Saints Row The Third Discussion

I was very disappointed by it. It was a huge step down from Saints Row 2 in my opinion. Why you ask? Well...

• Less customisation - You could no longer choose layers for your clothing, what material your clothes were made of, you couldn't pick a walking style, and you could not customize your gang as much as you used to.
• Activities disguised as missions - One supposed improvement was how the game did not force you to do activities anymore, but it still does. Around 1/3 of the missions are disguised as activities.
• Bad A.I - This was very frustrating. Your homies were very stupid since they would never follow you when you were in combat. This lead to them standing in a location and getting killed and causing me to die when I try to revive them.
• Activities taken out - What happened to fight club, septic avenger, or celebrity escort? These were all great activities taken out. Instead of these we got boring, repetitive ones like gang take over.
• Custom music playlist always starting from the beginning - This might be nitpicking but still does not mean that it is a problem. Every time you start up the game or die your playlist starts from the beginning. I hardly ever heard the songs at the end of the playlist because of this.
• Horrible story - [spoiler] I have no problem with a character dieing in a game, but how they killed off Gat was just plain wrong. I felt nothing when he died. When you feel nothing for the most iconic character in the whole series then you have a problem. SR2 killed off characters in a great way. When Aisha and Carlos died in SR2 I actually felt emotional, but with Gat in SR3 I did not. [/spoiler]
• Changing Shaundi - Why did they completely change her character? In SR2 she was chill and laid back but in SR3 she's the most generic female lead in a game: "OHH I'M A GIRL BUT I'M STILL BADASS!"
• Activities - There really was no reason to play them in SR3. You did not earn special upgrades from doing them like you did in SR2. Also why did you have to drive to a separate location to complete each level? In SR2 you played multiple level of the same activity in one location.
• Competitive multiplayer - This was taken out of the game, but SR2 had it.

You can disagree with me, this is just my opinion. I just think that it pales in comparison to SR2.

the only problem I had with the game was the main story been too short
Loved the side missions BTW

I'm definitely much more interested in the Saints Row series than GTA after playing SR3. It's more in line with what I want out of that style of game, which is to say I want completely and utterly ridiculousness.

i just picked it up recently for my PC and I love everything about it...this is what GTA 4 should have been for me. FUN!

I completely agree with you. I was super annoyed at how they "streamlined" so much of the game to make it more accessible to new players. They did the same with Mass Effect 2 :(. I noticed everything you said in my first few hours. I liked all those side activities in SR2, they were what gave the game it's unique charm and YES, why did they change Shaundi and Pierce. They were so awesome in SR2, especially Shaundi when she was still in college. Now she's just a Diva with IED. I also hated that you can't even customize the Bear without doing a glitch at Rim Jobs. :(

Despite those issues, this is still one of my favorite games of the year. I had a blast playing through on Co-op with a friend. One more thing, it annoys me in games like this when you end up with more money than you know what to do with? What's the point of being super rich if there's nothing to buy???

As much as I loved it ( I played it on PC, I do own a PS3 though so let's not start some useless system war)... It needs more content / bigger city. The Season Pass is pretty sub-par so far (that rhymes).trastamad03

But isn't it obvious? The reason there's so little content is because there IS an online pass. They so transparently sliced away content to be sold later. It's actually gettting into "insultingly obvious" territory.

It's definitely the last THQ/Volition game I buy and if I had known it had online pass, I wouldn't have bought it to begin with just on principle; I hate that crap. Seriously, they can go F themselves.

Saints Row 3 isn't a terrible game on its own but it's definitely not woth $60 and on the heels of Saints Row 2 it's probably the biggest disappointment I had this generation. It has maybe 1/6th of the content Saints Row 2 had; and that's a generous estimation.

[QUOTE="trastamad03"]As much as I loved it ( I played it on PC, I do own a PS3 though so let's not start some useless system war)... It needs more content / bigger city. The Season Pass is pretty sub-par so far (that rhymes).LeifLongbottom

But isn't it obvious? The reason there's so little content is because there IS an online pass. They so transparently sliced away content to be sold later. It's actually gettting into "insultingly obvious" territory.

It's definitely the last THQ/Volition game I buy and if I had known it had online pass, I wouldn't have bought it to begin with just on principle; I hate that crap. Seriously, they can go F themselves.

Saints Row 3 isn't a terrible game on its own but it's definitely not woth $60 and on the heels of Saints Row 2 it's probably the biggest disappointment I had this generation. It has maybe 1/6th of the content Saints Row 2 had; and that's a generous estimation.

Absolutely loved it.MethodManFTW

[QUOTE="MethodManFTW"]Absolutely loved it.Chaos_Bladez

[QUOTE="hanslacher54"]

I was very disappointed by it. It was a huge step down from Saints Row 2 in my opinion. Why you ask? Well...

• Less customisation - You could no longer choose layers for your clothing, what material your clothes were made of, you couldn't pick a walking style, and you could not customize your gang as much as you used to.
• Activities disguised as missions - One supposed improvement was how the game did not force you to do activities anymore, but it still does. Around 1/3 of the missions are disguised as activities.
• Activities taken out - What happened to fight club, septic avenger, or celebrity escort? These were all great activities taken out. Instead of these we got boring, repetitive ones like gang take over.
• Horrible story - [spoiler] I have no problem with a character dieing in a game, but how they killed off Gat was just plain wrong. I felt nothing when he died. When you feel nothing for the most iconic character in the whole series then you have a problem. SR2 killed off characters in a great way. When Aisha and Carlos died in SR2 I actually felt emotional, but with Gat in SR3 I did not. [/spoiler]
• Activities - There really was no reason to play them in SR3. You did not earn special upgrades from doing them like you did in SR2. Also why did you have to drive to a separate location to complete each level? In SR2 you played multiple level of the same activity in one location.

You can disagree with me, this is just my opinion. I just think that it pales in comparison to SR2.

I kind of agree. Saints Row 4 which has already been "announced" will hopefully be even better.

I renting it because Volition strips away content to sell as "Season Pass."

It's obvious these people don't care about the game or the fans.

It's just a money grab, that's all they care about, so I'm not going to support that by buying the game.

I'm just disappointed that they still made absolutely no improvements to co-op from SR2; still only 2 player, still no split screen, still no filter or lobby system to avoid people using cheats, & the game still mandatorily pauses for both players when one guy presses start.

It's still a pretty good game but I wasn't pumped for it when it came out, & it's definitely not worth full price due to lack of content.

I renting it because Volition strips away content to sell as "Season Pass."

It's obvious these people don't care about the game or the fans.

It's just a money grab, that's all they care about, so I'm not going to support that by buying the game.

LazySloth718

I thought it was great

One of my favourite games of 2011. Had a blast from start to finish.

I renting it because Volition strips away content to sell as "Season Pass."

It's obvious these people don't care about the game or the fans.

It's just a money grab, that's all they care about, so I'm not going to support that by buying the game.

LazySloth718

I wish I had known about the "Season Pass" crap. That usually tips me off. I wouldn't have bought it if I had known about that or the online pass.

Volition has definitely traded their integrity for what they think will be added revenue. It's sad because they used to make good games.

Sure, SR3 has about the same amount of content as your average game but you expect more from them and when you play you can tell that huge portions have been carved out of the final product.

I hate how people say it is dissapoiting compared to Saints Row 2, the stuff they removed was replaced with better stuff. They are both great games deserving of a 9.5.

I hate how people say it is dissapoiting compared to Saints Row 2, the stuff they removed was replaced with better stuff. They are both great games deserving of a 9.5.

ps3gameplayer

[QUOTE="ps3gameplayer"]

I hate how people say it is dissapoiting compared to Saints Row 2, the stuff they removed was replaced with better stuff. They are both great games deserving of a 9.5.

AmnesiaHaze

[QUOTE="AmnesiaHaze"]

[QUOTE="ps3gameplayer"]

I hate how people say it is dissapoiting compared to Saints Row 2, the stuff they removed was replaced with better stuff. They are both great games deserving of a 9.5.

ps3gameplayer

I hope GTAV will bring back the fun. 4 Felt really dry and pretentious. I thought the TV was an interesting touch and I actually liked some of the hang out activities (darts wasn't bad) but the problem was that sort of stuff should've been more like icing on the cake rather than the actual gameplay. San Andreas had a bunch of weird stuff like that but that was on top of the endless barrage of missions, side missions, and activities like pimping & trafficing. I think the reason the TV and dating annoyed everyone is because it used up resources that could've been used to add more of the content people buy a GTA to play. Then to add insult to injury, they make that stuff $20 dlc. I think they should've made all the cool side missions and unlockables from BoGT a part of the main game, then added all the fluff like TV and dating as DLC instead.

I hate how people say it is dissapoiting compared to Saints Row 2, the stuff they removed was replaced with better stuff. They are both great games deserving of a 9.5.

ps3gameplayer

No, the stuff they removed was replaced with additional DLC. That's the problem, is that they are so obviously milking the whole dlc system for more than it's worth...and then hoping that we're stupid enough to not notice.

[QUOTE="ps3gameplayer"]

I hate how people say it is dissapoiting compared to Saints Row 2, the stuff they removed was replaced with better stuff. They are both great games deserving of a 9.5.

LeifLongbottom

No, the stuff they removed was replaced with additional DLC. That's the problem, is that they are so obviously milking the whole dlc system for more than it's worth...and then hoping that we're stupid enough to not notice.

[QUOTE="LeifLongbottom"]

[QUOTE="ps3gameplayer"]

I hate how people say it is dissapoiting compared to Saints Row 2, the stuff they removed was replaced with better stuff. They are both great games deserving of a 9.5.

MethodManFTW

No, the stuff they removed was replaced with additional DLC. That's the problem, is that they are so obviously milking the whole dlc system for more than it's worth...and then hoping that we're stupid enough to not notice.

Ugh, gamers overusing/misusing the term "entitlement" is getting so old.

Believe it or not, paying $60 for a product does "entitle" you to a thing or two. And you better get used to it because as more and more publishers try to milk more and more out of the consumers, we see more disgruntled consumers on forums. The (temporary) good news for you is that some people are just abandoning the hobby and/or found ways of taking part in it for free. However, that's not going to end up well.

Entitlement is absolutely appropriate here. Gamers think paying 60 bucks (or less) for a title entitles you to all the content that will ever be released for that title. Which is freaking ridiculous. Games now (adjusted for inflation) are cheaper than ever. I remember paying 60 bucks Superman 64 on launch... in 1999 dollars. People will continue to cry about not getting what they want, but that is just part of the deal when so many gamers are children. MethodManFTW

Admitting to paying $60 for Superman 64 at launch doesn't exactly speak highly of your savvyness as a consumer. You might have wanted to keep that part to yourself.

No gamers just think that paying $60 for a title "entitles" you to the complete title. When there was obviously stuff carved away from the initial release and the game has less content than it's predecessor, you know that the publisher is just trying to milk more money out of you.

Of course gamers have the tendancy to roll over and pay whatever is being asked of them for anything from a company that they're a fan of (even when that company is taking advantage of their fans), but that's just part of the deal when so many gamers are children and don't know the value of their daddy's dollar.

And I was well into my 20s. Big deal.

All that tells me is that you should know better by now. But I've known people in their 60s who act like naive children as well as 12 year olds with wit that would put anyone here to shame, so numbers don't mean much to me.

If Saints Row 3 had even the same amount of content as SR2 and then announced plans for dlc a couple of months later, I would've been satisfied with that but they were giving specific details of the dlc packs Before the game launched. Between that, the season pass, and the online pass, it should be plain to any consumer that they quite obviously (it's insultingly obvious) chopped up the finished product so they could sell it to us in pieces.

This is the way I see it and not only is it getting more common but they aren't even trying to make it look like it's being done with integrity.

Visual aid:

http://s18.postimage.org/fkzv3xyi1/monalisaoriginal.jpg

It was some of the most fun I had in gaming in the last few years. I didn't like every change they made from Saint's Row 2, but, for the most part, I absolutely loved it.

And I was well into my 20s. Big deal.

All that tells me is that you should know better by now. But I've known people in their 60s who act like naive children as well as 12 year olds with wit that would put anyone here to shame, so numbers don't mean much to me.

If Saints Row 3 had even the same amount of content as SR2 and then announced plans for dlc a couple of months later, I would've been satisfied with that but they were giving specific details of the dlc packs Before the game launched. Between that, the season pass, and the online pass, it should be plain to any consumer that they quite obviously (it's insultingly obvious) chopped up the finished product so they could sell it to us in pieces.

This is the way I see it and not only is it getting more common but they aren't even trying to make it look like it's being done with integrity.

Visual aid:

http://s18.postimage.org/fkzv3xyi1/monalisaoriginal.jpg

LeifLongbottom

You were unsatisfied with SR3, fair enough, but I as many others got plenty of enjoyment out of that game. No pretty diagrams and bragging about how old you are(which makes you sound more like a kid) will change that.

Dude, pretty much every game announced they have DLC at launch. All what tells you is I should know better about what by now? But yeah, do you know what the Saints Row 3 DLC is? The first pack was a terrible mini game collection that adds nothing to the game. The second pack is a pretty cool movie parody that lasts about 45 minutes. And how is it obvious that this was cut out of the game? Pretty much every developer of big games keep working on more content after the games goes gold. MethodManFTW

Except that's not really what's happening is it; that was the point of the link to the illustration in my last post. What's been happening over the past few years is that they have been finishing a game, then the publisher chooses bits of the game to chop out so it can be sold seperately. From what you described of the dlc, that sounds like exactly what they did. Back when they did continue working on game content after it went gold, the dlc (expansion packs) would get announced a while after the launch and it was usually something a bit more thoughtful...like they listened to the fans and tried to make content that the gamers wanted to see.

Imagine that.

But you're old enough that you should remember those days.

[QUOTE="MethodManFTW"]Dude, pretty much every game announced they have DLC at launch. All what tells you is I should know better about what by now? But yeah, do you know what the Saints Row 3 DLC is? The first pack was a terrible mini game collection that adds nothing to the game. The second pack is a pretty cool movie parody that lasts about 45 minutes. And how is it obvious that this was cut out of the game? Pretty much every developer of big games keep working on more content after the games goes gold. LeifLongbottom

Except that's not really what's happening is it; that was the point of the link to the illustration in my last post. What's been happening over the past few years is that they have been finishing a game, then the publisher chooses bits of the game to chop out so it can be sold seperately. From what you described of the dlc, that sounds like exactly what they did. Back when they did continue working on game content after it went gold, the dlc (expansion packs) would get announced a while after the launch and it was usually something a bit more thoughtful...like they listened to the fans and tried to make content that the gamers wanted to see.

Imagine that.

But you're old enough that you should remember those days.

[QUOTE="LeifLongbottom"]

And I was well into my 20s. Big deal.

All that tells me is that you should know better by now. But I've known people in their 60s who act like naive children as well as 12 year olds with wit that would put anyone here to shame, so numbers don't mean much to me.

If Saints Row 3 had even the same amount of content as SR2 and then announced plans for dlc a couple of months later, I would've been satisfied with that but they were giving specific details of the dlc packs Before the game launched. Between that, the season pass, and the online pass, it should be plain to any consumer that they quite obviously (it's insultingly obvious) chopped up the finished product so they could sell it to us in pieces.

This is the way I see it and not only is it getting more common but they aren't even trying to make it look like it's being done with integrity.

Visual aid:

http://s18.postimage.org/fkzv3xyi1/monalisaoriginal.jpg

anime_gamer007

You were unsatisfied with SR3, fair enough, but I as many others got plenty of enjoyment out of that game. No pretty diagrams and bragging about how old you are(which makes you sound more like a kid) will change that.

You must have missed the part where I was responding to someone's specific post. Maybe you should go back and read how the thread has progressed rather than jumping to the last post and then jumping to conclusions.

And if you can't see that they have been trying to get us to pay more for full games then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you...or have you only been playing for a few years?

[QUOTE="anime_gamer007"]

[QUOTE="LeifLongbottom"]

And I was well into my 20s. Big deal.

All that tells me is that you should know better by now. But I've known people in their 60s who act like naive children as well as 12 year olds with wit that would put anyone here to shame, so numbers don't mean much to me.

If Saints Row 3 had even the same amount of content as SR2 and then announced plans for dlc a couple of months later, I would've been satisfied with that but they were giving specific details of the dlc packs Before the game launched. Between that, the season pass, and the online pass, it should be plain to any consumer that they quite obviously (it's insultingly obvious) chopped up the finished product so they could sell it to us in pieces.

This is the way I see it and not only is it getting more common but they aren't even trying to make it look like it's being done with integrity.

Visual aid:

http://s18.postimage.org/fkzv3xyi1/monalisaoriginal.jpg

LeifLongbottom

You were unsatisfied with SR3, fair enough, but I as many others got plenty of enjoyment out of that game. No pretty diagrams and bragging about how old you are(which makes you sound more like a kid) will change that.

You must have missed the part where I was responding to someone's specific post. Maybe you should go back and read how the thread has progressed rather than jumping to the last post and then jumping to conclusions.

And if you can't see that they have been trying to get us to pay more for full games then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you...or have you only been playing for a few years?

[QUOTE="LeifLongbottom"]

And I was well into my 20s. Big deal.

All that tells me is that you should know better by now. But I've known people in their 60s who act like naive children as well as 12 year olds with wit that would put anyone here to shame, so numbers don't mean much to me.

If Saints Row 3 had even the same amount of content as SR2 and then announced plans for dlc a couple of months later, I would've been satisfied with that but they were giving specific details of the dlc packs Before the game launched. Between that, the season pass, and the online pass, it should be plain to any consumer that they quite obviously (it's insultingly obvious) chopped up the finished product so they could sell it to us in pieces.

This is the way I see it and not only is it getting more common but they aren't even trying to make it look like it's being done with integrity.

Visual aid:

http://s18.postimage.org/fkzv3xyi1/monalisaoriginal.jpg

anime_gamer007

You were unsatisfied with SR3, fair enough, but I as many others got plenty of enjoyment out of that game. No pretty diagrams and bragging about how old you are(which makes you sound more like a kid) will change that.

I thought Saints Row 1 was one of the worst games I played in recent times. I heard Saints Row 2 is awesome and better than GT4, but I can't give an opinion on that and if that's the case, then I'd say SR3 is good because I keep hearing positive things about it.Gaming4You1990

[QUOTE="LeifLongbottom"]

[QUOTE="anime_gamer007"]You clearly don't have a clue how much work goes into a game like Saints Row The Third if this is your argument. SR3 was more well received and generally like than either of its predecessors. Why? Because they made a better game. From the writing to the to the pure gameplay, everything was up'd and improved. It's nice that you have you're fancy little pictures there but doesn't mean a damn thing. Games get content locked weeks, maybe even months, before the game actually ships. That time is spend polishing what needs to be polished. Developers might also think up some cool stuff they want to put into the game but couldn't given their circumstances. This what a lot of DLC is. It's not always some conspiracy to get you to pay more for the "full" game, even though sometimes that argument could be made(say for instance on disk DLC, which is a whole other issue).

You were unsatisfied with SR3, fair enough, but I as many others got plenty of enjoyment out of that game. No pretty diagrams and bragging about how old you are(which makes you sound more like a kid) will change that.

anime_gamer007

You must have missed the part where I was responding to someone's specific post. Maybe you should go back and read how the thread has progressed rather than jumping to the last post and then jumping to conclusions.

And if you can't see that they have been trying to get us to pay more for full games then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you...or have you only been playing for a few years?

Your mistake is making ignorant comments: I'm not the one that brought up the age subject. That was someone else. :roll:

I'm definitely much more interested in the Saints Row series than GTA after playing SR3. It's more in line with what I want out of that style of game, which is to say I want completely and utterly ridiculousness.

anime_gamer007

Sick of people complaining about Saints Row The Third being dissapointed with features taken out, the features removed from Saints Row 2 were replaced with better features.

Anyway Saints Row The Third is probaly one of the funnest games of 2011, and the most innovative, seriosuly no one else makes games focused on pure fun like Volition and THQ do, all people want in a modern game is graphics and story, a game could have perfect graphics, a perfect story and terrible gameplay and get a 10/10.

Sick of people complaining about Saints Row The Third being dissapointed with features taken out, the features removed from Saints Row 2 were replaced with better features.

Anyway Saints Row The Third is probaly one of the funnest games of 2011, and the most innovative, seriosuly no one else makes games focused on pure fun like Volition and THQ do, all people want in a modern game is graphics and story, a game could have perfect graphics, a perfect story and terrible gameplay and get a 10/10.

RageQuitter69

completely disagree with you there. and think you are so wrong. i'd like for you to tell me what they added what was far better than some of the activities which were in sr2 which were scraped because pretty much every activity in sr3 is the same as sr2's which most of them is blow everything up.

i also don't like how i go through the main story and i'm doing activities for the main game, half of the mission's for the main story are just the activities.

i really enjoyed saints row the third but i don't think it had anything on sr2, sr3 feels alot more stripped down of the main story and activities feel alot of the same. and customisation has took a nose dive.