Civilization V and the Disappointment

Last night I broke down and bought Civilization 5. It was a buy in anger. I had just logged onto WAR to run as fast as I could to the gate for the city attack. While in the city we were faced against a band of scrubs for a defense. Stage 1 was played as if there was no opposition at all. So we capture everything and setup our force at the gate to defend our Lord of Change. I get up to take a piss, 2 minutes maybe, to come back to the gates of Reikwald.


So, now I am 10K less of the renown I most surely would have received, I’m also down 3 Royal crest and … and I can’t do shit for 15 minutes. I can’t queue, I can go back into another instance, I can phap maybe? Overwhelming nerd rage overtook me. To the point that I even took the time for a CSR report. Obviously feedback isn’t enough. No response. So, knowing that my mood was going to be foul, I turned down a ToVL run. I just knew frustrating PvE was not the thing to do while I was steaming. So I bought and downloaded Civ 5.

Surprisingly the game downloaded and installed in no time. I mean, it was to the degree that I thought something went wrong. It was way to fast.

Now, to start, I am an old Civilization player. Like I started playing Civ 2 and went and bought Civ 1 after the better game just to see it, I was so in love. Civilization III owned me for 2 years and Civ IV’s box set is sitting on my shelf. It’s just tin, that’s just how much I love that game. And now, I go and read the reviews and I’m sad I missed the reviews from my fellow Civilization lovers before buying this game. This is not Civilization, this is not my Civilization at all.

You begin the game, and as a veteran Civilization player you roll your mouse over everything. Trying to learn the statistics, trying to see the notes. There is none. So then you go into settings trying to find how to turn back on those key OCD loved enablers of our beloved Civ III and IV features. To no avail. Okay, maybe they wanted a less cluttered screen. Can I right-click and pull up a Civlopedia to tell me every little detail? NO you fucking can’t. It does have a Civilopedia, it’s just mind-numbingly fucking stupid, it makes you want to blow the balls/ovaries off the designers so that they can’t reproduce future morons of game designs.

It shows you almost nothing. It’s not detailed at all. For instance, I’m playing as Alexander of the Greeks, and my little Warrior pack goes on a tribal village and upgrades my Warriors to Hoplite. Interesting I thought on 2 points, villages can now also upgrade your troops. But more so, as in past Civilizations, Warriors and Spearman were always on different upgrade trees. Warriors go to Axeman then to Macemen then to Machinegunners (Attack Based). Where Spearmen got to Pike then to Riflemen (Defense Based). I wanna see what changed. Go to Civilopedia, look up Warriors and …. yes in fact Warriors do in fact exist in the game. Thank you Civilopedia, your outstanding helpfulness was overwhelming in the amount of knowledge you spewed. For Sid’s sake, even Civ Revolution had a detailed Civilopedia.

So now it’s time for some combat. How much strategy and risk is there in combat? As long as you can understand colors, none what so effing ever. It clearly tells you exactly how its going to play out before you attack. What risk or big gain is there? None. 

Looking at reviews of game reviewers, Civilization V is being praised. Except, who earned giant respects from me for standing up and saying exactly what this game is. It’s a sad compromise to less involvment and thought to hopefully get them to play Civ. Which is a mind fuck in itself. You built a franchise that was on the complete basis for making a complex world. And now you want to meet them half way?

You clearly removed Religions due to political correctness so that you didn’t offend. It’s just like when you removed Tobacco from Civ III, you have no backbone. Religion has and in some ways, continues to be the main feature of everything in history. Go kill this, the Pope says so. Go claim this, I hate Taoism. What happened to the learning experience of Civilization. The quotes, the back history, the explanation. In this, I don’t get moments where I go, “Oh, I never knew Socrates said that.” Or, “Impies beat Italian tank divisions in northern Africa? Pansies.” Don’t sacrifice cool ass quotes and tidbits and then game play because, some Catholic Girl is going to get offended that Christianity was founded by the Chinese. It’s a fucking game, fuck her. She’ll repent, it’s all good.

Songhai, really? Really? That’s the big civilization for Africa? Mud huts? Spain, who practically came close to owning most the world didn’t even make it. But, we can’t forget Songhai.

It’s like they took the one game that actually had complexity and ruined it. Each Civ is supposed to get more and more complex, to the point the only thing holding back the games are the capabilities of the computers at the time. Civ III was light years in complexity from Civ II. And the 3 expansions just each add to that complexity. Then Civ IV comes, and we are blown away at the capabilities and just the depth of what we wanted out of Civilization. And then the expansions just take that depth and dig a new hole to China feeding our hearts content at having density and a bottomless pit of situations to tryout and manage. I and I’m sure my fellow Civ lovers were expecting Civ V to deliver the end all of real strategy and awesomeness. At the very worse, basically Civ IV with updated graphics and some new features.

That’s not what this is at all. Yeah, the graphics are better, but as for depth, new complexity, new things to learn, harder situations to manage. Ummmmmm … I didn’t see that. Am I supposed to have to wait till the industrial revolution to flex a brain cell to play this. I feel like I’m playing Civ Revolution on my PC. On my PEE CEE. The difference is it doesn’t take 5 minutes to save on my iPhone. As well, it doesn’t crash to desktop every other animation. This game is filled with bugs. Which makes no sense, there is nothing to it.

I was back on my DoK by 10 PM, needless to say. A shameless disappointment. Civilization V: Was IV too complicated, well come try V.

Post Edit: Some strong nouns like dumb and stupid offended some people and apparently was taken too personal. The post has been edited. Basically I just edited out those words. Almost same sentence. If you find yourself offended by Mr. Meh, thank you for taking me seriously, but in the future, I wouldn’t.

Bottom Line:

If you loved Civ IV, I can’t express to you the ungodly hate you will probably have for Civ V. The heavens will open and you will cry tears of blood.

If you hated Civ IV, you might have a shot at liking Civ V, many are happy as hell. Go try it out. There’s a free trial on Steam. Take minutes to download.


40 thoughts on “Civilization V and the Disappointment

  1. I guess that’s why I like Civ V, and have never been a big fan of the previous titles. Never thought I was stupid before, but I guess it must be true!

    Although I DID like Alpha Centauri….and I never thought that was very easy. Oh, and Star Wars Rebellion. That was micromanagement heaven and most people thought it was too hard for a Star Wars game, but I loved it. OH, and Carnage Heart…it was a game where you had to program a mech for battle. You had no control over him other than the design of the program you outfitted it with before battle. Liked that a lot.

    But yeah, I’m stoopid because I like Civ V.

    Come on man, seriously?

    You didn’t like the implementation, I get that….a hundred times over. But calling people dumb for liking a game?

    • Hmmmm … though stupid is a harsh word (Not really, I’m pretty effing mean) it doesn’t go into calling you stupid neccessarily for ‘liking Civ 5’ so much as a rant about dumbing down the game.

      I’m mostly attacking Firaxis. You wanna setup a ‘clean’ mode for not so OCD user? Okay.

      Making the whole game easier for everyone is not why I fell in love with Civ. Don’t hold me back in Algebra when I want to do Calculus just cause 3 people in the class can’t keep up.

      The last lines of my article are an attack against the developers. I never would have thought it could be construde as an insult to the player base.

      But now I see. Yes, Slurms, you are an idiot :D

      Serioulsy though … you liking Civ V and hating the prior is kind of my point. Stupidity or not, possibly bad choice of words (but you are at Mr. Meh’s blog, nothing PC here), I’m not at all happy the game was made to gain new players yet rip off the old. I see the veterans talking, we are not pleased.

      • I DO read your blog, I have you subscribed in my reader, so I’m aware of your flare and typically enjoy your writing. I just thought this was a bit much and hit too close to home because I DO like Civ V, and it really gets under my skin when people make attacks at someones personal enjoyment of a game. (regardless if that was your intent)

        I totally get your point that you think that the game has been molded into something to appeal towards a larger audience. I think BioWare is doing that with Dragon Age 2. But hey, they want to make money and like it or not Civ and Dragon Age aren’t “mass appeal” games. Sucks for the veteran players of the series, but I just think you could have gotten the rage towards Firaxis understood without the attack.

        I do have to ask though, have you tried anything past the default mode? I haven’t yet, but I am beginning to see some ease in combat, and will be starting another game with a larger map and higher difficulty. Just wonder if an increased difficulty would be more up your alley.

      • I hated Dragon Age 2. After playing I basically no longer look forward to SW:TOR. If I wanted to waste time in constant conversation trying to find the best words to get laid, I would stay more in real life. Maybe …

        My point is. The game isn’t bad, I see what it’s trying to do and it will, after some major bug fixes probably be more successful. However, it is not Civ V as we, the lovers of CIV IV and its predos imagined it. It’s at best, Civ: Revolutions II. Drop the price by $20 and don’t call it FIVE, and I would have been happy. However, it is FIVE and this is what we are stuck with for 4 years with.

        Firaxis took advantage of the veteran players, know we would buy this. I won’t be buying any expansions, and CIV 6 will be purchased under heavy heavy consideration.

        Yeah, I’m still playing in multiple functions, hoping I can find the Civ that I love in it. The problem with hgiher difficulty is not so much that it adds back complexity as it just increases the complication. Civ isn’t (rather wasn’t) so much about convolution, more than it was about detail and depth. I don’t see that.

        Civ 5 is the Star Wars Episode I to its fans. Best metaphor I can think of.

  2. You’re basically calling people who enjoy Civ V morons, yet you dropped $50 on this title without playing the free demo first? Even the most gushing reviews point out the fact that Civ V is more accessible than its predecessors save for Revolutions.

    My personal experience with the demo was pretty positive, though I’ll admit I did a bit too well on easy mode. I suppose it’s a testament to ease of play when I barely read the civopedia or advisor tips and my civ was still en route to military domination within the first 100 turns. Then again, it was easy mode and I was a big player of Civ I & II.

    What mode were you playing on? I hear you need to micromanage a lot more on King mode.

    • Actually did do the Trial first last week. Was hoping it was just ‘clean’ for easy trial mode.

      Arrrgggghhh.. it wasn’t.

      Yes. I keep making that $50 mistake with my fingers crossed on too many things.

      I noticed the need for more micro management in King mode, but that also gives my opponents 30% advantage in battle.

    • Huge difference between being “more accessible” and being completely watered down for the casual brainless masses…and yeah a free demo isn’t going to cut it for people who have loved a franchise for decades…We assume it wouldn’t sell out and get worse…just like Total War and every other developer nowadays. Stream line and feed to the console loving idiots…rinse repeat. When there was a touch screen option for the game I knew it was going to be one step up from playing fucking farmsville…

  3. Stupid is a bad word. What the earlier Civ games was were *complicated*. But eventually you got the hang of it, if you stuck with it long enough.

    Part of why I enjoyed the previous Civ titles was because they were complicated. Numbers were everywhere, and it was such an enjoyment on getting on top of them and “beating” the game.

    With Civ5 all that is gone. I understand that they wanted to make it more accessable and easier to us, but not by sacrificing the entire soul of the game!

    Take diplomacy for instance. In Civ4 you knew which people hated you, and for why. You attacked their friend (-2), you stopped trading with them (-1), you helped them once (+1). It was easy to see who liked who and form alliances based on those facts. Nothing like that exist in Civ5. We are to assume that AI is like players and will do batshit stupid things just because the hell of it. In Civ5 you have “pact of cooperation” (try look it up in the Civilopedia – it doesn’t exist) which apparently “makes them like you more”.

    If the things you do in diplomacy matter (and I’m not even sure they do) I can’t keep track of all the deals and insults everyone does to eachother to form even a basic understanding of who likes who.

    I want my numbers back. Would it be so hard to make an “advanced mode” where the game drops the kiddy gloves and show you the actual numbers in the tooltips?

    All that aside, the hexagons and no unit stacking are huge improvements, and I’m not sure I even can go back to Civ4 if I wanted to.

    • I disagree on the *complicated*. Complicated implies too hard. Complex implies depth.

      To me, they were difficult. They were so vast in the amount of possibilities, the game was different each time you played. And you learned something new each time.

      Yeah, at first glances it seems overwelming. One read of the civilopedia and its easy. All that’s left is you remember to manage and getting good rolls.

      I like your other points. There was a big push in IV to make diplomacy make sense instead of just have massive agressive AI. I feel like the diplomacy is like CIV II again.

      “Hey, wanna help me destroy those smelly Mongols?”
      “No, well FU.”

      And then they just continuely ask that every turn.

  4. Civ3 and 4 were rather dull and monotonous. You knew exactly how those were going to pan out before you did anything too. The combat in those two games sucked donkey balls. Especially compared to Civ 5. They took the best parts of Civ and the best parts of Panzer General and combined them. Big win for fans of both games.

    • Strongly disagree with your take. Though I like not stacking and hexagon movement. The combat is overly pretictable now.

      Didn’t play Panzer General, I have no comparison.

      • The only real problem with combat in CIV V is that there are no probabilities displayed for the attack – the EXACT results are displayed – knowing exactly what will happen in a battle beforehand makes it no battle at all … – on the other hand naval unit’s are finally to their full potential being able to bombard units in open terrain, and the introduction of actual ranged units

        there is a good move to no stacking and to hexagon tiles – but when you take uncertainty from battles you have really messed up

        it’s a great game – but it could have been much better if not for the dumbing down of the gameplay too suit today’s masses of console players – civilopedia isn’t what it should be (not enough detail, should be a lot more), there’s no tech trading (i like the research agreement but would have liked to have trading too), there’s no fixed “no growth” option (insted you have to fiddle, and can make it on your own, but then why can’t the AI make it(?))…

        not everything but enough to make a point

        a great game overall but it could have been even better without some glaring mistakes

      • Yeah, the no growth was a great feature of both III and IV to manage cities.

        Exactly my point on combat. It has no roll to it. No fortune, no misfortune.

  5. I’m going to politely disagree, I’m all for complexity, but I like the accessibility of Civilization V. While I do admit that things like Diplomacy are somewhat batshit insane, going from one turn of liking you to war the next for little to no reason, the positive’s that Civilization V brings, IE: Social Policies, City States, and actually being able to win without resorting to Domination/Space Race everytime, are big pluses for me.

    For the record, if you don’t mean to imply that people who enjoy this implementation are retarded, you should probably use better word choice, because as I read this I also felt as if this was directed towards me, not a developer.

    Its funny, because I *hate* Heroes IV, V, Kingdoms, and Online, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to rant on people who happen to like it. Perhaps you were just having a bad day, and the fact that you don’t like this version compounded with that.

    • aaaaahhh …. again, maybe not a big reader here. There is nothing PC about Mr. Meh’s drunken rants. I don’t make friends, I make the ragers rage. RAGE.

      So, you don’t have to politely anything here. Your love for the game is awesome, good for you. Who the Eff cares what Mr. Meh thinks.

      However … it still stands. Civ IV was Civ III plus. Civ III was Civ II OMG plus. And Civ II was light years over One, but major seperation in years. So … if I’m a hard veteran of Civilization would I not expect Civ V to be Civ IV plus awesome?

      Did I honestly get that (you sound like a veteran player to me)? I got major graphics, (alot of crashing with that I think), I got improved combat (different take that works more board like), but really I got a lot less game. I got less to manage, I have less to strategy, less options, more time to think about it though, a great deal less information, and quiet frankly not what I was expecting.

      Granted, if you took the good; hexagon board, combat and city states, and really graphics and just put them on the Civ IV model, I would be uber fanatistic in love. OMG. I’m getting giddy in the pants just thinking of the possibility.

      I actually got Revoluions plus.

      Veteran player with a sad and angry face here. Read around, are you seeing a shortage of us? Cuz I’m not at all. I’m just the angeriest of them. RAGE.

  6. I hate to say I agree with much of what you said (minus the stupid people part… well mostly). I saw a few reviews but everyone only seemed to be complaining about one or two minor things that bugged them, nothing debilitating. Happens all the time so i finally went out and got the game. First few turns felt kinda normal with a few tweaks, happened everytime since Civ 1.

    After a while though i felt that the essence of civ that gets me hooked every new game was totally lacking. Religions were a huge step up in civ 4 and have played an undeniable role in history and now they are gone. Their choice of civs was…. weak. Major world players like the Spanish, Portuguese, and Byzantines weren’t included but Songhai? Bleh…

    Combat was a nice change. But i have a hard time really saying its better. It’s just different. It adds a whole new level of complexity that i like but, maybe its just me, units seem much more difficult to come by. if you are in a war and you lose someone thats it. wait 30 turns to replace them even if you have your best production city on it (playing on marathon, i like the full experience). i only made it most of the way through the middle ages so maybe it gets better in that aspect. i certainly made little mistakes in my early game but regardless, playing on prince i had a cakewalk over anyone who opposed me. it was a little too easy. boosted the difficulty and it doesnt get more complex or present a problem that requires a more intricate level of management and strategizing to get over. it just downright gives you insane disadvantages like -30% in combat. i guess older versions did that to an extent but this is a little more over the top.

    The diplomacy feels really lacking in this one. City states are definitely a really neat addition but dealing with them is missing so much potential. give them gold, they become happy. don’t give them gold they slowly decrease how much they like you. its way too cut and dry. they offer you little missions to perform but still, they slowly deteriorate how much they like you after you accomplish them. i feel like there needs to be more substance behind just throwing money at them.

    The bugs in the game are inexcusable. This feels like a game that was rushed off the assembly line and chucked at us without any serious beta testing if any at all (i didn’t check). at one point it was crashing for me every 5 turns and i have a pretty up to date machine. go figure the last game that i got that absolutely required Steam was Empire Total War and i had similar problems. going to definitely think twice before getting games that require steam (not sure if its steam related or not but it was certainly a b**** to install).

    All in all i feel that they did some things right and moved in the right direction with combat, having cities being able to purchase additional territory, setting up puppet states, and independent city states that hold civs in check from becoming super powers early on to name a few. however in a cruel twist they annihilated certain aspects of the game that made civ feel like civ. no unit stacking whatsoever, dumbed down diplomacy with pointless aspects like pacts of cooperation, a poor civilopedia, no more transports, and many other tweaks just really shot the game down for me. i’m really hoping some mods down the road bring about some positive change for us civ vets looking for an upgraded version of the real deal rather than a hollow shell of its former glory but until then i am shelving it and returning to civ 4.

    First time i’ve been disappointed with a civ… hopefully 6 will be better if there is one in 5 years.

    • Effing exactly, right?

      Same, there were lots that werent please, expressed the same concern with bugs, but… but thats not usually enough to scare me away.

      And it should have. In hindsight.

    • I have been using Steam for a long time and I have never had any major problems with it. My Civ5 has also never crashed for me yet.

      On a completely different note, the Total War series has been becoming and more and more like Civilization each game. Empire and Napoleon (the latest) has tech trees, workable tiles (kinda), but the strategy, combat, trade, and diplomacy completely blows Civ out of the water.

      If Civ6 continue the trend of Civ5 (number of sales will probably dictate that more than feedback) then we might get an even dumber game. Meanwhile the upcoming Shogun 2 – Total War could be the best yet.

    • yeah civ 6 being a dumber version of civ 5 is exactly what i’m worried about. civ 5 already has an automatic audience out of us civ vets and i think they got a bunch of new people to “try it out”. the result? they’re going to look at it and go “hearken! everyone likes dumber! Lets keep this up!” when the grim reality is the loyal fan base (probably the majority of people who bought it initially) are shell shocked to say the least. i hope they read some honest customer reviews and adjust from there….

  7. I’m sorry, but I loved Civ IV and I love Civ V. I am sorry that you find Civ V so bad, but to state that all those who loved Civ IV will hate the newest version is wrong. Love the blog by the way.

  8. V is horrible, HORRIBLE i say!

    I was so full of hope for this game. It is a shame for the frenchise.

    And everyone, YES FUCKING EVERYONE, which can enjoy this crap wasnt a Civ IV player. I mean, even the social concepts are a joke compared to the old politic system.

    Whoever made this game has to get spanked with a sword.

    T Y (!!) for the first honest review.

  9. Honestly, I found your blog by googling solutions for my CONSTANT crashes on this game. I literally cannot load a save while in-game anymore without a crash 100% of the time… and yes, I have a fully up-to-date rig in every way (I’ve also seen all sorts of trouble-shooting articles by now, and none of them seem to give any useful tips on this). And when I’m not crashing, saving and/or loading from ANYWHERE leaves me waiting almost eternally. Again, I have a top-rate rig with everything up-to-date, and can flawlessly run other games/programs with graphics that blow Civ5’s out of the galaxy.

    I certainly have issues with the dumbed-down gameplay as well, but the embarrassing amount of bugs are what made me officially stop playing. Many people give ‘Elemental: War of Magic’ a hard time because of its many bugs. But let me assure you; Civ5’s bugs are far worse. I can actually PLAY Elemental without a crash for a good number of hours.

    Let me go a step further and recommend that game to anyone who wants a new turn-based-strategy game where you build an empire and doesn’t mind fantasy elements mixed in, Elemental is a solid choice. It’s got bugs, but they’re gradually being worked out in various patches and it’s already VASTLY superior to Civ5 in nearly every area.

    Anyway, it was nice to see a somebody write an honest review about this game. I must thank you for it. A rant it may be, but it desperately needs to get out there how awful this game is. It’s as if 2KGames literally paid-off every single reviewer on the face of the earth to shine-up this massive turd, while at the same time successfully fooling the masses.

    Spread the word; Now that religion has been banned from Civ, not even GOD himself can save this series.

    • LMAO.

      I keep trying to play it. I go a couple days and then go, “I wanna try CIV V again.”

      The further I get in the more and more of the save bugs I encounter. It’s definitely crashing a lot more than I expected. Once you get into later periods and everyone has 5+ cities, I end my turn and cross fingers for a chance to save.

      I’m not really sure how this got really decent reviews. It really confuses me. I mean it didn’t get modest reviews, it got really really good reviews and metascores.

  10. Yeah, I totally agree with every word.
    I used to play it on immortal (deity is too rough)

    at first, it looks suspiciously beautiful.
    after few moments – I realized why.
    so I thought – “it always happens in a new game, I just need to get to know it.”

    so yeah, the Hexes are good, the non stacked units are a good idea as well.

    but as u suggested – no info at all
    too many lines of words that tells u nothing.
    no hint of which unit require which tech.
    the design and compostions are awful.
    the style is sleek, but hard to comprehend (i.e trade table – took me a whole game to find it).
    the units are so rare that every one killed means your end is close.
    as a bottom line – no flow.

    the most amazing thing is – if a unit is in a city that is being conquered next turn – the unit vanishes ! no defence, nothing ! if u boght it, its gone with the gold..!
    who the hell designed this game??

    reminds me of HOMM 3 and HOMM 4… the same degrading because of a shitty art director.
    hope they revert back on CIV 6, that is, if I’ll be interested by then.

    total war it is.

    • Yeah.

      Total War has now completely taken the torch of complex strategy.

      At first Empire really wasn’t my style, had to play it a couple of times to enjoy it.

      If I heard an announcement for Medieval 3 I would flat out shit myself.

  11. I was very dissapointed, but I should have known better and played the demo first.

    Most people do not want to commit too much time into anything in this information heavy age and the developers cleary figured that there was more money to be made with that audience.

    I am of course sad that they choose to alienate their fanbase, but I as a consumer can just stop buying their products.

    • Yeah. That will work for future expansions. But Civ V definitely got away with a lot more purchases than they should have because of the loyal fanbase buying blind.

      4 years from now, I can only imagine the developer promising Civ 6 going to its roots to try and get us to come back. They know what they did.

      IMO, you got your money, but you are now just opened the door for a new strategy king to take over. I look to Total War to take the chance. Maybe even THQ with a broad game play in Dawn of War. (but that’s just super wishful thinking.)

  12. I found your review after a rather disappointing game of civ 5. I also want to like this game. I really do. But it’s just minute after painful minute of ‘next turn’ for me. Some of the maps are PAINFULLY slow (anything island, for example), the AI is dumb, there aren’t big city boosts for luxury or strategic resource development, and being a ‘builder’ player I find that CIV 5 feels like watching paint dry. When you get to the industrial age, it speeds up a little, like real life I suppose. But do I play this because I want to actually relive all of human history year by painful year, and THEN start playing around 1800?

    The game is so dumbed down that I just feel like quitting it every 20 minutes or so. And I’ve been trying to play this for months–I too have been playing civ since the early 90s, yet for some reason I feel like a 12 year old whose holding a cell phone and texting his friends while watching television AND playing this. This is not the engrossing civ I was hoping for. I’m supposed to look up and see that 5 hours have passed, freaking out because i have work in the morning. But I don’t. And yet like an idiot I go back to this game from time to time, convincing myself that it is not so bad. When, yeah, it kind of is.

  13. Great post! I couldn’t agree with you more. I was playing the civ series since the first one (for DOS), and this was the biggest disappointment ever…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s