Debunking The Saints Row IV Whining

Genocidicles

New member
Sep 13, 2012
1,747
0
0
A lot of people seem to forget that SR2 looked almost exactly the same as the first one, was set in the same city as before and had gameplay that was practically the same too. It was basically the first game with a new storyline and a lot more content added to it... and it was great!

I'm expecting the same to be true of SR4: SR3 with a new storyline, more content and superpowers.
 

piinyouri

New member
Mar 18, 2012
2,708
0
0
Genocidicles said:
A lot of people seem to forget that SR2 looked almost exactly the same as the first one, was set in the same city as before and had gameplay that was practically the same too. It was basically the first game with a new storyline and a lot more content added to it... and it was great!

I'm expecting the same to be true of SR4: SR3 with a new storyline, more content and superpowers.
You know, this is an interesting point, and a good one.

I myself did not play the first game, so I had nothing to compare SR2 to. I wonder if I would have felt different had I played the first entry.
 

Evonisia

Your sinner, in secret
Jun 24, 2013
3,257
0
0
It's a good job that "Focusing on goofy is crap, because look at SR:TT" is still a valid argument. I don't care if it looks like DLC. Saints Row: The Third was practically SR2 DLC, just with less features, being more linear and it was far too goofy. Everything I've heard about Saints Row IV has basically told me that we're not going to get a proper sequel to Saints Row 2 any time soon (and I've said that SR2 has no sequel ever since I heard that SR:TT had the wider audience in mind rather than fans).

In fact, seeing as they're inevitably going to highlight the goofy, I'm glad that it looks exactly that The Third.
 

mad825

New member
Mar 28, 2010
3,379
0
0
Legion said:
This reminds me of back before Fallout New Vegas was released. People kept saying that it was just a DLC or should have been one because it used the exact same engine and so on. Considering how much there is to do in the game, as well as the fact that a significant amount of people consider it to surpass Fallout 3 in almost every way, it is kind of amusing to recall the scepticism people had back then.
Apples and oranges mate.

Obsidian were able to cut so many corners(legitimately) that they should have done something good. Most of the ideas were built upon popular pre-existing mods for FO3, not even to mention that they were using an SDK that was even user friendly for some fairly inexperienced modders/programmers. It was essentially "more of the same" with more stuff.

SR3 was "more of the same" with removed features. Recycled and cut side-missons, Recycled (from SR2, SR1?) building/car textures, reduced amount of songs and merged storyline. Hell, why was Gat inexplicably cut from the game?

From the looks of things the "new" SR3 engine didn't change much other than take things away.
 

Savagezion

New member
Mar 28, 2010
2,455
0
0
D-Class 198482 said:
2. It looks like a DLC
This complaint is actually different from the first one - the first one goes after how the roots of the game where apparently from a DLC, while this one is just them attacking it because they think it *looks* like it should've been a DLC.
Well, yes. It's going to have the same engine, graphics, and map because it was made alongside Saints Row the Third. Wah. Meanwhile, it's a 24 hour game (which isn't something DLCs /do/), has new enemies, buildings, powers, guns, customization options, gameplay, vehicles, storyline, characters, and minigames.
Which, if you'd recall, Saints Row 2 and Saints Row 3 had as well, thus categorizing Saints Row IV as a new game and not deserving of DLC status.
Then it is official and DLC was a way for devs to charge more for the same content as expansions. I have seen this "prophecy of naysayers" coming true more and more over the past two years.

I have never played a Saints Row Game as I am not all that interested in the IP. I own SR3 due to a bundle package on Steam and haven't even touched it.

However, your post has given me all the information I need to see that this "full game" is actually what used to be refered to as an "expansion". Same map in the same engine but with new enemies, buildings, powers, guns, customizable options, etc. All balled into a 24 hour experience. Most expansions fell in around 20 hours - but full games also used to fall in at about 40. I remember people hissing and spitting about DLC taking the place of expansions saying they would end up charging you more for the same thing - or worse, charging you more for less. I was torn at the time and could see a benefit to both. Bethesda is a good example of DLC done well, despite that I don't care much for their games overall. The Sims 3 is a great example of it done wrong where the base game is bare bones and every little thing costs you. A while back someone made a post about buying Sims 3 and all its add ins on Steam would cost over $500. Much of which is basic skins and models. Basically cosmetic options.

Stuff like this you mention:
New enemies
New guns
New customization options
New powers
New buildings
New vehicles
New characters

That stuff is all run of the mill expansion stuff. Especially considering the game is a sandbox. This leaves:
New gameplay (Which expansions usually add due to the above listed items)
New story (Many expansion tend to carry on a story further - not sure if that is the case here.)
New Minigames

I can't help but agree with this argument against the game just by looking at what I have read. To me, this doesn't look like a full game. It looks like an expansion being sold as a new game. I disagree with practices like this. I may not be seeing the full picture here, I'll admit. But from my perspective this looks like some small retextures and a new price tag.
 

GonzoGamer

New member
Apr 9, 2008
7,063
0
0
But sr4 did start off as a dlc for sr3, so that's actually a valid complaint. Then again, if you really liked sr3, it's a selling point.

Is calling it a Prototype rip-off a complaint? What if you liked Prototype (I did), which in itself is a ripoff of Hulk Ultimate Destruction? I'd say calling it a prototype ripoff is a complement.

I love threads where people whine about people whining. It reminds me of that George Carlin line "Have you ever noticed that their stuff is shit and your shit is stuff?"
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Ruzinus said:
It's totally using ideas from Crackdown and Prototype.

That's not a whine, that's a hurray.
This.

Why would I be sad that it's taking cues from good superhero games?

Savagezion said:
D-Class 198482 said:
2. It looks like a DLC
This complaint is actually different from the first one - the first one goes after how the roots of the game where apparently from a DLC, while this one is just them attacking it because they think it *looks* like it should've been a DLC.
Well, yes. It's going to have the same engine, graphics, and map because it was made alongside Saints Row the Third. Wah. Meanwhile, it's a 24 hour game (which isn't something DLCs /do/), has new enemies, buildings, powers, guns, customization options, gameplay, vehicles, storyline, characters, and minigames.
Which, if you'd recall, Saints Row 2 and Saints Row 3 had as well, thus categorizing Saints Row IV as a new game and not deserving of DLC status.
Then it is official and DLC was a way for devs to charge more for the same content as expansions. I have seen this "prophecy of naysayers" coming true more and more over the past two years.

I have never played a Saints Row Game as I am not all that interested in the IP. I own SR3 due to a bundle package on Steam and haven't even touched it.

However, your post has given me all the information I need to see that this "full game" is actually what used to be refered to as an "expansion". Same map in the same engine but with new enemies, buildings, powers, guns, customizable options, etc. All balled into a 24 hour experience. Most expansions fell in around 20 hours - but full games also used to fall in at about 40. I remember people hissing and spitting about DLC taking the place of expansions saying they would end up charging you more for the same thing - or worse, charging you more for less. I was torn at the time and could see a benefit to both. Bethesda is a good example of DLC done well, despite that I don't care much for their games overall. The Sims 3 is a great example of it done wrong where the base game is bare bones and every little thing costs you. A while back someone made a post about buying Sims 3 and all its add ins on Steam would cost over $500. Much of which is basic skins and models. Basically cosmetic options.

Stuff like this you mention:
New enemies
New guns
New customization options
New powers
New buildings
New vehicles
New characters

That stuff is all run of the mill expansion stuff. Especially considering the game is a sandbox. This leaves:
New gameplay (Which expansions usually add due to the above listed items)
New story (Many expansion tend to carry on a story further - not sure if that is the case here.)
New Minigames

I can't help but agree with this argument against the game just by looking at what I have read. To me, this doesn't look like a full game. It looks like an expansion being sold as a new game. I disagree with practices like this. I may not be seeing the full picture here, I'll admit. But from my perspective this looks like some small retextures and a new price tag.
What I read: "Every single sequel ever is an expansion".

Which is kind of hilarious, considering that Saints Row sequels have always been not very sequel-like, in that they actually totally change their tone (and even their subgenre) from game to game.
 

Xarathox

New member
Feb 12, 2013
346
0
0
Ruzinus said:
It's totally using ideas from Crackdown and Prototype.

That's not a whine, that's a hurray.
This. Well, except the fact that I never played Prototype, so I can't be objective about it. However, SR4 looks like Crackdown on steroids. I will gladly pay full price for my copy since I am not disappoint with what I've seen. Hell, the moment I found out I could romance Kinzie Kensington I've been throwing my wallet at my screen.
 

Doom972

New member
Dec 25, 2008
2,312
0
0
Kalezian said:
Doom972 said:
Only 24 hours long? For a stand-alone sandbox game that's pretty short. I guess I'll get it when it becomes really cheap if that's the case. Maybe they should've released it as DLC.

compare a possible 24 hour game where as I beat it's predecessor in just over 16 hours.

including all the collections, hit lists, carjackings, challenges, gang operations, and activities.


so another eight hours of gameplay really isn't bad.



About to head to the nearest gamestop, which is actually 100 miles away, because LOL, RURAL AMERICA, to get it and trade in some really shitty games.


HEre's hoping that Black Ops II gets about $20, with all the fanboys waiting for Ghosts, someone is going to want to buy it.


who am I kidding, I'll probably get $5 and an offer to join the point club thing and/or preorder a Xbox One.
You finished everything in SR3 in 16 hours? According to Steam, it took me about 50. Enjoy SR4.
 

Maxtro

New member
Feb 13, 2011
940
0
0
Uh, it was supposed to originally be an expansion pack. That is common knowledge.

Enter the Dominatrix
http://saintsrow.wikia.com/wiki/Enter_The_Dominatrix
 

Savagezion

New member
Mar 28, 2010
2,455
0
0
lacktheknack said:
What I read: "Every single sequel ever is an expansion".

Which is kind of hilarious, considering that Saints Row sequels have always been not very sequel-like, in that they actually totally change their tone (and even their subgenre) from game to game.
Same engine, graphics, and map. In a sandbox game. As I said before, I don't know if this is a continuation story of DLC or what. But using the same map on the same engine in a sandbox game? You read wrong. GTA 1-4 + San Andreas didn't use any of the same maps. As a matter of fact I can't think of a game that uses the same static map in its sequel as in it's predecessor. Now, as I said I am unfamiliar with the story of SR games but if this is a continuation of a previous story, yeah it is a full dead on expansion. That is what expansions do. It is an expansion onto the game and the story. If this is a completely new and separate story with its own rising and falling action in the plot then it could be a proper sequel. Albeit a rather cheap one, which could be excused by the whole THQ business.

However, many sequels add more than that and many add a whole new engine or at least heavily modify the previous engine. The things in the first list in my previous posts are common things expansions throw in because they are easy to throw in. Adding that in doesn't mean it is a new game. Hell, a mod can throw that stuff in with ease. The second list of 3 things are the only things vouching towards an actual sequel. Two of which don't necessarily mean anything. They could, definitely - but that doesn't "debunk" anything. As a completely neutral observer that was unaware of any whining before this thread, the OP hasn't debunked anything. DLC = expansion nowadays to many gamers. Thus, points 1 and 2 appear valid from an outside perspective even when it is worded as the OP worded it and has been discussed in the thread.
 

Doom972

New member
Dec 25, 2008
2,312
0
0
Kalezian said:
Doom972 said:
Kalezian said:
Doom972 said:
Only 24 hours long? For a stand-alone sandbox game that's pretty short. I guess I'll get it when it becomes really cheap if that's the case. Maybe they should've released it as DLC.

compare a possible 24 hour game where as I beat it's predecessor in just over 16 hours.

including all the collections, hit lists, carjackings, challenges, gang operations, and activities.


so another eight hours of gameplay really isn't bad.



About to head to the nearest gamestop, which is actually 100 miles away, because LOL, RURAL AMERICA, to get it and trade in some really shitty games.


HEre's hoping that Black Ops II gets about $20, with all the fanboys waiting for Ghosts, someone is going to want to buy it.


who am I kidding, I'll probably get $5 and an offer to join the point club thing and/or preorder a Xbox One.
You finished everything in SR3 in 16 hours? According to Steam, it took me about 50. Enjoy SR4.
They kinda fucked up when they give you an attack helicopter so early in the game, makes gang operations a joke, and once you unlock the collection finder, well it's just a matter of flying everywhere.

Still somehow managed to beat the game without hitting level 50 though, kinda sucks, I wanted the unlimited ammo legit....
Gang Operations wasn't the problem. I took out many of them in seconds using the drone, and once I unlocked the chopper I used that of course. I didn't bother with the collections as far as I remember.
 

D-Class 198482

New member
Jul 17, 2012
672
0
0
Maxtro said:
Uh, it was supposed to originally be an expansion pack. That is common knowledge.

Enter the Dominatrix
http://saintsrow.wikia.com/wiki/Enter_The_Dominatrix
Take a look at Angry Joe's interview of someone working in the production of Saints Row IV -- he mentions that Saints Row IV was in production before Saints Row the Third and they decided to replace Saints Row IV's original storyline and gameplay with Enter the Dominatrix's.
So it wasn't originally an expansion pack.
 

DeeWiz

New member
Aug 25, 2010
108
0
0
I've played 7 hours so far and all this complaints about "It's and exanpsion/dlc" is bull. Do people remember expansion packs back in the day, they would barely introduce new features and were more level packs than anything. This is most definitely a full game. I'm still in tutorial missions after 7 hours (been distracted while playing), most DLC is done at this point. The gameplay has been remixed/changed for the better. Superpowers both make you feel super powerful yet don't break the game (at least on hard) which is something that is hard to do.

Long and short of it, they didn't change the engine so they could work on creating more CONTENT in a shorter period of time. I don't know about everyone else, and while I enjoy my graphics I am not that big of a snob, I think this is a Win-Win I get more saint's row in last time. The engine is perfectly decent and would have made no sense to try to upgrade it with new consoles coming (I'm playing on PC BTW), they need to guarantee the game came out before the new generation hit.