Saints Row IV - From the Crack House to the White House - Games

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39937390] They killed the fuck out of Ultor and completely dismantled them. In SR3 they're basically a clothes store again.[/QUOTE] Until they get to mars

[QUOTE=Mad Chatter;39938614]Isn't the appropriate canonical decision to save Shaundi?[/QUOTE] I didn't give enough of a shit to be honest.

in sr3 they arent just a clothing store, they own and sell a ton of shit, its just that the only thing you as the player only give a shit about clothes, guns, and cars, not fucking energy drinks or some other shit I just hope they do a full game this time with no tacked on 'lets explain all the fucking minigames in the world' missions that take 5 hours to slog through, and actually have gangs (since its a simulation, it would be really awesome to bring back the sr2 gangs as well to mix things up)

Oh shit. What if there's a gang of Genki's roaming with RPGs?

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;39938891]I have a question; Does it really matter how many weapons there are when most of them are reskins of the same exact thing? That's like lauding how TF2 has so many dozens of weapons when the [I]vast[/I] majority of them do the same exact thing as the originals. In terms of both what I felt when playing with them in SR2 and looking at the stats on the wiki I can tell that the grand majority of these weapons, especially in the melee department, have such minor differences that there is no real advantage for using one over the other. Meanwhile every single fully upgraded weapon in SR3 behaves completely different from any other weapons in its class with the exception of melee. So, in a nutshell. Does SR2 have more quantity of weapons? Of course, by a large margin. But SR3 very obviously has more quality.[/QUOTE] As I said at the bottom and top of my post, this is just the tip of the iceberg. SR2 has way more "stuff" than SR3 which makes it a much more fun game. Oh, and the guns in SR3 don't have "more quality" because they're bland, unsatisfying, and some of them become vastly different or absolute shit if you upgrade them all the way. See the flame SMG.

Don't forget that SR3 was basically an engine demo with a game to go along with it. Testing waters and such. Now they know what its capable of, I can assume we'll see a lot more shit done with it and, hopefully, bringing back Pimp Hand.

[url]http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/03/09/the-things-that-got-cut-from-saints-row-the-third/[/url] Here's an article I was talking about earlier, in the video section thread or this one. Volition was actually [i]cutting content out of the game[/i] [quote]For the first 6 months or so Saints Row: The Third went in a very different direction. You were an undercover cop infiltrating the Saints. We wanted choice to be a much bigger part of the game. At the end of a mission you might find a big pile of cocaine, and would have to decided whether to turn it over to the FBI, or give it to the Saints It was interesting, but it wasn’t a Saints Row game. So we completely reset after 6 months[/quote] And then you have dumb shit like this. The dildo bat was going to be a fun weapon that lasted for a single mission just to get a laugh out of players, but then [quote]Initially it was just one bulletpoint on one mission. Games have done that before, and we wanted to go much bigger. The team loved it. It really felt awesome. This was just a nice moment for the team to really gel, and feel like ‘Yes, we know what Saints Row is now’.[/quote] So the team kind of went in an odd direction and tried so hard to be over the top that they focused more on humor and FUNNY JOKES than on having a cohesive story and likable characters.

You'll get no argument from people when it came to the rather obnoxious amount of DLC. I mean shit, the games code had the cut stuff which was re-packed later as DLC, which was silly as shit, yet probably THQ's attempt at staying financially afloat. However, this is probably one of those things where if they didn't change anything, people would've cried out for something different. I'm not saying I would know if people would, but I'm not gonna lie when I say this game is just one of those games where you just want to sit down and have brainless fun. I mean shit, chariots being pulled by gimpsuits? Toilet avatars flapping about as you move? Iunno, I just laughed the whole way. Maybe this was their attempt at breaking away from SR1/2 and doing something new. Freegunning sounded pretty boss though.

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39939741]As I said at the bottom and top of my post, this is just the tip of the iceberg. SR2 has way more "stuff" than SR3 which makes it a much more fun game. Oh, and the guns in SR3 don't have "more quality" because they're bland, unsatisfying, and some of them become vastly different or absolute shit if you upgrade them all the way. See the flame SMG.[/QUOTE] If the weapons were bland and unsatisfying in SR3 then they were definitely not as bland as in SR2.

You know what? I'm fucking sick of all the people that say, "Oh saints row is too silly. why cant it be more like the first or second one?" The first and second ones were Grand Theft Auto clones. Played almost exactly like San Andreas. The third really solidified what the saints row series was about. Being completely fucking insane. There are far too many serious games out there, and its good, and refreshing to have some balls out nonsensical craziness every now and then.

that isnt cutting content out of the game, thats like saying you have a game where people want you to be black, than they decide that you're going to be white, thats a completely different storyline hell, you're looking at this from sr3, not sr4. in the teaser, theres lots of new weapons and enemies, sure its 'over the top' but then again this is a virtual reality, you cant go judging the game by its fucking teaser trailer I liked the over the top parts in sr3, it got a bit too much at times, but it wasnt arrow to the knee troll face meme jokes everywhere, I had a genuine laugh at points (much better than borderlands 2) the plot actually did make sense, I dont see where people get that wrong, it wasnt dark like sr2 yea, but its a different direction, and it isnt bad. Hopefully sr4 can be a bit more dark (kill off a main character or something, or all of them since its a virtual reality) but I think its fine. if you want darker more realistic shit, go to gta, currently sr is for over the top shit. the costume shit in sr3 was annoying as hell though 'you have new content for your game' and its like one warrior princess thing, so I hope they at least package that shit together in sr4, and hopefully make the weapons feel more satisfying to use, more melee weapons (a katana or an axe would be cool, and more automatic rifles) right now in sr3, the weapons have no real 'feel' to them, they sound bland as shit and dont have any kick or whatever to them (the stag rifle especially is just boring to use)

Also, I hate speaking in absolutes, but I think that a lot of people who enjoyed SR2 and [I]especially[/I] SR1 and are comparing it to SR3 today are simply suffering from rose-tinted nostalgia glasses in many cases. I played those games for the first time only recently and I did not find those games to be remotely enjoyable and their age got way in the way. Did SR1 & 2 have more shit to do? Absolutely. Doesn't change the fact that I had no motivation to play them past fucking around in coop. And don't you dare shove that "youre just used to being hand-holded/you just cant appreciate an actually complex story" bullshit because some of my favorite games of all time are Deus Ex and Thief 1 & 2, and I've only played those games for the first time within the past 5 years.

Yeah, the only thing I wish the Third had was mission replay or a new game plus. I know why it didn't have it, what with the zones and ability conflicts, but it would have been great to see my decked out character in all those cutscenes.

I, for one, look forward to another outing in the SR series. Say all you want about previous entries, this is still going to be insane fun.

[QUOTE=jazxsora;39939919]You know what? I'm fucking sick of all the people that say, "Oh saints row is too silly. why cant it be more like the first or second one?" The first and second ones were Grand Theft Auto clones. Played almost exactly like San Andreas. The third really solidified what the saints row series was about. Being completely fucking insane. There are far too many serious games out there, and its good, and refreshing to have some balls out nonsensical craziness every now and then.[/QUOTE] GTA can deliver a serious story, and SR can go whacky go nuts. I'm okay with that, and if I'm a developer trying to differentiate myself from the giant that GTA and Rockstar is, making my game as different from GTA as possible makes perfect sense from a strategic point of view. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] For the record San Andreas is probably my favorite GTA game. I did not enjoy GTA IV, and GTA V will need to be really fucking good. I'm not so sure it will. Not that I'll be able to play it because Rockstar doesn't understand how to do proper PC ports.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;39940003]GTA can deliver a serious story, and SR can go whacky go nuts. I'm okay with that, and if I'm a developer trying to differentiate myself from the giant that GTA and Rockstar is, making my game as different from GTA as possible makes perfect sense from a strategic point of view. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] For the record San Andreas is probably my favorite GTA game. I did not enjoy GTA IV, and GTA V will need to be really fucking good, and I'm not so sure it will. Not that I'll be able to play it because Rockstar doesn't understand how to do proper PC ports.[/QUOTE] There's not some written law that dictates that your sandbox car-driving game has to be very different from another. Look at Sleeping Dogs. It had a serious story, had likable characters, and had a lot of cool gameplay mechanics that set it apart. Saints Row 2 was set apart from GTA IV because it had the [I]capacity[/I] to be a funny game, which is a choice put up to the player. You can play through the game being a straight faced gangster wearing a suit that doesn't fuck around, or a shemale with a blue mustache that wears nothing but a hotdog suit. This way the story could be only moderately funny if the player wanted. However, Saints Row 3 had only a tiny bit of customization compared to 2, and your character acted like a ridiculous super hero rich guy instead of an anti-hero.

[QUOTE=jazxsora;39939919]You know what? I'm fucking sick of all the people that say, "Oh saints row is too silly. why cant it be more like the first or second one?" The first and second ones were Grand Theft Auto clones. Played almost exactly like San Andreas. The third really solidified what the saints row series was about. Being completely fucking insane. There are far too many serious games out there, and its good, and refreshing to have some balls out nonsensical craziness every now and then.[/QUOTE] It's stupid. In every Saints Row thread you have people saying "It should be more serious like GTA" and in every GTA thread you have people saying "It should be more silly like Saints Row". We have BOTH, why can't we enjoy them for what they are?

Stories affected that a lot too. The reasoning behind a lot of actions in SR3 is kinda ehh.. "We're going to kill all of these US marines and take all of their shit from the armory." "Why?" "... I'm rich fuck you" Opposed to stuff in SR2 like "We're going to throw Mearo's wife into the trunk of this car he's going to jump over so he accidentally kills her" "Why?" "Because that fucker killed Carlos."

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;39940100]It's stupid. In every Saints Row thread you have people saying "It should be more serious like GTA" and in every GTA thread you have people saying "It should be more silly like Saints Row". We have BOTH, why can't we enjoy them for what they are?[/QUOTE] Because product loyalty means people can only like one thing in a certain catagory. COD or battlefield? Gotta pick one. GTA or Saints row? Gotta pick one. Game Grumps or TBF? Gotta pick one. It is possible to like more than one thing of a catagory people. Why not both?

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;39940100]It's stupid. In every Saints Row thread you have people saying "It should be more serious like GTA" and in every GTA thread you have people saying "It should be more silly like Saints Row". We have BOTH, why can't we enjoy them for what they are?[/QUOTE] It shouldn't be serious like GTA IV, it should be serious like Saints Row 2. A great blend of serious and funny. You CAN have too much of one thing. SR3 is too ridiculous, and GTAIV is too serious. Both flaws make the games a lot less enjoyable then they could have been.

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39940114]Stories affected that a lot too. The reasoning behind a lot of actions in SR3 is kinda ehh.. "We're going to kill all of these US marines and take all of their shit from the armory." [/QUOTE] Did you not pay attention at all? They raided the armory because they didn't have any weapons to fight syndicate and other gangs. They lost their weapons en route to steelport. I mean christ, shaundi pretty much says exactly that in the game.

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39940114]Stories affected that a lot too. The reasoning behind a lot of actions in SR3 is kinda ehh.. "We're going to kill all of these US marines and take all of their shit from the armory." "Why?" "... I'm rich fuck you" Opposed to stuff in SR2 like "We're going to throw Mearo's wife into the trunk of this car he's going to jump over so he accidentally kills her" "Why?" "Because that fucker killed Carlos."[/QUOTE] That's not right. The whole reason they did that mission was because they were poor as fuck and they needed the equipment. I will admit that the story was stupid and the whole point of the story was to just tie the absurd missions together and not to be taken actually seriously, but at least get your facts straight.

They decided to rob the armoury because they wanted to fuck with the Sydicate for killing Gat. That was the whole point of stealing the bomb. So you could blow up Phillipe Loren's headquarters. It was the first act of the game. Don't ignore plot points to pretend the story of SR3 was more shallow than it really was. Also fucking with Mearo was the worst plot of SR2.

SR story has always been based on the player's whims and impulses, or responding to the world fucking them over by fucking the world right back. It's all the same, just written differently. [sp]I liked SR3, but I saw it for what it was (random fun) and enjoyed it. Never played SR2, only played demo for SR[/sp]

[QUOTE=legolover122;39940131]Because product loyalty means people can only like one thing in a certain catagory. COD or battlefield? Gotta pick one. GTA or Saints row? Gotta pick one. Game Grumps or TBF? Gotta pick one. It is possible to like more than one thing of a catagory people. Why not both?[/QUOTE] Team Billy or Team Lime?

[QUOTE=legolover122;39940149]Did you not pay attention at all? They raided the armory because they didn't have any weapons to fight syndicate and other gangs. They lost their weapons en route to steelport. I mean christ, shaundi pretty much says exactly that in the game.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but why would they murder a bunch of army guys? They're not fucking psychopaths, they're gangsters.

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39939799][url]http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/03/09/the-things-that-got-cut-from-saints-row-the-third/[/url] Here's an article I was talking about earlier, in the video section thread or this one. Volition was actually [i]cutting content out of the game[/i] [/QUOTE] And none of what they cut was what you're complaining about. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=milkandcooki;39940218]Yeah, but why would they murder a bunch of army guys? They're not fucking psychopaths, they're gangsters.[/QUOTE] Because said army guys are shooting at them?

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39940218]Yeah, but why would they murder a bunch of army guys? They're not fucking psychopaths, they're gangsters.[/QUOTE] Are the army guys gonna just hand over the guns when asked? No. Probably not. So they do as gangsters do and shoot some people to get what they need. And the army guys open fire as soon as they see you.

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39940218]Yeah, but why would they murder a bunch of army guys? They're not fucking psychopaths, they're gangsters.[/QUOTE] I thought the whole point of the story in 2 was to establish that the PC is a ruthless psychopath bent on domination. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] Hence, at the end of SR2, [sp]the little speech given by Julius Little right before you murder him.[/sp]

[QUOTE=AaronM202;39940235]And none of what they cut was what you're complaining about. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] Because said army guys are shooting at them?[/QUOTE] Right, my shit with the story isn't exactly spot on but there are an outrageous amount of shit that made SR3 a less than stellar game. The undercover cop plot point wasn't as big as the others, but it still shows that they were cutting a lot of content. The cut corners were everywhere. Voiced mission briefings replaced by a single sentence of text? No context for why you were doing any of the side missions. Most of the distractions in the game were story missions to fill in the blanks. Making constant references about something terrible that happened at Gat's funeral but never showing the funeral or explaining what happened. Because of all of these obvious cut corners, the story was very lackluster. That first bit is debatable. Some of the introductory distraction-missions were neat, but the tone of the game is the biggest flaw. The first two games' main stories were somewhat serious, so they had the capacity to be serious when it needed to be. However, a lot of the game is fucking ridiculous, even by Saint's Row standards. By forcing the player to be silly, and replacing all the serious underpinnings of the story with silliness, the game became very dull. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;39940248]I thought the whole point of the story in 2 was to establish that the PC is a ruthless psychopath bent on domination. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] Hence, at the end of SR2, [sp]the little speech given by Julius Little right before you murder him.[/sp][/QUOTE] He's an anti-hero. He had a reason to murder Julius. Sorta. Fuck, I'm not good at this bit right here. Apologizes for the mislead points about the story and the beginning of SR3, but hopefully that doesn't discredit the rest of my argument.