplay is slow enough as is) and Fates at least has some pretty cool and inventive gameplay elements. While Sacred Stones is still my favorite FE, I can't really say I like either modern or classic Fire Emblem better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I started with Awakening, then I went back to the older games. I honestly see no major difference between the eras other than the older ones focusing on story more, and to be honest, since the story is still shit even in the games with more plot focus, I'll take Awakening and Fates' lesser empathsis on plot anyday. A lesser empathsis on plot is one of many reasons I love FE3 and 6 alongside Fates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think FE6-10 was the golden age for Fire Emblem. I like the characters, stories and most of the gameplay was pretty solid too. I didn't care for Shadow Dragon at all and never played the Kaga games, or FE12. Of the "modern" era, I will say this, they are experimenting with the gameplay and making solid progress. Many of the shaky concepts introduced in Awakening have been refined into great features in Fates. I like class skills and Attack/Guard stance a lot, so I'd be happy to see them return. Where the modern games fail is their story and characters. Too many gimmicky characters and the stories range from safe and boring (Awakening, Birthright) to total train wrecks (Conquest and Revelation). I would like them focus more on politics and intrigue, and leave most of the shonen tropes behind. Gameplay-wise, I love having an Avatar character, but I think they are the worst thing to happen to the series in terms of story and characters (not just for themselves, but how other characters are designed to appeal to Waifuism).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess the tl;dr version is that newer Fire Emblem games seem to have taken a lot more cues from standard RPGs in terms of how they set things up. While they aren't totally devoid of significant things that the player has to exert conscious effort to get, those things are much fewer, and there's almost always some alternative, easier method to get the things that are potentially missed.

The way Skills have changed also reflects this. For example, in the Jugdral and Tellius games, while you did have a little wiggle room through Rings/Skill Manuals, Skills were largely predetermined for each character, and there was no Reclassing, either. Awakening's and Fates' system, on the other hand, is much more akin to a Fire Emblemization of the sort of Job System you'd see in a game like Final Fantasy V, or the Final Fantasy Tactics and Bravely series. Not that this is a bad thing, of course—Job Systems are really cool and fun—but it does definitely change the dynamic between units and their Skills, just as Reclassing changes the dynamic between units and their classes.

But, I guess whether this is a good or a bad thing depends on how you look at it. For some, it might be more fun to be relieved of the pressure of needing to work for so many characters and rare items, while others (like myself) might enjoy those characters and items more for the fact that they did require work to get. Neither philosophy is really right or wrong, but there's definitely been a shift on that axis in terms of how the games are designed.

Without getting into it too much, since I know the horse has been beaten into a liquid state at this point, the stories have also been trending more towards standard shonen/JRPG fantasy-style stories, as opposed to having somewhat more of a political focus to them like older Fire Emblem installments did. As with the previous shift, it's totally a matter of personal preference whether this is a good or a bad thing, but, also like before, there has definitely been a shift in direction.

Basically this. There has been a notable shift in direction, and depending on what you want out of the series this can be horribly polarizing regarding the fanbase. I personally have found every game past Shadow Dragon fairly unfulfilling, as Intelligent Systems has shifted their focus to a more anime-centric aesthetic and narrative.

I find the UI and control scheme of modern FE to be quite enjoyable, perhaps at its very best in the franchise, but the use of DLC practices for golden endings/money shortcuts and sloppy execution of world-building elements leaves me largely disinterested and perhaps somewhat offended by recent titles (particularly Fates). The series has exercised a bit of laziness before, but the little details such as weapon icons no longer being personalized to the individual weapon and limited boss conversations outside of Corrin make the world feel dull and uninspired, on par with the early Kaga-era games' simplicity but arriving 20 years too late and without the interconnected designer's notes. It gives me the impression that the characters are simply here to look pretty and impress me (as their spouse or otherwise) rather than take part in an active world where their actions and interactions with other characters have consequences.

But, hey: it's selling copies, so the games are doing something right from a business standpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While there's certainly a different feel to the 3DS games that does somewhat separate them from the rest of the series, my own enjoyment of each game doesn't fall along those lines. For example, I like FE5 more than Conquest but like Conquest considerably more than any of the GBA games. I guess what I'm trying to say is that while I recognize and acknowledge the differences between the 3DS games and the rest of the series said differences don't matter to me as much as the differences between more specific eras and even individual games.

I do agree with Party Moth about how the modern games have handled DLC, though. It rubs me the wrong way and I'll admit I don't understand why some people call it a good DLC model. It's not the worst in the industry, not by far, but it's not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think FE6-10 was the golden age for Fire Emblem. I like the characters, stories and most of the gameplay was pretty solid too. I didn't care for Shadow Dragon at all and never played the Kaga games, or FE12. Of the "modern" era, I will say this, they are experimenting with the gameplay and making solid progress. Many of the shaky concepts introduced in Awakening have been refined into great features in Fates. I like class skills and Attack/Guard stance a lot, so I'd be happy to see them return. Where the modern games fail is their story and characters. Too many gimmicky characters and the stories range from safe and boring (Awakening, Birthright) to total train wrecks (Conquest and Revelation). I would like them focus more on politics and intrigue, and leave most of the shonen tropes behind. Gameplay-wise, I love having an Avatar character, but I think they are the worst thing to happen to the series in terms of story and characters (not just for themselves, but how other characters are designed to appeal to Waifuism).

I totally agree with this FE6 to FE10 was indeed the "Golden Age" of Fire Emblem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They all have their positives and negatives, are good games that felt the same no matter how much is changed, and this 'golden age' is nonexistent, even today when Nintendo considers it a top IP.

The classic FEs, namely the GBA ones, all had some aspects that I like. Some neat maps and mechanics that gave them more depth, as well as being in sprites and having some nice music. Working more to complete a map when compared to Awakening was also a surprise that I enjoyed, and learning how to properly plan for situations was a fun experience. I can easily see why people enjoy these these and games like them. Playing them had me excited for the future.

And here we are. After playing Fates, I can honestly say that all 3 games did their jobs perfectly. Besides a few issues(I will never get over having only one dark tome and dark mages getting nerfed to hell), the games are fun on there own and generally have things that I like about all 3. The general feel of Fire Emblem is still there, as well, even though there are obvious additions to attract fans for people who enjoyed Awakening, but that's not really as a big of a deal as some of the OGs play it out to be. It's just one aspect of the game that they enjoy, and there's no harm in that. If that was the case, the issues that Awakening had would have been possibly left alone.

In terms of story, I honestly don't think that FE will ever have an amazing and engaging story. Sure there may be some moments, but nothing really special, which is why I feel that having high expectations for the story is kinda overkill. All of the FEs that I've played had an okay story, even Conquest had some moments, but nothing really made me say that 'this was FE is all about'. Same can be said with characters. I honestly don't think that every character has to be 'human' or have a deep and tragic story, as well as not every character has to be gimmicky or one dimensional. A healthy balance of the two makes a good cast, in my opinion. Too many gimmicky characters get old, and too many 'human' characters also get old.

In conclusion, the modern age is nice, and the classic age is nice, and no change has impacted what FE is to me: A relentless strategy game filled with rage and salt that requires patience, planning, and time to complete, but fills my body with satisfaction and joy when I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A healthy balance of the two makes a good cast, in my opinion. Too many gimmicky characters get old, and too many 'human' characters also get old.

I think this is a good way to think about characters. It's great having fleshed out, human characters, but a few characters who are just silly or villainous (to name a few roles) is good too. Concerning the modern games, my problem with the casts is they lean pretty heavily in the direction of gimmicky. Or perhaps (because this is a video game and we don't have the time to develop the entire cast as well as a book or tv series), I at least hope the major characters are deep and human, even if bandit boss #2631 just destroys things for the lulz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I dislike Awakening, it was the game that kicked off my Fire Emblem fandom so I will give it props for doing that much, and i still have fun with it even if such occasions are rare. However, as much as i hate to admit it, the older FE games have their problems as well. Poor Balancing in the case of Fire Emblem 3, 4 and 6 with mounted units dominating 4 and 6 (GBA FE's and FE 4 and FE 9 mounted units are just flat-out better than unmounted units) and the large chunk of pre-promos in FE 3 and 12 being useless (more so in FE 12). FE 7 is overrated to hell and back as the game just feels like a dumbed down version of FE 5 with maps that don't hold a candle to Thracia or New Mystery. Speaking of Thracia, the game also has fairly poor balance due to Warp Abuse. Radiant Dawn has terrible balancing due the availability of most units just being garbage. Sigurd and Seth cheese their games harder than Warp Abuse or Awakening Pair up ever could. And I personally hate lower growth rates as it increases the likelihood of your units getting RNG screwed. (FE 12 and 3ds FE's avoid this problem to an extent). Also a large portion of Armor Knights, Archers and early-game fighters in older FE games flat out suck.

While the story, and level design of older FE games and FE 12 for the most part are of higher quality than the new ones (Revelations as an example of how to make the most boring maps in Fire Emblem ever) the older FE games aren't exactly perfect in comparison.

Edited by Valkarian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly love all eras of FE. The series has obviously changed a lot over the years, and games from various eras play very differently from each other, but they're all a blast to play. Hell, it's hard for me to pick a single favourite game and my contenders range throughout the entire FE lifespan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I personally hate lower growth rates as it increases the likelihood of your units getting RNG screwed.

Lower growth rates (not FE 2 standards, god no) or an unbalanced character roster makes me feel like I'm in touch more with the cast, as not every person in an army will always be "top teir lulz." I feel like being RNG Screwed can happen to any unit with any growth rates unless you have 65+ growths in every stat. And when that happens for every character in the game, there is no reason to choose one unit over the other aside from class or personality.

Sure, you are playing as different characters, who may have slight alterations in growths, but when everyone is good because they grow consistently well, you lose a sense of variety in why one unit or character can be used over the other. (Not to mention joke characters or any character in general would have growths to reflect who they were or what they would represent.) Almost every team you have will end up the same. It's like an army of reclassed FE 6 Karels running around, and that isn't very fun. Even if the game is still difficult.

I think modern FE has it's charm, and the games are by no means bad. Although Revelations is debatable in my eyes. But I do think that the time where characters had a reason to stick around or a way that made them unique or interesting without relying on gimmicks or cheap "awww" factor (looking at you, Elise) is gone. Yes, Intelligent systems has a few chances in the coming years to redeem themselves in this respect. I'm just worried that it will get worse from here. And I've got an election to worry about too. But hey, I won't give up on my favorite game series just yet. Now if they can just make the fire emblem about fire....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They all have their positives and negatives, are good games that felt the same no matter how much is changed, and this 'golden age' is nonexistent, even today when Nintendo considers it a top IP.

BINGO!

Not everyone's tastes are the same, so finding that sweet spot where everything comes together is tricky. For me, it was the DS games, despite the rather poor unit balance. For example, Tellius LOOKED good, but I just couldn't get into it in the same way as I did with Archanea. Jugdral seems to have decent lore, but I'm not a fan of the many turns it takes to get from one castle to another. Those are just examples of strengths and flaws within each continent!

That being said, find whatever works best for you, and run with it. If someone else has a different "best", that's awesome, because it's boring when everyone agrees on everything. Not everyone is going to think that (insert FE game here) is the best in the series.

. . .unless it's story. FE's stories are sufficient, at best, and as long as I understand why I'm playing a map, I don't mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm rather a conservative FE player, so I prefer the older games.

I liked mechanics like

  • weapon weight
  • magic triangle
  • certain staves like sleep and berserk
  • finite weapon use

Also for supports I liked the system in GBA and FE9 the most. Idc for avatar and marrying in a FE game at all.

Also, I find Thracia 776 is still a modern FE game to me (even 17 years after date of release), because it made the biggest jump gameplaywise compared to its predecessor. New mission objectives were introduced and capturing is one of the best - if's not even the best mechanic in FE.

Edited by Ayama Wirdo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, I usually think of the Kaga games being the "classic" era and the Maeda games being the "modern" era with the games in between being a sort of "middle" era. But using the definitions presented, I guess I would fit in the "classic era" fandom.

While it can be fun to switch up the classes and influence the stats of the children characters to make them preform different roles, the whole process cheapens the classes. It reduces them to just jobs and robs the classes of their personality. A character's class used to be part of his/her personality and each class had an identity. It also can be satisfying to have characters to have really high stats. The problem with that, as others on this site have stated, is that it lessens the value of each point.

Granted, I can admit that the older games were often poorly balanced, had flat characters, and never had stories that were all that compelling. I do, however, feel that they did things better as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They all have their positives and negatives, are good games that felt the same no matter how much is changed, and this 'golden age' is nonexistent, even today when Nintendo considers it a top IP.

The classic FEs, namely the GBA ones, all had some aspects that I like. Some neat maps and mechanics that gave them more depth, as well as being in sprites and having some nice music. Working more to complete a map when compared to Awakening was also a surprise that I enjoyed, and learning how to properly plan for situations was a fun experience. I can easily see why people enjoy these these and games like them. Playing them had me excited for the future.

And here we are. After playing Fates, I can honestly say that all 3 games did their jobs perfectly. Besides a few issues(I will never get over having only one dark tome and dark mages getting nerfed to hell), the games are fun on there own and generally have things that I like about all 3. The general feel of Fire Emblem is still there, as well, even though there are obvious additions to attract fans for people who enjoyed Awakening, but that's not really as a big of a deal as some of the OGs play it out to be. It's just one aspect of the game that they enjoy, and there's no harm in that. If that was the case, the issues that Awakening had would have been possibly left alone.

In terms of story, I honestly don't think that FE will ever have an amazing and engaging story. Sure there may be some moments, but nothing really special, which is why I feel that having high expectations for the story is kinda overkill. All of the FEs that I've played had an okay story, even Conquest had some moments, but nothing really made me say that 'this was FE is all about'. Same can be said with characters. I honestly don't think that every character has to be 'human' or have a deep and tragic story, as well as not every character has to be gimmicky or one dimensional. A healthy balance of the two makes a good cast, in my opinion. Too many gimmicky characters get old, and too many 'human' characters also get old.

In conclusion, the modern age is nice, and the classic age is nice, and no change has impacted what FE is to me: A relentless strategy game filled with rage and salt that requires patience, planning, and time to complete, but fills my body with satisfaction and joy when I do.

This sums up my toughts pretty well.

FE never truly changed and has remained the same during all the eras and none of Its are genuinely bad just like there isn't an actual best FE, which is something defined by ours own tastes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the "Golden standard" is FE6-FE10, for a few reasons.

- I've played some of FE4 (more than the other Kaga FE's, FE1/3 remakes aside), and it's... well, kinda confusing at times. Some indication should be given of things, but they should also be difficult even with that indication. Things like the child system or certain items in out of the way spots can't really fault the player for not knowing. And some of FE4's mechanics are a tad outdated imo, like the individual gold or lack of trade.

- FE6-FE10 in general never really did much without some indication that it's there, which I like. I like the map design and mechanics of these games, they're simple enough to get the hang of, but can be utilized extremely well. The maps often had side objectives that the player could complete, but weren't necessary, and interesting designs. The casts are my favorites for the series.

- FE11 is an odd one. It's a remake of the first game, and added a lot of things from later games it originally lacked, like the weapon triangle. However, the cast was underwhelming. The lack of any form of support conversations caused only 5 people or so to have any personality at all. Some had no lines besides a death quote, even! It wound up being a step up but what it was, but never felt like enough after we were spoiled. Also, Gaiden requisites, nuff said.

- FE12 suffers from another problem altogether, in that it introduced one of my least favorite things that modern IS has been doing: an Avatar. Kris is a spotlight stealing Sue. Beyond that, it rectifies complaints with 11 (no more anti-Roy Gaiden requisites!), but it foreshadowed a dark turn...

- ...known as FE13. I, quite frankly, despise this game. The maps are boring slogs, and I don't care for 90% of the cast. The story is... ugh, why, and the Avatar is kissed up to quite a bit. The costuming was very hit or miss. And the support system removing the limits was a poor choice causing an unfortunate case of Sturgeon's law being very obvious. And don't even get me started on pair up and second seals.

...yeah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, Tellius represents the golden era of FE and what modern FE needs to use as a base. I liked Awakening and Fates, but not nearly as much. In fact, I'm not even sure I really like Awakening that much anymore. Tellius had the best story and characters, imo, and by far the best world-building. PoR had the best support system. And RD had the best gameplay mechanics.

I haven't played any Japan-only FEs, so I won't comment on them, but the GBA era was mixed for me. I enjoyed Sacred Stones, but FE7 was boring and too basic. It may have something to do with the fact that I played it after RD, meaning I more or less took a big step backward in terms of gameplay mechanics, but I also didn't think the story and characters were any good. Also, supports are a pain in the ass to get in the GBA games.

Modern FE, however, is far too fanservicy and not written well enough. The art direction is awful and the story in Awakening was rubbish. Fates Birthright did better, but I hear that Conquest and Revelation still weren't great. We need writers like those who wrote Tellius, and an art director that isn't allergic to pants-wearing females and doesn't have a fetish for battle thongs/panties and bras.

I get that IS is probably hesitant to try anything with or from Tellius after its poor sales, but because FE is much more popular now than it was then, its getting better advertisement, and Ike is pretty popular, I don't think it would hurt to give it a chance.

Edited by Anacybele
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, each FE "era" has a fantastic game in it, but also has a massive turd. Kaga Era has the awesome FE2 and 3, but also has FE4 which needs to DIE, GBA and Tellius has FE6 and 7, but also has RD which is my second least favorite game in the franchise, and the DS/3DS games have Fates Conquest and Birthrout, which I adore, but FUCK New Mystery.

I like all of the eras of the franchise, but FE4 and 10 are horrible games imo, and FE12 is so damn disappointing as a remake compared to FE11, I can't call it good despite having a lot of fun with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think my feelings one the series is that while I enjoy all of the games for their own reasons, I like sprites much better than 3D modeling. Gameplay aside, sprites give their unique "feel", and I love it.

I'm also of the opinion that FE games without skills are better than the ones with them - so that's really early Kaga and GBA for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...