Insane Kid Mar 7 @ 8:27pm
who thinks sr4 sucks?
i love sr1 sr2 and sr3 but i think sr4 just sucks. i do like how they got new guns cars and stuff but it looks like it was just a add on to sr3 and i know it was going to be. but still to me it sucks
Showing 1-15 of 58 comments
< >
Captain Nigeria Mar 7 @ 8:31pm 
I haven't played any of the previous games in the franchise (I've been meaning to check them out), but I've grown pretty fond of Saints Row IV. By itself, I say it's a pretty good game, but from the way people have been talking about it, it seems to still be poor in comparison to its predecessors. :/
crazy_alan1988 Mar 7 @ 8:36pm 
Saints 4 isn't bad by itself, but it does not do it's series justice. I have heard them working on the fifth aleady, whether that is true or not idk, I hope they go back closer to the feel of 2 or 3, where they gained their largest fanbase.
BlueHarvest1983 Mar 7 @ 10:27pm 
Yea I agree. The Super powers basically took out the need for vehicles, enemies become a joke, and the city is far to small and lifeless.
Gidion Mar 8 @ 4:48am 
Yup it got worse it almost looks like SR is getting worse and worse
Yup thay killed Saints row 4
Jekyllman Mar 8 @ 11:25am 
well and truley....the map is waaaaaay too small.
Zamio Mar 8 @ 11:25am 
Heck no. SR4 is awesome. I don't want another boring GTA clone(SR2). I want a game that really stands out. And SR4's craziness makes it stand out, It has an actual identity now.
WhistlerDark Mar 8 @ 11:37am 
Originally posted by A Nigerian Greeting:
I haven't played any of the previous games in the franchise (I've been meaning to check them out), but I've grown pretty fond of Saints Row IV. By itself, I say it's a pretty good game, but from the way people have been talking about it, it seems to still be poor in comparison to its predecessors. :/

It's totally different from it's predecossors. Saints Row 3 and 4 are both great in their own ways. People want the franchise to continue to grind out clones of clones. They want SR 2 done over and over again. *Yawn*
Gidion Mar 8 @ 11:39am 
Originally posted by WhistlerDark:
Originally posted by A Nigerian Greeting:
I haven't played any of the previous games in the franchise (I've been meaning to check them out), but I've grown pretty fond of Saints Row IV. By itself, I say it's a pretty good game, but from the way people have been talking about it, it seems to still be poor in comparison to its predecessors. :/

It's totally different from it's predecossors. Saints Row 3 and 4 are both great in their own ways. People want the franchise to continue to grind out clones of clones. They want SR 2 done over and over again. *Yawn*
or maybe some want all the stuff you could do back there here and maybe the old map since the new one is worse
WhistlerDark Mar 8 @ 3:49pm 
Again, you want a clone of the clone. You want all the games to be SR2 redone.
Gidion Mar 8 @ 4:08pm 
Originally posted by WhistlerDark:
Again, you want a clone of the clone. You want all the games to be SR2 redone.
cloning? really? this game is bad in many way's there are plenty less shop's , we can't drink or smoke anything no safehouses no optional dual weild and god know's what more and it doesn't mean it has to be done the SR2 *redone* but SR2 had more *content* as more stuff the do more option's like going to other shop's then clothing , tatoo , body or weapon shops and ofcourse the replayable missions and rewatchable scenes and multiplayer and that isn't cloning no it's keeping the game up keeping gameplay or content isn't cloning and wanting old good stuff back from previous titles isn't wanting a clone because doing the same thing over and over again will get boring BUT they can keep most of the content or gameplay because in many way's SR is getting in gameplay worse
topmech71 Mar 8 @ 6:19pm 
Originally posted by WhistlerDark:
Originally posted by A Nigerian Greeting:
I haven't played any of the previous games in the franchise (I've been meaning to check them out), but I've grown pretty fond of Saints Row IV. By itself, I say it's a pretty good game, but from the way people have been talking about it, it seems to still be poor in comparison to its predecessors. :/

It's totally different from it's predecossors. Saints Row 3 and 4 are both great in their own ways. People want the franchise to continue to grind out clones of clones. They want SR 2 done over and over again. *Yawn*
Exactly....people complain all the time when a new version comes out....its not like they can make the game the same as the last ones, that's getting to linear. Has to be a different story and so forth. I've never played previous Saints Row games...but I was pleasantly surprised when I bought this one when it was on sale. Really enjoyed playing it.
WhistlerDark Mar 8 @ 6:23pm 
Since SR2 is virtually unplayable for computer users I would say any gameplayablility is better. Yes, you could eat and smoke and drink in SR2, and it was redundent. Played through the game without ever having to eat or drink.

The different shops didn't give you more options, it only forced you to drive all over the map to find the things you wanted. There were more shops but less options, unless you are talking about picking out socks. SR2 did have socks and undershirts.

If you look over the map you will see plenty of activites alright, most are simply a copy of doing what you have already done at least six times if you completed the level. How many racing start points are there? All the same game play, same levels, you just have to drive to different parts of the map to get to them. Most of the 'game play' of SR2 was just driving..."Let's play commuter." doesn't make for an exciting gameplay for most people.

The 'safehouse' options involved changing a desk and dirty mattress to a stripper pole and a zebra print bed. You had, poor pad, middle class pad, pimp pad options. How exactly is that customizing? It was like chosing between green, blue, or teal...and none of the upgrades were useable except for the T.V. The missing of small things like that doesn't effect gameplay. It is more enviromentals, and if I have to give up a tv to have a Boss that doesn't look like he dropped a load in his britches, then please keep the TV. There is also something odd about the desire to play a video game where you are playing a video game. Talk about redundent.
crazy_alan1988 Mar 8 @ 7:14pm 
@whistlerdark SR2 was not virtually unplayable, in fact I had a great time playing it on PC, it is what got me into the series. There is a reduction in both playable content and customization from SR2 into SR3 and SR4, which is fairly evident, many things that you'd have more choice in colors for is limited. I don't think SR4 is particularly bad, but it is kind of a black sheep in the series. I don't think anyone should be pumping out reproductions of the previous games, but they ought to hold true to what made them poplular and expand on it. SR4 felt like they suddenly decided to take the series a whole different direction, which has killed many series before, one being Might and Magic, which the RPG series only just had a new game after a long time, because they moved away from what was already a great game to force it into a more 3D world. If the series evolves, let it evolve naturally, like Zelda did.
WhistlerDark Mar 8 @ 9:05pm 
The problem is SR2 is what some want the newer games based on, and it wasn't the success that 3 and 4 are. So if they want to make the series successfull over the long run you will see less things from SR2 and more from 3 or 4.

If you like SR2 and not four that is fine, but saying that Saints Row 4 is bad because it isn't Saints Row 2 is simply stating the obvious.
Showing 1-15 of 58 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50
Date Posted: Mar 7 @ 8:27pm
Posts: 58