Infinite world size

User avatar
LMD
Member
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 08:16
GitHub: appgurueu
IRC: appguru[eu]
In-game: LMD
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Infinite world size

by LMD » Post

debiankaios wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 13:32
LMD wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 10:56
Finding people who want a feature (usually players) is a lot easier than finding developers to implement the feature.
Really? https://github.com/proller/minetest/tree/minetest32
Yes. I was well aware of that PR. Despite making an honest effort, it was never close to the finish line and still had major issues to be resolved - not to mention backwards compatibility as well as worse performance & memory consumption on 32-bit devices. The core devs decided to shut it down for a reason (partially the reasons I outlined above, I assume). Proller made two PRs, both with massive diffs, which would've occupied practically most if not all available dev time had they been reviewed, conflicted with plenty of other PRs and were not sufficient to implement the feature to begin with. The devs would have had to put all other PRs aside to review & merge risky changes where a final stage might never come.
debiankaios wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 13:32
Yes, you don't really think it'll change in future? And in 10 years it will be harder to do, as if we would do it now because there will be many more features.
"Never" is also an option - those "many more" features may take priority, especially considering the value / effort ratio :)
debiankaios wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 13:32
I don't know what we do wrong. Mindustry is also so much fun like minetest and here are stats of minetest and Mindustry:
  • minetest has 625 cotributors, Mindustry has 482 contributors
    In minetest are 994 of 6551 Issues closed and in Mindustry are 3283/3283 Isues closed
    minetest-devlopment begann at end of 2010(12 years ago) and Anukens(maintainer of Mindustry) made his first commit in Mindustry at end of 2017(5 years ago)
That are only 3 of many stats which show that other repos do anything other and get them goals. I know last time that a update(I think it was 5.5.0) comes 5 months to late and some features which should been added weren't added. I think if we do anything other there wouldn't be so much problems.
Is Minetest engine development painfully slow? Yes. sfan5 has recently compared Minetest with a "government organization" due to 100loc taking a whopping year to be merged. See Zughy's work for how to speed it up through prioritization. Our main bottleneck probably is coredev approval. I hope it's getting better with the latest addition of TurkeyMcMac to the team.

Yet this is an absolute apples-to-oranges comparison.

First of all, Minetest being around longer is not a plus point as in "there was more time to work on it" - we have a decade-old legacy codebase. Mindustry is only half a decade old; they probably have a much cleaner codebase & stack (yay JVM) and didn't make mistakes like depending on abandonware like Irrlicht.

Second: It is apparent from your stats that Mindustry is more popular and sees more activity (consider e.g. contributors / year or issues / year).

Third: Issues don't scale linearly. At first, issues are probably low-hanging fruits such as bugfixes. Later on, only nontrivial feature request issues or hard-to-fix bugs remain. You got your numbers for Minetest swapped: The larger number of almost 6.5k is the number of issues closed, which is pretty impressive. "3283/3283 [issues] closed" for Mindustry also should be suspect to you: It means issues - especially nontrivial feature requests - are rigorously closed (on the plus side, it probably means bugs are worked on - unless they were sweeping them under the rug). You are advocating for a feature request - for which there are good reason to dismiss it, and where core devs have dismissed the PRs already - to not be dismissed here. Think about it.

Fourth: Counting contributors is insufficient as it says nothing about how invested contributors are. I would assume that Mindustry contributors may be more invested.

Fifth: The scope of Mindustry and Minetest is way different.

Sixth: Let me add another stat: Number of open PRs - the lower the better. Zughy has been triaging hard to keep it low for Minetest, managing to have just ~80. Mindustry has twice as many at around 160. So clearly Mindustry is again getting more contributions or managing PRs worse.

TL;DR: Your comparison with Mindustry is not constructive at all. Involve yourself in engine dev before you start criticizing it.
My stuff: Projects - Mods - Website

User avatar
debiankaios
Member
Posts: 886
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 12:48
IRC: debiankaios
In-game: debiankaios Nowe
Location: germany
Contact:

Re: Infinite world size

by debiankaios » Post

I am understanding your points. I heared of many proposing switch to other engines (because irrlicht is outdated) for example godot. I think also minetest has a great Development, and i would gladly help but there are two points:
  • I began learning C middle of this month and C++ some months ago. i am not ready now to make big changes.
  • I don't use Github to time with a reason
I also try to help where i can. Ok maybe it's not the core of minetest, but it's to time the best help i can offer.

c56
Member
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2021 03:05
GitHub: tigercoding56
In-game: bm5 or bemo5 also sell_her_on55

Re: Infinite world size

by c56 » Post

debiankaios wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 13:32
LMD wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 10:56
Finding people who want a feature (usually players) is a lot easier than finding developers to implement the feature.
Really? https://github.com/proller/minetest/tree/minetest32
LMD wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 10:56
This feature pretty clearly is high effort (nontrivial to implement, would create merge conflicts with practically all PRs and likely introduce subtle bugs to linger around for a decade), low reward (no one can even store a full world with the current limits, so workarounds like stacking dimensions are definitely feasible) and thus understandably low priority in the eyes of most devs.
Yes, you don't really think it'll change in future? And in 10 years it will be harder to do, as if we would do it now because there will be many more features.
LMD wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 10:56
There always is a trade-off to be made: How important is a feature to players & developers? How hard is it to implement? Prioritization is necessary. Minetest development slowed down to a crawl because of lack of proper prioritization. Fork Minetest and implement it yourself if you want it so dearly.
I don't know what we do wrong. Mindustry is also so much fun like minetest and here are stats of minetest and Mindustry:
  • minetest has 625 cotributors, Mindustry has 482 contributors
    In minetest are 994 of 6551 Issues closed and in Mindustry are 3283/3283 Isues closed
    minetest-devlopment begann at end of 2010(12 years ago) and Anukens(maintainer of Mindustry) made his first commit in Mindustry at end of 2017(5 years ago)
That are only 3 of many stats which show that other repos do anything other and get them goals. I know last time that a update(I think it was 5.5.0) comes 5 months to late and some features which should been added weren't added. I think if we do anything other there wouldn't be so much problems.
aaawwww here we go again with long discussions :P

what we do wrong seems to be discussing instead of getting to the point looking at mindustrys PR's

https://github.com/Anuken/Mindustry/pull/7625
this is a signature not a place to post messages also if i could change my username i would change it to sell_her_on55

c56
Member
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2021 03:05
GitHub: tigercoding56
In-game: bm5 or bemo5 also sell_her_on55

Re: Infinite world size

by c56 » Post

debiankaios wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 17:57
I am understanding your points. I heared of many proposing switch to other engines (because irrlicht is outdated) for example godot. I think also minetest has a great Development, and i would gladly help but there are two points:
  • I began learning C middle of this month and C++ some months ago. i am not ready now to make big changes.
  • I don't use Github to time with a reason
I also try to help where i can. Ok maybe it's not the core of minetest, but it's to time the best help i can offer.
yes but its very hard to compile godot based games without having godot installed ;P and one could probably manually compile minetest even without make by linking things manually (not that anyone would do that to themself )
this is a signature not a place to post messages also if i could change my username i would change it to sell_her_on55

User avatar
LMD
Member
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 08:16
GitHub: appgurueu
IRC: appguru[eu]
In-game: LMD
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Infinite world size

by LMD » Post

c56 wrote:
Fri Sep 30, 2022 00:02
aaawwww here we go again with long discussions :P

what we do wrong seems to be discussing instead of getting to the point looking at mindustrys PR's

https://github.com/Anuken/Mindustry/pull/7625
Good point - Mindustry seems to have much more trivial PRs, again reinforcing my stance that this was a pointless apples-to-oranges comparison to begin with :P
My stuff: Projects - Mods - Website

User avatar
rubenwardy
Moderator
Posts: 6805
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 18:11
GitHub: rubenwardy
IRC: rubenwardy
In-game: rubenwardy
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Infinite world size

by rubenwardy » Post

Mindustry is also a commercial project and so can afford to pay full-time developers
Renewed Tab (my browser add-on) | Mods | Minetest Modding Book

Hello profile reader

proller
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 15:22

Re: Infinite world size

by proller » Post

debiankaios wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 13:32
LMD wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 10:56
Finding people who want a feature (usually players) is a lot easier than finding developers to implement the feature.
Really? https://github.com/proller/minetest/tree/minetest32
Plz use https://github.com/proller/minetest/tree/minetest32net
(updated to 5.6.1)

User avatar
debiankaios
Member
Posts: 886
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 12:48
IRC: debiankaios
In-game: debiankaios Nowe
Location: germany
Contact:

Re: Infinite world size

by debiankaios » Post

Thank you proller that you further try it and still work on this project.

c56
Member
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2021 03:05
GitHub: tigercoding56
In-game: bm5 or bemo5 also sell_her_on55

Re: Infinite world size

by c56 » Post

proller wrote:
Fri Sep 30, 2022 17:32
debiankaios wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 13:32
LMD wrote:
Thu Sep 29, 2022 10:56
Finding people who want a feature (usually players) is a lot easier than finding developers to implement the feature.
Really? https://github.com/proller/minetest/tree/minetest32
Plz use https://github.com/proller/minetest/tree/minetest32net
(updated to 5.6.1)
thank you proller even though we dont deserve it
+Joke for those who can handle it
this is a signature not a place to post messages also if i could change my username i would change it to sell_her_on55

DOOM_possum
Member
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2021 22:06
In-game: DOOM_possum

Re: Infinite world size

by DOOM_possum » Post

hopefully someone can help us

i want to make my SEED infinite, and not start over
i'd ask some High Powered Ranking members, like the LOTR clone dev
but i don't think they know how------------------otherwise i'm stuck just... like, you know, chunking that really small map, with some blocks, when i could be having ounces of Fun

User avatar
ROllerozxa
Member
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2021 12:25
GitHub: ROllerozxa
IRC: ROllerozxa
In-game: ROllerozxa
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Infinite world size

by ROllerozxa » Post

DOOM_possum wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 01:27
i want to make my SEED infinite
uh, keep that to yourself.
ContentDB Editor | ContentDB | GitHub

User avatar
j0j0n4th4n
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2021 06:45

Re: Infinite world size

by j0j0n4th4n » Post

This feature pretty clearly is high effort (nontrivial to implement, would create merge conflicts with practically all PRs and likely introduce subtle bugs to linger around for a decade), low reward (no one can even store a full world with the current limits, so workarounds like stacking dimensions are definitely feasible) and thus understandably low priority in the eyes of most devs.
I totally agree the feature is low reward but I don't agree the effort is as high as you think. If the mapgen and coordinate system were to change to accommodate larger worlds yes but I don't think that is the only way to achieve larger sizes.

Different worlds could be 'adjacent' to each others, and by that I mean when the player reach one side of the world they would be logout from that world and login into another one whose terrain would be generated using the adjacent world border as constraining boundaries, to ensure it is continuous.

This way it is possible to have actual infinite worlds, at least as infinite as your storing device can get. They could even loop together if they are ordered to do so.

I think this approach would be a lot easier to do, it wouldn't break compatibility and would add a lot of customization since each world is separated. That wouldn't came without problems, I imagine having chunks from other worlds loaded due to mods like techage would be hard to implement and probably would present safety issues, the logout - login is another problem as it could break immersion however it could be masked by a loading screen, Resident Evil did that for years and I don't see people complaining. And finally, keeping track of different nodes from different mods could also be huge a problem to handle.

Despite all these problems(and probably others I haven't thought about) I still think it is worth considering how much extra space it would bring and how modular this approach is. It can even allow different sizes of nodes in relation to the player.
There always is a trade-off to be made: How important is a feature to players & developers? How hard is it to implement? Prioritization is necessary. Minetest development slowed down to a crawl because of lack of proper prioritization.
That, I do agree. The feature is not that important, most people playing singleplayer won't run out of space anytime soon and servers may not have storage space for generating infinite worlds. But still, if we were so pragmatic we wouldn't be discussing any innovative features as they would be the most impractical. Besides, the discussion itself can lead to new unrelated ideas.
cdb_894a100ddd76

randomperson
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2022 06:08

Re: Infinite world size

by randomperson » Post

j0j0n4th4n wrote:
Sun Dec 25, 2022 14:46
This feature pretty clearly is high effort (nontrivial to implement, would create merge conflicts with practically all PRs and likely introduce subtle bugs to linger around for a decade), low reward (no one can even store a full world with the current limits, so workarounds like stacking dimensions are definitely feasible) and thus understandably low priority in the eyes of most devs.
I totally agree the feature is low reward but I don't agree the effort is as high as you think. If the mapgen and coordinate system were to change to accommodate larger worlds yes but I don't think that is the only way to achieve larger sizes.

Different worlds could be 'adjacent' to each others, and by that I mean when the player reach one side of the world they would be logout from that world and login into another one whose terrain would be generated using the adjacent world border as constraining boundaries, to ensure it is continuous.

This way it is possible to have actual infinite worlds, at least as infinite as your storing device can get. They could even loop together if they are ordered to do so.

I think this approach would be a lot easier to do, it wouldn't break compatibility and would add a lot of customization since each world is separated.
While i disagree with this feature being "low reward" (i very much think it is essential not only for archiving feature parity with minecraft but also to support servers with large, spread out player bases), i also disagree with a "warp system" being easier to implement. Sure, it might avoid some of the "subtle bugs" but it does so at the cost of adding another layer of complexity and some pretty ugly corner cases while really being a hack and once this is implemented it'll likely stick around indefinitely. There is enough of such stuff already. Those warts should be ironed out (even if just very slowly), not added upon. Upgrading the coordinate system to 32 bits is the straight forward and sane solution here (maybe with an arbitrary limitation on height/depth - i'd say there is a reason for the vertical space regularly being unused). Real or even practical "infinity" is not archiveable anyways.

Concerning backwards compatibility i am a little surprised. I've played around a bit with prollers fork and skimmed through minetest sources to refresh my memory a little by now. Some functions are pretty much like 1/3 checking if some kind of legacy protocol should be used. While i understand multiversion support is kind of tricky to pull off for minetest (tons of possible architectures to support with static builds including more than a handful libraries often being non trivial or even downright impractical - one of the few situations where java has kind of an advantage, even if somewhat "cheaty") i feel the legacy support cult is a little extreme.

Going through options would kinda overreach the scope here but there should be another option than dragging on a ton of legacy cruft. As long as mod support is kept stable (at the very worst by supporting legacy apis if really needed) it shouldn't be all that hard to provide server admins with a safe update path that'll just convert map data if appropriate and carry on like nothing changed but the version number. After that it's just about nagging players to update (or even forcing to update - maybe while keeping compatibility down to the last stable version to give everyone some time to comply). I fully understand that this is done to avoid fragmentation but doing so has a certain cost.
Last edited by randomperson on Tue Dec 27, 2022 16:55, edited 7 times in total.

randomperson
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2022 06:08

Re: Infinite world size

by randomperson » Post

Oops doublepost :/

User avatar
snoopy
Member
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 16:49
Location: DE, European Union

Re: Infinite world size

by snoopy » Post

Hi,

@randomperson - Oops it happened again ...
randomperson wrote:
Tue Dec 27, 2022 16:40
Oops doublepost :/
@j0j0n4th4n - I wonder off an unrelated idea.
j0j0n4th4n wrote:
Sun Dec 25, 2022 14:46
This feature pretty clearly is high effort (nontrivial to implement, would create merge conflicts with practically all PRs and likely introduce subtle bugs to linger around for a decade), low reward (no one can even store a full world with the current limits, so workarounds like stacking dimensions are definitely feasible) and thus understandably low priority in the eyes of most devs.
I totally agree the feature is low reward but I don't agree the effort is as high as you think. If the mapgen and coordinate system were to change to accommodate larger worlds yes but I don't think that is the only way to achieve larger sizes.

[...]

Besides, the discussion itself can lead to new unrelated ideas.
Could one try to transfer the time & power of the argument into a timely power of the coding & compling? One supposedly could establish a fork from the MT core and produce a working Infiny-Minetest example in due time both as proof of concept as well as proving "the effort is [NOT] as high as you think" ...

@randomperson & @j0j0n4th4n - Would you agree and would you do that?

My five cents.

randomperson
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2022 06:08

Re: Infinite world size

by randomperson » Post

snoopy wrote:
Thu Dec 29, 2022 07:02
Could one try to transfer the time & power of the argument into a timely power of the coding & compling? One supposedly could establish a fork from the MT core and produce a working Infiny-Minetest example in due time both as proof of concept as well as proving "the effort is [NOT] as high as you think" ...

@randomperson & @j0j0n4th4n - Would you agree and would you do that?
Well, said fork was already done by proller. Like i mentioned earlier i'm toying around with it. While i haven't tried his latest version yet even the old one let me walk around past the 32k border without any noticeable glitches. So i guess that counts as POC? Admittedly i haven't tested it for to long and i quite certainly don't expect it to be perfect yet (and by not perfect i am not referring to trivial stuff like /teleport thinking coordinates beyond the 16 bit limit are invalid) but for a start it seems to be quite usable. Like i said in the other thread i am somewhat busy right now and i am really working on my own engine so i'll see if or how much time i can dedicate to it. I admit i am somewhat intrigued though. While i am not a big fan of the OO model there seems to be quite a bit of room for optimization and my fingers are itching...

Besides, in my opinion there really isn't all that much to prove here. While upping the coordinate size more than likely will have side effects it doesn't open a whole new set of problems to solve. I mean think about it. When you expand the limit by putting several "16 bit worlds" next to each other you will still have world borders between them, which you need to handle somehow. What do you do you do when a player approaches a border? Do you render the world beyond it? Yes? Well, than you need to come up with a whole new concept (and supporting code) to do so, which will definitely be uglier/more complex than whatever there already is. No? Well, then what's the point? Implement something like minecrafts bungeecord hack and be done with it (if simply splitting the world at various heights doesn't suffice needing next to zero code at all). Funfact: There will be edges where 4 8 different worlds are visible simultaneously. In a similar vein what happens to entities passing borders? Mods trying to access the map cross-border? And so on, and so on...

In any case it's not going to be pretty and in the end the result would still be a hack to avoid implementing the real thing. Ironing out the side effects from code that either hardcodes or somehow relies on the old limits might not be fun either but it'll easily beat dealing with the implications of a "warp approach".

User avatar
Kilarin
Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 00:36

Re: Infinite world size

by Kilarin » Post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytWz0qVvBZ0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34CZjsEI1yU

I am a dwarf and I'm digging a hole
Diggy diggy hole, diggy diggy hole
I am a dwarf and I'm digging a hole
Diggy diggy hole, digging a hole!


I'm sure everyone is familiar with the Minecraft song, "Diggy Diggy Hole" If not, go to the links and be introduced. :)

I was listening to it recently and noticed this verse:

Born underground, grown inside a rocky womb
The earth is our cradle; the mountain shall become our tomb
Face us on the battlefield; you will meet your doom
We do not fear what lies beneath
We can never dig too deep


It's a great song. BUT, it is so obviously a Minecraft song. "We do not fear what lies beneath, We can never dig too deep." Well, of course they can't dig too deep. In minecraft sea level is at Y=62 and bedrock is at Y=-64. When bedrock is only 126 nodes below the sea, indeed, you can never dig too deep.

How incredibly different is the world for Minetest dwarves.

When they hit -126, it's barely a scratch in the dirt. They keep digging.

At -1000 deep, you might hear one of them say:

"This country where we are now, the Witch's country, is what we call the Shallow Lands. It's a good deal too near the surface to suit us. Ugh! You might almost as well be living outside, on the surface itself."

At -5,000, they begin to feel comfortable. Here, at last, is the BEGINING of the deep lands.

By -10,000 below, things start getting strange. There are rumors of things that have gotten lost in the dark. And they begin to wonder, should we keep digging?" But the riches, the riches are beyond counting. And so they keep digging in the hole.

Until finally, one pick breaks through the -20,000 layer. The rock crumbles away, revealing a vast cavern. From the darkness comes the rhythmic sound of drums. All that is found of that dwarf is a blood stained note book that ends in "We cannot get out. The end comes, and then drums, drums in the deep."

The Dwarves dug too greedily and too deep. You know what they awoke in the darkness of Khazad-dûm... shadow and flame.

In Minecraft you can walk on the surface for a million nodes, but who cares. There is no need to fear what lies beneath, because you can never dig too deep!

In Minetest, dwarves feel the depth of the rock beneath their boots and tremble. But it does not stop them, because the danger is what makes the reward taste so sweet!

The next time someone tells me that Minetest needs infinite X and Z coords, I'm just going to start singing:

I am a dwarf and I'm digging a hole
Diggy diggy hole, diggy diggy hole
I am a dwarf and I'm digging a hole
Diggy diggy hole, digging a hole!

User avatar
Blockhead
Member
Posts: 855
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2019 10:14
GitHub: Montandalar
IRC: Blockhead256
In-game: Blockhead Blockhead256
Location: Land Down Under

Re: Infinite world size

by Blockhead » Post

Kilarin wrote:
Thu Jan 12, 2023 04:30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytWz0qVvBZ0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34CZjsEI1yU

I am a dwarf and I'm digging a hole
Diggy diggy hole, diggy diggy hole
I am a dwarf and I'm digging a hole
Diggy diggy hole, digging a hole!
You forgot the best version, Dwarf Hole! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR7EAdPUqvQ
/˳˳_˳˳]_[˳˳_˳˳]_[˳˳_˳˳\ Advtrains enthusiast | My map: Noah's Railyard | My Content on ContentDB

User avatar
Kilarin
Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 00:36

Re: Infinite world size

by Kilarin » Post

Blockhead wrote:You forgot the best version, Dwarf Hole! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR7EAdPUqvQ
Well, I'm still partial to Windrose. :)
The evolution of Diggy Diggy Hole: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI_PxGu7nZk

DOOM_possum
Member
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2021 22:06
In-game: DOOM_possum

Re: Infinite world size

by DOOM_possum » Post

eh... holes are holes, but what's more important is the bond and connection they set (towards)

The Real World

ggjones
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2021 16:16
In-game: ggjones47123 or ggjones

Re: Infinite world size

by ggjones » Post

Lol it's funny how this topic got brought up.

User avatar
Kilarin
Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 00:36

Re: Infinite world size

by Kilarin » Post

DOOM_possum wrote:holes are holes
I haven't watched Adventure Time yet. Do you recommend it?

User avatar
TenPlus1
Member
Posts: 3449
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 13:38
GitHub: tenplus1

Re: Infinite world size

by TenPlus1 » Post

Adventure Time is great :)

proller
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 15:22

Re: Infinite world size

by proller » Post

Tim790 wrote:
Sat Jan 08, 2022 04:30
Could you add it to Freeminer? smile
Yep, but only in branch - https://github.com/proller/freeminer/tree/wip5.6.1-32

proller
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 15:22

Re: Infinite world size

by proller » Post

Yet another test compatible server:
fm: Climbing to infinity 2

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests