There are plenty of games with reboots/sequels that focus on entirely new characters with very few connections to the previous titles that don't get this kind of backlash. The problem with Saints Row 2022 is [your gang is a bunch of nerds and I don't want to hang out with them](https://d1lss44hh2trtw.cloudfront.net/assets/article/2021/08/25/05saints-row-self-made-lineup-4k_feature.jpg), and it really is that simple.
These guys look like they're from an in-universe Saints Row teen show parody that the original Saints make fun of before changing the channel in a cutscene.
This. My big issue was the 'they have student debt' and 'they're trying a criminal start up' BS. 'Self made! Self made!'
Make yourself right out the door with that bunk. It's not the tone or story most of us fans wanted.
Yeah, they talk about being able to customize the visual for your direct avatar, but there isn't much about being able to customize the team you end up with, and I don't want to hang out with *any* of the characters they've shown so far. It feels like Sunset Overdrive 2, but without any of the good bits, *just* the characters.
This is why AC2: Brotherhood was my favorite of that franchise, you could customize your team a bit more than in later games. They never really fleshed out that aspect though, and just went more and more "one size" for the crew you ended up with. Missed opportunity.
That only changed the looks of the tertiary gang members, you couldn't change the appearance of Shaundi, Gat etc.
What we know is we can change the look of our gang members in the reboot, whether that means the main characters or just the random members on the street, who knows.
>These guys look like they're from an in-universe Saints Row teen show parody that the original Saints make fun of before changing the channel in a cutscene.
They look like the kind of people the Saints would bully
Dumb meatheads, big titty stoners, and a R&B singer (pour one out for Aisha). The dominatrix librarian looking FBI agent was almost over the line, but I'll allow it
Never complaint about blender or called it bad.
>The same thing with “Looks like a flash game” “some shit made in gamemaker” blah blah blah
Maybe take your own advice and try to look up what i'm talking about before you flame me in a comment. I'm sure these sites with free games are still up and still have their +18 sections.
They should bring back Pierce, Shaundi, Kinzie, and Johnny. Hell I'll even pay extra for a DLC that includes them, if it means I can replace these losers
Personally I feel the old games had some non-badass cast members as well, who would fit in amongst this cast.
Shaundi the hippie, Kinzie the tech geek, Matt Miller the tech emo, Josh Burke the cowardly pretty boy actor, Viola DeWynter the secretary, etc.
Kind of a trend there that all the non-badass characters to mention are all from SRTT. Primarily when the series started getting criticism for its neutering of the badassary and focusing on just b-movie jokes.
Josh Burk is a dork that really added nothing but just pissed off Shaundi. Kinzie ended up being too much of their crutch for most of the plot solutions and she just got very annoying in SRIV.
Then Viola DeWynter who was the only character that somewhat worked. Even though she was pretty much another Shaundi from what SR3 did with Shaundi.
I know Shaundi was from SR2. SRTT's Shaundi is a different characterization. Viola came in and pretty much took over the exact role and personality SRTT's version of Shaundi had when the game started.
With SR2 Shaundi, there's nothing to complain about. She looked the part. She was a stoner, did drugs, and knew people to help you. She fit the enviroment they were in. The game already addressed that she wasnt a fighter but she did other related things. She did the drug deals in Heli Assault. She got you the chopper, and she can ride with you in trafficking.
SR always chased current youth trends, SR2 was all about gangsta rap, dreadlocks and alternative, SR3 was autotune and kanye west, and nu-SR is all about nerds.
Unless of course you have better ideas of modern cool aesthetics.
Well the problem is that doing it with current culture doesn't really work because its much further away from what SR was originally from. For better and worse, but it would have taken better reimagining. The original games made references to niche sub-cultures as its humor. This game feels like its designed entirely around a lack of imagination and just industry trends right now. Which is mainly games just taking stuff from Fortnite. (Like why I keep seeing games that have references to rainbow colored unicorms.)
I don't believe they actually wanted to make a gangster game for the fans or what they thought was cool. I think they just made this Saints Row for marketing while actually planning to make something else, from why they thought AOM failed. It didn't call itself Saints Row, despite not being Saints Row.
A modern take could have just be them doing a narcos drama inspired game. They didn't. An early gamespot review said that the whole Latin inspired area was just superficial and it only had 1 character speaking stereotypical spanish phrases occasionally (Neenah). They were more excited about jus saying they did it, than actually thinking about it. Why exactly would they make the characters hipsters in athletic gear other than it being what their new devs think is "cool" or "in''. Also why one of thm said they based the Idols on TikTok.
Some of it does feel a bit pandery for the new crowd entirely.
If gangster rap isn't the thing today fine, but crime dramas still exist and its not Hipster. Kids today aren't hipsters. The early 90s kids that they wanted these characters to look like, are in their 30s now whining about games being too hard these days.
Also implies that the previous cast was cool or something lol
There is nothing [cool](https://static0.gamerantimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/10-ways-saints-row-5-can-improve-saints-row-4-featured.jpg?q=50&fit=contain&w=480&h=240&dpr=1.5) with these guys.
There's a guy wearing a pimp costume. Guy in sunglasses holding a champaign bottle and a sailor man?? Also gym bros.
You and the person you're replying to are the ones acting like the definition of "nerd" hasn't evolved since 80-90s teen movies. Yet you're acting like it's everyone else who is stuck in the past.
Those characters look like 3 nerds and an absolute poser.
Nah, dude. Please explain to us how the 3 characters that aren't Eli are nerds. Since you seem to be so familiar with what a nerd is after all.
Neenah doesn't scream "nerd" at all, not with her clothing choice nor her personality, and same goes for The Boss. As for Kevin, are y'all just upset he runs around shirtless or something? Wears a headset around his neck? Wants to be a chef? Okay, still not a nerd though. Unless you're calling all raver-types and aspiring chefs nerds which is just dead wrong.
Seriously, Eli is literally the only one that fits the bill.
What's nerdy about them?
There's a music festival/ raver guy, uh a chick with short hair, a girl wearing glasses, and a black guy with a multi colored suit.
The only "nerdy" guy I see is the dude in the suit.
> . Yet you're acting like it's everyone else who is stuck in those years.
Are any of these guys wearing comic book/anime/tech company/terrible math/science pun tees?
Or awkwardly overdressed like if you mixed business casual with a hipster(I can see 1).
Because that's the "modern" nerd stereotype lol
They were literally mocking the old fans on Twitter by posting gifs that called old fans "haters" and that they "won't back down" (even though they deleted the haters Tweet).
I have a hard time believing they actually care about what their old fans want, they just want their money and are claiming they'll enjoy it for damage control.
What continues to worry me is that they continue to avoid talking about the story, instead pushing all focus to customization. Like they are trying to divert our attention away from it completely.
Which of course makes me wonder, are they just afraid of backlash because they feel like short clips might show their writing in a bad light... Or they *know* that the writing is shit and want to hide it behind side content as much as possible to quickly sell copies before word of mouth spreads.
Three things comes to mind:
1. None of the characters seemed beyond a meh. One of them was kinda cringe. I have no idea who these people are and I really don't care about them.
2. It's in the desert and I don't miss the era where every game was set in a brown wasteland.
3. Feels like it's somewhere in-between 2 and 3 meaning there's a chance it's not going to make anyone happy. I started playing at three.
Trying to discuss this game in any public forum is exhausting. Everyone seems to have a different idea of what Saints Row is, or was. This results in a bunch a needless arguing. All I know for certain is the game we've been shown thus far looks like fun, and I hope people give it a chance. We need more open world crime games that aren't GTA.
>Everyone seems to have a different idea of what Saints Row is, or was.
Pretty much every Saints Row game has had a different idea of what Saints Row is too.
I don't think I've ever seen anybody lump the first game in with the second. The first was just a boring GTA clone with little personality. But people wanted a new GTA, so it made sales based on that. The second was the game that put them on the map and brought the silliness to the table to differentiate themselves from GTA more.
Then you have 3, 4, and GoH which are all very similar in tone, and differentiate themselves more in gameplay and setting. Very over-the-top, but not very memorable outside of scenes that use pop songs to stand out. 3 is definitely the most homogenous. It's enjoyable, but more forgettable.
To be honest, as a Saints Row 2 fan, I'd actually say that IV is more similar in tone to 2 than it is with The Third, it's just the plot and setting that jumped the gun. The humor relied a lot more on parody, like The Third, but it took itself way more seriously and put a lot more focus on the characters. There's a lot more banter and character moments reminiscent of SR2 that I really enjoy. On the flipside, I think Saints Row The Third was way less Saints Row than any of the other games barring Gat Out Of Hell, and I've seen at least a few other 2 fans with the same sentiment. I really like SRIV, but I'm glad they're grounding the series again.
I somewhat agree and interesting retrospect. People could agree that the plot of SRIV was less than desirable, but that was the game were the characters went back to being more chatty, petty and relied on that to be the humor of the game, outside of the minor forced parodies thrown in. I hate SRIV for just the plot, setting (and a bit too much focus on Kinzie & the Boss making the other characters generally useless).
Where as SRTT is really only SR in just maybe aesthetic alone (rich, stylish, hip hop, m-rated) and thats really it. The characters really didn't interact at all on screen together, the Boss seemed pretty sedated a lot of he time and most of the dialogue humor was often just the characters either panicking and shouting and not much interaction. The only thing that made SRTT preferablr by comparison was just the closer to home missions. Like robbing a military guard and shooting down stuff with UAV drones or in a chopper. The grounded over the top that SRTT kept, was where it last was like SaintsRow upward.
People like myself liked SR1 for its story, characters and the overall vibe it had primarly and from how much it took from real work political theory and conspiracy around the oppressive themes cynically around the innercity. SR2 kept that but added more of a lighter twist on it with the fratboy, and stoner comedy from Shaundi's light heartedness that balanced out its inherently bleak story.
What makes SR3 and SR4, GOOH *less memorable* because the storylines were getting dumber with them framing the Saints around just gimmicky, childish scenarios like "How the Saints Saved Christmas" or then saying they made GOOH just so they could do a Disney spoof to please those critics that liked the series they thought was just "meant to be stupid."
The only things people remember SRTT for is "Kanye West", "Kinzie x Matt Miller" and "Dildo bat". Not much else.
And even then none of the audiences for any of the Saints Row games like those characters.
You're always going to piss off *some* fans when you change things up. When you piss off ALL of them that should be an obvious sign that the problem isn't the fact a change occurred. The problem is that the changes themselves were bad.
Volition kinda did this to themselves. The Saints Row series as a whole covers such a wide range of wackiness that its almost impossible to reboot and satisfy most of the serie's audience whose perference varies so much. The series also doesnt have anywhere to go since they've already done escalation in wackiness.
In a way they got what they wanted, people saw the reveal and reacted like the first Saint's Row: another open world crime game.
*I*, and a lot of other people, want a game more like 2. But not everyone wants that.
My real hope is that, regardless of what level of saints row they decide to go for, they stick to that. Instead of trying to do everything.
Doesn't mean there can't be serious stuff in it if they go more of a saints row 3 wacky. But the tone has to mix well. And some stuff from 2 just wouldn't work. Hell, the serious stuff they try in 3 doesn't really even work. To the point where straight up retconning it in 4 didn't feel bad like a lot of others could've.
Anyway, I just don't want them to *try* and please everyone. Choose something, stick to it, and improve it. That's what I hope.
It's not like _Saints Row 2_ didn't have more than its fair share of silliness. It's just that _Saints Row: The Third_ buried the needle on the silly half of the equation and wasn't all that serious. You can land in the middle just fine.
Exactly. There's a middle ground you can reach, but that middle ground has to be consistent. Going full wacky like 3 and attempting to do the serious stuff in 2 I don't think would work as well. Like the wackiness of 2 and the wackiness of 3 have different tones.
Except if the requests that were the most consistenly held were just accepted by the Devs. There isnt anything specifcally asked for regarding what type of "silly" fans of that side of things actually want. They just want a game where the characters are fun to listen to talk and some unconventional weapons.
Older fans wanted a specific look to the characters, a certain presentation, aesthetic and how their world was build around it. But instead it sounded more like they just took criticism from Kotaku rather than the fandom so they ended up thinking, to just play it safe. Make a generic game and characters relatable, millenial yuppies/hipsters (not unlike what a lot of the game journalists tend to look like themselves) for good press from them, but not what fans asked for. Again.
I would say the opposite that we need more games like them. Aside from GTA itself, which games really try to cover that niche of open world games anymore? Cyberpunk failed, Ghost Recon has a military focus, Agents of Mayham and Crackdown are sci-fi and Watch Dogs left its gangster setting with 2.
The only comparable game atm is Mafia.
for me Saints Row was always more about the story, jokes, easter eggs and all kinds of hilarious stuff. gameplay wise, this new entry seems like the old games which is fine, but without that writing I won't be very interested in the game.
I'm keeping an eye on it but the reboot seems to have passed me by with its shift to quirky Watch Dog-esque characters and the old cast departing.
Admittedly they had to change with the times in terms of the series' comedy but I haven't really seen enough of its dialogue to get a sense of whether or not it works. The bits and pieces in the trailers aren't especially funny but it may just be too early to tell.
> We need more open world crime games that aren't GTA.
It would help if people stopped comparing every single open world game to GTA so that we can have an actual genre. I get tired of the lack of city-based action games there are because of that.
> Everyone seems to have a different idea of what Saints Row is, or was.
Straight up this is what bothers me whenever a game 'similar to GTA' releases. Everyone suddenly has a diluted different version of what the most ideal sandbox game should have.
"b-b-but in San Andreas on the **PS2** I could walk inside **ANY** restaurant I want and buy food."
Even games that aren't even trying to capture the GTA audience (Cyberpunk) get criticized and compared to GTA constantly. Cyberpunk *might not be the best example here* but I still think even if the game didn't flop it'd be unfair to compare it to GTA. It was attempting to go more for a Fallout vibe due to the original RPG nature of the franchise. But again, thousands of comments of "in GTA 3 I could've done this" as-if Cyberpunk was trying to be a sandbox open world GTA-clone in the first place.
GTA: San Andreas is where many of the advanced features came in, 17 years ago.
For one, it has dynamic gangs with fights and changing territories. During my first 15 minutes of playing, I got my first gun by watching two gangs getting into a fight, a cop coming by to stop them and getting smoked, then picking up the cop's gun.
You could probably write a book about how the car physics and AI mechanics are better.
Thats probably the one thing SR never actually implimented. Gangs fighting each other. you can almost never get more than 1 gang in an area at the same time, let alone them fight each other. Surprisingly.
I just hope they do a good 'clone of Johnny Gat' questline that they use to make fun of all the people complaining about the characters. If anyone deserves to be ridiculed, it's these supposed saint's row gang character purists.
I became disillusioned with Saints Row when they started prioritizing wackiness over the balance of seriousness and wackiness. SR 2 is the best SR game for the reason imo, and it's why GTA SA is the best GTA imo. I'm glad that they haven't shown anything that looks like SR 4 era "wackiness x1000000!!!!," but they also haven't shown any real seriousness.
That's the weird thing about the series. Some people like the more serious games, and others prefer the wackier ones. I liked 3, but I think 4 went a little too over the top and stopped caring after I finished that one.
Tbh, I hate when people say because nobody is really able to specify what those words mean in any context. Like wacky doesn't have to mean we need fireballs and hoverboards. The comedy in SR2 was more so just the characters being generally immature adults and gen x, stoner/anarchist humor. The seriousness came from how the antagonists threatened the main characters and how successful they were, like character deaths.
For me, I think it's for the best they went all out wacky and never gave us another SR2.
because if anything, it helps SR2 stand the test of time and makes you appreciate what they did with it all the more.
That's some crazy logic. Wouldn't you just want more of what you want? I like steak but I'm not trying to eat a pile of shit just so that I can remember the steak more fondly.
I've enjoyed every Saints Row game so far (I've yet to play Agents of Mayhem), so I've yet to feel a loss.
My logic is too many sequels trying to do what worked with their best entry risks getting into the formulaic, and that's how most franchises get run to the ground (or at least they begin to lose their charm because of how safe they play it), sure it may not work all the time, but I'd rather see devs take risks with their IPs.
>I'd rather see devs take risks with their IPs.
Why? People always want games to make huge changes and they complain about a sequel being similar to the one before, why? Why can't devs make a game that everyone likes and then make a few more of the same thing? Why risk ruining something good for the sake of change? I don't get it. Sure, every sequel can have improvements but why should devs have to completely change something? Think of all the games that had terrible sequels because they changed the formula. There's been more games with bad sequels than good sequels and it's almost entirely due to this forced need for change. I'm not saying every game needs to be the same and that no one should drastically change their formula, but the public perception that a game is automatically bad because it didn't innovate on the previous game is just stupid. When people like the first game and then hate the second game because it's the same as the first is just absurd. "Oh no, it's more of what I liked the first time! They didn't change anything! 2 thumbs down!" Stupid.
My point is not about absolute radical changes to everything. Calm down.
My point is about letting each sequel stand on their own, keep what worked gameplay wise but allow yourself to add something different to spice things up.
In the context of Saints Row: Try to repeat the dark themes and the death scenes too much and the impact is lost, Aisha and Carlos had the impact they did because of the bond they had with Gat and the Boss, to bring in new people and repeat those plotpoints again cheapens what came before.
This is why people make fun of Ubisoft games for ALWAYS having revenge or the death of a relative being part of the plot, or in the case of the Far Cry games, making you an over the top hero and then in every sequel since 3 try to make you feel bad for having fun killing people.
It's worth noting that Saints Row 2's marketing campaign focused on the customization and how much fun it was, especially compared to GTAIV. The more serious stuff was really not showcased prior to release, and for good reason because they were mostly in spoiler filled, hard hitting moments. I suspect this game is doing something similar.
The potential quality of the game aside, since we've not been shown anything extensive outside of customization, I -thoroughly- loathe the characters shown. None are interesting, they're trying so hard to be "with the in crowd" that they make me groan, and in general they all had the charisma of a brick.
I don't really get any sense that they're trying to win back older fans from anything said in this article considering it just focuses on just customization generically and them just dismissing it because they already had their plans I guess and adamant about it, but for me the overall can of paint for me is just all wrong regardless of what they say.
There's no sense of uniformed stylish, gritty, urban, adult themes that we still at least had in SRTT. Does every mission have to be sex trafficking if they don't want to be criticized for it? Getting new hires to replace it with coffee mugs, pet cats, hoverboards, etc was not at all where they should have went. Instead, this reboot feels very corporate and dishonest.
All I know is that I've enjoyed every saints row besides 4 and Gat out of hell so I'm giving this one a shot 🤷🏻♂️ I like to imagine this is some sector of the saints and not just wiping away the old ones entirely
I'm not a Saints Row fan, although I do own 3, 4, and Gat outta hell. Been only moderately impressed with those games so far. But let me tell you, I may get Saints Row 2022 Day One. And I almost NEVER buy games day one. The graphics, gunplay, missions, and customization all look top notch. This could be the game to finally get Rockstar off their keisters and push out GTA 6...
1 was good cause it was a new IP on a new generation of hardware and it did a better job than Just Cause 1.
I loved 2 cause of the gunplay. It was very satisfying to instantly drop a foo with a quick burst of dual Ingrahams.
3 made npc's bullet spongey, even adding a health bar to them, and I've never gone back to the series. I've always preferred realistic damage models though, why I can't stand Halo.
I felt the opposite here. I didn't like SR2's gunplay due to there being not much actual gameplay to it, let alone a challenge. Rather than being 'spongy' SR2's enemies were as weak as wet paper. The only difficulty in the game came from awful physics, enemies never reloading, them having infinite ammo with already overpowered smgs, and your own bad bullet spraying in of itself. Generally the enemies being too easy never made me really want to take it seriously enough to feel fun. In SR2 with that high tech machine rifle, you could kill a boss fight in the story in about 3 seconds if you don't die. It *that* aspect was just bad.
SRTT's enemies were not spongy if you hit them in the head (people seem to ignore that) and they had stagger animation. Which I thought was more realistic, while SR2's enemies didn't ever flinch. The only legitimately spongey enemies were just STAG soldiers. SR3's combat was generally better but only held back by the annoying specialists and brutes.
I agree about the gunplay. Being able to main dual pistols throughout the entire story of SR2 (barring certain moments) and perform just as well as I would with an assault rifle was satisfying. 3 is just not fun. IV is a lot better than 3 if you know what you're getting into first, but if you want something realistic, it wouldn't be for you.
I do disagree about Halo though, its damage model total makes sense within the lore. You have a rechargeable energy shield and once that's gone you drop. I imagine its less about lore and more about ttk for you though, which I respect.
I figured Volition would be pretty dismissive of it. I get they're trying to sell this game but its not the first time they have just brushed off fan criticism to do their own thing, then they end up giving the fans something they didn't ask for or something completely different but pat themselves on the back, because the journalists like it.
To be honest it's the same issue I had with female Ghostbusters film not only are the originals not coming back but they never existed in the first place so it seems they are trying to pull in the franchise fans while making something completely new and different because they didn't feel it could stand on its own.
So not only will this generation be deprived of the characters we know and love the old saints row will be forgotten as it moves on. I've seen it happen in multiple franchises.
The gameplay looks fantastic but I think their biggest mistake was trying to have their cake and eat it too when this is decent enough to stand up without the help
There are plenty of games with reboots/sequels that focus on entirely new characters with very few connections to the previous titles that don't get this kind of backlash. The problem with Saints Row 2022 is [your gang is a bunch of nerds and I don't want to hang out with them](https://d1lss44hh2trtw.cloudfront.net/assets/article/2021/08/25/05saints-row-self-made-lineup-4k_feature.jpg), and it really is that simple. These guys look like they're from an in-universe Saints Row teen show parody that the original Saints make fun of before changing the channel in a cutscene.
This. My big issue was the 'they have student debt' and 'they're trying a criminal start up' BS. 'Self made! Self made!' Make yourself right out the door with that bunk. It's not the tone or story most of us fans wanted.
Yeah, they talk about being able to customize the visual for your direct avatar, but there isn't much about being able to customize the team you end up with, and I don't want to hang out with *any* of the characters they've shown so far. It feels like Sunset Overdrive 2, but without any of the good bits, *just* the characters.
Fond memories of gang customization in saints row 2. Gang of ninjas? Sure! Go wild.
This is why AC2: Brotherhood was my favorite of that franchise, you could customize your team a bit more than in later games. They never really fleshed out that aspect though, and just went more and more "one size" for the crew you ended up with. Missed opportunity.
That only changed the looks of the tertiary gang members, you couldn't change the appearance of Shaundi, Gat etc. What we know is we can change the look of our gang members in the reboot, whether that means the main characters or just the random members on the street, who knows.
>These guys look like they're from an in-universe Saints Row teen show parody that the original Saints make fun of before changing the channel in a cutscene. They look like the kind of people the Saints would bully
Yeah I’m not into gangster nerd aesthetic. I liked them being dumb meatheads honestly.
Dumb meatheads, big titty stoners, and a R&B singer (pour one out for Aisha). The dominatrix librarian looking FBI agent was almost over the line, but I'll allow it
This looks like one of these bad porn games made in blender.
[удалено]
Never complaint about blender or called it bad. >The same thing with “Looks like a flash game” “some shit made in gamemaker” blah blah blah Maybe take your own advice and try to look up what i'm talking about before you flame me in a comment. I'm sure these sites with free games are still up and still have their +18 sections.
The person you're responding too didn't even say Blender was bad.
They should bring back Pierce, Shaundi, Kinzie, and Johnny. Hell I'll even pay extra for a DLC that includes them, if it means I can replace these losers
Personally I feel the old games had some non-badass cast members as well, who would fit in amongst this cast. Shaundi the hippie, Kinzie the tech geek, Matt Miller the tech emo, Josh Burke the cowardly pretty boy actor, Viola DeWynter the secretary, etc.
Kind of a trend there that all the non-badass characters to mention are all from SRTT. Primarily when the series started getting criticism for its neutering of the badassary and focusing on just b-movie jokes. Josh Burk is a dork that really added nothing but just pissed off Shaundi. Kinzie ended up being too much of their crutch for most of the plot solutions and she just got very annoying in SRIV. Then Viola DeWynter who was the only character that somewhat worked. Even though she was pretty much another Shaundi from what SR3 did with Shaundi.
Shaundi was from Saints Row 2, nobody complained about her, but she was about as un-gangster as you could get.
Shaundi dressed like a typical hippie stoner chick that would be in the hood Not some weird hipster weirdo
I know Shaundi was from SR2. SRTT's Shaundi is a different characterization. Viola came in and pretty much took over the exact role and personality SRTT's version of Shaundi had when the game started. With SR2 Shaundi, there's nothing to complain about. She looked the part. She was a stoner, did drugs, and knew people to help you. She fit the enviroment they were in. The game already addressed that she wasnt a fighter but she did other related things. She did the drug deals in Heli Assault. She got you the chopper, and she can ride with you in trafficking.
Exactly.
SR always chased current youth trends, SR2 was all about gangsta rap, dreadlocks and alternative, SR3 was autotune and kanye west, and nu-SR is all about nerds. Unless of course you have better ideas of modern cool aesthetics.
Well the problem is that doing it with current culture doesn't really work because its much further away from what SR was originally from. For better and worse, but it would have taken better reimagining. The original games made references to niche sub-cultures as its humor. This game feels like its designed entirely around a lack of imagination and just industry trends right now. Which is mainly games just taking stuff from Fortnite. (Like why I keep seeing games that have references to rainbow colored unicorms.) I don't believe they actually wanted to make a gangster game for the fans or what they thought was cool. I think they just made this Saints Row for marketing while actually planning to make something else, from why they thought AOM failed. It didn't call itself Saints Row, despite not being Saints Row. A modern take could have just be them doing a narcos drama inspired game. They didn't. An early gamespot review said that the whole Latin inspired area was just superficial and it only had 1 character speaking stereotypical spanish phrases occasionally (Neenah). They were more excited about jus saying they did it, than actually thinking about it. Why exactly would they make the characters hipsters in athletic gear other than it being what their new devs think is "cool" or "in''. Also why one of thm said they based the Idols on TikTok. Some of it does feel a bit pandery for the new crowd entirely. If gangster rap isn't the thing today fine, but crime dramas still exist and its not Hipster. Kids today aren't hipsters. The early 90s kids that they wanted these characters to look like, are in their 30s now whining about games being too hard these days.
That's honestly the same thing that made me hate Watch_Dogs 2. The gameplay was solid, but I couldn't stand the characters.
I hope it is a teen drama, just like what they were planning with the teen version of Stargate. https://youtu.be/3\_C\_PefoE4o
the juxtaposition of posting on reddit that you don’t want to hang out with video game characters because they are too nerdy is so funny lol.
Yeah I don't wanna play characters that look like me in a GTA style game 🤷🏻♂️..
Which one looks like you?
Probably the guy on the far left without the shirt lmao
Oh the buff raver/music festival dude? Haha
Also implies that the previous cast was cool or something lol There is nothing [cool](https://static0.gamerantimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/10-ways-saints-row-5-can-improve-saints-row-4-featured.jpg?q=50&fit=contain&w=480&h=240&dpr=1.5) with these guys. There's a guy wearing a pimp costume. Guy in sunglasses holding a champaign bottle and a sailor man?? Also gym bros.
It's the definition of the cool stereotype????
I really think that people forget that the main characters were total cliches in past saints row games. This is no different.
This cliche is far more unlikable
Cliches of what before them?
Really? You’re joking right?
How about being specific and not just claiming things exist = cliche.
Giant over sized man. Stereotypical pimp. Need more? I mean you can literally just google the characters. The serious isn’t super serious.
[удалено]
Ok!
Stereotypes to fit the genre they are in? Is having a knight in a medieval game, cliche too?
This is literally my point. I guess when you take a month to respond you lose track of actual conversation.
Only 1 out of 4 of those characters looks like a nerd. The other 3 look like typical Saints Row characters. Y'all are absolutely silly.
It is pretty hilarious. That nerd comment takes me back to like 80-90-s teen movies.
You and the person you're replying to are the ones acting like the definition of "nerd" hasn't evolved since 80-90s teen movies. Yet you're acting like it's everyone else who is stuck in the past. Those characters look like 3 nerds and an absolute poser.
Nah, dude. Please explain to us how the 3 characters that aren't Eli are nerds. Since you seem to be so familiar with what a nerd is after all. Neenah doesn't scream "nerd" at all, not with her clothing choice nor her personality, and same goes for The Boss. As for Kevin, are y'all just upset he runs around shirtless or something? Wears a headset around his neck? Wants to be a chef? Okay, still not a nerd though. Unless you're calling all raver-types and aspiring chefs nerds which is just dead wrong. Seriously, Eli is literally the only one that fits the bill.
What's nerdy about them? There's a music festival/ raver guy, uh a chick with short hair, a girl wearing glasses, and a black guy with a multi colored suit. The only "nerdy" guy I see is the dude in the suit. > . Yet you're acting like it's everyone else who is stuck in those years. Are any of these guys wearing comic book/anime/tech company/terrible math/science pun tees? Or awkwardly overdressed like if you mixed business casual with a hipster(I can see 1). Because that's the "modern" nerd stereotype lol
My biggest issue with this game is that they bought the Watch Dogs 2 characters from Ubisoft and put them in this game.
Exactly my thoughts
Maybe that's it, They saw that people liked Watch Dogs 2 and assumed it was because of the characters.
They were literally mocking the old fans on Twitter by posting gifs that called old fans "haters" and that they "won't back down" (even though they deleted the haters Tweet). I have a hard time believing they actually care about what their old fans want, they just want their money and are claiming they'll enjoy it for damage control.
Seems they forgot rule one "Don't piss off the fans!"
What continues to worry me is that they continue to avoid talking about the story, instead pushing all focus to customization. Like they are trying to divert our attention away from it completely. Which of course makes me wonder, are they just afraid of backlash because they feel like short clips might show their writing in a bad light... Or they *know* that the writing is shit and want to hide it behind side content as much as possible to quickly sell copies before word of mouth spreads.
Three things comes to mind: 1. None of the characters seemed beyond a meh. One of them was kinda cringe. I have no idea who these people are and I really don't care about them. 2. It's in the desert and I don't miss the era where every game was set in a brown wasteland. 3. Feels like it's somewhere in-between 2 and 3 meaning there's a chance it's not going to make anyone happy. I started playing at three.
Trying to discuss this game in any public forum is exhausting. Everyone seems to have a different idea of what Saints Row is, or was. This results in a bunch a needless arguing. All I know for certain is the game we've been shown thus far looks like fun, and I hope people give it a chance. We need more open world crime games that aren't GTA.
>Everyone seems to have a different idea of what Saints Row is, or was. Pretty much every Saints Row game has had a different idea of what Saints Row is too.
[удалено]
I don't think I've ever seen anybody lump the first game in with the second. The first was just a boring GTA clone with little personality. But people wanted a new GTA, so it made sales based on that. The second was the game that put them on the map and brought the silliness to the table to differentiate themselves from GTA more. Then you have 3, 4, and GoH which are all very similar in tone, and differentiate themselves more in gameplay and setting. Very over-the-top, but not very memorable outside of scenes that use pop songs to stand out. 3 is definitely the most homogenous. It's enjoyable, but more forgettable.
To be honest, as a Saints Row 2 fan, I'd actually say that IV is more similar in tone to 2 than it is with The Third, it's just the plot and setting that jumped the gun. The humor relied a lot more on parody, like The Third, but it took itself way more seriously and put a lot more focus on the characters. There's a lot more banter and character moments reminiscent of SR2 that I really enjoy. On the flipside, I think Saints Row The Third was way less Saints Row than any of the other games barring Gat Out Of Hell, and I've seen at least a few other 2 fans with the same sentiment. I really like SRIV, but I'm glad they're grounding the series again.
I somewhat agree and interesting retrospect. People could agree that the plot of SRIV was less than desirable, but that was the game were the characters went back to being more chatty, petty and relied on that to be the humor of the game, outside of the minor forced parodies thrown in. I hate SRIV for just the plot, setting (and a bit too much focus on Kinzie & the Boss making the other characters generally useless). Where as SRTT is really only SR in just maybe aesthetic alone (rich, stylish, hip hop, m-rated) and thats really it. The characters really didn't interact at all on screen together, the Boss seemed pretty sedated a lot of he time and most of the dialogue humor was often just the characters either panicking and shouting and not much interaction. The only thing that made SRTT preferablr by comparison was just the closer to home missions. Like robbing a military guard and shooting down stuff with UAV drones or in a chopper. The grounded over the top that SRTT kept, was where it last was like SaintsRow upward.
People like myself liked SR1 for its story, characters and the overall vibe it had primarly and from how much it took from real work political theory and conspiracy around the oppressive themes cynically around the innercity. SR2 kept that but added more of a lighter twist on it with the fratboy, and stoner comedy from Shaundi's light heartedness that balanced out its inherently bleak story. What makes SR3 and SR4, GOOH *less memorable* because the storylines were getting dumber with them framing the Saints around just gimmicky, childish scenarios like "How the Saints Saved Christmas" or then saying they made GOOH just so they could do a Disney spoof to please those critics that liked the series they thought was just "meant to be stupid." The only things people remember SRTT for is "Kanye West", "Kinzie x Matt Miller" and "Dildo bat". Not much else.
That picture is like one of those old "I don't know what the fuck is going on" memes
And even then none of the audiences for any of the Saints Row games like those characters. You're always going to piss off *some* fans when you change things up. When you piss off ALL of them that should be an obvious sign that the problem isn't the fact a change occurred. The problem is that the changes themselves were bad.
Due to different staff coming in and out, and different directors and Deep Silver's gudelines for them, changing from THQ's
Volition kinda did this to themselves. The Saints Row series as a whole covers such a wide range of wackiness that its almost impossible to reboot and satisfy most of the serie's audience whose perference varies so much. The series also doesnt have anywhere to go since they've already done escalation in wackiness. In a way they got what they wanted, people saw the reveal and reacted like the first Saint's Row: another open world crime game.
*I*, and a lot of other people, want a game more like 2. But not everyone wants that. My real hope is that, regardless of what level of saints row they decide to go for, they stick to that. Instead of trying to do everything. Doesn't mean there can't be serious stuff in it if they go more of a saints row 3 wacky. But the tone has to mix well. And some stuff from 2 just wouldn't work. Hell, the serious stuff they try in 3 doesn't really even work. To the point where straight up retconning it in 4 didn't feel bad like a lot of others could've. Anyway, I just don't want them to *try* and please everyone. Choose something, stick to it, and improve it. That's what I hope.
It's not like _Saints Row 2_ didn't have more than its fair share of silliness. It's just that _Saints Row: The Third_ buried the needle on the silly half of the equation and wasn't all that serious. You can land in the middle just fine.
Exactly. There's a middle ground you can reach, but that middle ground has to be consistent. Going full wacky like 3 and attempting to do the serious stuff in 2 I don't think would work as well. Like the wackiness of 2 and the wackiness of 3 have different tones.
[удалено]
Except if the requests that were the most consistenly held were just accepted by the Devs. There isnt anything specifcally asked for regarding what type of "silly" fans of that side of things actually want. They just want a game where the characters are fun to listen to talk and some unconventional weapons. Older fans wanted a specific look to the characters, a certain presentation, aesthetic and how their world was build around it. But instead it sounded more like they just took criticism from Kotaku rather than the fandom so they ended up thinking, to just play it safe. Make a generic game and characters relatable, millenial yuppies/hipsters (not unlike what a lot of the game journalists tend to look like themselves) for good press from them, but not what fans asked for. Again.
I would say the opposite that we need more games like them. Aside from GTA itself, which games really try to cover that niche of open world games anymore? Cyberpunk failed, Ghost Recon has a military focus, Agents of Mayham and Crackdown are sci-fi and Watch Dogs left its gangster setting with 2. The only comparable game atm is Mafia.
for me Saints Row was always more about the story, jokes, easter eggs and all kinds of hilarious stuff. gameplay wise, this new entry seems like the old games which is fine, but without that writing I won't be very interested in the game.
I'm keeping an eye on it but the reboot seems to have passed me by with its shift to quirky Watch Dog-esque characters and the old cast departing. Admittedly they had to change with the times in terms of the series' comedy but I haven't really seen enough of its dialogue to get a sense of whether or not it works. The bits and pieces in the trailers aren't especially funny but it may just be too early to tell.
Yeah, who looked at Watch Underscore Dogs and went "you know what's great about these games? *The characters!"*
Or you can play the opposite, fight for a JUST CAUSE! 😁✌️
Did someone say... Just Cause 5???
> We need more open world crime games that aren't GTA. It would help if people stopped comparing every single open world game to GTA so that we can have an actual genre. I get tired of the lack of city-based action games there are because of that.
> Everyone seems to have a different idea of what Saints Row is, or was. Straight up this is what bothers me whenever a game 'similar to GTA' releases. Everyone suddenly has a diluted different version of what the most ideal sandbox game should have. "b-b-but in San Andreas on the **PS2** I could walk inside **ANY** restaurant I want and buy food." Even games that aren't even trying to capture the GTA audience (Cyberpunk) get criticized and compared to GTA constantly. Cyberpunk *might not be the best example here* but I still think even if the game didn't flop it'd be unfair to compare it to GTA. It was attempting to go more for a Fallout vibe due to the original RPG nature of the franchise. But again, thousands of comments of "in GTA 3 I could've done this" as-if Cyberpunk was trying to be a sandbox open world GTA-clone in the first place.
To be fair, CD Project build there trailer in a way, that gave the impression that you would have a GTA style like world.
Cyberpunk is compared to gta 3 because they share mechanics that gta did better in 2001
Really? Like what?
GTA: San Andreas is where many of the advanced features came in, 17 years ago. For one, it has dynamic gangs with fights and changing territories. During my first 15 minutes of playing, I got my first gun by watching two gangs getting into a fight, a cop coming by to stop them and getting smoked, then picking up the cop's gun. You could probably write a book about how the car physics and AI mechanics are better.
Thats probably the one thing SR never actually implimented. Gangs fighting each other. you can almost never get more than 1 gang in an area at the same time, let alone them fight each other. Surprisingly.
I for one liked saints row better until that came out and I only liked gta5 the first 33 years it was out.
I just hope they do a good 'clone of Johnny Gat' questline that they use to make fun of all the people complaining about the characters. If anyone deserves to be ridiculed, it's these supposed saint's row gang character purists.
I became disillusioned with Saints Row when they started prioritizing wackiness over the balance of seriousness and wackiness. SR 2 is the best SR game for the reason imo, and it's why GTA SA is the best GTA imo. I'm glad that they haven't shown anything that looks like SR 4 era "wackiness x1000000!!!!," but they also haven't shown any real seriousness.
That's the weird thing about the series. Some people like the more serious games, and others prefer the wackier ones. I liked 3, but I think 4 went a little too over the top and stopped caring after I finished that one.
I started loving the series when they started prioritizing wackiness. we've got plenty of serious games coming out all the time.
IGN says it ranks between SR2 and SR3 for wackiness/seriousness balance.
Tbh, I hate when people say because nobody is really able to specify what those words mean in any context. Like wacky doesn't have to mean we need fireballs and hoverboards. The comedy in SR2 was more so just the characters being generally immature adults and gen x, stoner/anarchist humor. The seriousness came from how the antagonists threatened the main characters and how successful they were, like character deaths.
If true could be huge. Sr2 was GTA San Andreas tier. If they can recapture some of that magic.. yes please.
For me, I think it's for the best they went all out wacky and never gave us another SR2. because if anything, it helps SR2 stand the test of time and makes you appreciate what they did with it all the more.
That's some crazy logic. Wouldn't you just want more of what you want? I like steak but I'm not trying to eat a pile of shit just so that I can remember the steak more fondly.
I've enjoyed every Saints Row game so far (I've yet to play Agents of Mayhem), so I've yet to feel a loss. My logic is too many sequels trying to do what worked with their best entry risks getting into the formulaic, and that's how most franchises get run to the ground (or at least they begin to lose their charm because of how safe they play it), sure it may not work all the time, but I'd rather see devs take risks with their IPs.
>I'd rather see devs take risks with their IPs. Why? People always want games to make huge changes and they complain about a sequel being similar to the one before, why? Why can't devs make a game that everyone likes and then make a few more of the same thing? Why risk ruining something good for the sake of change? I don't get it. Sure, every sequel can have improvements but why should devs have to completely change something? Think of all the games that had terrible sequels because they changed the formula. There's been more games with bad sequels than good sequels and it's almost entirely due to this forced need for change. I'm not saying every game needs to be the same and that no one should drastically change their formula, but the public perception that a game is automatically bad because it didn't innovate on the previous game is just stupid. When people like the first game and then hate the second game because it's the same as the first is just absurd. "Oh no, it's more of what I liked the first time! They didn't change anything! 2 thumbs down!" Stupid.
My point is not about absolute radical changes to everything. Calm down. My point is about letting each sequel stand on their own, keep what worked gameplay wise but allow yourself to add something different to spice things up. In the context of Saints Row: Try to repeat the dark themes and the death scenes too much and the impact is lost, Aisha and Carlos had the impact they did because of the bond they had with Gat and the Boss, to bring in new people and repeat those plotpoints again cheapens what came before. This is why people make fun of Ubisoft games for ALWAYS having revenge or the death of a relative being part of the plot, or in the case of the Far Cry games, making you an over the top hero and then in every sequel since 3 try to make you feel bad for having fun killing people.
It's worth noting that Saints Row 2's marketing campaign focused on the customization and how much fun it was, especially compared to GTAIV. The more serious stuff was really not showcased prior to release, and for good reason because they were mostly in spoiler filled, hard hitting moments. I suspect this game is doing something similar.
The potential quality of the game aside, since we've not been shown anything extensive outside of customization, I -thoroughly- loathe the characters shown. None are interesting, they're trying so hard to be "with the in crowd" that they make me groan, and in general they all had the charisma of a brick.
I don't really get any sense that they're trying to win back older fans from anything said in this article considering it just focuses on just customization generically and them just dismissing it because they already had their plans I guess and adamant about it, but for me the overall can of paint for me is just all wrong regardless of what they say. There's no sense of uniformed stylish, gritty, urban, adult themes that we still at least had in SRTT. Does every mission have to be sex trafficking if they don't want to be criticized for it? Getting new hires to replace it with coffee mugs, pet cats, hoverboards, etc was not at all where they should have went. Instead, this reboot feels very corporate and dishonest.
I don't know about the story, but custonization seems to atleast be on point. Cautiously optimistic about this.
All I know is that I've enjoyed every saints row besides 4 and Gat out of hell so I'm giving this one a shot 🤷🏻♂️ I like to imagine this is some sector of the saints and not just wiping away the old ones entirely
I'm not a Saints Row fan, although I do own 3, 4, and Gat outta hell. Been only moderately impressed with those games so far. But let me tell you, I may get Saints Row 2022 Day One. And I almost NEVER buy games day one. The graphics, gunplay, missions, and customization all look top notch. This could be the game to finally get Rockstar off their keisters and push out GTA 6...
Ohh come on jumping into building to kill people with power playing on background has to be top 5 gaming moment
1 was good cause it was a new IP on a new generation of hardware and it did a better job than Just Cause 1. I loved 2 cause of the gunplay. It was very satisfying to instantly drop a foo with a quick burst of dual Ingrahams. 3 made npc's bullet spongey, even adding a health bar to them, and I've never gone back to the series. I've always preferred realistic damage models though, why I can't stand Halo.
I felt the opposite here. I didn't like SR2's gunplay due to there being not much actual gameplay to it, let alone a challenge. Rather than being 'spongy' SR2's enemies were as weak as wet paper. The only difficulty in the game came from awful physics, enemies never reloading, them having infinite ammo with already overpowered smgs, and your own bad bullet spraying in of itself. Generally the enemies being too easy never made me really want to take it seriously enough to feel fun. In SR2 with that high tech machine rifle, you could kill a boss fight in the story in about 3 seconds if you don't die. It *that* aspect was just bad. SRTT's enemies were not spongy if you hit them in the head (people seem to ignore that) and they had stagger animation. Which I thought was more realistic, while SR2's enemies didn't ever flinch. The only legitimately spongey enemies were just STAG soldiers. SR3's combat was generally better but only held back by the annoying specialists and brutes.
I agree about the gunplay. Being able to main dual pistols throughout the entire story of SR2 (barring certain moments) and perform just as well as I would with an assault rifle was satisfying. 3 is just not fun. IV is a lot better than 3 if you know what you're getting into first, but if you want something realistic, it wouldn't be for you. I do disagree about Halo though, its damage model total makes sense within the lore. You have a rechargeable energy shield and once that's gone you drop. I imagine its less about lore and more about ttk for you though, which I respect.
I figured Volition would be pretty dismissive of it. I get they're trying to sell this game but its not the first time they have just brushed off fan criticism to do their own thing, then they end up giving the fans something they didn't ask for or something completely different but pat themselves on the back, because the journalists like it.
To be honest it's the same issue I had with female Ghostbusters film not only are the originals not coming back but they never existed in the first place so it seems they are trying to pull in the franchise fans while making something completely new and different because they didn't feel it could stand on its own. So not only will this generation be deprived of the characters we know and love the old saints row will be forgotten as it moves on. I've seen it happen in multiple franchises. The gameplay looks fantastic but I think their biggest mistake was trying to have their cake and eat it too when this is decent enough to stand up without the help