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

what's with the fanboyism in this thread? don't tell me you actually think SR3 was anywhere near as good as SR2 or even 'good' in general

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39940295]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.[/QUOTE] I wont disagree they cut corners, but thats still kinda bullshit when it comes to the cut content. I mean, every game goes through that basically, you must be fucking PISSED at Valve for HL2 then. And what was cut still wasnt what you were complaining about and you have no grounds for your argument about said shit being cut because the engine was created from scratch, they didnt have time to add them back in. [QUOTE=milkandcooki;39940295] 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.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rqjmzG2yEo[/url] I beg to differ.

[QUOTE=krail9;39940332]what's with the fanboyism in this thread? don't tell me you actually think SR3 was anywhere near as good as SR2 or even 'good' in general[/QUOTE] I'm loving this logic. "People like things I don't like so they must be fanboys"

[QUOTE=krail9;39940332]what's with the fanboyism in this thread? don't tell me you actually think SR3 was anywhere near as good as SR2 or even 'good' in general[/QUOTE] "waah you like something i dont, fanboy fanboy fanboy bitches!" Jesus, dude, really?

[QUOTE=AaronM202;39940363]"waah you like something i dont, fanboy fanboy fanboy bitches!" Jesus, dude, really?[/QUOTE] ugh, no? just a comment on the dumbs that guy gets for bringing up perfectly valid points (also what I said earlier about sr4) [editline]edit[/editline] [QUOTE=AaronM202;39940393]Im sorry, didnt you just post: Could've sworn you did.[/QUOTE] yeah see after you quote the post, that's where you explain your reasoning or counter-argument, or at least justify how what I said translates to "waah you like something i dont, fanboy fanboy fanboy bitches!"

[QUOTE=krail9;39940373]ugh, no? just a comment on the dumbs that guy gets for bringing up perfectly valid points (also what I said earlier about sr4)[/QUOTE] Im sorry, didnt you just post: [QUOTE=krail9;39940332]what's with the fanboyism in this thread? don't tell me you actually think SR3 was anywhere near as good as SR2 or even 'good' in general[/QUOTE] Could've sworn you did.

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39940295]... Making constant references about something terrible that happened at Gat's funeral but never showing the funeral or explaining what happened...[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQIY1qQiync"]About the first two minutes.[/URL] That's a hearse they were driving.

[QUOTE=krail9;39940373] yeah see after you quote the post, that's where you explain your reasoning or counter-argument, or at least justify how what I said translates to "waah you like something i dont, fanboy fanboy fanboy bitches!"[/QUOTE] You come in without quoting anything or giving any sort of context and essentially go A LOTTA FANBOYS HERE HUH SR3 SUCKED AND YOU KNOW IT. So yeah. That's what translates to "waah you like something i dont, fanboy fanboy fanboy bitches!" because that's exactly what your post came across as.

Going to collect my thoughts here. Here are my biggest issues with SR3 - Environment. Steelport is boring and lacks the personality that Stilwater had. Many of the buildings are not used, or barely used at all. See the stadiums. SR2, they had a purpose. SR3, one of them is used in a single mission you can't even replay without mods. There are also tons of memorable areas from Saints Row 2, like the stadiums, the mall, the suburbs, the docks where the Chinese festival takes place, and all of the districts look different. Try to name one memorable place in SR3. All that comes up for me is some of the buildings with huge advertisements and the Saint's tower. - Distractions and activities. SR3 is very lacking in this department. A lot of cool ones return like Trailblazing, but the coolest ones like Fuzz didn't. Saints Row 2 had 18 activities and 27 diversions in many different locations with small story arcs with local characters. They also had kick-ass rewards. Saints Row 3 had 11, which were introduced during the main story. There is no incentive to finish these aside from getting XP and cash. - Character customization. Although Saints Row 3 had much better face customization, had an easy-to-use body shape pyramid thing, and jigglebones, Saints Row 2 had a lot more. It had more facial hair, hair, face paint and makeup, had fighting styles and many more taunts. - Story. This is the most opinionated argument I have. Saints Row 2's story had a lot more serious moments so you actually cared about the characters and felt for them when they were hurt. Saints Row 3 was mostly hilarious and over the top, so the sad moments felt very out of place. - Cribs. You could actually customize and buy your cribs in SR2. You could go with a grand piano or a stripper pole, have your place be a modern art-deco home or a pimp's whore lair. It was a bit limited, but definitely better than the nonexistent customization or house-buying in SR3. You just get all of them for free, and they have no purpose other than starting missions, getting to your helicopters/planes, and accessing your gear. - Weapons. Saints Row 2 simply had many more weapons, around 50. They felt "real" too, like things a rich gangster would get instead of fantasy shark guns that SR3 had. Made me feel much less overpowered from the get-go, working up from the glock to the kobra or from the AK to the high-tech AR-50 w/GL. -Cars. There are over a hundred cars in SR2, opposed to the 80 in SR3. Car customization is also lacking, as SR2 had muuuuuch more detail and more shit you could do. Both games have really tight cars, though. I give SR3 props for having great car handling opposed to the tank controls SR2 had. - Planes. In SR2, you actually felt like you were flying a real plane, because you had to tilt around to turn around and be careful and shit. SR3, you could do 360s without even turning on the y axis. Felt unsatisfying as fuck. - Easter eggs. Minor point. SR2 had some kick-ass fun easter eggs, like the gigantic bunny off the coast. There were also secret areas to find in SR2. Oh, and the Julius mission. - Citizens. In SR3, all of the citizens felt dead and didn't really do anything. In SR2, they were jugglers, skydivers, people committing suicide.... All SR3 had was an occasional near-invincible Genki NPC. - Gangs. Another opinionated point. I felt that the Ronin, Sons of Samedi, the Brotherhood, and the old Saints were kickass in this game. They all felt unique and had rad people in charge of them. Instead of being in some gang triad, they all fought each other and all had separate campaigns that didn't really tie into each other, too. - Misc features. Another minor point. SR2 had a lot more shit to do, like rewatching cutscenes or replaying missions, playing the zombie videogame, [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Konork;39940444][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQIY1qQiync"]About the first two minutes.[/URL] That's a hearse they were driving.[/QUOTE] Yeah. We didn't see the funeral. We didn't have a cutscene where you get to see everybody all sad about Gat being lowered 6 feet under. Didn't get to see the gang being human, that's my big issue with that.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;39939972]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.[/QUOTE] Saints Row the Third has a better engine than Saint Row 2, but that's about it. Saints Row 2 had more customization, a better city, better Activities, and Johnny Gat. Even neat little things like pedestrian-driven boats and planes were removed in The Third. Oh, and I lost all motivation to play Saints Row the Third the month after its release, yet I still play Saints Row 2 to this day.

[QUOTE=legolover122;39940478]You come in without quoting anything or giving any sort of context and essentially go A LOTTA FANBOYS HERE HUH SR3 SUCKED AND YOU KNOW IT. So yeah. That's what translates to "waah you like something i dont, fanboy fanboy fanboy bitches!" because that's exactly what your post came across as.[/QUOTE] sorry for not clarifying, it was in response to this thread's responses regarding milkandcooki's posts, which are now neatly summarized above

[QUOTE=krail9;39940332]what's with the fanboyism in this thread? don't tell me you actually think SR3 was anywhere near as good as SR2 or even 'good' in general[/QUOTE] SR3 was better in terms of gameplay over its predecessor by a lot. The game felt more like...well, a game. Animation and sound was near superb, and the gameplay was solid. The ONLY thing SR2 had over SR3 was the amount of content. The vast improvement to the gameplay was enough to make up for it. And this was a brand new engine that Volition was working with, so like someone said earlier, SR3 was testing the waters. Don't be hating just because SR3 isn't a carbon copy of SR2 with better graphics. It's people like you who probably hate Battlefield 3 or Skyrim because they're not carbon copies of Battlefield 2 or Morrowind with better graphics. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] also, melee weapons were pretty much useless in SR3 because of all the shit you could to with your hands to beat up people.

[QUOTE=redBadger;39940553]SR3 was better in terms of gameplay over its predecessor by a lot. The game felt more like...well, a game. Animation and sound was near superb, and the gameplay was solid. The ONLY thing SR2 had over SR3 was the amount of content. The vast improvement to the gameplay was enough to make up for it. And this was a brand new engine that Volition was working with, so like someone said earlier, SR3 was testing the waters. Don't be hating just because SR3 isn't a carbon copy of SR2 with better graphics. It's people like you who probably hate Battlefield 3 or Skyrim because they're not carbon copies of Battlefield 2 or Morrowind with better graphics. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] also, melee weapons were pretty much useless in SR3 because of all the shit you could to with your hands to beat up people.[/QUOTE] A sequel is supposed to have more content than its predecessor, not have less. Nobody asked for a carbon copy of Saints Row 2, that's a ludicrous statement.

[QUOTE=redBadger;39940553]Don't be hating just because SR3 isn't a carbon copy of SR2 with better graphics. It's people like you who probably hate Battlefield 3 or Skyrim because they're not carbon copies of Battlefield 2 or Morrowind with better graphics.[/QUOTE] They may've been testing the waters with a new engine they created from scratch, but for a game that is a direct successor, i'd expect it to play like its predecessors. That's the [i]point[/i] of a sequel, aside from just making easy money from an established IP - to expand and improve what came before it, or at the very least bring you what you enjoyed previously but better somehow. While the gameplay feel of SR3 was improved, the content was severely chopped down and simplified, and the game just felt.. Unfinished, to me. No Sonic '06 or Aliens: Colonial Marines by any means, it was fun and all, but yeah. And I can come to terms with SR4, so long as it has its own merits, properly expands and doesn't come off as a mere expansion pack at a possible full price. This simulated Steelport shit to justify the same area could be the entire game or a mere portion if the presidential stuff comes into play. The plot could be 6 hours long or 12. It got announced only yesterday, but the Saints Row series is at least known well enough to get both hype and false rumors spreading about. The most I can hope is, with the obvious 'going super crazy' route, that they make it fun and enjoyable in the post-game instead of pointlessly boring like SR3 was.

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39940494]-text-[/QUOTE] The story was way more captivating too. [video=youtube;_-7oAS9uQR0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-7oAS9uQR0[/video]

[QUOTE=JohanGS;39941150]The story was way more captivating too.[/QUOTE] Cool cutscenes don't make a good story. Revenge plots are a dime a dozen.

[QUOTE=JohanGS;39941150]The story was way more captivating too. [video=youtube;_-7oAS9uQR0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-7oAS9uQR0[/video][/QUOTE] the entire ronin storyline was a fucking masterpiece [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=G3rman;39941371]Cool cutscenes don't make a good story. Revenge plots are a dime a dozen.[/QUOTE] the entirety of sr3 was a revenge plot which was pretty dumb imo. also doesn't even make sense how gat got killed by like 1 goon. fucking dumb. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] not sure if this is true, but i read somewhere that they killed off gat because they couldn't afford his voice actor

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39941404] the entirety of sr3 was a revenge plot which was pretty dumb imo. also doesn't even make sense how gat got killed by like 1 goon. fucking dumb. [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] not sure if this is true, but i read somewhere that they killed off gat because they couldn't afford his voice actor[/QUOTE] Who said SR3's selling point was its story? I couldn't take it seriously because it seemed to me it was a parody of a really bad action movie. Seeing as how it was so obvious that it was to be non-sensical and funny, I didn't expect more from it.

Genki should be in IV I really think they could have done more with that character They just sort of brushed over the mass murdering insane cat-man

The rest of this thread is probably gonna be pointless arguing where people who have different (totally acceptable) opinions over which games are best will attempt to fruitlessly try to convince one another that "I'm right and you're wrong." There will be no winners in this debate. So stop and get out if you want out or be locked in an endless fight without respite.

I felt SR3 had really weak gangs if you can call them that since they're just wrestlers/mafia/hackers Compared to SR2 gangs they were shit. I mean they've should have expanded more on the villains in my opinion. [sp]Killing off the main antagonist and replacing it with the wannabe wrestler was a mistake.[/sp]

[QUOTE=doomevil;39942059]I felt SR3 had really weak gangs if you can call them that since they're just wrestlers/mafia/hackers Compared to SR2 gangs they were shit. I mean they've should have expanded more on the villains in my opinion. [sp]Killing off the main antagonist and replacing it with the wannabe wrestler was a mistake.[/sp][/QUOTE] I actually really liked the SR3 gang bosses I absolutely hated Killbane (not in a "he is a bad character" way, in "If it would be an actual person I'd kill him brutally" way) and Matt Miller was pretty funny in his boss stage

I hope they improve the customization (although the trailer shows like 90% reused clothing so my hopes aren't too high). I haven't played SR2[sp]yet[/sp]but that seems tons better - shirt/jacket separation, settings like buttoned or tucked, and all that jazz. Not having a mullet (that "Maero Mullet" doesn't count) hairstyle is a sin. The body types could use some tweaking (I like how Yahtzee describes them as "three protein shakes for lunch" and "twelve protein shakes for lunch"). On an unrelated note, are any of the story DLC packs worth the money?

Hopefully because SR3 made so much money we'll surely see more weapons, features and such.

[QUOTE=RaTcHeT302;39942822]Hopefully because SR3 made so much money we'll surely see more weapons, features and such.[/QUOTE] Well I already saw Guitar-Rocket Launcher in the trailer. 2013 will be awesome for gaming.

Yeah 2013 is going to be a great year for gaming A month after saints row IV and you're bored of it GTA V will be out Can't fucking wait

My friend and I loved the shit out of SR2. So much that we completed it at least once every two months. SR3 we've completed 3 times since we both got the game on release day. I love both games, just SR3 isn't as good as SR2.

All in all i liked SR3 because it was fun. Not because of the amount of weapons, not because of the quality of the gangs, but just because it was fun. And isn't that pretty much the definition of a game?

They should certainly try to add more interesting pedestrians, the ones in 3 were just boring, and similarly they should try to make the area in general be more interesting, again, Steelport was just boring as fuck. It would also be nice if they made the super over the top stuff a little more rare like in 2, I don't mind over the top, but if it's always over the top from beginning to end it will just end up being dull. [QUOTE=jackattack;39943565]All in all i liked SR3 because it was fun. Not because of the amount of weapons, not because of the quality of the gangs, but just because it was fun. And isn't that pretty much the definition of a game?[/QUOTE] I thought it was very fun while I was playing it in Co-op with a friend of mine, and quite a few of the missions were pretty fun too, the first time atleast. But unlike SR2, just going around in the city doing random shit was not even remotely fun for me, the whole city just feels lifeless, a lot of the weapons are boring as fuck and most enemies are either really dull or really annoying to fight.

[QUOTE=elowin;39943598]They should certainly try to add more interesting pedestrians, the ones in 3 were just boring, and similarly they should try to make the area in general be more interesting, again, Steelport was just boring as fuck. It would also be nice if they made the super over the top stuff a little more rare like in 2, I don't mind over the top, but if it's always over the top from beginning to end it will just end up being dull. I thought it was very fun while I was playing it in Co-op with a friend of mine, and quite a few of the missions were pretty fun too, the first time atleast. But unlike SR2, just going around in the city doing random shit was not even remotely fun for me, the whole city just feels lifeless, a lot of the weapons are boring as fuck and most enemies are either really dull or really annoying to fight.[/QUOTE] My favourite thing about SR3 was the music in missions. They made you feel unstoppable. POWER while taking the penthouse and Holding Out For A Hero as you saved Shaundi. The best part of the whole game!