I really think Saints row 2 is going to be better than gta 4?!?

It looks like it will be more "fun", but GS looks to more interested in that cinematic presentation, GTA4 and MGS4.

Prably 8.0 or 8.5

I think Crackdown was quite a bit better aswell.angelkimne

I never really saw what was so amazing about crackdown, but that is me.

Not even close.

Maybe it will have more stuff to do but the overall quality.....

If you're so sure of this why does your title have question marks?Jaysonguy

well, i didn't play saints row 2, and you never know. all this excitement for a game, and then you get bashed because the game turns out bad for some reason. It has to be better because gta 4 was missing alot of things. Even the killing of the ppl. gta 4 took that idea from saints row too. remember the classic gta games (san andreas, vice city, etc) you can chop off peoples heads, and use a chainsaw etc. on the other hand saints row didn't let you do that. there was no chainsaw chopping off peoples heads arms etc. gta 4 is like that too. you can't use a chainsaw or chop people up. saints row and gta 4 have so much alike. but i think saints row 2 will be better, just because it will have more features. gta 4 copied off of saints row, thats why it isn't the best gta 4 game. and hopefully rockstar lets you create your own character for the next gta 5! and bring back the other fun cheats!

[QUOTE="angelkimne"]I think Crackdown was quite a bit better aswell.Mercenary848

I never really saw what was so amazing about crackdown, but that is me.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]If you're so sure of this why does your title have question marks?jazuzu13

well, i didn't play saints row 2, and you never know. all this excitement for a game, and then you get bashed because the game turns out bad for some reason. It has to be better because gta 4 was missing alot of things. Even the killing of the ppl. gta 4 took that idea from saints row too. remember the classic gta games (san andreas, vice city, etc) you can chop off peoples heads, and use a chainsaw etc. on the other hand saints row didn't let you do that. there was no chainsaw chopping off peoples heads arms etc. gta 4 is like that too. you can't use a chainsaw or chop people up. saints row and gta 4 have so much alike. but i think saints row 2 will be better, just because it will have more features. gta 4 copied off of saints row, thats why it isn't the best gta 4 game. and hopefully rockstar lets you create your own character for the next gta 5! and bring back the other fun cheats!

Or you can realise that they are different games, with different styles, with different devs, and with different feel. It is a waste of time to compare the games at every corner, when they are two different series.

[QUOTE="jazuzu13"]

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]If you're so sure of this why does your title have question marks?Mercenary848

well, i didn't play saints row 2, and you never know. all this excitement for a game, and then you get bashed because the game turns out bad for some reason. It has to be better because gta 4 was missing alot of things. Even the killing of the ppl. gta 4 took that idea from saints row too. remember the classic gta games (san andreas, vice city, etc) you can chop off peoples heads, and use a chainsaw etc. on the other hand saints row didn't let you do that. there was no chainsaw chopping off peoples heads arms etc. gta 4 is like that too. you can't use a chainsaw or chop people up. saints row and gta 4 have so much alike. but i think saints row 2 will be better, just because it will have more features. gta 4 copied off of saints row, thats why it isn't the best gta 4 game. and hopefully rockstar lets you create your own character for the next gta 5! and bring back the other fun cheats!

Or you can realise that they are different games, with different styles, with different devs, and with different feel. It is a waste of time to compare the games at every corner, when they are two different series.

they are the same type of games! how are they different?

A lot of people say that saints row is a copy cat from gta series. saints row didn't copy off anyone.jazuzu13

Are you kidding me? Saint's Row obviously copied GTA. Everything from the structure of the game to some of the small details, like the radio.

To say they didn't copy anyone is insulting everyone's intelligence. Every developer copies to a certain extent and the Saint's Row people took copying further than most devs do.

Even the Saint's Row devs will admit that they copied GTA, but added their own "flavor." You may not call that copying, but in reality, it is. When you completely take the unique structure of a game down to small details, it is certainly an imitation.

Please don't insult people's intelligence by suggesting that SR was not an imitation.

I personally think Saint's Row 2 will be garbage. Everything about it looks ugly to me.

I love the polish and general elegance of GTA4.

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"][QUOTE="jazuzu13"]

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]If you're so sure of this why does your title have question marks?jazuzu13

well, i didn't play saints row 2, and you never know. all this excitement for a game, and then you get bashed because the game turns out bad for some reason. It has to be better because gta 4 was missing alot of things. Even the killing of the ppl. gta 4 took that idea from saints row too. remember the classic gta games (san andreas, vice city, etc) you can chop off peoples heads, and use a chainsaw etc. on the other hand saints row didn't let you do that. there was no chainsaw chopping off peoples heads arms etc. gta 4 is like that too. you can't use a chainsaw or chop people up. saints row and gta 4 have so much alike. but i think saints row 2 will be better, just because it will have more features. gta 4 copied off of saints row, thats why it isn't the best gta 4 game. and hopefully rockstar lets you create your own character for the next gta 5! and bring back the other fun cheats!

Or you can realise that they are different games, with different styles, with different devs, and with different feel. It is a waste of time to compare the games at every corner, when they are two different series.

they are the same type of games! how are they different?

Yes they are in the same genre, but they aren't the same. You don't compare Doom and Halo. Don't get me wrong I love comparing games, but when your whole opinion of a game stems from how it stacks up to another isn't right.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]If you're so sure of this why does your title have question marks?jazuzu13

well, i didn't play saints row 2, and you never know. all this excitement for a game, and then you get bashed because the game turns out bad for some reason. It has to be better because gta 4 was missing alot of things. Even the killing of the ppl. gta 4 took that idea from saints row too. remember the classic gta games (san andreas, vice city, etc) you can chop off peoples heads, and use a chainsaw etc. on the other hand saints row didn't let you do that. there was no chainsaw chopping off peoples heads arms etc. gta 4 is like that too. you can't use a chainsaw or chop people up. saints row and gta 4 have so much alike. but i think saints row 2 will be better, just because it will have more features. gta 4 copied off of saints row, thats why it isn't the best gta 4 game. and hopefully rockstar lets you create your own character for the next gta 5! and bring back the other fun cheats!

Wow. So you say that GTA4 copied the cell phone, yet Saint's Row copied no one even though they took GTA's entire structure?

That's mindblowing logic and in a bad way.

And I fail to see why people laud character creation. I'd rather have a rich character and accompanying story. Character creation is so overdone yet there's a shortage of rich characters.

I personally think Saint's Row 2 will be garbage. Everything about it looks ugly to me.

I love the polish and general elegance of GTA4.

Tragic_Kingdom7

That is a bit extreme, despite yur opinion you can't deny the work the Devs are putting into this one.

Yes they are in the same genre, but they aren't the same. You don't compare Doom and Halo. Don't get me wrong I love comparing games, but when your whole opinion of a game stems from how it stacks up to another isn't right.Mercenary848

It's perfectly fine to compare FPS against FPS just as it's perfectly fine to compare sandbox crime games to sandbox crime games.

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"]Yes they are in the same genre, but they aren't the same. You don't compare Doom and Halo. Don't get me wrong I love comparing games, but when your whole opinion of a game stems from how it stacks up to another isn't right.Tragic_Kingdom7

It's perfectly fine to compare FPS against FPS just as it's perfectly fine to compare sandbox crime games to sandbox crime games.

Yes but I have never heard the term Doom clone or mario clone for almost every game in that same genre. i don't see why this one is special. .

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"]

[QUOTE="angelkimne"]I think Crackdown was quite a bit better aswell.angelkimne

I never really saw what was so amazing about crackdown, but that is me.

I enjoyed Crackdown, but the fact that the whole single player game was just killing a gang boss really killed it for me.

[QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]

I personally think Saint's Row 2 will be garbage. Everything about it looks ugly to me.

I love the polish and general elegance of GTA4.

Mercenary848

That is a bit extreme, despite yur opinion you can't deny the work the Devs are putting into this one.

Can't deny the work devs are putting into it? So with what developer can you deny the work? What if that work isn't good?

I stand by my opinion. The visuals look like garbage, the character designs look like garbage, the city design looks like garbage. These guys just don't seem to have any inspiration when it comes to visual design. (And for those who can't tell this is my opinion, this is a disclaimer just for you)

The gameplay elements will be solid in SR (but nothing out of the ordinary), but it was never the gameplay elements that made GTA great. It was the characters, the humor, the cities which were always impeccably designed, especially the one in GTA4. Then there is the story and all the astounding details in the games. I don't know why people think GTA's appeal was just that it's a sandbox game, it's much more than that.

I feel that gameplay elements is the only area in which GTA4 and SR will even be able to be compared and I somehow doubt that SR2 will have anything on par with the best missions in GTA4 (Three Leaf Clover, Truck Hustle, Call to Collect, Final Interview, To Live or Die in Alderney, the one where you kidnap Gracie, etc.).

I'd take the rich story and characters, elegance, polish and detail of GTA4 over the SR2's "over-the-top action" and character customization any day.

gta4 is fun and yes sr 2 will be much better. Looks kinda cartoonish but the gameplay looks more mischeivish. Mischief is fun in a game, and gta4 just didn't satisfy it. I mean I've stole tons of cars beat people to a pulp with no remorse, but their was something missing in gta4 that I can't describe. Maybe it was the sorry lame russian characters. Or maybe it was the fact that Almost all the buildings were locked, either way it felt fake this time. Cheers to Uncle Gary for making the game look cool. Gotta love Uncle Gary.gamewhat

Uncle Gary makes the game look like its for bozos. He typifies how SR looks to me: ugly, goofy and tacky.

Do you really think you're going to be able to go in every building in SR2? I think SR2 will have way less detail than GTA4.

And if you don't like lame characters, you shouldn't be playing any Saint's Row game.

And if you're looking for something that doesn't feel fake, again: stay away from Saint's Row.

Lastly, I can think of loads of things that felt missing in SR: a well-designed city, humor that actually works, characters that aren't cheesy and tacky, etc.

I'm basically saying that I find it quite funny that people talk about what they felt GTA's lacks and then they think SR2 is going to remedy all this. It'll remedy he customization stuff that some people were missing and some of the more over-the-top elements. I'd be willing to bet that's pretty much it.

A better sandbox game.

Possibly

A better game.

Most probably not.

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"][QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]

I personally think Saint's Row 2 will be garbage. Everything about it looks ugly to me.

I love the polish and general elegance of GTA4.

Tragic_Kingdom7

That is a bit extreme, despite yur opinion you can't deny the work the Devs are putting into this one.

Can't deny the work devs are putting into it? So with what developer can you deny the work? What if that work isn't good?

You are calling the game garbage, but it seems you know little about it. "What if that work isn't good" we will have to wait till in comes out won't we.

I stand by my opinion. The visuals look like garbage, the character designs look like garbage, the city design looks like garbage. These guys just don't seem to have any inspiration when it comes to visual design. (And for those who can't tell this is my opinion, this is a disclaimer just for you)

not really like you say its a matter of opinion, the more realistic look of GTA 4 appeals to you more. We haven't seen the full city yet. Also if you have gone to the site they have hired artists who have come up with with the different charachters, cars, and over all design etc.

They gameplay elements will be solid in SR (but nothing out of the ordinary), but it was never the gameplay elements that made games like GTA great. It was the characters, the humor, the cities which were always impeccably designed, especially the one in GTA4. Then there is the story and all the astounding details in the games.

people wouldn't still be playing SA tday if it wasn't for the amazing gameplay and amount of things you could do. But still the atmospere in gTA 4 was top knotch, but a lot of core fans wanted more then that, and that doesn't make everyone come back.

I feel that gameplay elements is the only area in which GTA4 and SR will even be able to be compared and I somehow doubt that SR2 will have anything on par with the best missions in GTA4 (Three Leaf Clover, Truck Hustle, Call to Collect, Final Interview, To Live or Die in Alderney, the one where you kidnap Gracie, etc.).

Honestly none of those missions were really that amazing to me because except for the one where you kill the lawyer they were just more of the same run and shoot.

I'd take the rich story and characters, elegance, polish and detail of GTA4 over the SR2's "over-the-top action" and character customization any day.

The story in the first wasn't that bad(the ending made people want more), there was a signifigant amount of polish and detail in the first have you even played.

my statements in bold

[QUOTE="angelkimne"][QUOTE="Mercenary848"]

[QUOTE="angelkimne"]I think Crackdown was quite a bit better aswell.Ninja-Hippo

I never really saw what was so amazing about crackdown, but that is me.

I enjoyed Crackdown, but the fact that the whole single player game was just killing a gang boss really killed it for me.

It was pretty much - the game is going to be as good as you make it.

It was fun leaping about killing gang bosses in different ways, platforming and dicking around, but thats about it.

Woudl have been better if there was some sort of territory struggle or whatnot - like in STALKER Clear Sky.

i thought gta iv was a real let down with not nearly enough to do. the city was well made, the story was well told and the driving was fun but once the story was finished with there was nothign left to do apart from hunt pigeons and do jumps. and the less said about the multiplayer the better.

saints row, while still being a bit more rough around the edges than gta iv still had far more stuff to do when the story got boring and the game was completed.

i'm really looking forward to saints row 2 almost as much as i was looking forward to gta iv but i get the feeling saints row 2 isn;t going to let me down as much as gta did.

Tragic you take this way to serious bro, lol. Anyways cheers to your company Rockstar, and may they live to make another gta, after all gaiming wouldn't be the same without Rockstar. As for your questions well we will see.

Why all the hate with Uncle gary?

[QUOTE="gamewhat"]gta4 is fun and yes sr 2 will be much better. Looks kinda cartoonish but the gameplay looks more mischeivish. Mischief is fun in a game, and gta4 just didn't satisfy it. I mean I've stole tons of cars beat people to a pulp with no remorse, but their was something missing in gta4 that I can't describe. Maybe it was the sorry lame russian characters. Or maybe it was the fact that Almost all the buildings were locked, either way it felt fake this time. Cheers to Uncle Gary for making the game look cool. Gotta love Uncle Gary.Tragic_Kingdom7

Uncle Gary makes the game look like its for bozos. He typifies how SR looks to me: ugly, goofy and tacky.

Do you really think you're going to be able to go in every building in SR2? I think SR2 will have way less detail than GTA4.

And if you don't like lame characters, you shouldn't be playing any Saint's Row game.

And if you're looking for something that doesn't feel fake, again: stay away from Saint's Row.

Lastly, I can think of loads of things that felt missing in SR: a well-designed city, humor that actually works, characters that aren't cheesy and tacky, etc.

I'm basically saying that I find it quite funny that people talk about what they felt GTA's lacks and then they think SR2 is going to remedy all this. It'll remedy he customization stuff that some people were missing and some of the more over-the-top elements. I'd be willing to bet that's pretty much it.

You are calling the game garbage, but it seems you know little about it. "What if that work isn't good" we will have to wait till in comes out won't we.Mercenary

I said it looks like garbage. I didn't say it was garbage.

not really like you say its a matter of opinion, the more realistic look of GTA 4 appeals to you more. We haven't seen the full city yet. Also if you have gone to the site they have hired artists who have come up with with the different charachters, cars, and over all design etc. Mercenary

Wow. They've hired artists. :roll:

What would say if I told you that I think those artists have made some ugly character designs from what I've seen?

Also, it's not GTA being more realistic that appeals to me more. I like cartoonish games too if it's done well. I feel that SR2 is just plain ugly.

people wouldn't still be playing SA tday if it wasn't for the amazing gameplay and amount of things you could do. But still the atmospere in gTA 4 was top knotch, but a lot of core fans wanted more then that, and that doesn't make everyone come back.Mercenary

People are still playing alot of games. That doesn't mean they all have amazing gameplay.

But it's useless arguing that. You have your opinion and I have mine.

I think SR's gameplay is solid at best.

I think GTA's gameplay is just about solid too. It's all the other things combined with a solid gameplay foundation which makes the game amazing IMO.

I feel SR only has one leg to stand on.

Honestly none of those missions were really that amazing to me because except for the one where you kill the lawyer they were just more of the same run and shoot.Mercenary

Now it sounds as if you haven't played those missions.

Three Leaf Clover was indeed a shoot-out, but it was exhilirating and lenghty with a frantic police chase at the end.

Call to Collect wasn't just run and shoot. You had to locate a man by keeping him on the phone. Extremely clever.

The kidnapping mission didn't involve shooting or running at all. It was a mission where you had to drive straight with Gracie pulling at the wheel.

To Live or Die in Alderney involved a car chase mixed with shooting and some rocket action. It was a three-part mssion.

In the Truck Hustle mission there was a bit of shooting, but the uncoventional part was when you had to frantically tap X to stay on the truck.

Seriously, you're trying to make these missions sound like running and gunning and that's just not the truth.

The lawyer mission was actually more run and shoot than any of the ones I mentioned. But it was very clever.

The story in the first wasn't that bad(the ending made people want more), there was a signifigant amount of polish and detail in the first have you even played.Mercenary

I haven't played the first game all the way through, but I have played it.

The first one was definitely polished, but it wasn't significant and it wasn't nearly as polished as GTA4 is. Even GTA4's polish is not all that significant up against games like MGS4 so I hope you'll excuse me if I don't find significant polish in SR.

And for the record, I think the graphics in SR2 look much worse than those in the original from what I've seen.

As for detail in the first? I beg to differ. I thought the city was bland and nondescript.

Tragic you take this way to serious bro, lol. Anyways cheers to your company Rockstar, and may they live to make another gta, after all gaiming wouldn't be the same without Rockstar. As for your questions well we will see.gamewhat

You're right. I do take this too seriously. I guess I need to get out my political forum mode and get into a game forum mode. ;)

Why all the hate with Uncle gary?

I don't hate him. I just think he's ugly, tacky and goofy and a turn off for consumers.

[QUOTE="Mercenary"]You are calling the game garbage, but it seems you know little about it. "What if that work isn't good" we will have to wait till in comes out won't we.Tragic_Kingdom7

I said it looks like garbage. I didn't say it was garbage.

not really like you say its a matter of opinion, the more realistic look of GTA 4 appeals to you more. We haven't seen the full city yet. Also if you have gone to the site they have hired artists who have come up with with the different charachters, cars, and over all design etc. Mercenary

Wow. They've hired artists. :roll:

What would say if I told you that I think those artists have made some ugly character designs from what I've seen?

I would say that is your opinion.

Also, it's not GTA being more realistic that appeals to me more. I like cartoonish games too if it's done well. I feel that SR2 is just plain ugly.

Can you please tell me what is so ugly about it.

people wouldn't still be playing SA tday if it wasn't for the amazing gameplay and amount of things you could do. But still the atmospere in gTA 4 was top knotch, but a lot of core fans wanted more then that, and that doesn't make everyone come back.Mercenary

People are still playing alot of games. That doesn't mean they all have amazing gameplay.

True but a lot of people fell in love with GTA for the amazing gameplay.

But it's useless arguing that. You have your opinion and I have mine.

True

I think SR's gameplay is solid at best.

I think GTA's gameplay is just about solid too. It's all the other things combined with a solid gameplay foundation which makes the game amazing IMO.

Yes and I feel that the extras included in SR will make it amazing.

I feel SR only has one leg to stand on.

I think it has more.

Honestly none of those missions were really that amazing to me because except for the one where you kill the lawyer they were just more of the same run and shoot.Mercenary

Now it sounds as if you haven't played those missions.

Three Leaf Clover was indeed a shoot-out, but it was exhilirating and lenghty with a frantic police chase at the end.

Call to Collect wasn't just run and shoot. You had to locate a man by keeping him on the phone. Extremely clever.

Yes it was one of the more unique missions but I wasn't sitting there thinking wow calling him at shooting the first guy that stands up is really amazing.

The kidnapping mission didn't involve shooting or running at all. It was a mission where you had to drive straight with Gracie pulling at the wheel.

It would of been great if that was the whole thing but Niko knocked her out and it ws just more driving.

To Live or Die in Alderney involved a car chase mixed with shooting and some rocket action. It was a three-part mssion.

This one was one of my favs, but still it was more been there done that.

In the Truck Hustle mission there was a bit of shooting, but the uncoventional part was when you had to frantically tap X to stay on the truck.

I think you had to tap A, but anyway apart from that and the sliding on the truck it was buisness as usual.

Seriously, you're trying to make these missions sound like running and gunning and that's just not the truth.

Most of them did pale in comparison to previouse GTAs, the build up and dramatic cutscenes just made them seem like more.

The lawyer mission was actually more run and shoot than any of the ones I mentioned. But it was very clever.

Not if you stabbed him like I did, then you just walk out his office ;) .

The story in the first wasn't that bad(the ending made people want more), there was a signifigant amount of polish and detail in the first have you even played.Mercenary

I haven't played the first game all the way through, but I have played it.

The first one was definitely polished, but it wasn't significant and it wasn't nearly as polished as GTA4 is. Even GTA4's polish is not all that significant up against games like MGS4 so I hope you'll excuse me if I don't find significant polish in SR.

And for the record, I think the graphics in SR2 look much worse than those in the original from what I've seen.

They wanted a darker feel, I saw screens in a Game informer and they took a old charachter odel and compared it and the level of detail was inreased. The detail in the surroundings are a lot better.

As for detail in the first? I beg to differ. I thought the city was bland and nondescript.

And they fixed it.

I hope you can notice mine.

[QUOTE="gamewhat"]Tragic you take this way to serious bro, lol. Anyways cheers to your company Rockstar, and may they live to make another gta, after all gaiming wouldn't be the same without Rockstar. As for your questions well we will see.Tragic_Kingdom7

You're right. I do take this too seriously. I guess I need to get out my political forum mode and get into a game forum mode. ;)

Please don't, I'm tired of the whole "LOL my opinion your wrong i'm right no disagreeing" mentality I notice here.

Can you please tell me what is so ugly about it.Mercenary848

Bad texturing, weird coloration, flat, undetailed character models that looks last gennish, a lack of smoothness to the visuals. Also, it is cartoonish, but it doesn't have a distinct visual style, it just seems very nondescript, almost as if they're merely rendering placeholder graphics. Wind Waker is an example of a superb cartoonish style with grace and nuance. SR2 can't even lick Wind Waker's boots as far as graphical style is concerned.

It also doesn't help that the game has this hickishness about its atmosphere.

True but a lot of people fell in love with GTA for the amazing gameplay.Mercenary

Was GTA's gameplay really that amazing aside from the freedom though? I'd argue it wasn't. Shooting elements were sub-par and etc.

I'd actually argue that GTA4's actual gameplay mechanics (driving, shooting, etc.) are better than the PS2 GTA games even if the game is streamlined. GTA4's shooting elements can actually start to compare with its comtemporaries.

That's why they seemed to have more shooting in the game. The shooting is actually good this time, so it makes sense to put more of it in.

Yes and I feel that the extras included in SR will make it amazing.Mercenary

But what if it has these extras, but fails entirely as far as story, humor, city design, etc? I'm not saying it will, but I'm saying that I don't think extras are the be-all, end-all.

I see a game as a myriad of elements. Few games are actually so good on the gameplay front that that gameplay can stand alone.

Think about Metal Gear Solid. None of the actual gameplay elements are actually all that amazing, it's certainly is not stand alone as far as gameplay, the game is really quite tiny without all the other elements. But when all the presentational, story, atmosphere, and detail elements are added, the experience is amazing.

Same with most of the games people consider to be amazing. It's a combination of stuff that makes them the cream of the crop.

I think it has more.Mercenary

Fair enough.

Yes it was one of the more unique missions but I wasn't sitting there thinking wow calling him at shooting the first guy that stands up is really amazing.Mercenary

Well, for me, it's the little details that make this mission amazing. The fact that if you get close to guy on the phone, you can hear him both in the speaker of the phone and in real-time, the way they guy reacts to you if he sees you, etc.

In any of the GTA games, you basically do the same things. It's just a slightly different twist to each of them (like in the above example, the mission ends with you shooting someone and taking blackmail evidence, but the unique twist as a means to shooting him makes it different) that makes them seem different. I will admit that R* didn't do as well with the illusion of variation with GTA4 (many missions did seem very similar), but all you're getting in all GTA games is an illusion of variation.

It's all in details. The details make missions seem different.

It would of been great if that was the whole thing but Niko knocked her out and it ws just more driving.Mercenary

But remember the set up to that mission. The use of the computer, the appointment, taking a picture of her later? Like I said, it did boil down to driving, but all missions are going to boil down to driving, shooting or gunning. However, the details of this mission really set it apart from the others.

This one was one of my favs, but still it was more been there done that.Mercenary

I don't know what you were expecting. It was your standard high-octane GTA mission and it was quite a bit more thrilling than some of the other more sedate missions.

I felt this mission was closer to a high-octane SA or VC mission that some of the others.

I think you had to tap A, but anyway apart from that and the sliding on the truck it was buisness as usual.Mercenary

But that's how most GTA missions are. They function off of repeated elements with a "twist" thrown in.

I hear people lauding the pot-burning mission in San Andreas, but really burning the pot was more repetitive than any shooting in GTA: SA. You just pressed the action button over and over and then blew up a helicopter, elements that have been used in so many missions.

I'd say that mission in GTAIV for where you had to indentify a gangmember by taking a picture of him and Call to Collect were less "been there, done that" than almost anything in San Andreas. Yes, they boiled down to a repeated element, but the means to finding the target were very clever.

Most of them did pale in comparison to previouse GTAs, the build up and dramatic cutscenes just made them seem like more.Mercenary

I disagree. I felt that the dramatic elements in the other GTA games made those missions seem like they were more complex than the ones in GTA4 when they really weren't all that much different. I felt they went for a more "grounded" approach in GTA4, leading to missions with a more sedate feeling.

And from what I've played in Saint's Row, those missions don't really impress. They didn't seem nearly as clever as some of the missions Rockstar comes up with and they seem pretty repetitive as well.

I'd say the best stuff in SR is outside of the missions.

Not if you stabbed him like I did, then you just walk out his office ;) .Mercenary

I should have taken the time to get creative too. ;)

They wanted a darker feel, I saw screens in a Game informer and they took a old charachter odel and compared it and the level of detail was inreased. The detail in the surroundings are a lot better.

And they fixed it.Mercenary

They wanted a darker feel? It looks as goofy and colorful as ever. And even if the detail has increased (which is standard for a sequel), the actual visual quality has seemed to suffer. SR1's look was much more smooth and its style was more consistent.

And still the city doesn't satisfy me. It doesn't have any richness to it. It screams "generic video game city" IMO.

I personally think Saint's Row 2 will be garbage. Everything about it looks ugly to me.Tragic_Kingdom7

[QUOTE="angelkimne"][QUOTE="Mercenary848"]

[QUOTE="angelkimne"]I think Crackdown was quite a bit better aswell.Ninja-Hippo

I never really saw what was so amazing about crackdown, but that is me.

I enjoyed Crackdown, but the fact that the whole single player game was just killing a gang boss really killed it for me.

will it get a better rating? no

will it have more replay value? probably yes....i hope

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"]Can you please tell me what is so ugly about it.Tragic_Kingdom7

Bad texturing, weird coloration, flat, undetailed character models that looks last gennish, a lack of smoothness to the visuals. Also, it is cartoonish, but it doesn't have a distinct visual style, it just seems very nondescript, almost as if they're merely rendering placeholder graphics. Wind Waker is an example of a superb cartoonish style with grace and nuance. SR2 can't even lick Wind Waker's boots as far as graphical style is concerned.

It also doesn't help that the game has this hickishness about its atmosphere.

True but a lot of people fell in love with GTA for the amazing gameplay.Mercenary

Was GTA's gameplay really that amazing aside from the freedom though? I'd argue it wasn't. Shooting elements were sub-par and etc.

I'd actually argue that GTA4's actual gameplay mechanics (driving, shooting, etc.) are better than the PS2 GTA games even if the game is streamlined. GTA4's shooting elements can actually start to compare with its comtemporaries.

The shooting is better, but that was it. The amount of things to do, coupled with the extreme randomness in missions. I remember in three the mission where you get in a car. All of a sudden some drugged up dudes with bombs on them attack. It was incredible.

That's why they seemed to have more shooting in the game. The shooting is actually good this time, so it makes sense to put more of it in.

Yes and I feel that the extras included in SR will make it amazing.Mercenary

But what if it has these extras, but fails entirely as far as story, humor, city design, etc? I'm not saying it will, but I'm saying that I don't think extras are the be-all, end-all.

Like I said lets wait.

I see a game as a myriad of elements. Few games are actually so good on the gameplay front that that gameplay can stand alone.

Think about Metal Gear Solid. None of the actual gameplay elements are actually all that amazing, it's certainly is not stand alone as far as gameplay, the game is really quite tiny without all the other elements. But when all the presentational, story, atmosphere, and detail elements are added, the experience is amazing.

Sadly I haven't played but I will admit great presentation can push a game forward, but it depends on what you want.

Same with most of the games people consider to be amazing. It's a combination of stuff that makes them the cream of the crop.

True

I think it has more.Mercenary

Fair enough.

Yes it was one of the more unique missions but I wasn't sitting there thinking wow calling him at shooting the first guy that stands up is really amazing.Mercenary

Well, for me, it's the little details that make this mission amazing. The fact that if you get close to guy on the phone, you can hear him both in the speaker of the phone and in real-time, the way they guy reacts to you if he sees you, etc.

In any of the GTA games, you basically do the same things. It's just a slightly different twist to each of them (like in the above example, the mission ends with you shooting someone and taking blackmail evidence, but the unique twist as a means to shooting him makes it different) that makes them seem different. I will admit that R* didn't do as well with the illusion of variation with GTA4 (many missions did seem very similar), but all you're getting in all GTA games is an illusion of variation.

It's all in details. The details make missions seem different.

Deyail is great, but the big picture not haveing every mission revolve around killing or driving is great.

It would of been great if that was the whole thing but Niko knocked her out and it ws just more driving.Mercenary

But remember the set up to that mission. The use of the computer, the appointment, taking a picture of her later? Like I said, it did boil down to driving, but all missions are going to boil down to driving, shooting or gunning. However, the details of this mission really set it apart from the others.

Come on all those little diversions were nice, but still It wouldn't have hurt to add a little bit more.

This one was one of my favs, but still it was more been there done that.Mercenary

I don't know what you were expecting. It was your standard high-octane GTA mission and it was quite a bit more thrilling than some of the other more sedate missions.

I felt this mission was closer to a high-octane SA or VC mission that some of the others.

Yes it was close, but it didn't have the randomness. In the old ones I always went in thinking i'll go in do what the guy says but boom something unexpected always happened or it was harder. The missions were also a lot harder.

I think you had to tap A, but anyway apart from that and the sliding on the truck it was buisness as usual.Mercenary

But that's how most GTA missions are. They function off of repeated elements with a "twist" thrown in.

I hear people lauding the pot-burning mission in San Andreas, but really burning the pot was more repetitive than any shooting in GTA: SA. You just pressed the action button over and over and then blew up a helicopter, elements that have been used in so many missions.

Yes but it was better then the 100th shootout.

I'd say that mission in GTAIV for where you had to indentify a gangmember by taking a picture of him and Call to Collect were less "been there, done that" than almost anything in San Andreas. Yes, they boiled down to a repeated element, but the means to finding the target were very clever.

The picture one was good, but it is the one of the few where you use the camera. They gave us all this stuff like phones and cameras and computers but wasted it.

Most of them did pale in comparison to previouse GTAs, the build up and dramatic cutscenes just made them seem like more.Mercenary

I disagree. I felt that the dramatic elements in the other GTA games made those missions seem like they were more complex than the ones in GTA4 when they really weren't all that much different. I felt they went for a more "grounded" approach in GTA4, leading to missions with a more sedate feeling.

And from what I've played in Saint's Row, those missions don't really impress. They didn't seem nearly as clever as some of the missions Rockstar comes up with and they seem pretty repetitive as well.

I'd say the best stuff in SR is outside of the missions.

I agree a lot of SR missions were repetive, I hope they add more clever missions. Also the cinematics in the previous were not nearly as amazing as this one. But the missions in the last made up for it.

Not if you stabbed him like I did, then you just walk out his office ;) .Mercenary

I should have taken the time to get creative too. ;)

Yes I just thought meh why not sorry JT.

They wanted a darker feel, I saw screens in a Game informer and they took a old charachter odel and compared it and the level of detail was inreased. The detail in the surroundings are a lot better.

And they fixed it.Mercenary

They wanted a darker feel? It looks as goofy and colorful as ever. And even if the detail has increased (which is standard for a sequel), the actual visual quality has seemed to suffer. SR1's look was much more smooth and its style was more consistent.

A lot of the screens look good to me, and the ideos are an older build from what i've heard.

And still the city doesn't satisfy me. It doesn't have any richness to it. It screams "generic video game city" IMO.

Well they haven't shown the full city yet on their site but what I have seen so far keeps me a little optimistic. Also Gta 4 LC seemed uneventful. In the past games gangs would fight when they met, thugs attacked people in parks, people shot back at the police, and etc.

Sorry late response

[QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"]Can you please tell me what is so ugly about it.Mercenary848

Bad texturing, weird coloration, flat, undetailed character models that looks last gennish, a lack of smoothness to the visuals. Also, it is cartoonish, but it doesn't have a distinct visual style, it just seems very nondescript, almost as if they're merely rendering placeholder graphics. Wind Waker is an example of a superb cartoonish style with grace and nuance. SR2 can't even lick Wind Waker's boots as far as graphical style is concerned.

It also doesn't help that the game has this hickishness about its atmosphere.

True but a lot of people fell in love with GTA for the amazing gameplay.Mercenary

Was GTA's gameplay really that amazing aside from the freedom though? I'd argue it wasn't. Shooting elements were sub-par and etc.

I'd actually argue that GTA4's actual gameplay mechanics (driving, shooting, etc.) are better than the PS2 GTA games even if the game is streamlined. GTA4's shooting elements can actually start to compare with its comtemporaries.

The shooting is better, but that was it. The amount of things to do, coupled with the extreme randomness in missions. I remember in three the mission where you get in a car. All of a sudden some drugged up dudes with bombs on them attack. It was incredible.

That's why they seemed to have more shooting in the game. The shooting is actually good this time, so it makes sense to put more of it in.

Yes and I feel that the extras included in SR will make it amazing.Mercenary

But what if it has these extras, but fails entirely as far as story, humor, city design, etc? I'm not saying it will, but I'm saying that I don't think extras are the be-all, end-all.

Like I said lets wait.

I see a game as a myriad of elements. Few games are actually so good on the gameplay front that that gameplay can stand alone.

Think about Metal Gear Solid. None of the actual gameplay elements are actually all that amazing, it's certainly is not stand alone as far as gameplay, the game is really quite tiny without all the other elements. But when all the presentational, story, atmosphere, and detail elements are added, the experience is amazing.

Sadly I haven't played but I will admit great presentation can push a game forward, but it depends on what you want.

Same with most of the games people consider to be amazing. It's a combination of stuff that makes them the cream of the crop.

True

I think it has more.Mercenary

Fair enough.

Yes it was one of the more unique missions but I wasn't sitting there thinking wow calling him at shooting the first guy that stands up is really amazing.Mercenary

Well, for me, it's the little details that make this mission amazing. The fact that if you get close to guy on the phone, you can hear him both in the speaker of the phone and in real-time, the way they guy reacts to you if he sees you, etc.

In any of the GTA games, you basically do the same things. It's just a slightly different twist to each of them (like in the above example, the mission ends with you shooting someone and taking blackmail evidence, but the unique twist as a means to shooting him makes it different) that makes them seem different. I will admit that R* didn't do as well with the illusion of variation with GTA4 (many missions did seem very similar), but all you're getting in all GTA games is an illusion of variation.

It's all in details. The details make missions seem different.

Deyail is great, but the big picture not haveing every mission revolve around killing or driving is great.

It would of been great if that was the whole thing but Niko knocked her out and it ws just more driving.Mercenary

But remember the set up to that mission. The use of the computer, the appointment, taking a picture of her later? Like I said, it did boil down to driving, but all missions are going to boil down to driving, shooting or gunning. However, the details of this mission really set it apart from the others.

Come on all those little diversions were nice, but still It wouldn't have hurt to add a little bit more.

This one was one of my favs, but still it was more been there done that.Mercenary

I don't know what you were expecting. It was your standard high-octane GTA mission and it was quite a bit more thrilling than some of the other more sedate missions.

I felt this mission was closer to a high-octane SA or VC mission that some of the others.

Yes it was close, but it didn't have the randomness. In the old ones I always went in thinking i'll go in do what the guy says but boom something unexpected always happened or it was harder. The missions were also a lot harder.

I think you had to tap A, but anyway apart from that and the sliding on the truck it was buisness as usual.Mercenary

But that's how most GTA missions are. They function off of repeated elements with a "twist" thrown in.

I hear people lauding the pot-burning mission in San Andreas, but really burning the pot was more repetitive than any shooting in GTA: SA. You just pressed the action button over and over and then blew up a helicopter, elements that have been used in so many missions.

Yes but it was better then the 100th shootout.

I'd say that mission in GTAIV for where you had to indentify a gangmember by taking a picture of him and Call to Collect were less "been there, done that" than almost anything in San Andreas. Yes, they boiled down to a repeated element, but the means to finding the target were very clever.

The picture one was good, but it is the one of the few where you use the camera. They gave us all this stuff like phones and cameras and computers but wasted it.

Most of them did pale in comparison to previouse GTAs, the build up and dramatic cutscenes just made them seem like more.Mercenary

I disagree. I felt that the dramatic elements in the other GTA games made those missions seem like they were more complex than the ones in GTA4 when they really weren't all that much different. I felt they went for a more "grounded" approach in GTA4, leading to missions with a more sedate feeling.

And from what I've played in Saint's Row, those missions don't really impress. They didn't seem nearly as clever as some of the missions Rockstar comes up with and they seem pretty repetitive as well.

I'd say the best stuff in SR is outside of the missions.

I agree a lot of SR missions were repetive, I hope they add more clever missions. Also the cinematics in the previous were not nearly as amazing as this one. But the missions in the last made up for it.

Not if you stabbed him like I did, then you just walk out his office ;) .Mercenary

I should have taken the time to get creative too. ;)

Yes I just thought meh why not sorry JT.

They wanted a darker feel, I saw screens in a Game informer and they took a old charachter odel and compared it and the level of detail was inreased. The detail in the surroundings are a lot better.

And they fixed it.Mercenary

They wanted a darker feel? It looks as goofy and colorful as ever. And even if the detail has increased (which is standard for a sequel), the actual visual quality has seemed to suffer. SR1's look was much more smooth and its style was more consistent.

A lot of the screens look good to me, and the ideos are an older build from what i've heard.

And still the city doesn't satisfy me. It doesn't have any richness to it. It screams "generic video game city" IMO.

Well they haven't shown the full city yet on their site but what I have seen so far keeps me a little optimistic. Also Gta 4 LC seemed uneventful. In the past games gangs would fight when they met, thugs attacked people in parks, people shot back at the police, and etc.

Sorry late response

I'm going to have to respond later too. I have some things to do.

But for now I'll say I totally agree with you that the mission with the spankheads suicide bombers in GTAIII was amazing.

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"][QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]

[QUOTE="Mercenary848"]Can you please tell me what is so ugly about it.Tragic_Kingdom7

Bad texturing, weird coloration, flat, undetailed character models that looks last gennish, a lack of smoothness to the visuals. Also, it is cartoonish, but it doesn't have a distinct visual style, it just seems very nondescript, almost as if they're merely rendering placeholder graphics. Wind Waker is an example of a superb cartoonish style with grace and nuance. SR2 can't even lick Wind Waker's boots as far as graphical style is concerned.

It also doesn't help that the game has this hickishness about its atmosphere.

True but a lot of people fell in love with GTA for the amazing gameplay.Mercenary

Was GTA's gameplay really that amazing aside from the freedom though? I'd argue it wasn't. Shooting elements were sub-par and etc.

I'd actually argue that GTA4's actual gameplay mechanics (driving, shooting, etc.) are better than the PS2 GTA games even if the game is streamlined. GTA4's shooting elements can actually start to compare with its comtemporaries.

The shooting is better, but that was it. The amount of things to do, coupled with the extreme randomness in missions. I remember in three the mission where you get in a car. All of a sudden some drugged up dudes with bombs on them attack. It was incredible.

That's why they seemed to have more shooting in the game. The shooting is actually good this time, so it makes sense to put more of it in.

Yes and I feel that the extras included in SR will make it amazing.Mercenary

But what if it has these extras, but fails entirely as far as story, humor, city design, etc? I'm not saying it will, but I'm saying that I don't think extras are the be-all, end-all.

Like I said lets wait.

I see a game as a myriad of elements. Few games are actually so good on the gameplay front that that gameplay can stand alone.

Think about Metal Gear Solid. None of the actual gameplay elements are actually all that amazing, it's certainly is not stand alone as far as gameplay, the game is really quite tiny without all the other elements. But when all the presentational, story, atmosphere, and detail elements are added, the experience is amazing.

Sadly I haven't played but I will admit great presentation can push a game forward, but it depends on what you want.

Same with most of the games people consider to be amazing. It's a combination of stuff that makes them the cream of the crop.

True

I think it has more.Mercenary

Fair enough.

Yes it was one of the more unique missions but I wasn't sitting there thinking wow calling him at shooting the first guy that stands up is really amazing.Mercenary

Well, for me, it's the little details that make this mission amazing. The fact that if you get close to guy on the phone, you can hear him both in the speaker of the phone and in real-time, the way they guy reacts to you if he sees you, etc.

In any of the GTA games, you basically do the same things. It's just a slightly different twist to each of them (like in the above example, the mission ends with you shooting someone and taking blackmail evidence, but the unique twist as a means to shooting him makes it different) that makes them seem different. I will admit that R* didn't do as well with the illusion of variation with GTA4 (many missions did seem very similar), but all you're getting in all GTA games is an illusion of variation.

It's all in details. The details make missions seem different.

Deyail is great, but the big picture not haveing every mission revolve around killing or driving is great.

It would of been great if that was the whole thing but Niko knocked her out and it ws just more driving.Mercenary

But remember the set up to that mission. The use of the computer, the appointment, taking a picture of her later? Like I said, it did boil down to driving, but all missions are going to boil down to driving, shooting or gunning. However, the details of this mission really set it apart from the others.

Come on all those little diversions were nice, but still It wouldn't have hurt to add a little bit more.

This one was one of my favs, but still it was more been there done that.Mercenary

I don't know what you were expecting. It was your standard high-octane GTA mission and it was quite a bit more thrilling than some of the other more sedate missions.

I felt this mission was closer to a high-octane SA or VC mission that some of the others.

Yes it was close, but it didn't have the randomness. In the old ones I always went in thinking i'll go in do what the guy says but boom something unexpected always happened or it was harder. The missions were also a lot harder.

I think you had to tap A, but anyway apart from that and the sliding on the truck it was buisness as usual.Mercenary

But that's how most GTA missions are. They function off of repeated elements with a "twist" thrown in.

I hear people lauding the pot-burning mission in San Andreas, but really burning the pot was more repetitive than any shooting in GTA: SA. You just pressed the action button over and over and then blew up a helicopter, elements that have been used in so many missions.

Yes but it was better then the 100th shootout.

I'd say that mission in GTAIV for where you had to indentify a gangmember by taking a picture of him and Call to Collect were less "been there, done that" than almost anything in San Andreas. Yes, they boiled down to a repeated element, but the means to finding the target were very clever.

The picture one was good, but it is the one of the few where you use the camera. They gave us all this stuff like phones and cameras and computers but wasted it.

Most of them did pale in comparison to previouse GTAs, the build up and dramatic cutscenes just made them seem like more.Mercenary

I disagree. I felt that the dramatic elements in the other GTA games made those missions seem like they were more complex than the ones in GTA4 when they really weren't all that much different. I felt they went for a more "grounded" approach in GTA4, leading to missions with a more sedate feeling.

And from what I've played in Saint's Row, those missions don't really impress. They didn't seem nearly as clever as some of the missions Rockstar comes up with and they seem pretty repetitive as well.

I'd say the best stuff in SR is outside of the missions.

I agree a lot of SR missions were repetive, I hope they add more clever missions. Also the cinematics in the previous were not nearly as amazing as this one. But the missions in the last made up for it.

Not if you stabbed him like I did, then you just walk out his office ;) .Mercenary

I should have taken the time to get creative too. ;)

Yes I just thought meh why not sorry JT.

They wanted a darker feel, I saw screens in a Game informer and they took a old charachter odel and compared it and the level of detail was inreased. The detail in the surroundings are a lot better.

And they fixed it.Mercenary

They wanted a darker feel? It looks as goofy and colorful as ever. And even if the detail has increased (which is standard for a sequel), the actual visual quality has seemed to suffer. SR1's look was much more smooth and its style was more consistent.

A lot of the screens look good to me, and the ideos are an older build from what i've heard.

And still the city doesn't satisfy me. It doesn't have any richness to it. It screams "generic video game city" IMO.

Well they haven't shown the full city yet on their site but what I have seen so far keeps me a little optimistic. Also Gta 4 LC seemed uneventful. In the past games gangs would fight when they met, thugs attacked people in parks, people shot back at the police, and etc.

Sorry late response

I'm going to have to respond later too. I have some things to do.

But for now I'll say I totally agree with you that the mission with the spankheads suicide bombers in GTAIII was amazing.

Alright good talking to you, and thank you for not saying anything like "this game is a simulation for white people to be gangsters" like some people do.