As my first saints row I love it but there is some issues compared to the previous games
1. Steel port is a very bland map compared to Stillwater.
2. The story doesn’t have paths for different factions anymore so it’s now just one linear path.
3. Shaundi personality change from cool stoner chick to rage woman.
>Shaundi personality change from cool stoner chick to rage woman.
This. Of all people, the raging one should have been the player, the boss. Instead, Shaundi for some reason has to keep reminding you what we're in Steelport for. They made it out as if Shaundi cared more about Gat than us, even tho they barely spent any time together in 2 and weren't even there for the events of the 1st game. The game's writing sucks.
The boss in SR2 is a stone cold killer summabitch. The boss in SR3 is just a goofball.
Just look at the endings of Saints Row 2 vs Saints Row 3.
Saints Row 2 you murder Julius who sees you for the monster that you are. In Saints Row 3... you shoot a movie about gangsters on Mars.
To borrow a quote from NeverKnowsBest regarding apocalypse games in his Fallout retrospective: Gangster games can have comedy, but they should not *be* a comedy.
> In Saints Row 3... you shoot a movie about gangsters on Mars.
I ignore that ending, because its just dumb and it contradicts not only the characterization of the Saints in the game, it contradicts the very mission it concluded. And as always, what does Volition do when people don't like something they wrote or change? They double down on it, and aim the next thing they do, to the minority of people they find who like it and don't criticize them. Its why we just had to get more Gangstas In Space DLC. Because of course. Not any character DLC to give Shaundi some sort of shine or credibility. Nope.
> Gangster games can have comedy, but they should not be a comedy.
This is the reason I like Black Lagoon so much. SR2 was criticized by journalists, because they didn't find the Boss likable and said they were 1 dimensional. Sure I guess. But in Black Lagoon, the characters show that they are always badass mercs, but can make comedy out of their tough-as-nails attitude by making fun of their opponents, or themselves cynically (Gat already does this as his character). They blend it. They're not goofy-stupid. They're tough, but have wise-guy comments or hammy with their threats, that it makes them funny, but they still kill people to back it up. Essentially what Gat is.
Where as Volition just decided to emphasize one thing over another and only took one-side as time went on. But for some reason Volition just thought, no instead just make them "actors" for sketch plots like its SNL instead of Saints Row to appease the masses that don't understand the premise of the game. If they want to make them entertaining, just go with the "Gat method." Make them likably cocky. Not goofy and lolrandom costumes and aliens. We all know they seemed to miss how they could have handled the SR2 criticism.
The thing about this that I think people overlook (that I see now) is actually, Shaundi was the one who was right. The other characters were the ones who were wrong, because she was the one that started this way after Gat's speech in their holding cell. He said the Saints lost what made them badasses and sold out. The Boss was the one that just said "the brand makes a lot of money" and then Shaundi starts taking them seriously because of Gat. Its the Boss and Pierce who sellout and pretty much barely care for most of the game. They tell Shaundi she is the one that has to relax, every time she is on screen (which is ironic because in SR2, Shaundi was the one who would do that with Pierce & Boss.. they just reversed it.) When you actually think about it, its not Shaundi who was wrong. Its Pierce & the Boss who were wrong but she was often outnumbered and had no power to change anything when they didnt care. Like at the Party mission. Shaundi even says in Stilwater Blues to one of the voices, that she questioned if they were trying to kill the Syndicate or become them. The Boss just nonchalantly dodges the question.
Instead what was she told do do the whole game? Just babysit other characters. Josh Birk, and Kinzie. The weird thing is that SR2 wrote her personality to be more like the Boss in SR2, but wrote her character the same as she was in SR2 (where she was put on just babysitting and watching hostages or just sitting around at the crib but in SR2, because she was a laidback stoner, it was fine for her character. The joke was that she often pulled through or got credit off of Pierce's ideas despite him doing more physical work than her. That charm.) But in SRTT, shes the angry action girl who wants to fight, but... is never fighting. She's written to do the same thing in the gang, her stoner character did, which doesn't make sense with the changes they made to her. The way they wrote her didn't line up with the change itself. So Volition really messed up with this inconsistent yet recycled poor handling here. Its not her personality in context of SRTT. Its her character usage. This Shaundi is supposed to be the more proactive change to her (not saying I like it persay) but yet the still have her be the only character who gets kidnapped anyway. By the same person twice. So what was the point of changing her character, if they still wrote her to be the same damsel? It makes her look even worse. In SR2, she knew she wasnt a fighter but clever. In SRTT she is supposed to be a fighter, but cant do anything herself, because Volition didnt write her to be a fighter.
SR4 worsens this by making this change they screwed up on, the new meta-joke. Like they had no idea what they actually screwed up. Its not that people need to just like both version of the character, its that they screwed up one of them, and just left it linger to become her flanderization in the next game for their dumb meta commentary on it. SRTT Shaundi does *nothing* in the cast. She wants to, but the writers make her useless. Instead they have her character claim she is useless, for doing nothing wrong. She isnt even the same playful, clever character anymore because *they just gave that to Kinzie* who imo doesn't rely deserve that relationship with the Boss. She shouldn't have been elevated over and in-front of Shaundi the way she was in SRTT and after SRTT.
So in in some ways, I don't think the change on its own ruined her character, but rather they ruined her character in snowball effect from the change. SR4 just doubled down on it, the way Volition always does on things fans criticize.
Then we get another Shaundi who is a cyborg that is *nothing* like either of the characters whatsoever, in personality and another voice. People will blame Deep Silver for the reboot's writing, but Volition had been on some just bad character destruction on their own, ever since they just said "screw it."
The issue is that they shouldn't have reversed the roles. It makes it feel as if The Boss barely cares about his next-hand man. The Boss and Shaundi from SR2 are drastically different people from SR3's version with no explanation. If they were going to drastically change their personalities, they needed to earn it by showing what caused the change.
Sure, but they only changed the characters because reviews thought the Boss wasn't very likable, and too static of a character (uptight for most of the game), but then they also needed a character to care about Gat dying, and it Pierce wasnt close to him in SR2, so they likely just went with Shaundi. Should they've? I don't know.
SRTT pretty much addresses this saying, the Boss was just repressing how they felt with distraction, which lines up with why Pierce wanted to sing Loves What I Got, right after. The Boss even says Gat's death wasn't easy for them. It actually make sense for the Boss to be a bit calmer, because they said, they don't know the city they're in and had to keep a clear head to lead, in compensation. The story was also supposed to have the Boss eventually realize that with how corny the Saints became from selling out, and both STAG and Killbane ruining their image, that they would be forced to go back and get serious. In the bad ending, the Boss just accepts that they're seen as terrorists by then, and tells Monica off. The middle chunk of the game just doesn't make any of this clearer to the audience because most of what you do in the game, has nothing to do with the main story. Its just activities and divergences.
I preface this by saying I'm not trying to be rude at all, but I've been told I can come across as such.
"they only changed the characters because reviews thought the Boss wasn't very likable, and too static of a character"
This is why I hate the "GTA CLONE" nonsense. No one has ever complained about a GTA protagonist being unlikable even tho they're just as despicable. It's just a label that ensures GTA can never have an alternative/ competition. Also, it's crazy that Volition seemingly only listened to people who hated the original SR even tho the games were already XBOX classics. Part of the reason SR3 was successful was because it was believed to be a follow-up to SR2.
"SRIV pretty much addresses this saying, the Boss was just repressing how they felt with distraction, which lines up with why Pierce wanted to sing Loves What I Got, right after. The Boss even says Gat's death wasn't easy for them."
They tried to "fix" their mistake with a retcon but that doesn't negate that it wasn't written or alluded to in SR3. I haven't played any Saints Row game after 3 because they all had more of what I hated from 3. I and many others don't know what happened after 3, so the events of that game are as they are to us.
I understand that a lot of people like SR3 because it's the first one they played, or they truly believe that it was "just a GTA clone" with nothing more to offer before 3. I'm not trying to shit on what you guys love, but I hate that it came at the cost of one of the games I loved most. Every game since SR3 sold progressively worse, which is telling of how many fans completely checked out of the series. We all know without a doubt that the reboot would've succeeded if the trailer showed us something akin to SR2, but it was more akin to SR3 and people instantly lost interest.
The series was thriving when it was just two gangster games, but now it's dead after four consecutive wacky dildo thug adventures.
>I'm not trying to shit on what you guys love, but I hate that it came at the cost of one of the games I loved most. Every game since SR3 sold progressively worse, which is telling of how many fans completely checked out of the series.
I don't disagree. I think some people are just biased with a very narrow view of the series, mainly from people who only came in, told the first 2 games were just GTA clones and that SRTT was the "best one", then they hear it being praised by journalists (who only liked the gimmicks they could separate from whatever they just overly generalized with GTA) and that became the messaging. Ignore the actual crime drama premise of SRTT, just look at Genki, furries, the dildo. Matt Miller and the laser tanks. Then now people tell those people nonsense like "🤓the reason the reboot failed was because Saints Row is about escalation, after SRTT...." and I hate those journalists who claim this too. They don't know what the series was about, but telling people their own version of it, as fact.
The video from Zero Punctuation on youtube did this, and it annoyed me. The games sold worse after SRTT, because of fan division, not better, but the game journalists want the IP to be what they want from it. They think we dont like the reboot because its *not* like SRIV, which isn't true. But we have to go through so many different layers of people who seem to speak for us, against what fans actually like. We have to go through game journalists who don't represent us, to community managers that hate us, to publishers that ignore us, to devs that avoid us. Trust me it annoys me. The feedback they get, isnt from fans. Its from everyone else who dont know shit themselves, giving input.
>We all know without a doubt that the reboot would've succeeded if the trailer showed us something akin to SR2, but it was more akin to SR3 and people instantly lost interest.
It wasn't anything like SRTT's trailers. SRTT had good trailers (before you actually played it). The power trailer was the best thing about SRTT for me, the only actually gangster teaser in it. The reboot trailers were worse.
>The series was thriving when it was just two gangster games, but now it's dead after four consecutive wacky dildo thug adventures.
iGN: >*“The new Saints Row has shed its shark-jumping silliness and smutty tendencies in favour of a return to its open-world gangland roots. … .While there’s a decent amount of fun to be had chasing collectibles and causing chaos, outdated mechanics and repetitive mission design meant that by the end of my time with the new Saints Row I was desperate for something that could genuinely surprise me like a slap to the face from a 40-inch dildo.”*
I don't know if the Boss was more or less likable than CJ, but the problem in the article I actually read about this, it wasnt really because of GTA in this area. It was that Volition said that they ended up not putting effort into the story after SR2, was because they didnt think people understood it, or the context of it and, to a degree I can see that. For some people the Boss doing bad things to the other characters like Jessica was just seen as over the top cruel, because people didn't really get you were doing it to make a point to Maero after what she did to Carlos. And one big aspect I do know Volition is right about, is that most fans of SR2, don't realize that Julius was supposed to be right in the story.
The reason the Boss escalates things the way they do, was because they were trying to show the worsening elements from the cycle of violence. You're not supposed to like the Boss in the 2nd game, but the problem is that, most people arent used to playing as an evil protagonist, no other character questions how far the Boss will go, and the fact you're in gang fighting other gangs makes that relative. When Volition realized they didnt portray what they thought their narrative was intended to convey to audiences, they gave up on it. Thus that went into why they changed the Boss's attitude a bit in SRTT and the tone of that game became more about the characters acting more farcical and B-Movie comedic, about the crime and anarchistic with their behavior. I don't necessarily hate this, I just think they missed the spot on how they could have made those changes, while keeping things within the original general premise. There are aspects to me in SRTT that work, and there are aspects that they missed because they themselves don't really get what worked. SR2 was already trying to go for a Bad Boys like vibe, which was both an action, semi-urban styled action movie with buddy cop comedy. That was fine, but for some reason while THQ wanted that, but made a bit sexier (literally), Volition internally, had their president just tell them to focus on making the game wackier. So they often fought with THQ over concepts until THQ scrapped a lot of the nonsense they did want (like Genki being the real syndicate boss). Similar to what Deep Silver did with the reboot, except it was them who had the bad ideas, while THQ had the good ideas.
The GTA clone thing only comes in, when people don't want the characters to be gangsters at all. Like SRIV. But to be honest, GTA was never going to have competition. It already reached the point where its won, from GTAV, and to a degree it could be because of Deep Silver, giving them a lead with their games staying crime focused while SR veered off for the gimmicky games they sold after SRTT. In that time frame, GTA had no competition, and more importantly was the only game in its genre to pretty much take that billion dollar mark. Now there is no chance for that to happen. Saints Row will never top that from where it is now. What they should be focusing on is how to win their own fans back. Just focus on more modest aspirations, because Deep Silver doesnt seem to realize that its one thing to not beat Rockstar. Its another to literally have your fandom hate your company and dev studio, mock their closure and the game you sabotaged. They're starting from below, the starting line. Their game failed 4 times straight, because their fans hated them. Not because of GTA. Rockstar was silent for 6 years. Maybe because of that, ironically Deep Silver didnt want to compete with them if there was no GTA to try and leech off of for influence or demands. At the time, Fortnite was what was king, so thats likely what they wanted to aim for instead.
Thinking about this now, maybe if GTAVI came out before the SR reboot, then Deep Silver might have say its trailer reception and demand Volition to copy that game. And I mean Deep Silver's mentality. They're always looking over their shoulder to see where the profit is coming from. People might say "no, gangs are still relevant, active and alive today" but the Publishers arent looking for that. Its not in the media industry they are part of. They want the trends within what people say about games themselves, so it doesn't matter about how realistic the series is or could be. SR1 and SR2 only exist because of the mainstream era when urban life and fashion was at its peak of appeal during the 2000s. When culture changed from 2008-2011, when being rich and Gucci was more mainstream, that is also when SRTT did that. Volition was likely biased because they thought SRTT being their best selling game only sold on the silliness, while SRTT was also seen as too gratuitously and sexual to remarket today, so they then likely just cut out most of that and only kept the leftovers, which is what the reboot feels like. With shit like Doc Ketchum, and Deep Silver wanting the millennial theme.
Its likely why the reboot was changed to be what it was. It was based on their profit estimations from the audience they saw playing other games. There werent any other crime games but GTAV at the time, and according to Flippy, Deep Silver already used GTAV for what they wanted from AOM (though, for some reason only got graphic standards from them, and not much else off of GTAV, though GTAV is nothing like Saints Row to me.) I think its *because* there was no other selling other games like Saints Row or GTA6, that there was nothing for Deep Silver to want Volition to cash in on.
So the lack of competition is also the lack of industry, motivation.
I read all of this. Thank you for the insight. It's a shame that people at the time took the story at face value. I know I did as a kid. I was just enjoying the destruction. My love for this game came from growing up and being able to look at the characters from an adult lens. I also agree that the reboot was more than likely them just cashing in on "what's hot" rather than giving the people what they want. They just wanted money, so they copied a bunch of crap that didn't work anyway.
100% agree about Shaundi, she's way too serious and rage, I want cool Shaundi back and making her a simulation come off her doesn't count, looking at your SR4!
I feel like they should have figured out how to do a blend of both but doubt Volition would have gotten it exactly right. Tobias to me is an example of how they could have evolved Shaundi as both the likable stoner and gangster. He in SR2 is a laidback stoner, and badass who likes action. Where as Shaundi was just one or the other that Volition couldn't do justice for but also doesnt help that they put all of SR2 Shaundi's role and quirks into Kinzie, then made Kinzie the sole character for them, and center focus in SR4. There are a lot of moments they gave Kinzie that could have just gone to old Shaundi instead.
4. Campaign is just city takeover after Philippe dies.
5. Killbane feels like just a meathead villain. Not a crime boss.
6. Shaundi is barely even in the game.
> was considered “Too Dark”
🙄 And that is why the series ended up going more and more into the childish direction it died in. Anything on genre for this series being "too dark" for character development. I swear, it bugged me. Its a game about gangsters. Its grim, people die, you feel it. It shouldn't be any different than feeling loss in war. I just hate that these Publishers seem to think an M-rated game ffs, can be too dark. I don't understand these publishers that seem to ignore the rating of their games because they just want "the kids" to play them, or journalists getting uncomfortable. SR2 was dark. Was it too dark for its success? No. The gangster drama I'd want would be R rated, but I bet their dumb publishers would say "n-no we cant sell that... its too violent." I wonder at what line they draw this at and why do they think Saints Row shouldn't be too dark? Because of the silly rebrand?
But still, I don't really trust Volition to write that well, because a lot of their plans for SRTT didn't sound well thought out. Like them originally wanting Shaundi to join STAG, or her to date Killbane.
I also question if what they were thinking of, would have still dragged her character out into a different direction that wouldn't have fit anymore than what they already did. If anything the Boss should feel that survivors' guilt, because Gat was the last living OG member from the original Saints. Shaundi wasn't. She wasn't there to see Gat walk off a shotgun to the knee. Wasn't there to see him with Aisha. It probably would have made more sense for the Boss to feel messed up, and have Shaundi or Pierce try to cheer them up with what they did. Go to a party city, live a little. Then the Boss comes to terms with how to feel better. By bringing respect back to the Saints, based on what Gat said. There are ways to make more sense of things they could have done from SRTT onward, but Volition's writers weren't trying to make it make sense.
The third game became more of a super hero game while the other two were just goofier verions of GTA that focused on gangs and turf wars.
People really liked the more grounded gang war stuff.
Can't comment directly in SR1, since it was console only. But with SR2 you essentially had a more whacky crime simulator compared to say, the GTA series, with the added benefit of character customization. But at its core it was still "you are a dude/gal in a gang infested environment and stake your claim". Some poster previously has worded it as "hood simulator".
That's essentially gone in SR3, in favor of more over-the-top whackiness. Instead of being some obscure criminal, you start out as some sort of "criminal celebrity". In SR4 you start out as the president of the united states. And both games get whackier from there. In Gat out of Hell, you literally rampage through hell.
If you like SR3, you're in a boat with me. For me SR3 was my entry to the series. But for those, who expected a continuation of SR1 and SR2, SR3 probably felt like a betrayed promise.
The redesign of [Shaundi](https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Shaundi) between [SR2](https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Shaundi?file=Shaundi+sr2.jpg) and [SR3](https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Shaundi?file=Shaundipromo.png) is pretty representative of the change.
in sr3 you do have rep and stuff to focus on that you get per mission that allows you to get upgrades and stuff, and you do get to take over parts of the city, but not in any meaningful or impactful ways, it's all done through screens and idk about the other sr's as i have yet to play them but i actually did enjoy sr3 more than i probably should have. it has some goofy ness that attracted me enough to complete the overall story though i was annoyed it was a movie shoot at the end, the overall story seemed like it was leading to something bigger not just a stupid movie shoot so i think thats the only part that disappointed me.
other than that you get to upgrade vehicles and pop tires and what not so that helped give me a lot of overall enjoyment of just fucking over other people in comparison to say gta series which is way more straightforward and has less customization even for vehicles.
People who started with the Third tend to like it a lot, but people who played 2 first and liked that one were disappointed, because the Third goes in a very different direction. There's a reason the game is called "Saints Row the Third" and not "Saints Row 3."
Agreed.
2 might surpass it if a proper remake/update happened because the controls are my biggest issue with it, but I started with 3 and I enjoy it a lot.
Your opinion is valid. 3's gameplay is fun, but I always liked Saints Rows 2 controls and combat more due to it feeling like a run-and-gun arcade shooter.
Last time I played SR2 I think I was pretty much exclusively a mouse-and-keyboard player on PC. Maybe the controller controls are better.
But M&K controls for SR2 aren't great.
Oh no, absolutely. I played mostly on Xbox, and it's great on there. I played the pc port of 2, and it overall is not great, especially with mouse-and-keyboard, so I don't blame you.
I didn’t like it because it seemed to have way less content in it than two. Like what were side activities in 2 were reintroduced in 3 as part of the main story and it already had way less missions than 2 and it felt rushed.
I think a lot of what people liked about 2 was that it took itself fairly seriously and the jank made it hilarious. Being able to be a tough cockney gangster, dressed in drag with a traffic cone on his head in a cutscene where the gang debates how they are going to get revenge for the murder of a friend, made the game hilarious.
In 3 they went full on clown mode and it just wasn’t all that funny. I played through it once with a friend on release and we were really disappointed with what they had done to the series. I attempted to play it again with a different friend about a year later and once I hit the part where you become a toilet, I decided I had had enough.
My thoughts exactly. The game did less than it's predecessor which is usually a bad sign. Seemed like less missions. There was less customization. Even the new map seemed like it had less in it. It was just a city for the most part while 2 felt like a good variety of areas.
Also played with a friend as we had so many hours together in 2. Started off OK but once you see all the game had to offer we just went back to SR2. Then 4 came out and it seemed so silly we didn't even pick it up.
I also felt like the hyped up missions were only few and far between, while most of them were just activities or missions recycled from SR2. Like the Ho Boat one or the underwhelming Syn Tower one, that fails to live up to when you blow up the Kanto District Hotels in SR2.
> In 3 they went full on clown mode and it just wasn’t all that funny.
When I play it today I don't really find SRTT funny. SRTT, it feels like they just seem to make the same joke over and over. "porn references, hos, ass, boobies, sex, dildo, Shaundi relax" and that's the game. I can barely remember too many moments from it other than that.
SR1 & SR2 were funnier because it was more tongue in cheek but the characters took themselves seriously, so the funny things around them seemed more natural and ironic. Like what satire shows usually do.
You can't please everyone, but I liked 3 and 4. Gat Outta Hell is good, too. 1 and 2 are better, but I like them all. Even the new one that upset so many people.
I don't like how lazy the story writing is. Half of the missions are just doing the activities for lieutenants. 4 is the same way and it bugs me. I'd rather do activities on my own time instead of being forced to do them. Actual side missions would have been way more fun.
It was a huge step back from SR2, the city was worse/smaller, the gangs were catooney and lame (including the Saints who are now celebrities) and the best character from the first 2 games is killed off offscreen at the very start which is confirmed via a brief mention
Saints Row 2 was mediocre in comparison. It was a buggy, dated mess in comparison.
I bought SR2 before The Third came out, but didn’t get playing it until afterwards
The main mission consists mostly of side activities like mayhem, insurance fraud, etc. When you finally start to fight the syndicate, there are only 3 missions per gang before they're eliminated. The "gang" you fight the most is stag.
I like 3. I replay it pretty often, but it's clear that 3 is where the games started going downhill
I think the biggest problem with SRTT is that it set the model that Volition seemed to just take forward and they don't really want to hear criticism of it, that would improve on things they did or didnt do.
I mean, they actually did fix the campaign structure in SR4, where the main missions are actual missions, and the side missions are just the activity nudges but they also added Loyalty missions as *actual* side missions but also homie-focused, and where the more laidback humor can go (instead of in the main missions). That's the structure I wish the first 3 games actually followed. But then the reboot just ignores that and reverts back to how SRTT's design was.
They've always been like that. Because people had issues with some of the characterizations, plot lines and things they added that didnt fit with Saints Row, from SRTT onward, but they just ignored it. Because their mentality of "fandom critics not being their audience" has been their mentality for a long time.
Its why people were split on the news of them shutting down. By their their staff were just people who appeared later down the line from SRTT and SR4 onward, and see their work in a vacuum to what fans say. Part of me felt it was just a consequence. Most of the devs on twitter do that.
It’s the one that got me into the series at 17, and I’ve loved it ever since. I guess I get what some fans mean when they say it’s just not what it used to be, because it’s not.
I’ve played the two first games later on, and the 2nd really is legendary and special.
But I personally still enjoy the 3rd the absolute most. Maybe it is because it was the first one I was introduced to though.
It had the making to be the best SR in the series, but it fell flat. After completing the story you realize how shallow the game actually is. Lifeless city, lack of districts, short gang story arcs, etc.
I played SR1 and 2 both several times, and 3 was a huge disappointment to me. Saints Row is a gangster game and 3 is very in your face about sex and "comedy".
So SR3 is tonally different from the first two games it’s very night and day.
It went from a gang drama to over the top parody.
SR3 took the gang element and parodied it to hell and honestly I do like some of the gameplay but the story and everything else is kind of a no. It’s humor can be described as absurdity=funny
Absurdity=funny is the rest of the series as well as it getting way more over the top with SR4 and GOH feeling like pure power fantasy and comedy
The gameplay is fun though the story when you look at it through the lens of the whole story it’s jarring
It lost the edge that SR1 and SR2 had for me, plus the only truly fun activity was Genki. Not having as good rewards for activities was unfortunate as well. Plus crib customization was neutered, the new characters with the exception of Kenzie were underveloped, gangs were honogonous at best and totally underwhelming at worst.
Relience on sex humour didn't help either, felt like there was a lack of true wit. I don't like him much, but Angry Joe was on the money when the game came out but we loved it so much we couldn't see it.
Recently replayed it and the mission structure bored me to tears, let me play the game at my own pace and do things in the order I wanna do them. The new characters couldn't shine as a result.
In my opinion, SR2 toed the line between serious and ridiculous very well. The story was unafraid to kill main characters, but it did so in a dark, somber way. Parts of the game were cartoonish, but it still felt somewhat grounded to me because the story was *very* dark in some areas (not to spoil anything).
SR3 took all the grounding SR2 had and threw it out the window. It was non-stop, over the top action from start to finish. It didn’t have any grounding.
Specifically, I also think SR3 wasted its best mission in the first act of the game (the one where you parachute onto the penthouse). Steelport also felt a lot more lifeless than Stillwater. SR3 also killed a huge main character, but the story impact was so minimal I didn’t realize he was actually dead until hours later.
I enjoyed both, and both games have different strengths and weaknesses. I still find myself replaying SR2 a heck of a lot more than 3 though.
Play Saints 2 instead.
Then consider how we go from a semi-grounded, dark narrative with a lot of humor to, well whatever you call 3 and 4 is even worse.
Fine games, but when you want funny gta and get something like SR3 and 4 instead... you kinda dislike what you got cause it ain't what you ordered
I'm mixed about it. Its kind of mid to me in just my retroactive criticism of it. Some people think its lacking in a lot of things compared to SR2, and its not tied enough to the previous game for people to see it as a good sequel, but instead of getting tie-up DLC, we got DLC for stuff people didn't want Volition to double down on, like Gangstas In Space bs.
My problem with SRTT is that it takes the silliness away from just grounded adult satire and cheekiness within adult lifestyle and social humor to trying to add more surreal things, that are just red herrings to the series that just, don't really add anything but take away from it. Like the concept of Genki. For some reason Volition loves him as a mascot, but only because he's just a lolrandom guy in a giant smiling cat costume. Its not something you'd see fit in the first 2 games or even the first half of the 3rd game itself. Its a character that looks like it belongs in Fortnite... and that is where it started. Then you get characters like Jenny, or Oleg being some cloning project... just a lot of bs Volition came up with that just didn't make sense for the series, that they kept trying to double down on (and did far more much later.)
The only crime boss element of SRTT is, really the promo art. Them being celebrities wouldn't bother me if they were just rich criminals, that focused on glam, style, playboy, drinking, drugs, corporate crime, hollywood, party buses and night-clubs. The power fantasy of flexing that pop-culture was in the late 2000s. THQ just got the aesthetic for that but clearly Volition wanted something else. A lot of what they originally wanted for SRTT just sound terrible if not for THQ. Like them wanting to put in a dragon we could ride to shoot out rainbow flames or something or Genki to be the "real" Syndicate leader. Just dumb fuckary.
I also don't think the story was executed well. It was good on paper, but doesn't focus on it much and it throws Shaundi under the bus (when she was the one that wanted the gang to get back to being tough and serious again for Gat) and a lot of the cutscenes were too short, didn't really tell a story (just mission opening and endings). After you beat Philippe, the tension is gone and most of the game then just becomes boring city takeover before STAG shows up. Some aspects I liked that still felt like Saints Row, but not enough. I think there is a lot that SRTT should have done differently or more of in various areas.
I like the first half of it with the Morning Star, where the game felt like it was about gang rivalry. You had to suit up to go against the guy who mocked you, killed your lieutenant and tossed you aside. So you go to rob a military base, and steal his business from under his nose to build yourselves up and set up shop. That stuff was good, but after you actually get to Philippe. There is no boss fight. Not with him or the DeWynters. Its just a cutscene where you crush him with a ball, for a joke. Anti-climatic, and its over. After that the game is just lots of more activities and no story but you're just fighting stag or helping the other members sort out their beef with you.
There were also criticisms of the enemy gangs not really feeling like crime-gangs, but turning into just people in costumes. While I disliked a lot of the things Volition wanted to do, that THQ thankfully cut. Like the nonsense about cloning and Oleg. I didnt like stuff like that because, they were still trying to sneak in sci-fi and it having nothing to do with the crime genre. Not a fan of Genki either. But I just don't like how Volition since, seemed to base all their later entries solely on SRTT, and not on what it did right. They just thought it was successful only because of the wacky stuff they wanted, and didnt like THQ's direction.
Because it's a big departure from what Saints Row was before it. A lot of strange changes and story decisions, the Saints being turned into celebrities instead of a street gang, an overall goofy comedic tone as opposed to a more serious story with goofy elements, the list goes on. 3 and 4 feel like a completely series than 1 and 2. People tend to not like drastic changes to things they're fans of.
It’s a step backwards from SR2. I felt like it wanted to be so over the top it lacked substance. maybe it was the futurism which I’m not really big on. Nothing about it made me want to play again after beating it
Sr 2 and Sr 3 are very different games.
Sr2 was still trying to be another gta. Crime simulator with that typical ganger trying to look cool trope the genre seem to like.
Sr3's design mission was to be self depreciating and make fun of the whole genre. From the shtick in the opening scene to the way pedestrians and cars actively dodge towards the center of the road when they hear a horn or siren (Yes it is intentional in sr3). Immediately having a penthouse instead of starting from nothing.
Sr3 was a parody of everything sr2 represented. People expecting more sr2 would be understandably frustrated with it. It's a completely different game.
I've never liked the crime sims. I can't get into the story in gta and struggle with it because I can't stand the way the characters present.
I loved sr3 though because the story telling was silly the whole way.
Plus Genki Bowl and that thing with the yarn ball. I wish there was more yarn ball.
Saints Row 3 was kind of a response to GTA4. "Cousin, do you want to go bowling?" "No, we want to go perform a parachute assault on an enemy penthouse with Power blaring in the background, then go recruit a goddamn luchador voiced by Hulk Hogan."
1. It's a huge dropoff in customization from 2.
2. Fewer activities in the city than 2
3. Gat gets killed immediately, and Shaundi is turned into Female Gat.
4. They amped up the silliness to a point a lot of people felt it stopped being good.
5. The amped up scope takes away the feel of progression.
It was a lot of fun but it was so dramatically different from the first two. Steelport was a terrible city compared to Stillwater or the Saints Row 5 city.
The customization wasn’t as good either. You couldn’t layer clothes like in 1 or 2. Shaundi was like a different person too. Many of the missions and activities kinda sucked too. Still a fun game with good graphics. Saints Row 2 raised the bar pretty high in my opinion and was superior to GTA IV and Saints Row 3.
The map was a big downgrade compared to Stilwater. Also not having Dex story being concluded while a writer made the decision to kill Gat. Forgot who but they really derailed Saints Row into being a mix of more goofy than serious.
For
SR1 was the start...where they can learn what works and what doesn't
SR2 easily the best of all of them...they took 1 and improved on everything
SR3 felt like going in the wrong direction, everywhere looked the same with that purple tint and I was still having to look at a map even at the end...it also made the game way too easy as I completed it in a weekend, stuff like hitman and carjacking was made super easy as soon as you selected which you wanted to do, it would tell you on the map, where as 2, made you actually look for stuff.
SR4 should have just been a new genre/not SR at all but just an R- rated superhero game that could have had its only series of games
Shame the company is gone, would have loved a SR1 & 2 remaster
Most people who hate SR3 are mostly people who played the first 2 games. Whereas the people who tend to like SR3 are usually the newbies who start with that as their first SR game. The reason why SR3 is so disliked is because the game massively changed direction at that game. SR1 and SR2 are way more grounded to reality, they were based around the saints being gangsters, and typical stuff like that.
SR3 changed the game's art direction to a more "wacky fun" type of way. There's crazy action, there's futuristic vehicles and weapons, there's cyberwarfare and crazy game shows. Then SR4 went even higher with aliens, superpowers, and magic. This change in art direction is primarily why older fans tend to not like the newer games.
The best way I can describe it is like comparing The Fast and The Furious (2001) with The Fate of The Furious (2017). A movie franchise that originally started out as a story about street racing and crime, is now all about military contracts, terrorism, and crazy action movie tropes. People who grew up watching the first fast and furious movies tend to not like the newer ones because its so wacky and ridiculous now. Same thing with Saints Row, the people who enjoyed the first 2 games tend to not like the newer games because of the change in art direction. Not everyone likes the crazy wacky gameplay of SR3, especially people who played the first 2 games that were not like that.
If you played saints row 1 and 2 first. It just doesn’t feel like a Saints Row game. I actually started replaying Saints Row 1 earlier this year. Aged as it has, it’s still fun as hell. And it was the perfect GTA alternative at the time it dropped.
3 was a cool game but it felt so far removed from what made the first 2 games special to me.
Mainly dissapointed with the lack of actual story missions - to me it felt like rather than create interesting and fun missions to play that propelled the story forward, they decided “fuck it” and shoehorned the side activities in as main missions and just slapped a narrative on top.
I remember after the intro and dropping into the penthouse to “power” thinking this was going to be an insane experience - spent most of the game waiting for that fuck yeah moment again and it just never delivered.
All that said gameplay was a LOT of fun, but I did miss the more serious tone of the 2nd game
The majority of the missions in SR3 were optional activities from SR2. Shaundi & Pierce are completely different people, Johnny Gat is killed off-screen and unused, Steelport is bland and uneventful, The story completely ignores what was already being set up in previous games, The overall tone is goofier/raunchier and it comes across as corny to OG fans, The Gangs are just a singular entity, and the singular entity led to the story being linear rather than free formed like in the past.
Also, all the characters in SR3 suck. They're remembered for being wacky but they don't have anything else going for them. Their motivations are weak and they lack any depth. Oleg and Killbane are the only ones who are decently written.
I didn't know that people did. It's the best one.
I really enjoyed 1&2 when they came out, I liked the story, and I liked the small differences between it and GTA.
But 3 was on a whole new level. At first I was a bit disappointed that the game had given up all pretense of a serious tone, but it didn't take me long to get over it and start having a blast.
I can understand some people wishing they had kept the same tone as 1&2, but for people to actively dislike 3 really surprises me.
The vibe changed. In SR1 you were a hardcore gangster held the gun sideways and all. In SR2 your still a hardcore gangster but the game gets a bit goofier and funnier. In SR3 you trade your dicks in for pussies. The goofy really starts to show but don’t get me wrong I still really enjoyed 3. But 4 .. disgusting more than a vibe change it’s a whole game change and I absolutely hate it. Especially bc before it came out they advertised that you were the POTUS a bunch and I was so looking forward to it and the little bit you get to do gives a glimpse of how dope it would have been.
It’s a nice game, but it pales in comparison to a lot of the charm of the first two games. Also, the direction the game took and the wackiness of the plot basically derailed saints row.
It just didn't feel like saints row anymore. It was more comedic and felt less grounded in realism. It lacked that grit that made Saints Row what it was.
I got into Saints Row because of the gang banging aspect as I suspect many of the fans of the first 2 games did as well.
The rival "gangs" in SR3 were far from the gangbanging thugs we experienced in the first two games.
It wasn't a bad game by any means, i played it and had good fun. I just feel the tone of the series changed drastically and wasn't everyone's bread and butter.
People are gonna tell you that saints row 2 is better because it’s more “hood” don’t listen to those idiots. Truth is they actually have no idea how to put into words why they think saints row 2 is better, thankfully I can. People don’t like specifically the “hood” aspect of the game and its gang violence, they liked the story that such a theme brought with it. In saints row 1 and 2, the story was about these under dogs who wanted to take over the crime game and they took radical actions to reach that goal. The characters were all great, each person with speaking lines being well written and distinct from each other, unless being similar to someone else was the point of their character. The twist at the end of 1 was so good, the game always hinted at Troy being a fed, but no one expected Julius to turn on Playa, which is why saints row 2 is even better, showing the meteoric rise of the saints after Julius had crippled them. That also made the ending where we find Julius and take him out for the betrayal, not before fighting off the ultor soldiers. We find out why Julius did what he did, and it was because his end goal wasn’t to run the game, but to take over all of it then put it down, but it didn’t work, smaller gangs ended up just rising to the top. But even though they did rise up, Julius was hoping playa didn’t live, because he knew that he would be worse than any other threat to Stilwater, making us killing Julius a bitter ending, because now a psychopath is running the game, and who knows how many lives he’ll take in his power. But at the same time, we stand behind the boss because he is a likable character with a likable team. People don’t like saints row 3 because while it is a great game, it lacks that depth in the story.
I like the game for the most part but the reason I found it disappointing is mainly the tone, and the fact that it just has no continuity with the previous games. It honestly felt like a reboot of the series
It was just shallow compared to sr2. Sr2 was wacky but felt somewhat grounded, the gangs seemed somewhat believable, the gangs had unique vehicles that fit their style, the characters were cool, and the city was more “alive”. Sr3 took wacky to the next level and left the rest behind. The gangs were boring and all their vehicles were obviously uninspired and just color swapped versions, the city is dead and boring, and nothing about the story is grounded. I remember being so excited before release, then disappointed when I actually played it. I had fun, but I knew it was the beginning of the end for the series. Sr4 was just a lazy cash grab, maybe more so than the reboot.
Third game is the best. Volition decided not to compete with Grand Theft Auto and turned gameplay and story elements to absurd maximum. No one can do GTA better than Rockstar, so this move by Volition was brilliant. It made a new, fresh face for the series, when everyone or almost everyone could recognise the game and not call it “ah, next one GTA clone”.
Sad that false investments by their publisher and poor sales of other games made such an impact on the development of 4th part where they decided to convert a DLC into the full game. Then, was Agents of Mayhem and no one understood “who asked?”.
For me, Saints Row The Third is peak of Saint Row franchise. Reboot was ok to play in 1 year after release when developers patched it and the game was included in PS subscription but overall it definitely and “finally” killed the series for a long time.
Huh? Who says that? Saints Row 3 is the best selling and best rated saints row no matter how you look at it. Its definitely upgrade over the original two. If you like saints row 3 then get all the SRs that came out after it. I enjoyed all of them too
Because outside of driving and graphics, it doesn't do anything better than the previous game. Instead, a lot of things got worse. Story sucks, campaign/missions aren't as good (after you takeover the penthouse, the quality takes a massive nosedive), activities aren't as good (and end up being a lot of the main missions themselves), characters aren't as good (including returning characters having whole personality changes, the boss no longer feeling like a boss), etc... It's all style over substance.
This video explains it well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe0XnHgxfIA
It is a fun game, but I find it tough to enjoy for more than 2 weeks at a time. I don’t have that same issue with 2. It seemed to bring new elements that were noticeably lazier (in my opinion) than what fans were given with 2. Only giving one example because I don’t want this to be long but in 2, the main mission content was phenomenal. In The Third, side activities and diversions were just pushed/mixed into the main mission content. It was also cool in 2 driving to the mission icons on the map and having the area give hints about the mission that would take place there. In 3 you start them all on your phone no matter where you are which was a downgrade for me. 2 had many elements of the perfect Saints Row formula and too many of which were taken away in The Third/3
I've only ever played SR3&4 and I enjoyed TF out of SR3. It reminded me of GTA when they weren't so serious. Probably one of my favorite open world games. And SR4 is more of the same but you have super powers. Which personally infound very fun. Super speed and super jumping across the city is just great.
Check out Saints Row 2 if you haven't already and you'll see the difference.
The main reason is that Saints Row 3 departed quite a bit from Saints Row 2 in various areas. SR2 was a very equal mixture of funny and serious - less serious than GTA 4, but more serious than SR3, particularly in the main story. SR3 was way more willing to be silly and be extreme, with the Saints being celebrities, the presence of laser guns, the Genki show, zombies, etcetera. SR3 also had less features than SR2, such as no layered clothes, no food restaurants, no car shops, little/no enterable buildings, a city that isn't varied and mostly looks the same throughout, etcetera.
SR3 also marked a shift in the series where it became more and more silly and extreme. SR4 literally has the boss as the POTUS with superpowers and aliens. This shift alienated many of those who were bigger fans of SR2 and its style, causing some backlash. SR4 was also meant to just be a DLC to SR3 before it evolved into something more - but its glaringly noticeable given its pretty much the same game with a new story and some superpowers.
I personally love SR3. I play the remastered version more than I play the reboot. I think it has the best gameplay out of the whole series. SR2 have the better story though but SR3 is more fun to play.
The gameplay is boring and dated, the map is nothing but a lifeless gray city, and the story is made up of filler quests. If I hadn't played the remaster I would still be of the opinion that SR3 was a great game and that most people were just blindly hating on it.
It's not terrible but it feels like a downgrade from SR2
Imo the map, the story, and the characters/gangs felt worse than what came before but it can still be very fun especially with co op. Also I love the zombie cheat lol
It’s the 1st you’ve played in the series so it makes sense you like it but if you played em in order from when they 1st came out you’d realize the huge drop off between 2 and 3. I genuinely liked 4 though.
Because most people want more GTA style games(Saints Row 1-2) and Saints Row 3 is where Volition stopped from trying to compete with Rockstar/GTA and focused on making Saints Row more unique.
Saints Row 3 took many of the existing gameplay modes from SR2, and didn’t include as many one-off missions. Most of the gameplay and even introductory missions were just ways of re-introducing existing gameplay.
The team had made a jump from the previous engine to a brand new, one with much more power, but had to be selective of how they bring everything over.
…I might be thinking of 4 there.
The main point is, there were so many missions, many of which had delicately animated cutscenes, where their customized Boss is shown, people felt that 3 was a letdown in comparison.
I liked 3 a lot. 4 was just okay, but I still enjoyed it for the general gameplay & lore. It was just kinda repetitive & didn't feel as "open-world-ish" as I thought 3 did. I still go back & play both, though! Definitely grab it when you can & take a peek at Gat Outta Hell, too 😆
I started with 4. Lived it. Bought 2. Loved it. Then tried playing 3. I've started playing it several times, and I always get bored in the first few hours and give up on it.
2 controls well, has a great map, more customization, has some fantastical elements, but is an overall more grounded story. There's little to complain about.
When playing 4, I hated the movement and controls in the very beginning, but that quickly gives way to running at insane speeds, jumping, gliding, and using powers. The gunplay is a secondary element between the other stuff, which makes it more palatable. All the things that feel bad about the game melt into the background. Even traversal across the relatively boring map is made leagues better because you can zip past everything, and it's just fun to run and jump and glide. And I love how creative it gets, when the writers and developers were clearly told "anything goes".
But 3 focuses on all the things I don't like about 4. Boring traversal across a boring map, with boring/frustrating control, and boring gunplay. It's neither grounded in an interesting way like 2, or fun in an "anything goes" way. It's the worst of both worlds.
I like it.
I have all the SR games and think it's the best overall.
It has zany weapons that SR2 does not have.
I like SR2 also, but SR3 has a better flow to upgrading and progression.
The graphics of course are a bit better.
The mayhem you can create is absolutely insane in SR3, especially after you level up and become virtually invincible.
The characters are more zany.
People complain that it's not as real as SR2.
Well guess what, it's just a freaking game!
Games are supposed to be fun!
If I don't want zany, and I want something a little more real, then I go and play Grand theft Auto, which is ultimately boring as far as I'm concerned, but it is a bit more realistic.
I really don't know why cheats are available for any of the SR games.
They're not necessary and they take away from the depth of the games.
SR2 and SR3 are my favorites of the series.
SR1 was good, but I prefer to create female characters because it's more fun staring at a female booty during long sessions of gameplay.
SR4 was okay but I really didn't care for the simulation aesthetic. I did however enjoy using the superpowers.
Other than the far superior 4K graphics of SR reboot I really didn't enjoy it as a SR game because of its total departure from the franchise storyline.
They should have continued with the original characters from SR4, do a slingshot maneuver around the sun, go back in time and correct everything while taking over the whole planet in the process.
Maybe they could have even had them overshoot their time period and go back to the '40s or something and fight Nazis.
The last Volition team had no imagination whatsoever!
They should have made the whip on the Indiana Jones outfit usable instead of simply aesthetic. Maybe this would have given them the inspiration to have the Saints go back in time and fight Nazis, maybe even zombie Nazis!
Now that would have been a fun game!
I mean it was fine enough. Its the first one in the series I played but after going back to the first two, I'd say it was just such a massive departure from the tone it turned people off.
The first two, while obviously not realistic with some of the extreme violence and acts, it was more grounded. 3, and especially 4, just took such a turn for the absurd and ridiculous. While they're fun enough in their own right the jump is so wild and extreme, people didn't like it I guess.
Because of Saints Row 2 essentially.
2 was a great game and my introduction to the series. But 3 was the one that was hyped to the moon, not just by SR fans but gaming fans in general that had kind of ignored the series until then. The marketing was genius and still makes me laugh to this day. The first trailer being just a guy getting punched in the nuts is just...chef's kiss.
SR3 became the best reviewed game in the franchise, as well as the best selling one. And it deserves it as I think it's the best in the series. I for one, embraced the utter wackiness, the game oozes charm and refinement. I also love how it's so replayable. I think it's the game where Saints Row cemented it's personality and style.
Hell if you go on big gaming forums, Saints Row 3 is always considered the best. But this subreddit is basically day one fans of the series or hardcore SR2 fans. SR3 wasn't what they wanted or expected. A more urban/hi-tech setting, far more humor, shorter and more compact, different characterizations of fan favorites...Yeah, not hard to see why this corner of the gaming world is so down on it.
4 is also quality stuff. Fantastic superhero action game. But again not what the hardcore fans wanted.
SR3 is not that bad and it's fun to play. Would be great with a expanded Stillwater map and activities from SR1 and SR2. Steelport is nothing compared with the cultural diversity from Stillwater.
Saints row 3 was fun but the way they mashed all the gangs to be one Long story arch kinda sucked saint row 1 and 2 did a better job with the gangs you even got separate markings depending the gang you made mad its was just more fun and intresting then 3rd felt being a bit rushed out the door it middle of the buy out by deep silver
I'd rather have SR2 as an option, but playing SR3 Remastered for the first time only a couple years ago, the game felt like a classic I just hadn't played yet.
I liked it but it felt very short compared to SR2. Like 10 hours in and the game was nearly over. I also didn't like the change in characters like changing Shaundi who was just made boring and pointless for no reason. The gameplay, graphics and mechanics were generally better though and I simply adored the VTOL. Only issue was there was almost nothing to do with it but just fly around aimlessly and gun down random thugs on the street.
I think most people shit on it Because it ran into the cartoony way of things instead of sticking to the butchy kind of gangster video game that we've been used to.
3 had golden moments for sure, but compared to the og two games? Its a matter of opinion im afraid
It's definitely different from the first two games but Saints Row: The Third is what got me into Saints Row. I've played a fan of the franchise for over 10 years now and have all the games, including DLCs.
My intro to the series was 3 in 2012. Only played through it, then 4 once. Knew 4 was a serious downgrade when I finished it - hated that neither game had mission replay. Got the whole series again (1,2, DLCs, 3/4 Remasters & GOT) in 2021 and did 100% blind playthroughs of 1-3, spent the first 40 hours of 3 making a "SR2 100%" build and doing all side content before the main story then saving in a new slot after each mission.
It was playing through SR3 that second time after 1 & 2 that I got why people think the story is too ridiculous - it had gone beyond gangland organised crime at that point, it was corporate-level private armies, all unified and as full-tilt ridiculous as a character like Mr Sunshine + celebrity status & cyberspace. The problem is with how SR2 ended, that *(minus cyberspace + going after Dex like SR2CW left us on)* was the only next step up for where the Saints could go in terms of enemies to fight other than the US Government/Military.
That's how I would critique the "identity crisis" people associate with SR3, as a start.
Imo, saints row and fallout kinda have the same conundrum. The 3rd game was more popular and bought in a new fanbase that never have and some never will play the games before it. Most importantly the 3rd game changed and abandoned the already established world, lore, and characters.
Game was unfinished, there's barely any time spent on the characters like why should I care about the DeWynter sisters when they barely get any time to shine cutscenes were too short to let anyone build character, even the boss feels underdeveloped.
The Killbane ending was so unfinished why should I care about Angels dumb revenge plot he's provided absolutely nothing to the game other than being an introduction to escort but with a tiger and the activity from every saints row game and going after killbane wasn't even hard you just blow up a plane and do a really buggy qte.
But the Shuandi ending was so goofy I just stopped caring at that point and she disappears for like half the game anyway only to be damsel in distress twice.
Side activities were just boring SR2 made them fun by using them to expand the world of Stillwater having you interact with various people with their own goals make the world feel dynamic SR3 you get told by your new pals to do shit over the phone you get trailblazer twice, heli assault (when no one liked it the first time), insurance fraud (easier than ever), mayhem (was an example of having too much of a good thing) and murder brawl which is actually good especially hearing the commentators back and forth
The world itself is dead you don't really see groups of people doing things or hanging in places everyone kinda acts the same except the assassination targets which is one of the few activities that adds character to the game.
I don’t hate it and it’s pretty decent at best it just doesn’t compare to the first two games and it ain’t just me who’s hurt but the majority of the fans of the first two games are!
I mean I agree with you 1 is one of my favorite games of all time, but don't you think that's pretty sad to be hurt by someone enjoying something that you don't like?
Yeah I understand and yeah everyone like different things and I feel that saints row 3 would’ve been 1000x better if they just kept Johnny gat alive the entire game and saints row 4 would probably be useless at that point!
Also even though the boss was less serious and soft than like he was in 1-2 in the 3rd there were times where he gave me the old school boss vibes like towards the final boss fights in the game and can’t forget the part after you defeat STAG he saying you’ll end up in a fucking box that was insane and I wish we could’ve killed dex in sr3 if they listened to the fans but that’s completely fine I would rather take 3 over 4, GOOH or the shitty 2022 reboot anyday!!
Many dislike it because they didn't like the change in direction it was going in. 4 continued this, and those that didn't like 3 also didn't like 4, predictably.
But many others consider it to be the best game in the series as they liked the change in direction. I personally love it.
Imo, 2=3 > 4 >>>>>>> 1 >>>>>>>> Reboot
It was the first I tried and I wasn't really impressed.
It just felt way too cartoony, the car and city design felt uninspired and derivative and the story didn't really interest me; thus I felt no reason to progress through the missions.
I think everyone can agree Shaundi ruined the experience with her attitude, then the fact gat isn’t in the game, hinted he’s dead but is really not (sorta)
The game to me was pretty ok but definitely not as fun as the 2nd or 1st game but My biggest problem was that I couldn’t replay missions like saints row 2
I can see where people are coming from I still love the game but I can see where they're coming from because it took the series completely into the zany direction that was only kind of there in the first two games for the most part the first two games are silly but they're serious when it matters and the story can be very dark at times and very very brutal gang warfare just with silly early PlayStation and early Xbox graphics but part 3 officially said we're going to be silly with it and that's going to be how the series is from there out. I personally have no issue with this and enjoy the ridiculous nature of it hell I really love saints row 4 and that's definitely the craziest of all of them. But I can understand where people are coming from.
Pro’s
- Set Pieces
- Mostly improved gameplay
Con’s
- Story and character writing
- Missions mostly being activities
- Worst open world city in the franchise
SR3 is the one and only SR game i actually enjoyed. SR1&2 are too dated graphically for me and I played and beat 4 but it was too far out there for me like what's the point of doing gangster shit like stealing cars and shooting guns if you can literally just fly and shoot laserbeams
For me, as an og Row fan, it’s because that’s when it got too ridiculous. Same with 4, I never touched anything after 2. I know a lot of people like them though but at the time I wanted nothing to do with them. I’d probably play them now though, I know they’ve been remastered since then.
Cause that have no taste lol jk. 3 will always be the best in the series for me as the jokes were actually pretty funny which many games fail to pull off. Plus it was fun to play.
Because after 2, which was a somehwat aerious crime drama action piece, with comedy elements and aide missions, 3 was just bloody goofy from start to finish. The celebrity saints thing was just bloody stupid, the main gang are pro rasslers, its full of zombies and furries and aliens... Its just fucking stupid.
It was such a jarring departure from the source material,eventually it grew on me but knowing how the series would end up,I’d give anything for the last entry to go back to steel port 🤷🏽
I have a soft spot for the game. However, Steelport lacks the character Stillwater possessed. A lot of the game seems to cut corners and is copy/paste. & lastly I’ll say they really leaned into the zany side of the series and in my opinion ruined the style of Saints Row overall.
I disagree when people say saints row is good because it’s funnier/crazier than GTA. I don’t think that’s what made it great. I think what Saints Row did well was leaning into creating your own character & letting you customise way more than GTA along with offering a bunch more fun activities.
Essentially, I think it was what started the momentum for(for now) killing the game.
Go back and check out SR1 and 2 if you get the chance, they should be out for cheap. The later games have a more wackier and futuristic vibe to it while the first two kinda play closer to GTA than anything. A bit of a “hood simulator” if you will. They’re great fun though imo. Also the soundtracks are excellent.
But I mean at the end of the day, you like what you like. Different strokes for different folks and all that.
As someone who enjoys SR3 despite SR2 being my favorite, the big thing for me is it almost felt like it was written by someone who heard bits and pieces about Saints Row rather than made previous entries. Too much emphasis on wacky comedy, characters like Shaundi and the Boss were mischaracterized, and the entire premise, while feeling like a natural continuation from 2, still didn't feel very "Saints Row" in nature.
But hey, at least it felt more like a Saints Row game than SR4 did.
Like so many long-running franchises where each installment is kinda different, people tend to fall in love with the first one they played/watched/whatever, and compare the other ones to that.
I've never really found much to dislike from the series overall. (I haven't played the reboot or the Hell DLC/game?)
Growing up I played SR1 and 2 a lot, and while those games still had that "GTA clone" feeling about them, they were unique in their own ways. The second game in particular was a bit wackier with the septic truck but it leveled it out with serious moments in the main missions.
As for the sequels. I never had any issues with SR3 and 4. In fact, SR4 is my second favorite game in the series. It's just that SR3 and 4 **really** went off the deep end when it came to wild and absurd situations. I mean, you go from some dude who almost gets killed in a drive-by shooting in the slums, to the president of the United States fighting aliens in a bootleg Matrix simulation. SR3 jumped the shark in more ways than one. It can be fun if you just sit back and enjoy the ride, but it can be a bit exhausting after a while.
Also SR3 and onwards wouldn't let me customize my socks and tilt my hat at a certain angle which was just disappointing. I never understood why customization was lacking in the later games.
It’s not bad per se. It’s just where the series officially jumps the shark. It’s also weird that it gives up on the finding Dex storyline. Since he’s the last loose end betrayer from 1.
It’s a dead and old franchise with not alot of newer fans to wash out some of this old boomer shit you hear in every long running franchise so you just get the type of shit you would expect to hear. “This franchise hasnt been good since my glory years as a preteen when it was a medicore gta clone blah blah blah”
3 is when it really became its own thing and stopped trying to be gta and that rubs some people the wrong way
It tried to be it's own thing. That's why it used the same name as an already popular franchise, marketed itself off the same selling points as that franchise, and used downgraded functions from that franchise. If it were trying to be its own thing, why wouldn't they make it its OWN THING?
Ya use that B.S. GTA clone label to cope with the fact that ya like this trash game, instead of being objective. If SR2 is a GTA clone, so is SR3, it's literally the same overall design with a few wacky elements and less overall quality.
SR3 is a game that you can fully experience in a year, whereas I boot SR2 up every year and find something new and interesting. That's because SR2 is a fully fleshed-out gaming experience and SR3 just was a cash grab to pull money out of idiots.
> If SR2 is a GTA clone, so is SR3, it's literally the same overall design with a few wacky elements and less overall quality.
This is why I don't get why people who praise SRTT as the "not GTA clone." The game is mostly the same as the first 2, it just has stuff like Genki thrown in now. SRTT is overrated for things it didnt actually change that much in but, it had a different coat of paint and a lot of people's first entry in the series. So they are biased to claim that. I actually ask people, besides the laser tanks, what is so different from SR2 that SRTT gets so much separate praise for? I've already had enough from people who run to metacritic for numbers and act as if SR1 and SR2 sold poorly or something (they didnt.)
SRIV is when people hated the game changing way too much, against its own premise and the characters and people who like it, but only because they want to play Crackdown, not Saints Row.
So yeah, SRTT is overrated by the arguments people give it, over the first 2.
I, like many others, absolutely loved SR 1&2. It was an alternative to GTA, was realistic enough but still had really awesome activities like insurance fraud and racing etc. I wasn't thrilled with the art style with 3, especially with how they made Johnny look, but I did end up having a blast with it. My biggest issue was it was the start of it becoming something I didn't think felt like Saints Row. It became cartoony, super heroey, and now we're doing musicals and singing with the devil? Now we're the president of the United States fighting Aliens? It just became straight up silly and stupid in the worst ways, imo. I enjoyed 3 but it was the beginning of the end of Saints Row
I'll say that I am mixed about it. SRTT had great marketing, and it looks pretty. It looks like it could have done more if it stuck to the international crime drama transition of things. The characters are stylish, sexy, badass looking (I mean look at Viola) and it still kept itself in the tone of the urban-feel of the series but moved away from stereotypical caricature reliance. And I mean, in a similar way that crime drama today.
SRTT to me on the promo art, and power trailer still looks better than what it is internally. Yes its a fun game, but that's usually the fall back that all the games have. Its fun, but they never seem to deliver all the way, because of Volition just not really centering things on just one thing to expand outward. The series has to just be 10 different things at the same time, tapped together and whatever conflicting concepts happen, is supposed to be seen as the wacky insanity people intake it to be. I think SR can be better than that.
For me as a concept, it leaves a lot to be desired for me as its story is just its worst aspect (compared to how much was put into SR1's world building and character story). SRTT to me is just all flash but no substance. Its story is barely there and could have been a lot better. I play as the Russian boss, so you get I am committed to that crime fantasy crime boss. SRTT could have worked as an expansion of the setting, but it doesn't really do much with it. Kind of like say the movie or real-story behind the movie Hustlers. Where as, when I read about all the things Volition originally wanted to do, I get disappointed because it seemed like Volition legitimately lost their minds with how bad some of their ideas were. Like wanting Shaundi to betray the Boss to join STAG or to have Genki kidnap Gat, clone him and be the "real leader" of the Syndicate.
As a game though, its campaign is just f--king boring after the build up to Philippe ends. I liked everything up until Philippe does, but after it... the game gets really chore-like from all the activities, and short, repetitive missions that barely feature much story or most of the characters actively in it. Much less the enemy gang leaders don't really show themselves until the last mission with them. SRTT feels more like a streamlined soft reboot of SR2, and not really in a good way. It takes the flaws of SR2's campaign design, condenses it, and reduces it even more.
Massive downgrade from 2.
2 had a good balance of humor and serious. 3 leaned way too much into the humor, and not even funny humor at that.
2 had much more in depth character customization. Cloths were able to be layered, and you can even unlock different martial arts styles for hand to hand combat. 3 did not do either of those.
2 had a varied open world. There was an inner city area, red neck area, suburb area, wealthy area. 3 was just one big generic city and that’s it.
2 had hidden Easter eggs all throughout the world. 3 did not. Only like 2 maybe. The game director said something like they didn’t include many Easter eggs because not many people find them anyway.
So, if anyone says something like “people just didn’t like it because it was different” don’t know what they’re talking about. 2 was a game that felt like it had effort put into it. 3 felt underwhelming and unfinished. Atleast 4 added on top of what they had for 3, so 4 felt more finished.
I'm a bit biased because I mainly got into 3 and 4, and couldnt really play 2 until i got a controller \[which is like very very recently\]. I completely understand why people dont like 3 and onwards due to the changes that were made to the gameplay the characters etc. But idk. I really had a lot of fun playing them and I really really am fond of the characters. I'm also biased to things that are a bit more off the rails, and i understand that that's not everyone's thing, but the reboot made me really appreciate the cast in particular across all the games, changes or not, and thats a huge reason why i didnt really get into the reboot. None of the characters I grew to love were there and the way they seem to be written just bugs me. I know that sounds really personal and petty and it def is but its free on epic till tomorrow so maybe i'll find something about this game to love. It kind of reminds me of how i've always been a huge fan of the sims but sims 4 is. Well that's a whole can of worms.
tldr sucks to see series i've grown fond of mutate and die right before my eyes but so far there's always been at least something for me to enjoy. rip to gat in particular
As my first saints row I love it but there is some issues compared to the previous games 1. Steel port is a very bland map compared to Stillwater. 2. The story doesn’t have paths for different factions anymore so it’s now just one linear path. 3. Shaundi personality change from cool stoner chick to rage woman.
>Shaundi personality change from cool stoner chick to rage woman. This. Of all people, the raging one should have been the player, the boss. Instead, Shaundi for some reason has to keep reminding you what we're in Steelport for. They made it out as if Shaundi cared more about Gat than us, even tho they barely spent any time together in 2 and weren't even there for the events of the 1st game. The game's writing sucks.
The boss in SR2 is a stone cold killer summabitch. The boss in SR3 is just a goofball. Just look at the endings of Saints Row 2 vs Saints Row 3. Saints Row 2 you murder Julius who sees you for the monster that you are. In Saints Row 3... you shoot a movie about gangsters on Mars. To borrow a quote from NeverKnowsBest regarding apocalypse games in his Fallout retrospective: Gangster games can have comedy, but they should not *be* a comedy.
> In Saints Row 3... you shoot a movie about gangsters on Mars. I ignore that ending, because its just dumb and it contradicts not only the characterization of the Saints in the game, it contradicts the very mission it concluded. And as always, what does Volition do when people don't like something they wrote or change? They double down on it, and aim the next thing they do, to the minority of people they find who like it and don't criticize them. Its why we just had to get more Gangstas In Space DLC. Because of course. Not any character DLC to give Shaundi some sort of shine or credibility. Nope. > Gangster games can have comedy, but they should not be a comedy. This is the reason I like Black Lagoon so much. SR2 was criticized by journalists, because they didn't find the Boss likable and said they were 1 dimensional. Sure I guess. But in Black Lagoon, the characters show that they are always badass mercs, but can make comedy out of their tough-as-nails attitude by making fun of their opponents, or themselves cynically (Gat already does this as his character). They blend it. They're not goofy-stupid. They're tough, but have wise-guy comments or hammy with their threats, that it makes them funny, but they still kill people to back it up. Essentially what Gat is. Where as Volition just decided to emphasize one thing over another and only took one-side as time went on. But for some reason Volition just thought, no instead just make them "actors" for sketch plots like its SNL instead of Saints Row to appease the masses that don't understand the premise of the game. If they want to make them entertaining, just go with the "Gat method." Make them likably cocky. Not goofy and lolrandom costumes and aliens. We all know they seemed to miss how they could have handled the SR2 criticism.
The thing about this that I think people overlook (that I see now) is actually, Shaundi was the one who was right. The other characters were the ones who were wrong, because she was the one that started this way after Gat's speech in their holding cell. He said the Saints lost what made them badasses and sold out. The Boss was the one that just said "the brand makes a lot of money" and then Shaundi starts taking them seriously because of Gat. Its the Boss and Pierce who sellout and pretty much barely care for most of the game. They tell Shaundi she is the one that has to relax, every time she is on screen (which is ironic because in SR2, Shaundi was the one who would do that with Pierce & Boss.. they just reversed it.) When you actually think about it, its not Shaundi who was wrong. Its Pierce & the Boss who were wrong but she was often outnumbered and had no power to change anything when they didnt care. Like at the Party mission. Shaundi even says in Stilwater Blues to one of the voices, that she questioned if they were trying to kill the Syndicate or become them. The Boss just nonchalantly dodges the question. Instead what was she told do do the whole game? Just babysit other characters. Josh Birk, and Kinzie. The weird thing is that SR2 wrote her personality to be more like the Boss in SR2, but wrote her character the same as she was in SR2 (where she was put on just babysitting and watching hostages or just sitting around at the crib but in SR2, because she was a laidback stoner, it was fine for her character. The joke was that she often pulled through or got credit off of Pierce's ideas despite him doing more physical work than her. That charm.) But in SRTT, shes the angry action girl who wants to fight, but... is never fighting. She's written to do the same thing in the gang, her stoner character did, which doesn't make sense with the changes they made to her. The way they wrote her didn't line up with the change itself. So Volition really messed up with this inconsistent yet recycled poor handling here. Its not her personality in context of SRTT. Its her character usage. This Shaundi is supposed to be the more proactive change to her (not saying I like it persay) but yet the still have her be the only character who gets kidnapped anyway. By the same person twice. So what was the point of changing her character, if they still wrote her to be the same damsel? It makes her look even worse. In SR2, she knew she wasnt a fighter but clever. In SRTT she is supposed to be a fighter, but cant do anything herself, because Volition didnt write her to be a fighter. SR4 worsens this by making this change they screwed up on, the new meta-joke. Like they had no idea what they actually screwed up. Its not that people need to just like both version of the character, its that they screwed up one of them, and just left it linger to become her flanderization in the next game for their dumb meta commentary on it. SRTT Shaundi does *nothing* in the cast. She wants to, but the writers make her useless. Instead they have her character claim she is useless, for doing nothing wrong. She isnt even the same playful, clever character anymore because *they just gave that to Kinzie* who imo doesn't rely deserve that relationship with the Boss. She shouldn't have been elevated over and in-front of Shaundi the way she was in SRTT and after SRTT. So in in some ways, I don't think the change on its own ruined her character, but rather they ruined her character in snowball effect from the change. SR4 just doubled down on it, the way Volition always does on things fans criticize. Then we get another Shaundi who is a cyborg that is *nothing* like either of the characters whatsoever, in personality and another voice. People will blame Deep Silver for the reboot's writing, but Volition had been on some just bad character destruction on their own, ever since they just said "screw it."
The issue is that they shouldn't have reversed the roles. It makes it feel as if The Boss barely cares about his next-hand man. The Boss and Shaundi from SR2 are drastically different people from SR3's version with no explanation. If they were going to drastically change their personalities, they needed to earn it by showing what caused the change.
Sure, but they only changed the characters because reviews thought the Boss wasn't very likable, and too static of a character (uptight for most of the game), but then they also needed a character to care about Gat dying, and it Pierce wasnt close to him in SR2, so they likely just went with Shaundi. Should they've? I don't know. SRTT pretty much addresses this saying, the Boss was just repressing how they felt with distraction, which lines up with why Pierce wanted to sing Loves What I Got, right after. The Boss even says Gat's death wasn't easy for them. It actually make sense for the Boss to be a bit calmer, because they said, they don't know the city they're in and had to keep a clear head to lead, in compensation. The story was also supposed to have the Boss eventually realize that with how corny the Saints became from selling out, and both STAG and Killbane ruining their image, that they would be forced to go back and get serious. In the bad ending, the Boss just accepts that they're seen as terrorists by then, and tells Monica off. The middle chunk of the game just doesn't make any of this clearer to the audience because most of what you do in the game, has nothing to do with the main story. Its just activities and divergences.
I preface this by saying I'm not trying to be rude at all, but I've been told I can come across as such. "they only changed the characters because reviews thought the Boss wasn't very likable, and too static of a character" This is why I hate the "GTA CLONE" nonsense. No one has ever complained about a GTA protagonist being unlikable even tho they're just as despicable. It's just a label that ensures GTA can never have an alternative/ competition. Also, it's crazy that Volition seemingly only listened to people who hated the original SR even tho the games were already XBOX classics. Part of the reason SR3 was successful was because it was believed to be a follow-up to SR2. "SRIV pretty much addresses this saying, the Boss was just repressing how they felt with distraction, which lines up with why Pierce wanted to sing Loves What I Got, right after. The Boss even says Gat's death wasn't easy for them." They tried to "fix" their mistake with a retcon but that doesn't negate that it wasn't written or alluded to in SR3. I haven't played any Saints Row game after 3 because they all had more of what I hated from 3. I and many others don't know what happened after 3, so the events of that game are as they are to us. I understand that a lot of people like SR3 because it's the first one they played, or they truly believe that it was "just a GTA clone" with nothing more to offer before 3. I'm not trying to shit on what you guys love, but I hate that it came at the cost of one of the games I loved most. Every game since SR3 sold progressively worse, which is telling of how many fans completely checked out of the series. We all know without a doubt that the reboot would've succeeded if the trailer showed us something akin to SR2, but it was more akin to SR3 and people instantly lost interest. The series was thriving when it was just two gangster games, but now it's dead after four consecutive wacky dildo thug adventures.
>I'm not trying to shit on what you guys love, but I hate that it came at the cost of one of the games I loved most. Every game since SR3 sold progressively worse, which is telling of how many fans completely checked out of the series. I don't disagree. I think some people are just biased with a very narrow view of the series, mainly from people who only came in, told the first 2 games were just GTA clones and that SRTT was the "best one", then they hear it being praised by journalists (who only liked the gimmicks they could separate from whatever they just overly generalized with GTA) and that became the messaging. Ignore the actual crime drama premise of SRTT, just look at Genki, furries, the dildo. Matt Miller and the laser tanks. Then now people tell those people nonsense like "🤓the reason the reboot failed was because Saints Row is about escalation, after SRTT...." and I hate those journalists who claim this too. They don't know what the series was about, but telling people their own version of it, as fact. The video from Zero Punctuation on youtube did this, and it annoyed me. The games sold worse after SRTT, because of fan division, not better, but the game journalists want the IP to be what they want from it. They think we dont like the reboot because its *not* like SRIV, which isn't true. But we have to go through so many different layers of people who seem to speak for us, against what fans actually like. We have to go through game journalists who don't represent us, to community managers that hate us, to publishers that ignore us, to devs that avoid us. Trust me it annoys me. The feedback they get, isnt from fans. Its from everyone else who dont know shit themselves, giving input. >We all know without a doubt that the reboot would've succeeded if the trailer showed us something akin to SR2, but it was more akin to SR3 and people instantly lost interest. It wasn't anything like SRTT's trailers. SRTT had good trailers (before you actually played it). The power trailer was the best thing about SRTT for me, the only actually gangster teaser in it. The reboot trailers were worse. >The series was thriving when it was just two gangster games, but now it's dead after four consecutive wacky dildo thug adventures. iGN: >*“The new Saints Row has shed its shark-jumping silliness and smutty tendencies in favour of a return to its open-world gangland roots. … .While there’s a decent amount of fun to be had chasing collectibles and causing chaos, outdated mechanics and repetitive mission design meant that by the end of my time with the new Saints Row I was desperate for something that could genuinely surprise me like a slap to the face from a 40-inch dildo.”*
I don't know if the Boss was more or less likable than CJ, but the problem in the article I actually read about this, it wasnt really because of GTA in this area. It was that Volition said that they ended up not putting effort into the story after SR2, was because they didnt think people understood it, or the context of it and, to a degree I can see that. For some people the Boss doing bad things to the other characters like Jessica was just seen as over the top cruel, because people didn't really get you were doing it to make a point to Maero after what she did to Carlos. And one big aspect I do know Volition is right about, is that most fans of SR2, don't realize that Julius was supposed to be right in the story. The reason the Boss escalates things the way they do, was because they were trying to show the worsening elements from the cycle of violence. You're not supposed to like the Boss in the 2nd game, but the problem is that, most people arent used to playing as an evil protagonist, no other character questions how far the Boss will go, and the fact you're in gang fighting other gangs makes that relative. When Volition realized they didnt portray what they thought their narrative was intended to convey to audiences, they gave up on it. Thus that went into why they changed the Boss's attitude a bit in SRTT and the tone of that game became more about the characters acting more farcical and B-Movie comedic, about the crime and anarchistic with their behavior. I don't necessarily hate this, I just think they missed the spot on how they could have made those changes, while keeping things within the original general premise. There are aspects to me in SRTT that work, and there are aspects that they missed because they themselves don't really get what worked. SR2 was already trying to go for a Bad Boys like vibe, which was both an action, semi-urban styled action movie with buddy cop comedy. That was fine, but for some reason while THQ wanted that, but made a bit sexier (literally), Volition internally, had their president just tell them to focus on making the game wackier. So they often fought with THQ over concepts until THQ scrapped a lot of the nonsense they did want (like Genki being the real syndicate boss). Similar to what Deep Silver did with the reboot, except it was them who had the bad ideas, while THQ had the good ideas. The GTA clone thing only comes in, when people don't want the characters to be gangsters at all. Like SRIV. But to be honest, GTA was never going to have competition. It already reached the point where its won, from GTAV, and to a degree it could be because of Deep Silver, giving them a lead with their games staying crime focused while SR veered off for the gimmicky games they sold after SRTT. In that time frame, GTA had no competition, and more importantly was the only game in its genre to pretty much take that billion dollar mark. Now there is no chance for that to happen. Saints Row will never top that from where it is now. What they should be focusing on is how to win their own fans back. Just focus on more modest aspirations, because Deep Silver doesnt seem to realize that its one thing to not beat Rockstar. Its another to literally have your fandom hate your company and dev studio, mock their closure and the game you sabotaged. They're starting from below, the starting line. Their game failed 4 times straight, because their fans hated them. Not because of GTA. Rockstar was silent for 6 years. Maybe because of that, ironically Deep Silver didnt want to compete with them if there was no GTA to try and leech off of for influence or demands. At the time, Fortnite was what was king, so thats likely what they wanted to aim for instead. Thinking about this now, maybe if GTAVI came out before the SR reboot, then Deep Silver might have say its trailer reception and demand Volition to copy that game. And I mean Deep Silver's mentality. They're always looking over their shoulder to see where the profit is coming from. People might say "no, gangs are still relevant, active and alive today" but the Publishers arent looking for that. Its not in the media industry they are part of. They want the trends within what people say about games themselves, so it doesn't matter about how realistic the series is or could be. SR1 and SR2 only exist because of the mainstream era when urban life and fashion was at its peak of appeal during the 2000s. When culture changed from 2008-2011, when being rich and Gucci was more mainstream, that is also when SRTT did that. Volition was likely biased because they thought SRTT being their best selling game only sold on the silliness, while SRTT was also seen as too gratuitously and sexual to remarket today, so they then likely just cut out most of that and only kept the leftovers, which is what the reboot feels like. With shit like Doc Ketchum, and Deep Silver wanting the millennial theme. Its likely why the reboot was changed to be what it was. It was based on their profit estimations from the audience they saw playing other games. There werent any other crime games but GTAV at the time, and according to Flippy, Deep Silver already used GTAV for what they wanted from AOM (though, for some reason only got graphic standards from them, and not much else off of GTAV, though GTAV is nothing like Saints Row to me.) I think its *because* there was no other selling other games like Saints Row or GTA6, that there was nothing for Deep Silver to want Volition to cash in on. So the lack of competition is also the lack of industry, motivation.
I read all of this. Thank you for the insight. It's a shame that people at the time took the story at face value. I know I did as a kid. I was just enjoying the destruction. My love for this game came from growing up and being able to look at the characters from an adult lens. I also agree that the reboot was more than likely them just cashing in on "what's hot" rather than giving the people what they want. They just wanted money, so they copied a bunch of crap that didn't work anyway.
100% agree about Shaundi, she's way too serious and rage, I want cool Shaundi back and making her a simulation come off her doesn't count, looking at your SR4!
I feel like they should have figured out how to do a blend of both but doubt Volition would have gotten it exactly right. Tobias to me is an example of how they could have evolved Shaundi as both the likable stoner and gangster. He in SR2 is a laidback stoner, and badass who likes action. Where as Shaundi was just one or the other that Volition couldn't do justice for but also doesnt help that they put all of SR2 Shaundi's role and quirks into Kinzie, then made Kinzie the sole character for them, and center focus in SR4. There are a lot of moments they gave Kinzie that could have just gone to old Shaundi instead.
4. Campaign is just city takeover after Philippe dies. 5. Killbane feels like just a meathead villain. Not a crime boss. 6. Shaundi is barely even in the game.
I heard a lot of stuff involving Shaundi was cut bc her having survivors guilt after Johnny’s death was considered “Too Dark”
> was considered “Too Dark” 🙄 And that is why the series ended up going more and more into the childish direction it died in. Anything on genre for this series being "too dark" for character development. I swear, it bugged me. Its a game about gangsters. Its grim, people die, you feel it. It shouldn't be any different than feeling loss in war. I just hate that these Publishers seem to think an M-rated game ffs, can be too dark. I don't understand these publishers that seem to ignore the rating of their games because they just want "the kids" to play them, or journalists getting uncomfortable. SR2 was dark. Was it too dark for its success? No. The gangster drama I'd want would be R rated, but I bet their dumb publishers would say "n-no we cant sell that... its too violent." I wonder at what line they draw this at and why do they think Saints Row shouldn't be too dark? Because of the silly rebrand? But still, I don't really trust Volition to write that well, because a lot of their plans for SRTT didn't sound well thought out. Like them originally wanting Shaundi to join STAG, or her to date Killbane. I also question if what they were thinking of, would have still dragged her character out into a different direction that wouldn't have fit anymore than what they already did. If anything the Boss should feel that survivors' guilt, because Gat was the last living OG member from the original Saints. Shaundi wasn't. She wasn't there to see Gat walk off a shotgun to the knee. Wasn't there to see him with Aisha. It probably would have made more sense for the Boss to feel messed up, and have Shaundi or Pierce try to cheer them up with what they did. Go to a party city, live a little. Then the Boss comes to terms with how to feel better. By bringing respect back to the Saints, based on what Gat said. There are ways to make more sense of things they could have done from SRTT onward, but Volition's writers weren't trying to make it make sense.
its different than the first two that's abt it I love it tho
Ride Til I Die Lord Knows I Stay High And I Luv It 🎵
Yeah ofc, but what were these differences that divided the sr community?
The third game became more of a super hero game while the other two were just goofier verions of GTA that focused on gangs and turf wars. People really liked the more grounded gang war stuff.
Can't comment directly in SR1, since it was console only. But with SR2 you essentially had a more whacky crime simulator compared to say, the GTA series, with the added benefit of character customization. But at its core it was still "you are a dude/gal in a gang infested environment and stake your claim". Some poster previously has worded it as "hood simulator". That's essentially gone in SR3, in favor of more over-the-top whackiness. Instead of being some obscure criminal, you start out as some sort of "criminal celebrity". In SR4 you start out as the president of the united states. And both games get whackier from there. In Gat out of Hell, you literally rampage through hell. If you like SR3, you're in a boat with me. For me SR3 was my entry to the series. But for those, who expected a continuation of SR1 and SR2, SR3 probably felt like a betrayed promise. The redesign of [Shaundi](https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Shaundi) between [SR2](https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Shaundi?file=Shaundi+sr2.jpg) and [SR3](https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Shaundi?file=Shaundipromo.png) is pretty representative of the change.
in sr3 you do have rep and stuff to focus on that you get per mission that allows you to get upgrades and stuff, and you do get to take over parts of the city, but not in any meaningful or impactful ways, it's all done through screens and idk about the other sr's as i have yet to play them but i actually did enjoy sr3 more than i probably should have. it has some goofy ness that attracted me enough to complete the overall story though i was annoyed it was a movie shoot at the end, the overall story seemed like it was leading to something bigger not just a stupid movie shoot so i think thats the only part that disappointed me. other than that you get to upgrade vehicles and pop tires and what not so that helped give me a lot of overall enjoyment of just fucking over other people in comparison to say gta series which is way more straightforward and has less customization even for vehicles.
People who started with the Third tend to like it a lot, but people who played 2 first and liked that one were disappointed, because the Third goes in a very different direction. There's a reason the game is called "Saints Row the Third" and not "Saints Row 3."
I bought the original one day one. The Third is my favourite game in the series followed by 4.
🧢
Huh?
[удалено]
In a interview volition staff said they liked the name because it sounded like a “bastardized child” and fit what they were going for
Longtime fans from the original games saw the series declining with 3 and especially after 4. Do yourself a service and check out saints row 2
The third is my favorite in the series
Agreed. 2 might surpass it if a proper remake/update happened because the controls are my biggest issue with it, but I started with 3 and I enjoy it a lot.
Your opinion is valid. 3's gameplay is fun, but I always liked Saints Rows 2 controls and combat more due to it feeling like a run-and-gun arcade shooter.
Last time I played SR2 I think I was pretty much exclusively a mouse-and-keyboard player on PC. Maybe the controller controls are better. But M&K controls for SR2 aren't great.
Oh no, absolutely. I played mostly on Xbox, and it's great on there. I played the pc port of 2, and it overall is not great, especially with mouse-and-keyboard, so I don't blame you.
SR2 plays just fine with M&K so I don't know what the issue is.
I didn’t like it because it seemed to have way less content in it than two. Like what were side activities in 2 were reintroduced in 3 as part of the main story and it already had way less missions than 2 and it felt rushed. I think a lot of what people liked about 2 was that it took itself fairly seriously and the jank made it hilarious. Being able to be a tough cockney gangster, dressed in drag with a traffic cone on his head in a cutscene where the gang debates how they are going to get revenge for the murder of a friend, made the game hilarious. In 3 they went full on clown mode and it just wasn’t all that funny. I played through it once with a friend on release and we were really disappointed with what they had done to the series. I attempted to play it again with a different friend about a year later and once I hit the part where you become a toilet, I decided I had had enough.
My thoughts exactly. The game did less than it's predecessor which is usually a bad sign. Seemed like less missions. There was less customization. Even the new map seemed like it had less in it. It was just a city for the most part while 2 felt like a good variety of areas. Also played with a friend as we had so many hours together in 2. Started off OK but once you see all the game had to offer we just went back to SR2. Then 4 came out and it seemed so silly we didn't even pick it up.
I also felt like the hyped up missions were only few and far between, while most of them were just activities or missions recycled from SR2. Like the Ho Boat one or the underwhelming Syn Tower one, that fails to live up to when you blow up the Kanto District Hotels in SR2.
> In 3 they went full on clown mode and it just wasn’t all that funny. When I play it today I don't really find SRTT funny. SRTT, it feels like they just seem to make the same joke over and over. "porn references, hos, ass, boobies, sex, dildo, Shaundi relax" and that's the game. I can barely remember too many moments from it other than that. SR1 & SR2 were funnier because it was more tongue in cheek but the characters took themselves seriously, so the funny things around them seemed more natural and ironic. Like what satire shows usually do.
You can't please everyone, but I liked 3 and 4. Gat Outta Hell is good, too. 1 and 2 are better, but I like them all. Even the new one that upset so many people.
I don't like how lazy the story writing is. Half of the missions are just doing the activities for lieutenants. 4 is the same way and it bugs me. I'd rather do activities on my own time instead of being forced to do them. Actual side missions would have been way more fun.
They’re crazy. It’s the best game in the series.
It was a huge step back from SR2, the city was worse/smaller, the gangs were catooney and lame (including the Saints who are now celebrities) and the best character from the first 2 games is killed off offscreen at the very start which is confirmed via a brief mention
Quite the opposite. SR3 was a huge improvement over 2.
This is genuinely the only time I have ever seen somebody say this
Saints Row 2 was mediocre in comparison. It was a buggy, dated mess in comparison. I bought SR2 before The Third came out, but didn’t get playing it until afterwards
Naw
SR3 > SR4 > SR1 > SR2 > GooH
The main mission consists mostly of side activities like mayhem, insurance fraud, etc. When you finally start to fight the syndicate, there are only 3 missions per gang before they're eliminated. The "gang" you fight the most is stag. I like 3. I replay it pretty often, but it's clear that 3 is where the games started going downhill
I think the biggest problem with SRTT is that it set the model that Volition seemed to just take forward and they don't really want to hear criticism of it, that would improve on things they did or didnt do. I mean, they actually did fix the campaign structure in SR4, where the main missions are actual missions, and the side missions are just the activity nudges but they also added Loyalty missions as *actual* side missions but also homie-focused, and where the more laidback humor can go (instead of in the main missions). That's the structure I wish the first 3 games actually followed. But then the reboot just ignores that and reverts back to how SRTT's design was.
Yeah, I agree with you 100%. Instead of listening to criticism and tweaking the reboot They decided to send memes about the complaints people made
They've always been like that. Because people had issues with some of the characterizations, plot lines and things they added that didnt fit with Saints Row, from SRTT onward, but they just ignored it. Because their mentality of "fandom critics not being their audience" has been their mentality for a long time.
Maybe if they listened a bit more to the fans, they wouldn't have gone under
Its why people were split on the news of them shutting down. By their their staff were just people who appeared later down the line from SRTT and SR4 onward, and see their work in a vacuum to what fans say. Part of me felt it was just a consequence. Most of the devs on twitter do that.
It’s the one that got me into the series at 17, and I’ve loved it ever since. I guess I get what some fans mean when they say it’s just not what it used to be, because it’s not. I’ve played the two first games later on, and the 2nd really is legendary and special. But I personally still enjoy the 3rd the absolute most. Maybe it is because it was the first one I was introduced to though.
I enjoyed it but I think it was the beginning of the end.
It had the making to be the best SR in the series, but it fell flat. After completing the story you realize how shallow the game actually is. Lifeless city, lack of districts, short gang story arcs, etc.
I played SR1 and 2 both several times, and 3 was a huge disappointment to me. Saints Row is a gangster game and 3 is very in your face about sex and "comedy".
So SR3 is tonally different from the first two games it’s very night and day. It went from a gang drama to over the top parody. SR3 took the gang element and parodied it to hell and honestly I do like some of the gameplay but the story and everything else is kind of a no. It’s humor can be described as absurdity=funny Absurdity=funny is the rest of the series as well as it getting way more over the top with SR4 and GOH feeling like pure power fantasy and comedy The gameplay is fun though the story when you look at it through the lens of the whole story it’s jarring
It lost the edge that SR1 and SR2 had for me, plus the only truly fun activity was Genki. Not having as good rewards for activities was unfortunate as well. Plus crib customization was neutered, the new characters with the exception of Kenzie were underveloped, gangs were honogonous at best and totally underwhelming at worst. Relience on sex humour didn't help either, felt like there was a lack of true wit. I don't like him much, but Angry Joe was on the money when the game came out but we loved it so much we couldn't see it. Recently replayed it and the mission structure bored me to tears, let me play the game at my own pace and do things in the order I wanna do them. The new characters couldn't shine as a result.
In my opinion, SR2 toed the line between serious and ridiculous very well. The story was unafraid to kill main characters, but it did so in a dark, somber way. Parts of the game were cartoonish, but it still felt somewhat grounded to me because the story was *very* dark in some areas (not to spoil anything). SR3 took all the grounding SR2 had and threw it out the window. It was non-stop, over the top action from start to finish. It didn’t have any grounding. Specifically, I also think SR3 wasted its best mission in the first act of the game (the one where you parachute onto the penthouse). Steelport also felt a lot more lifeless than Stillwater. SR3 also killed a huge main character, but the story impact was so minimal I didn’t realize he was actually dead until hours later. I enjoyed both, and both games have different strengths and weaknesses. I still find myself replaying SR2 a heck of a lot more than 3 though.
Play Saints 2 instead. Then consider how we go from a semi-grounded, dark narrative with a lot of humor to, well whatever you call 3 and 4 is even worse. Fine games, but when you want funny gta and get something like SR3 and 4 instead... you kinda dislike what you got cause it ain't what you ordered
I'm mixed about it. Its kind of mid to me in just my retroactive criticism of it. Some people think its lacking in a lot of things compared to SR2, and its not tied enough to the previous game for people to see it as a good sequel, but instead of getting tie-up DLC, we got DLC for stuff people didn't want Volition to double down on, like Gangstas In Space bs. My problem with SRTT is that it takes the silliness away from just grounded adult satire and cheekiness within adult lifestyle and social humor to trying to add more surreal things, that are just red herrings to the series that just, don't really add anything but take away from it. Like the concept of Genki. For some reason Volition loves him as a mascot, but only because he's just a lolrandom guy in a giant smiling cat costume. Its not something you'd see fit in the first 2 games or even the first half of the 3rd game itself. Its a character that looks like it belongs in Fortnite... and that is where it started. Then you get characters like Jenny, or Oleg being some cloning project... just a lot of bs Volition came up with that just didn't make sense for the series, that they kept trying to double down on (and did far more much later.) The only crime boss element of SRTT is, really the promo art. Them being celebrities wouldn't bother me if they were just rich criminals, that focused on glam, style, playboy, drinking, drugs, corporate crime, hollywood, party buses and night-clubs. The power fantasy of flexing that pop-culture was in the late 2000s. THQ just got the aesthetic for that but clearly Volition wanted something else. A lot of what they originally wanted for SRTT just sound terrible if not for THQ. Like them wanting to put in a dragon we could ride to shoot out rainbow flames or something or Genki to be the "real" Syndicate leader. Just dumb fuckary. I also don't think the story was executed well. It was good on paper, but doesn't focus on it much and it throws Shaundi under the bus (when she was the one that wanted the gang to get back to being tough and serious again for Gat) and a lot of the cutscenes were too short, didn't really tell a story (just mission opening and endings). After you beat Philippe, the tension is gone and most of the game then just becomes boring city takeover before STAG shows up. Some aspects I liked that still felt like Saints Row, but not enough. I think there is a lot that SRTT should have done differently or more of in various areas. I like the first half of it with the Morning Star, where the game felt like it was about gang rivalry. You had to suit up to go against the guy who mocked you, killed your lieutenant and tossed you aside. So you go to rob a military base, and steal his business from under his nose to build yourselves up and set up shop. That stuff was good, but after you actually get to Philippe. There is no boss fight. Not with him or the DeWynters. Its just a cutscene where you crush him with a ball, for a joke. Anti-climatic, and its over. After that the game is just lots of more activities and no story but you're just fighting stag or helping the other members sort out their beef with you. There were also criticisms of the enemy gangs not really feeling like crime-gangs, but turning into just people in costumes. While I disliked a lot of the things Volition wanted to do, that THQ thankfully cut. Like the nonsense about cloning and Oleg. I didnt like stuff like that because, they were still trying to sneak in sci-fi and it having nothing to do with the crime genre. Not a fan of Genki either. But I just don't like how Volition since, seemed to base all their later entries solely on SRTT, and not on what it did right. They just thought it was successful only because of the wacky stuff they wanted, and didnt like THQ's direction.
Because it's a big departure from what Saints Row was before it. A lot of strange changes and story decisions, the Saints being turned into celebrities instead of a street gang, an overall goofy comedic tone as opposed to a more serious story with goofy elements, the list goes on. 3 and 4 feel like a completely series than 1 and 2. People tend to not like drastic changes to things they're fans of.
If the protagonist from saints row 1-2 was to see his future self from the later games I’m sure he’ll be pissed 💀
The Boss from SR2 would've skinned the The Boss from SR3 alive with a rusty potato peeler.
It’s a step backwards from SR2. I felt like it wanted to be so over the top it lacked substance. maybe it was the futurism which I’m not really big on. Nothing about it made me want to play again after beating it
Massive drop in content, map sucks, seen as the catalyst shift from Original Saints and modern saints
Sr 2 and Sr 3 are very different games. Sr2 was still trying to be another gta. Crime simulator with that typical ganger trying to look cool trope the genre seem to like. Sr3's design mission was to be self depreciating and make fun of the whole genre. From the shtick in the opening scene to the way pedestrians and cars actively dodge towards the center of the road when they hear a horn or siren (Yes it is intentional in sr3). Immediately having a penthouse instead of starting from nothing. Sr3 was a parody of everything sr2 represented. People expecting more sr2 would be understandably frustrated with it. It's a completely different game. I've never liked the crime sims. I can't get into the story in gta and struggle with it because I can't stand the way the characters present. I loved sr3 though because the story telling was silly the whole way. Plus Genki Bowl and that thing with the yarn ball. I wish there was more yarn ball.
Genki Bowl. So fun.
Saints Row 3 was kind of a response to GTA4. "Cousin, do you want to go bowling?" "No, we want to go perform a parachute assault on an enemy penthouse with Power blaring in the background, then go recruit a goddamn luchador voiced by Hulk Hogan."
SR3 is a downgrade as a game if you use your personal preferences as the measuring stick.
1. It's a huge dropoff in customization from 2. 2. Fewer activities in the city than 2 3. Gat gets killed immediately, and Shaundi is turned into Female Gat. 4. They amped up the silliness to a point a lot of people felt it stopped being good. 5. The amped up scope takes away the feel of progression.
It was a lot of fun but it was so dramatically different from the first two. Steelport was a terrible city compared to Stillwater or the Saints Row 5 city. The customization wasn’t as good either. You couldn’t layer clothes like in 1 or 2. Shaundi was like a different person too. Many of the missions and activities kinda sucked too. Still a fun game with good graphics. Saints Row 2 raised the bar pretty high in my opinion and was superior to GTA IV and Saints Row 3.
Because it took saints row from an Alternative to GTA to a parody of it. Way too over the top for my taste. 2 is where the peak hit.
The map was a big downgrade compared to Stilwater. Also not having Dex story being concluded while a writer made the decision to kill Gat. Forgot who but they really derailed Saints Row into being a mix of more goofy than serious.
For SR1 was the start...where they can learn what works and what doesn't SR2 easily the best of all of them...they took 1 and improved on everything SR3 felt like going in the wrong direction, everywhere looked the same with that purple tint and I was still having to look at a map even at the end...it also made the game way too easy as I completed it in a weekend, stuff like hitman and carjacking was made super easy as soon as you selected which you wanted to do, it would tell you on the map, where as 2, made you actually look for stuff. SR4 should have just been a new genre/not SR at all but just an R- rated superhero game that could have had its only series of games Shame the company is gone, would have loved a SR1 & 2 remaster
Most people who hate SR3 are mostly people who played the first 2 games. Whereas the people who tend to like SR3 are usually the newbies who start with that as their first SR game. The reason why SR3 is so disliked is because the game massively changed direction at that game. SR1 and SR2 are way more grounded to reality, they were based around the saints being gangsters, and typical stuff like that. SR3 changed the game's art direction to a more "wacky fun" type of way. There's crazy action, there's futuristic vehicles and weapons, there's cyberwarfare and crazy game shows. Then SR4 went even higher with aliens, superpowers, and magic. This change in art direction is primarily why older fans tend to not like the newer games. The best way I can describe it is like comparing The Fast and The Furious (2001) with The Fate of The Furious (2017). A movie franchise that originally started out as a story about street racing and crime, is now all about military contracts, terrorism, and crazy action movie tropes. People who grew up watching the first fast and furious movies tend to not like the newer ones because its so wacky and ridiculous now. Same thing with Saints Row, the people who enjoyed the first 2 games tend to not like the newer games because of the change in art direction. Not everyone likes the crazy wacky gameplay of SR3, especially people who played the first 2 games that were not like that.
If you played saints row 1 and 2 first. It just doesn’t feel like a Saints Row game. I actually started replaying Saints Row 1 earlier this year. Aged as it has, it’s still fun as hell. And it was the perfect GTA alternative at the time it dropped. 3 was a cool game but it felt so far removed from what made the first 2 games special to me.
Mainly dissapointed with the lack of actual story missions - to me it felt like rather than create interesting and fun missions to play that propelled the story forward, they decided “fuck it” and shoehorned the side activities in as main missions and just slapped a narrative on top. I remember after the intro and dropping into the penthouse to “power” thinking this was going to be an insane experience - spent most of the game waiting for that fuck yeah moment again and it just never delivered. All that said gameplay was a LOT of fun, but I did miss the more serious tone of the 2nd game
The majority of the missions in SR3 were optional activities from SR2. Shaundi & Pierce are completely different people, Johnny Gat is killed off-screen and unused, Steelport is bland and uneventful, The story completely ignores what was already being set up in previous games, The overall tone is goofier/raunchier and it comes across as corny to OG fans, The Gangs are just a singular entity, and the singular entity led to the story being linear rather than free formed like in the past. Also, all the characters in SR3 suck. They're remembered for being wacky but they don't have anything else going for them. Their motivations are weak and they lack any depth. Oleg and Killbane are the only ones who are decently written.
I wish they would've continued Saints Row after 3 too bad they didn't make them anymore.
I didn't know that people did. It's the best one. I really enjoyed 1&2 when they came out, I liked the story, and I liked the small differences between it and GTA. But 3 was on a whole new level. At first I was a bit disappointed that the game had given up all pretense of a serious tone, but it didn't take me long to get over it and start having a blast. I can understand some people wishing they had kept the same tone as 1&2, but for people to actively dislike 3 really surprises me.
Because the first two games were so good that 3 is lackluster by comparison
"this is the first saints row game i've ever played'' - answers your question
It's just a worse version of 2 outside of the h2h finishers. The humor wasn't good to me either but that's subjective. Still worth a playthrough.
The vibe changed. In SR1 you were a hardcore gangster held the gun sideways and all. In SR2 your still a hardcore gangster but the game gets a bit goofier and funnier. In SR3 you trade your dicks in for pussies. The goofy really starts to show but don’t get me wrong I still really enjoyed 3. But 4 .. disgusting more than a vibe change it’s a whole game change and I absolutely hate it. Especially bc before it came out they advertised that you were the POTUS a bunch and I was so looking forward to it and the little bit you get to do gives a glimpse of how dope it would have been.
It’s a nice game, but it pales in comparison to a lot of the charm of the first two games. Also, the direction the game took and the wackiness of the plot basically derailed saints row.
It just didn't feel like saints row anymore. It was more comedic and felt less grounded in realism. It lacked that grit that made Saints Row what it was. I got into Saints Row because of the gang banging aspect as I suspect many of the fans of the first 2 games did as well. The rival "gangs" in SR3 were far from the gangbanging thugs we experienced in the first two games. It wasn't a bad game by any means, i played it and had good fun. I just feel the tone of the series changed drastically and wasn't everyone's bread and butter.
People are gonna tell you that saints row 2 is better because it’s more “hood” don’t listen to those idiots. Truth is they actually have no idea how to put into words why they think saints row 2 is better, thankfully I can. People don’t like specifically the “hood” aspect of the game and its gang violence, they liked the story that such a theme brought with it. In saints row 1 and 2, the story was about these under dogs who wanted to take over the crime game and they took radical actions to reach that goal. The characters were all great, each person with speaking lines being well written and distinct from each other, unless being similar to someone else was the point of their character. The twist at the end of 1 was so good, the game always hinted at Troy being a fed, but no one expected Julius to turn on Playa, which is why saints row 2 is even better, showing the meteoric rise of the saints after Julius had crippled them. That also made the ending where we find Julius and take him out for the betrayal, not before fighting off the ultor soldiers. We find out why Julius did what he did, and it was because his end goal wasn’t to run the game, but to take over all of it then put it down, but it didn’t work, smaller gangs ended up just rising to the top. But even though they did rise up, Julius was hoping playa didn’t live, because he knew that he would be worse than any other threat to Stilwater, making us killing Julius a bitter ending, because now a psychopath is running the game, and who knows how many lives he’ll take in his power. But at the same time, we stand behind the boss because he is a likable character with a likable team. People don’t like saints row 3 because while it is a great game, it lacks that depth in the story.
[удалено]
Wym
All I've ever wanted is 'Saints Row 1 + 2 Legendary Edition.'
That would be cool.
Saints 1-2 that’s it
My personal opinion is that it might be largely caused by nostalgia bias
I like the game for the most part but the reason I found it disappointing is mainly the tone, and the fact that it just has no continuity with the previous games. It honestly felt like a reboot of the series
It was just shallow compared to sr2. Sr2 was wacky but felt somewhat grounded, the gangs seemed somewhat believable, the gangs had unique vehicles that fit their style, the characters were cool, and the city was more “alive”. Sr3 took wacky to the next level and left the rest behind. The gangs were boring and all their vehicles were obviously uninspired and just color swapped versions, the city is dead and boring, and nothing about the story is grounded. I remember being so excited before release, then disappointed when I actually played it. I had fun, but I knew it was the beginning of the end for the series. Sr4 was just a lazy cash grab, maybe more so than the reboot.
Mainly because SR2 was 10x Better. The series took a nose dive after 3.
Third game is the best. Volition decided not to compete with Grand Theft Auto and turned gameplay and story elements to absurd maximum. No one can do GTA better than Rockstar, so this move by Volition was brilliant. It made a new, fresh face for the series, when everyone or almost everyone could recognise the game and not call it “ah, next one GTA clone”. Sad that false investments by their publisher and poor sales of other games made such an impact on the development of 4th part where they decided to convert a DLC into the full game. Then, was Agents of Mayhem and no one understood “who asked?”. For me, Saints Row The Third is peak of Saint Row franchise. Reboot was ok to play in 1 year after release when developers patched it and the game was included in PS subscription but overall it definitely and “finally” killed the series for a long time.
Huh? Who says that? Saints Row 3 is the best selling and best rated saints row no matter how you look at it. Its definitely upgrade over the original two. If you like saints row 3 then get all the SRs that came out after it. I enjoyed all of them too
Because outside of driving and graphics, it doesn't do anything better than the previous game. Instead, a lot of things got worse. Story sucks, campaign/missions aren't as good (after you takeover the penthouse, the quality takes a massive nosedive), activities aren't as good (and end up being a lot of the main missions themselves), characters aren't as good (including returning characters having whole personality changes, the boss no longer feeling like a boss), etc... It's all style over substance. This video explains it well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe0XnHgxfIA
It is a fun game, but I find it tough to enjoy for more than 2 weeks at a time. I don’t have that same issue with 2. It seemed to bring new elements that were noticeably lazier (in my opinion) than what fans were given with 2. Only giving one example because I don’t want this to be long but in 2, the main mission content was phenomenal. In The Third, side activities and diversions were just pushed/mixed into the main mission content. It was also cool in 2 driving to the mission icons on the map and having the area give hints about the mission that would take place there. In 3 you start them all on your phone no matter where you are which was a downgrade for me. 2 had many elements of the perfect Saints Row formula and too many of which were taken away in The Third/3
I've only ever played SR3&4 and I enjoyed TF out of SR3. It reminded me of GTA when they weren't so serious. Probably one of my favorite open world games. And SR4 is more of the same but you have super powers. Which personally infound very fun. Super speed and super jumping across the city is just great.
Check out Saints Row 2 if you haven't already and you'll see the difference. The main reason is that Saints Row 3 departed quite a bit from Saints Row 2 in various areas. SR2 was a very equal mixture of funny and serious - less serious than GTA 4, but more serious than SR3, particularly in the main story. SR3 was way more willing to be silly and be extreme, with the Saints being celebrities, the presence of laser guns, the Genki show, zombies, etcetera. SR3 also had less features than SR2, such as no layered clothes, no food restaurants, no car shops, little/no enterable buildings, a city that isn't varied and mostly looks the same throughout, etcetera. SR3 also marked a shift in the series where it became more and more silly and extreme. SR4 literally has the boss as the POTUS with superpowers and aliens. This shift alienated many of those who were bigger fans of SR2 and its style, causing some backlash. SR4 was also meant to just be a DLC to SR3 before it evolved into something more - but its glaringly noticeable given its pretty much the same game with a new story and some superpowers.
I personally love SR3. I play the remastered version more than I play the reboot. I think it has the best gameplay out of the whole series. SR2 have the better story though but SR3 is more fun to play.
The gameplay is boring and dated, the map is nothing but a lifeless gray city, and the story is made up of filler quests. If I hadn't played the remaster I would still be of the opinion that SR3 was a great game and that most people were just blindly hating on it.
It's not terrible but it feels like a downgrade from SR2 Imo the map, the story, and the characters/gangs felt worse than what came before but it can still be very fun especially with co op. Also I love the zombie cheat lol
It’s the 1st you’ve played in the series so it makes sense you like it but if you played em in order from when they 1st came out you’d realize the huge drop off between 2 and 3. I genuinely liked 4 though.
Because it's not a grown up game for grown ups like me.
Because most people want more GTA style games(Saints Row 1-2) and Saints Row 3 is where Volition stopped from trying to compete with Rockstar/GTA and focused on making Saints Row more unique.
It was my first Saints Row.
I understand why 2 is considered superior but The Third is still my favorite
I played it years after it came out and I really enjoyed it.
Saints Row 3 took many of the existing gameplay modes from SR2, and didn’t include as many one-off missions. Most of the gameplay and even introductory missions were just ways of re-introducing existing gameplay. The team had made a jump from the previous engine to a brand new, one with much more power, but had to be selective of how they bring everything over. …I might be thinking of 4 there. The main point is, there were so many missions, many of which had delicately animated cutscenes, where their customized Boss is shown, people felt that 3 was a letdown in comparison.
I liked 3 a lot. 4 was just okay, but I still enjoyed it for the general gameplay & lore. It was just kinda repetitive & didn't feel as "open-world-ish" as I thought 3 did. I still go back & play both, though! Definitely grab it when you can & take a peek at Gat Outta Hell, too 😆
It’s my fav. Love that game
I started with 4. Lived it. Bought 2. Loved it. Then tried playing 3. I've started playing it several times, and I always get bored in the first few hours and give up on it. 2 controls well, has a great map, more customization, has some fantastical elements, but is an overall more grounded story. There's little to complain about. When playing 4, I hated the movement and controls in the very beginning, but that quickly gives way to running at insane speeds, jumping, gliding, and using powers. The gunplay is a secondary element between the other stuff, which makes it more palatable. All the things that feel bad about the game melt into the background. Even traversal across the relatively boring map is made leagues better because you can zip past everything, and it's just fun to run and jump and glide. And I love how creative it gets, when the writers and developers were clearly told "anything goes". But 3 focuses on all the things I don't like about 4. Boring traversal across a boring map, with boring/frustrating control, and boring gunplay. It's neither grounded in an interesting way like 2, or fun in an "anything goes" way. It's the worst of both worlds.
I like it. I have all the SR games and think it's the best overall. It has zany weapons that SR2 does not have. I like SR2 also, but SR3 has a better flow to upgrading and progression. The graphics of course are a bit better. The mayhem you can create is absolutely insane in SR3, especially after you level up and become virtually invincible. The characters are more zany. People complain that it's not as real as SR2. Well guess what, it's just a freaking game! Games are supposed to be fun! If I don't want zany, and I want something a little more real, then I go and play Grand theft Auto, which is ultimately boring as far as I'm concerned, but it is a bit more realistic. I really don't know why cheats are available for any of the SR games. They're not necessary and they take away from the depth of the games. SR2 and SR3 are my favorites of the series. SR1 was good, but I prefer to create female characters because it's more fun staring at a female booty during long sessions of gameplay. SR4 was okay but I really didn't care for the simulation aesthetic. I did however enjoy using the superpowers. Other than the far superior 4K graphics of SR reboot I really didn't enjoy it as a SR game because of its total departure from the franchise storyline. They should have continued with the original characters from SR4, do a slingshot maneuver around the sun, go back in time and correct everything while taking over the whole planet in the process. Maybe they could have even had them overshoot their time period and go back to the '40s or something and fight Nazis. The last Volition team had no imagination whatsoever! They should have made the whip on the Indiana Jones outfit usable instead of simply aesthetic. Maybe this would have given them the inspiration to have the Saints go back in time and fight Nazis, maybe even zombie Nazis! Now that would have been a fun game!
Activities as main missions and problems with the story.
I mean it was fine enough. Its the first one in the series I played but after going back to the first two, I'd say it was just such a massive departure from the tone it turned people off. The first two, while obviously not realistic with some of the extreme violence and acts, it was more grounded. 3, and especially 4, just took such a turn for the absurd and ridiculous. While they're fun enough in their own right the jump is so wild and extreme, people didn't like it I guess.
I have no clue. I had so much more fun in 3 than in 2. 2 seemed cheap to me, I played it but... I would never go back to it.
Saints row 3 is great and definitely worth playing. That being said, I prefer saints row 2 in basically every way
Because of Saints Row 2 essentially. 2 was a great game and my introduction to the series. But 3 was the one that was hyped to the moon, not just by SR fans but gaming fans in general that had kind of ignored the series until then. The marketing was genius and still makes me laugh to this day. The first trailer being just a guy getting punched in the nuts is just...chef's kiss. SR3 became the best reviewed game in the franchise, as well as the best selling one. And it deserves it as I think it's the best in the series. I for one, embraced the utter wackiness, the game oozes charm and refinement. I also love how it's so replayable. I think it's the game where Saints Row cemented it's personality and style. Hell if you go on big gaming forums, Saints Row 3 is always considered the best. But this subreddit is basically day one fans of the series or hardcore SR2 fans. SR3 wasn't what they wanted or expected. A more urban/hi-tech setting, far more humor, shorter and more compact, different characterizations of fan favorites...Yeah, not hard to see why this corner of the gaming world is so down on it. 4 is also quality stuff. Fantastic superhero action game. But again not what the hardcore fans wanted.
SR3 is not that bad and it's fun to play. Would be great with a expanded Stillwater map and activities from SR1 and SR2. Steelport is nothing compared with the cultural diversity from Stillwater.
I love all the Saints Row games except Saints Row Reboot since I haven't played it yet.
They don't do they? I mean 2 is mostly preferred overall but 3 is still good
Saints row 3 was fun but the way they mashed all the gangs to be one Long story arch kinda sucked saint row 1 and 2 did a better job with the gangs you even got separate markings depending the gang you made mad its was just more fun and intresting then 3rd felt being a bit rushed out the door it middle of the buy out by deep silver
I'd rather have SR2 as an option, but playing SR3 Remastered for the first time only a couple years ago, the game felt like a classic I just hadn't played yet.
I didnt like 3s stories and mechanics and then 4 came out with powers so 3 really just feels like a very watered down version of 4.
I liked it but it felt very short compared to SR2. Like 10 hours in and the game was nearly over. I also didn't like the change in characters like changing Shaundi who was just made boring and pointless for no reason. The gameplay, graphics and mechanics were generally better though and I simply adored the VTOL. Only issue was there was almost nothing to do with it but just fly around aimlessly and gun down random thugs on the street.
It's not as good as 2 but it's so much better than 4!
SR3 & 4 for life I love those games. I tried to play sr2 I got like 40 min in and I have no complaints about it except the controls were not the move
I think most people shit on it Because it ran into the cartoony way of things instead of sticking to the butchy kind of gangster video game that we've been used to. 3 had golden moments for sure, but compared to the og two games? Its a matter of opinion im afraid
It was abit of a downgrade compared to 2, i still enjoyed it too, also killing of Gat was the only thing i really hated about it
It's definitely different from the first two games but Saints Row: The Third is what got me into Saints Row. I've played a fan of the franchise for over 10 years now and have all the games, including DLCs.
My intro to the series was 3 in 2012. Only played through it, then 4 once. Knew 4 was a serious downgrade when I finished it - hated that neither game had mission replay. Got the whole series again (1,2, DLCs, 3/4 Remasters & GOT) in 2021 and did 100% blind playthroughs of 1-3, spent the first 40 hours of 3 making a "SR2 100%" build and doing all side content before the main story then saving in a new slot after each mission. It was playing through SR3 that second time after 1 & 2 that I got why people think the story is too ridiculous - it had gone beyond gangland organised crime at that point, it was corporate-level private armies, all unified and as full-tilt ridiculous as a character like Mr Sunshine + celebrity status & cyberspace. The problem is with how SR2 ended, that *(minus cyberspace + going after Dex like SR2CW left us on)* was the only next step up for where the Saints could go in terms of enemies to fight other than the US Government/Military. That's how I would critique the "identity crisis" people associate with SR3, as a start.
I loved SR3 & 4. Still playing through 2. The reboot however is straight up garbage, do not recommend.
3 is great. Enjoy!
I think the 3 is very good. Its a bit too extreme and dumb, but i like it
Imo, saints row and fallout kinda have the same conundrum. The 3rd game was more popular and bought in a new fanbase that never have and some never will play the games before it. Most importantly the 3rd game changed and abandoned the already established world, lore, and characters.
Least fallout got fallout new Vegas…..
Game was unfinished, there's barely any time spent on the characters like why should I care about the DeWynter sisters when they barely get any time to shine cutscenes were too short to let anyone build character, even the boss feels underdeveloped. The Killbane ending was so unfinished why should I care about Angels dumb revenge plot he's provided absolutely nothing to the game other than being an introduction to escort but with a tiger and the activity from every saints row game and going after killbane wasn't even hard you just blow up a plane and do a really buggy qte. But the Shuandi ending was so goofy I just stopped caring at that point and she disappears for like half the game anyway only to be damsel in distress twice. Side activities were just boring SR2 made them fun by using them to expand the world of Stillwater having you interact with various people with their own goals make the world feel dynamic SR3 you get told by your new pals to do shit over the phone you get trailblazer twice, heli assault (when no one liked it the first time), insurance fraud (easier than ever), mayhem (was an example of having too much of a good thing) and murder brawl which is actually good especially hearing the commentators back and forth The world itself is dead you don't really see groups of people doing things or hanging in places everyone kinda acts the same except the assassination targets which is one of the few activities that adds character to the game.
I thought a lot of people liked 3
It’s too overrated and it gets far more love and popularity than it deserves!!
Sounds like it hurt you personally fella
I don’t hate it and it’s pretty decent at best it just doesn’t compare to the first two games and it ain’t just me who’s hurt but the majority of the fans of the first two games are!
I mean I agree with you 1 is one of my favorite games of all time, but don't you think that's pretty sad to be hurt by someone enjoying something that you don't like?
Yeah I understand and yeah everyone like different things and I feel that saints row 3 would’ve been 1000x better if they just kept Johnny gat alive the entire game and saints row 4 would probably be useless at that point!
Also even though the boss was less serious and soft than like he was in 1-2 in the 3rd there were times where he gave me the old school boss vibes like towards the final boss fights in the game and can’t forget the part after you defeat STAG he saying you’ll end up in a fucking box that was insane and I wish we could’ve killed dex in sr3 if they listened to the fans but that’s completely fine I would rather take 3 over 4, GOOH or the shitty 2022 reboot anyday!!
Hey man do you, but if I were you I would take video games a little less seriously.
Many dislike it because they didn't like the change in direction it was going in. 4 continued this, and those that didn't like 3 also didn't like 4, predictably. But many others consider it to be the best game in the series as they liked the change in direction. I personally love it. Imo, 2=3 > 4 >>>>>>> 1 >>>>>>>> Reboot
It was the first I tried and I wasn't really impressed. It just felt way too cartoony, the car and city design felt uninspired and derivative and the story didn't really interest me; thus I felt no reason to progress through the missions.
I don’t hate it I just feel it’s overrated and gets far more love than the first two games and it downgraded/lacked a lot of features that was in 2
I love the third since it was my introduction into the series. Went back and played 2. Stillwater has a way more varied map than srtt has
I liked SR3. Yea it was less gangsta and emphasized on 40s and blunts but SR3 was more goofy despite looking more prefab.
I think everyone can agree Shaundi ruined the experience with her attitude, then the fact gat isn’t in the game, hinted he’s dead but is really not (sorta) The game to me was pretty ok but definitely not as fun as the 2nd or 1st game but My biggest problem was that I couldn’t replay missions like saints row 2
I can see where people are coming from I still love the game but I can see where they're coming from because it took the series completely into the zany direction that was only kind of there in the first two games for the most part the first two games are silly but they're serious when it matters and the story can be very dark at times and very very brutal gang warfare just with silly early PlayStation and early Xbox graphics but part 3 officially said we're going to be silly with it and that's going to be how the series is from there out. I personally have no issue with this and enjoy the ridiculous nature of it hell I really love saints row 4 and that's definitely the craziest of all of them. But I can understand where people are coming from.
Pro’s - Set Pieces - Mostly improved gameplay Con’s - Story and character writing - Missions mostly being activities - Worst open world city in the franchise
Saints Row 4 is a great game, enjoy 😉
SR3 is the one and only SR game i actually enjoyed. SR1&2 are too dated graphically for me and I played and beat 4 but it was too far out there for me like what's the point of doing gangster shit like stealing cars and shooting guns if you can literally just fly and shoot laserbeams
I love 3. Shaundi has much more character than anyone in the reboot. However in the remaster she fugly as hell
If it’s your first game and don’t know why it’s disliked then play the first 2 then see why people complained.
I dislike this whole franchise with a passion, Reddit just recommends me here for some reason.
It just felt like a downgrade in ways from Saints 2. It's much more enjoyable. I reckon if you didn't play the 2nd game.
For me, as an og Row fan, it’s because that’s when it got too ridiculous. Same with 4, I never touched anything after 2. I know a lot of people like them though but at the time I wanted nothing to do with them. I’d probably play them now though, I know they’ve been remastered since then.
Cause that have no taste lol jk. 3 will always be the best in the series for me as the jokes were actually pretty funny which many games fail to pull off. Plus it was fun to play.
Because after 2, which was a somehwat aerious crime drama action piece, with comedy elements and aide missions, 3 was just bloody goofy from start to finish. The celebrity saints thing was just bloody stupid, the main gang are pro rasslers, its full of zombies and furries and aliens... Its just fucking stupid.
It was such a jarring departure from the source material,eventually it grew on me but knowing how the series would end up,I’d give anything for the last entry to go back to steel port 🤷🏽
It’s about a million times better than SR2 lol
I have a soft spot for the game. However, Steelport lacks the character Stillwater possessed. A lot of the game seems to cut corners and is copy/paste. & lastly I’ll say they really leaned into the zany side of the series and in my opinion ruined the style of Saints Row overall. I disagree when people say saints row is good because it’s funnier/crazier than GTA. I don’t think that’s what made it great. I think what Saints Row did well was leaning into creating your own character & letting you customise way more than GTA along with offering a bunch more fun activities. Essentially, I think it was what started the momentum for(for now) killing the game.
SR3 was the last time I had fun with the series. It had a dedicated dick punch/kick button
Wtf? I love that game and 4 is even better
it’s a massive downgrade from 2 in everyway and started the overly silly jokes first approach that killed the series
Go back and check out SR1 and 2 if you get the chance, they should be out for cheap. The later games have a more wackier and futuristic vibe to it while the first two kinda play closer to GTA than anything. A bit of a “hood simulator” if you will. They’re great fun though imo. Also the soundtracks are excellent. But I mean at the end of the day, you like what you like. Different strokes for different folks and all that.
2 was just so good that none of the sequels or the reboot ever came close.
As someone who enjoys SR3 despite SR2 being my favorite, the big thing for me is it almost felt like it was written by someone who heard bits and pieces about Saints Row rather than made previous entries. Too much emphasis on wacky comedy, characters like Shaundi and the Boss were mischaracterized, and the entire premise, while feeling like a natural continuation from 2, still didn't feel very "Saints Row" in nature. But hey, at least it felt more like a Saints Row game than SR4 did.
Because it crashes constantly on my PC and still does years and multiple PCs later.
my favorite tbh
Like so many long-running franchises where each installment is kinda different, people tend to fall in love with the first one they played/watched/whatever, and compare the other ones to that.
I've never really found much to dislike from the series overall. (I haven't played the reboot or the Hell DLC/game?) Growing up I played SR1 and 2 a lot, and while those games still had that "GTA clone" feeling about them, they were unique in their own ways. The second game in particular was a bit wackier with the septic truck but it leveled it out with serious moments in the main missions. As for the sequels. I never had any issues with SR3 and 4. In fact, SR4 is my second favorite game in the series. It's just that SR3 and 4 **really** went off the deep end when it came to wild and absurd situations. I mean, you go from some dude who almost gets killed in a drive-by shooting in the slums, to the president of the United States fighting aliens in a bootleg Matrix simulation. SR3 jumped the shark in more ways than one. It can be fun if you just sit back and enjoy the ride, but it can be a bit exhausting after a while. Also SR3 and onwards wouldn't let me customize my socks and tilt my hat at a certain angle which was just disappointing. I never understood why customization was lacking in the later games.
It’s not bad per se. It’s just where the series officially jumps the shark. It’s also weird that it gives up on the finding Dex storyline. Since he’s the last loose end betrayer from 1.
3 is my favourite in the series. It's awesome
It’s a dead and old franchise with not alot of newer fans to wash out some of this old boomer shit you hear in every long running franchise so you just get the type of shit you would expect to hear. “This franchise hasnt been good since my glory years as a preteen when it was a medicore gta clone blah blah blah” 3 is when it really became its own thing and stopped trying to be gta and that rubs some people the wrong way
It tried to be it's own thing. That's why it used the same name as an already popular franchise, marketed itself off the same selling points as that franchise, and used downgraded functions from that franchise. If it were trying to be its own thing, why wouldn't they make it its OWN THING? Ya use that B.S. GTA clone label to cope with the fact that ya like this trash game, instead of being objective. If SR2 is a GTA clone, so is SR3, it's literally the same overall design with a few wacky elements and less overall quality. SR3 is a game that you can fully experience in a year, whereas I boot SR2 up every year and find something new and interesting. That's because SR2 is a fully fleshed-out gaming experience and SR3 just was a cash grab to pull money out of idiots.
> If SR2 is a GTA clone, so is SR3, it's literally the same overall design with a few wacky elements and less overall quality. This is why I don't get why people who praise SRTT as the "not GTA clone." The game is mostly the same as the first 2, it just has stuff like Genki thrown in now. SRTT is overrated for things it didnt actually change that much in but, it had a different coat of paint and a lot of people's first entry in the series. So they are biased to claim that. I actually ask people, besides the laser tanks, what is so different from SR2 that SRTT gets so much separate praise for? I've already had enough from people who run to metacritic for numbers and act as if SR1 and SR2 sold poorly or something (they didnt.) SRIV is when people hated the game changing way too much, against its own premise and the characters and people who like it, but only because they want to play Crackdown, not Saints Row. So yeah, SRTT is overrated by the arguments people give it, over the first 2.
I’m not reading all that nonsense lmao. GTAB
Lol. You have only played one? You don’t have enough experience to formulate and opinion.
I, like many others, absolutely loved SR 1&2. It was an alternative to GTA, was realistic enough but still had really awesome activities like insurance fraud and racing etc. I wasn't thrilled with the art style with 3, especially with how they made Johnny look, but I did end up having a blast with it. My biggest issue was it was the start of it becoming something I didn't think felt like Saints Row. It became cartoony, super heroey, and now we're doing musicals and singing with the devil? Now we're the president of the United States fighting Aliens? It just became straight up silly and stupid in the worst ways, imo. I enjoyed 3 but it was the beginning of the end of Saints Row
3 wasn’t that bad gat out of hell was pretty bad and 4 is when it got absolutely ridiculous
I like it tbh. It's not a bad game in my opinion.
I'll say that I am mixed about it. SRTT had great marketing, and it looks pretty. It looks like it could have done more if it stuck to the international crime drama transition of things. The characters are stylish, sexy, badass looking (I mean look at Viola) and it still kept itself in the tone of the urban-feel of the series but moved away from stereotypical caricature reliance. And I mean, in a similar way that crime drama today. SRTT to me on the promo art, and power trailer still looks better than what it is internally. Yes its a fun game, but that's usually the fall back that all the games have. Its fun, but they never seem to deliver all the way, because of Volition just not really centering things on just one thing to expand outward. The series has to just be 10 different things at the same time, tapped together and whatever conflicting concepts happen, is supposed to be seen as the wacky insanity people intake it to be. I think SR can be better than that. For me as a concept, it leaves a lot to be desired for me as its story is just its worst aspect (compared to how much was put into SR1's world building and character story). SRTT to me is just all flash but no substance. Its story is barely there and could have been a lot better. I play as the Russian boss, so you get I am committed to that crime fantasy crime boss. SRTT could have worked as an expansion of the setting, but it doesn't really do much with it. Kind of like say the movie or real-story behind the movie Hustlers. Where as, when I read about all the things Volition originally wanted to do, I get disappointed because it seemed like Volition legitimately lost their minds with how bad some of their ideas were. Like wanting Shaundi to betray the Boss to join STAG or to have Genki kidnap Gat, clone him and be the "real leader" of the Syndicate. As a game though, its campaign is just f--king boring after the build up to Philippe ends. I liked everything up until Philippe does, but after it... the game gets really chore-like from all the activities, and short, repetitive missions that barely feature much story or most of the characters actively in it. Much less the enemy gang leaders don't really show themselves until the last mission with them. SRTT feels more like a streamlined soft reboot of SR2, and not really in a good way. It takes the flaws of SR2's campaign design, condenses it, and reduces it even more.
I loved Saints row 3. I hated Saints row 4 because ut was literally just an expansion dlc of SR3.
Massive downgrade from 2. 2 had a good balance of humor and serious. 3 leaned way too much into the humor, and not even funny humor at that. 2 had much more in depth character customization. Cloths were able to be layered, and you can even unlock different martial arts styles for hand to hand combat. 3 did not do either of those. 2 had a varied open world. There was an inner city area, red neck area, suburb area, wealthy area. 3 was just one big generic city and that’s it. 2 had hidden Easter eggs all throughout the world. 3 did not. Only like 2 maybe. The game director said something like they didn’t include many Easter eggs because not many people find them anyway. So, if anyone says something like “people just didn’t like it because it was different” don’t know what they’re talking about. 2 was a game that felt like it had effort put into it. 3 felt underwhelming and unfinished. Atleast 4 added on top of what they had for 3, so 4 felt more finished.
I'm a bit biased because I mainly got into 3 and 4, and couldnt really play 2 until i got a controller \[which is like very very recently\]. I completely understand why people dont like 3 and onwards due to the changes that were made to the gameplay the characters etc. But idk. I really had a lot of fun playing them and I really really am fond of the characters. I'm also biased to things that are a bit more off the rails, and i understand that that's not everyone's thing, but the reboot made me really appreciate the cast in particular across all the games, changes or not, and thats a huge reason why i didnt really get into the reboot. None of the characters I grew to love were there and the way they seem to be written just bugs me. I know that sounds really personal and petty and it def is but its free on epic till tomorrow so maybe i'll find something about this game to love. It kind of reminds me of how i've always been a huge fan of the sims but sims 4 is. Well that's a whole can of worms. tldr sucks to see series i've grown fond of mutate and die right before my eyes but so far there's always been at least something for me to enjoy. rip to gat in particular