|
Im having trouble finding out for an Austrailian friend of mine, is there anyway to get the uncensored version of the game? I was wondering if anyone was in the know on this. Cause what i heard is that the AUS version of the game is incompatible with the other normal versions, and if that is so, then thats kinda hosed. I would like to be able to play with my friend. EDIT: Ignore me. Somehow i missed the top of the last page.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 04:01 |
|
|
TalonDemonKing posted:Ars Technica didn't care for the game, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
TalonDemonKing posted:Ars Technica didn't care for the game, apparently. Ars are mooooostly fair but do have a tendency to be snooty as hell and jump immediately up themselves about things that contain silliness or might cause people to look at gaming as anything but a mature robust artform etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
Stanko-Prussian posted:Ars are mooooostly fair but do have a tendency to be snooty as hell and jump immediately up themselves about things that contain silliness or might cause people to look at gaming as anything but a mature robust artform etc. And whats all this poo poo: "Sam Machkovech posted:Rather, I thought of this scene: A high-ranking executive at Koch Media has just come home from a corporate auction flush with good news. He's secured the rights to a giant video game series thanks to the bankruptcy of former publisher THQ. His obnoxious pre-teen son Caleb enters the room when dad utters the words "Saint's Row." Does he even have a firm understanding of who exactly made this game, or is he pretty much trying to score mad hipster cred? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
Ars are the kings of being pretentious hipster gamers. They just don't "get" immature humour and think they're above it since games have to be high art. Edit: \/ Im talking mostly about how the review is written. They were similarly snobbish about the humour in 3. Mokinokaro fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Aug 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:36
|
|
|
Mokinokaro posted:Ars are the kings of being pretentious hipster gamers. edit: and remember, we wouldn't even be having this conversation if 3 had been as funny as 2, we'd all just be running out to buy it based on the strength of that alone. Samurai Sanders fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Aug 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:That was not the majority of their complaints... All of their complaints are basically just one complaint, that in the reviewer's subjective opinion it wasn't as "fun" or "enjoyable" as some of the other openworld games that they cribbed some gameplay ideas from. The reviewer doesn't come up with any concrete argument against the game, just that they didn't enjoy it. The review is about 500 words that say absolutely nothing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:44
|
|
|
Not true, he basically called the producers of the game spoiled, bratty 12 year olds. Edit: I wonder what that makes the people who enjoy these games. Uncultured barbarians maybe?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
Was 2's humor somehow less juvenile than 3's and I missed it? Is that why criticizing 3's humor as being juvenile means you're a stick in the mud?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
Kind of cute that he writes about a 'spoiled brat' wanting sr4 to be like all these other games, then himself complains that its not enough like red faction or crackdown.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Was 2's humor somehow less juvenile than 3's and I missed it? Is that why criticizing 3's humor as being juvenile means you're a stick in the mud? Arstechnica didn't review Saints Row 2 so we can only compare their SR3 and 4 reviews which were also written by different people. Ben Kuchura loved Saints Row 3. Sam Machkovech not only disliked the humour in SR4, but went out of the way to insult the developers and anyone who might like its humour. He also hated that so much of it is played straight (which is exactly what SR2 did.) Machkovech even says the series "peaked in 2011." The game obviously just didn't appeal to him on the writing front and most of his other complaints apply to pretty much every modern open world game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
That is one hell of a pretentious review, for what is essentially a silly game about running around doing crazy poo poo.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
Refused posted:Kind of cute that he writes about a 'spoiled brat' wanting sr4 to be like all these other games, then himself complains that its not enough like red faction or crackdown. It's a banal complaint anyway. It borrows from Crackdown. So what? Crackdown is a good game. It's not like Crackdown was the first game to have super powers. There's only so many ways you can super-punch a man, and whining about how 'X did it first' just feels really facile. The confined nature of the main missions is something that I expected, and I'm not really sure why anyone would be surprised by this. Every game in the Saints Row series has limited you in some way for the duration of most of its story missions. It's not uncommon in the genre or hell, games in general. It just isn't the kind of game for everyone I guess, and that extends to reviewers as well. He doesn't strike me as the type who would 'waste time' dicking around on this game without any clear goal in mind. If you're just gonna shoot straight through the story and then put it down once you've beaten it, this probably isn't the game for you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
One and the Same posted:It's a banal complaint anyway. It borrows from Crackdown. So what? Crackdown is a good game. It's not like Crackdown was the first game to have super powers. There's only so many ways you can super-punch a man, and whining about how 'X did it first' just feels really facile. I don't get why the "run time" of the game keeps getting brought up, either. I put 100 hours into SR3 according to Steam, and I may put in more than that on this game if Shmorky's stream last night was any indication of the full game. Am I in some bizarro universe where people don't get the point of a sandbox game?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
Bovineicide posted:I don't get why the "run time" of the game keeps getting brought up, either. I put 100 hours into SR3 according to Steam, and I may put in more than that on this game if Shmorky's stream last night was any indication of the full game. Am I in some bizarro universe where people don't get the point of a sandbox game? The run time gives you an indication on how much side content there is. To a lot of people, sand box means extra activities outside of the main quest, not dicking around with emergent gameplay. So a 15-17 hour looks "poor" because there isn't much side content.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
I've logged over 100 hours into Saints Row: The Third and I didn't enjoy it nearly as much as Saints Row 2. Most of that time was just dicking around (although I also played through the story twice, once solo and once in co-op). I get the impression that that reviewer is the type who needs to be told how to have fun in a game. If they were a poster on the forums, they'd be That Guy who comes into the thread of a popular game to say that they "didn't like it" and then expect us to convince them to like it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
King Vidiot posted:I've logged over 100 hours into Saints Row: The Third and I didn't enjoy it nearly as much as Saints Row 2. Most of that time was just dicking around (although I also played through the story twice, once solo and once in co-op). I think I only managed about 50-60 hours in SR3, which isn't terrible but sad compared to the 160 in SR2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
The announcement of the purchase of the Saints Row IP and Volition came during an all-hands meeting of Deep Silver staff in Germany. The mood was said to be jubilant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
Mokinokaro posted:I think I only managed about 50-60 hours in SR3, which isn't terrible but sad compared to the 160 in SR2. I spent most of my time in SR2 grinding XP to be able to play missions, driving places to get to missions and restarting both after the game crashes. So maybe it's for the best if it's shorter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
I just watched the Giant Bomb Quick Look of the game, and besides the fact that they spent the whole time yelling "BUY THE PC VERSION" instead of actually talking about the game, the other thing I noticed was near-universal indifference or hatred for the game in the comments. People here might seem happy with it, but is it going to sell well overall? I'm not sure.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
Orgophlax posted:The run time gives you an indication on how much side content there is. To a lot of people, sand box means extra activities outside of the main quest, not dicking around with emergent gameplay. So a 15-17 hour looks "poor" because there isn't much side content. Except that that hour count doesn't take into account a huge portion of the game. 17 hours is only main story missions and side quests. That doesn't include: playing dress-up, diversions, getting gold in activities, picking up collectibles, upgrading and testing out new weapons/powers, customizing everything ever, or exploring stuff. All of that is side content in addition to the 17 hours of mission content, and definitely cannot be written of as dicking around with emergent gameplay. Behonkiss posted:I just watched the Giant Bomb Quick Look of the game, and besides the fact that they spent the whole time yelling "BUY THE PC VERSION" instead of actually talking about the game, the other thing I noticed was near-universal indifference or hatred for the game in the comments. People here might seem happy with it, but is it going to sell well overall? I'm not sure. For some reason Angry Nerds across the internet decided a long time ago that they hated SRIV because it isn't serious enough, because it is "glorified DLC" (evidently it is apparently the only game in history to have dared to re-use a previous game's engine and assets), and because it is vaguely of the same genre as GTAV but Is Not GTAV. I hope it will sell well despite this, because I think silly games which privilege fun over realism are good for the industry and I want to play more of them. Zigoot fucked around with this message at 18:46 on Aug 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
Are there any codes at GMG for this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
The Ars Technica review is full of press shots and generic unmodified default boss screenshots. It's clear he Didn't Get It, and that's all that really needs to be said.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
After seeing everything I've seen from this game, I'm speechless from excitement, so I can only choke out 3 words: Saints Row, bitches!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
Behonkiss posted:I just watched the Giant Bomb Quick Look of the game, and besides the fact that they spent the whole time yelling "BUY THE PC VERSION" instead of actually talking about the game, the other thing I noticed was near-universal indifference or hatred for the game in the comments. People here might seem happy with it, but is it going to sell well overall? I'm not sure. I just broke down and started watching it. Every time I see open world gameplay in this game I jizz a little.  The wall-running, holy poo poo. I didn't know you could do that. It makes scaling buildings that much easier and more awesome. 
THE FUCKING MOON fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Aug 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 18:59
|
|
|
One and the Same posted:I just broke down and started watching it. Every time I see open world gameplay in this game I jizz a little. They will clearly warn you when they get into spoiler territory (and even then they only spoil a minor recruitment mission and talk over most of the dialogue.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
Orgophlax posted:The run time gives you an indication on how much side content there is. To a lot of people, sand box means extra activities outside of the main quest, not dicking around with emergent gameplay. So a 15-17 hour looks "poor" because there isn't much side content. I should note something: 17-20 hours with sidequests is about usual for sandbox games to me. I can't think of many that have gone particularly longer and quite a few that are shorter. Emergent gameplay is and pretty much always be the place where sandbox games get their hours. SR4 is a lot more of a Prototype than a Grand Theft Auto when it comes to side material, mind you, but still.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
Comrade Flynn posted:Are there any codes at GMG for this? yup: GMG20-4B9NY-L4FEN for 20% off http://www.greenmangaming.com/s/gb/en/pc/games/action/saints-row-4/
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:I should note something: Yeah seriously, since when has 17 hours for a sandbox is bad? I"m fine with it being like that. I rather not have a Just Cause 2 situation. Good lord the OCD in me always tries to be 100 percent things and JC2 was a nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
All I need to know about this game, review-wise, is that IGN rated SRTT an 85%, and gave Saints Row 2 and this one about 70%. I am gonna love this game  Also, The Escapist gave it a perfect 100%.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:18
|
|
|
Common Sensei posted:Except that that hour count doesn't take into account a huge portion of the game. 17 hours is only main story missions and side quests. That doesn't include: playing dress-up, diversions, getting gold in activities, picking up collectibles, upgrading and testing out new weapons/powers, customizing everything ever, or exploring stuff. All of that is side content in addition to the 17 hours of mission content, and definitely cannot be written of as dicking around with emergent gameplay. Exactly. I get the feeling that people expect every open world game to have as much content as Skyrim, too. That expectation is just loving insane. Also, if you watch this and don't immediately buy the game, you are a butthole  http://www.twitch.tv/sashmorky/b/445812232 Shindragon posted:Yeah seriously, since when has 17 hours for a sandbox is bad? I"m fine with it being like that. I rather not have a Just Cause 2 situation. I guess no one told you that it's impossible to 100% some areas because of bugs 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
ClownSyndrome posted:yup: GMG20-4B9NY-L4FEN for 20% off  I really don't want to wait for a sale on this, but Christ. The console version is £30 on Amazon! Lunchmeat Larry fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Aug 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:23
|
|
|
ClownSyndrome posted:yup: GMG20-4B9NY-L4FEN for 20% off Thanks. Babby's first sandbox game on the PC. I'm scared.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
Super powers are cool and everything, but does the advancement system in the game get stupid like SR3 with making you literally immune to everything?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
Lotish posted:Super powers are cool and everything, but does the advancement system in the game get stupid like SR3 with making you literally immune to everything? Yeah, but not until max level and you can always choose to not buy those upgrades. Some upgrades are also tied to activities/missions now so they're harder to earn.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
Lotish posted:Super powers are cool and everything, but does the advancement system in the game get stupid like SR3 with making you literally immune to everything? Damage reduction upgrades are purchasable but not required. The exception is top-tier fire reduction which is a sidequest reward. At high levels you have high (but not complete) reduction to explosive and bullet damage and immunity to fire.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
Generally don't like when I have to choose not to break the game. It should encourage me to go nuts within the limits. Can you unbuy upgrades/respec? I mean cheats like god mode can be turned off, but in SR3 you couldn't turn off being immune so you could have challenge back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
Lotish posted:Generally don't like when I have to choose not to break the game. It should encourage me to go nuts within the limits. No, there is no unbuying and it's pretty much impossible not to break the game. The basic premise is that you are breaking the rules of the simulation and it sticks to that for good or ill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
It's the little things that have me excited about the power. like the fact that the super sprint creates a shockwave around you when it's powered up where you start pulling light poles out of the ground as you run by it. I can't wait to run from one end of the city to the other.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 04:01 |
|
|
Not trying to excuse the game, but pretty sure in SR2 you can do the exact same thing. The only difference was that you had to beat side missions in order to unlock the ability/bonus. I mean I don't see a problem avoiding thigns that break the game. It provides another way to play the game. poo poo I'm playing SR3 on hard mode with no bonus. Yeah it's a bitch but it's fun. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:49
|
|