Zero Punctuation: Saints Row 4

[Megacherv]

Wait, hang on a minute, that 'Snorting drugs and then choking on their own hip bones' line...is that a subtle Brass Eye reference?

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

I've never played a Saints Row game, but I might be willing to give this one a try once it comes down in price.

Be warned, the game is a love letter to fans and the franchise as a whole. There is a lot of content referencing the first 3 games. I'd watch all the cutscenes of the first game on Youtube (or a LP if you have the time), play the second game, and watch a LP of the third on Youtube. Or jut watch LPs/the cutscenes of all the games. You do lose a bit from just the cutscenes, though.

So I should play through at least one of the other games first then?

I'd highly recommend it.

 

[AJey]

I'm glad Saints Row 4 exists as a game. It proved that fun does not make a game good and that people want more than stupid, mindless killy-stompy-bang-bang game.

Proved that to who?

You?

I could counter that Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs proved that people want more than a good story in their games, and that would prove exactly as much (possibly more, because people are actually QUITE upset about the new Amnesia, while less than half are upset about the new Saints Row).

For starters to me, yes. But there are people who share that opinion. Here's the thing, I finished that game and i enjoyed it (to the point). But I would never call it good. Lets look at it objectively.

Story - simple, serviceable story without much complexity or meaning as a whole. It just acted as glue for other elements.
Characters - one-dimensional. They have their little quirk or feature that they play at, that's it. No development or arcs. Just chess pieces for main character to play with and get upgrades from.
Mechanics - it is a game built around gimmicks. Superpowers, odd weapons, strange vehicles - all are fun for 10-20 minutes, as a joke, for a laugh. But then it gets old very quickly and you start looking for a best hings to deal with any particular situation. You use superpowers to move around, or kill enemies efficiently, or use the best weapons. They even built all the challenges around those gimmicks to force players to use them more often. That's not very smart design. Gimmicks wear off very quickly.
Minigames - minigames that for some reason were made to progress the game, never feel fun, or challenging, or in any way plot related. "Complete this or that and you will destabilize the simulation" - sounds like a silly excuse than an actual plot point. Besides, you can do all the jumping, shooting and exploding outside those minigames. They seem out of place.
Series - SR4 made the established world obsolete. Sprinting is faster than driving, powers and moves are better than any weapon, gang members are simple unnecessary, most upgrades (character and weapons) are useless. It's like they were not even making Saint Row game, but a parody or an expansion at best.

Game doenst offer many interesting concepts to play with, or interesting characters, or amazing story. It's just silly, mindless, pew-pew fun. There's nothing bad with that, but that alone cannot make a game good.

 

[AJey]

I'm glad Saints Row 4 exists as a game. It proved that fun does not make a game good and that people want more than stupid, mindless killy-stompy-bang-bang game.

I disagree, if anything, games Saints Row 4 prove that we need more games that don't take themselves too seriously. After playing Bioshock: Infinite, The Last of Us, Tomb Raider, then Far Cry 3 all in succession, I needed a game like Saints Row 4. Gaming today tries waaaaaay too hard to be serious, dark, and/or gritty, and while none of that is necessarily bad, having the occasional "mindless killy-stompy-bang-bang" game to keep some variety in this saturated industry is needed.

You dont understand. I am not against it. I played it, finished it, enjoyed it. I just dont feel the element of fun alone is enough to make a game good. Relaxing, even therapeutic, yes. But not necessarily good.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

I liked how SR4 was all over the place. It created a delightful variance of pacing.

The writing was pretty good. I liked hearing homies interact, too.

It doesn't hurt that there's 2 of my favorite wrestlers in the game.

The referrences in general really hit home with me, though 'm old enouigh to catch most of'em. Especially an infamous fight scene towards the end.

The Sound Track had many many many songs that were perfect for the use of super powers. The Touch, and Song 2 easily. Plus FINALLY having the ability to listen to the radio while on foot? Massive bonus.

The weapon selection was surprisingly big. A glowing blue penetrator? Awesome!

I really appreciated that they referrenced SR 1, 2, and 3. I never played 1.
4 is definitely one of the best entries, 2 being up there.

The game's pretty dern nice, really. My only complaint is the same complaint I have for a lot of sandboxes. Story's over!... what now?

And now that the saints are over, more or less, 'm kinda sad. 'll miss flying Purple, black, and Gold. I was never a huge fan of purple, black and silver.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I've never played a Saints Row game, but I might be willing to give this one a try once it comes down in price.

Be warned, the game is a love letter to fans and the franchise as a whole. There is a lot of content referencing the first 3 games. I'd watch all the cutscenes of the first game on Youtube (or a LP if you have the time), play the second game, and watch a LP of the third on Youtube. Or jut watch LPs/the cutscenes of all the games. You do lose a bit from just the cutscenes, though.

So I should play through at least one of the other games first then?

I'd highly recommend it.

Ok then, I'll have to see if I can find them.

 

[lacktheknack]

I'm glad Saints Row 4 exists as a game. It proved that fun does not make a game good and that people want more than stupid, mindless killy-stompy-bang-bang game.

Proved that to who?

You?

I could counter that Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs proved that people want more than a good story in their games, and that would prove exactly as much (possibly more, because people are actually QUITE upset about the new Amnesia, while less than half are upset about the new Saints Row).

For starters to me, yes. But there are people who share that opinion. Here's the thing, I finished that game and i enjoyed it (to the point). But I would never call it good. Lets look at it objectively.

Story - simple, serviceable story without much complexity or meaning as a whole. It just acted as glue for other elements.
Characters - one-dimensional. They have their little quirk or feature that they play at, that's it. No development or arcs. Just chess pieces for main character to play with and get upgrades from.
Mechanics - it is a game built around gimmicks. Superpowers, odd weapons, strange vehicles - all are fun for 10-20 minutes, as a joke, for a laugh. But then it gets old very quickly and you start looking for a best hings to deal with any particular situation. You use superpowers to move around, or kill enemies efficiently, or use the best weapons. They even built all the challenges around those gimmicks to force players to use them more often. That's not very smart design. Gimmicks wear off very quickly.
Minigames - minigames that for some reason were made to progress the game, never feel fun, or challenging, or in any way plot related. "Complete this or that and you will destabilize the simulation" - sounds like a silly excuse than an actual plot point. Besides, you can do all the jumping, shooting and exploding outside those minigames. They seem out of place.
Series - SR4 made the established world obsolete. Sprinting is faster than driving, powers and moves are better than any weapon, gang members are simple unnecessary, most upgrades (character and weapons) are useless. It's like they were not even making Saint Row game, but a parody or an expansion at best.

Game doenst offer many interesting concepts to play with, or interesting characters, or amazing story. It's just silly, mindless, pew-pew fun. There's nothing bad with that, but that alone cannot make a game good.

Again... according to you.

Also, I bolded all the parts of your objective overview that are not objective at all.

 

[BushMonstar]

I've never played a Saints Row game, but I might be willing to give this one a try once it comes down in price.

Be warned, the game is a love letter to fans and the franchise as a whole. There is a lot of content referencing the first 3 games. I'd watch all the cutscenes of the first game on Youtube (or a LP if you have the time), play the second game, and watch a LP of the third on Youtube. Or jut watch LPs/the cutscenes of all the games. You do lose a bit from just the cutscenes, though.

So I should play through at least one of the other games first then?

I'd highly recommend it.

Ok then, I'll have to see if I can find them.

If I could make a recommendation, it'd be to play SR2 - not because many consider it the best in the series, but because that's the game that SRIV calls back to the most. There are definitely some big call backs to SR1 and SRTT, but there are even more for SR2, that'll really allow you to appreciate the game/story more.

 

[jetriot]

As someone who played and loved all the Saints Row games I am happy to report that I also loved this one. Kudos to them for not bending over for the 'purists' that want more of the same crap and trying something unique and fun that is all its own.

 

[BernardoOne]

I own SR2 and SR3 and don't like neither all that much (SR2 being the most terrible PC port ever in existence doesn't help).

I respect the games, but I'm surprised how popular is the notion that SR = FUN FUN FUN. Okay, I guess running around with a pink dildo and causing silly mayhem is fun in a way, but I'm a little troubled by it.

I hope not all the developers will follow this path now and we'll continue to get also some serious games with context and story. Which can also be lots of fun.

/quote]
Games today try wayyyyy to hard to be serious, dark and gritty. I welcome some sillyness and I think we need more of that, not less.

 

[AJey]

I'm glad Saints Row 4 exists as a game. It proved that fun does not make a game good and that people want more than stupid, mindless killy-stompy-bang-bang game.

Proved that to who?

You?

I could counter that Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs proved that people want more than a good story in their games, and that would prove exactly as much (possibly more, because people are actually QUITE upset about the new Amnesia, while less than half are upset about the new Saints Row).

For starters to me, yes. But there are people who share that opinion. Here's the thing, I finished that game and i enjoyed it (to the point). But I would never call it good. Lets look at it objectively.

Story - simple, serviceable story without much complexity or meaning as a whole. It just acted as glue for other elements.
Characters - one-dimensional. They have their little quirk or feature that they play at, that's it. No development or arcs. Just chess pieces for main character to play with and get upgrades from.
Mechanics - it is a game built around gimmicks. Superpowers, odd weapons, strange vehicles - all are fun for 10-20 minutes, as a joke, for a laugh. But then it gets old very quickly and you start looking for a best hings to deal with any particular situation. You use superpowers to move around, or kill enemies efficiently, or use the best weapons. They even built all the challenges around those gimmicks to force players to use them more often. That's not very smart design. Gimmicks wear off very quickly.
Minigames - minigames that for some reason were made to progress the game, never feel fun, or challenging, or in any way plot related. "Complete this or that and you will destabilize the simulation" - sounds like a silly excuse than an actual plot point. Besides, you can do all the jumping, shooting and exploding outside those minigames. They seem out of place.
Series - SR4 made the established world obsolete. Sprinting is faster than driving, powers and moves are better than any weapon, gang members are simple unnecessary, most upgrades (character and weapons) are useless. It's like they were not even making Saint Row game, but a parody or an expansion at best.

Game doenst offer many interesting concepts to play with, or interesting characters, or amazing story. It's just silly, mindless, pew-pew fun. There's nothing bad with that, but that alone cannot make a game good.

Again... according to you.

Also, I bolded all the parts of your objective overview that are not objective at all.

So you want to tell me that the gimmick of superpowers retains its value throughout the game? That building challenges around gimmicks is clever design? Or that it was a fully fleshed out game? I'm sorry, but I dont understand your standards at all. What is there in SR4 for you that makes it a good game?

 

[lacktheknack]

I'm glad Saints Row 4 exists as a game. It proved that fun does not make a game good and that people want more than stupid, mindless killy-stompy-bang-bang game.

Proved that to who?

You?

I could counter that Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs proved that people want more than a good story in their games, and that would prove exactly as much (possibly more, because people are actually QUITE upset about the new Amnesia, while less than half are upset about the new Saints Row).

For starters to me, yes. But there are people who share that opinion. Here's the thing, I finished that game and i enjoyed it (to the point). But I would never call it good. Lets look at it objectively.

Story - simple, serviceable story without much complexity or meaning as a whole. It just acted as glue for other elements.
Characters - one-dimensional. They have their little quirk or feature that they play at, that's it. No development or arcs. Just chess pieces for main character to play with and get upgrades from.
Mechanics - it is a game built around gimmicks. Superpowers, odd weapons, strange vehicles - all are fun for 10-20 minutes, as a joke, for a laugh. But then it gets old very quickly and you start looking for a best hings to deal with any particular situation. You use superpowers to move around, or kill enemies efficiently, or use the best weapons. They even built all the challenges around those gimmicks to force players to use them more often. That's not very smart design. Gimmicks wear off very quickly.
Minigames - minigames that for some reason were made to progress the game, never feel fun, or challenging, or in any way plot related. "Complete this or that and you will destabilize the simulation" - sounds like a silly excuse than an actual plot point. Besides, you can do all the jumping, shooting and exploding outside those minigames. They seem out of place.
Series - SR4 made the established world obsolete. Sprinting is faster than driving, powers and moves are better than any weapon, gang members are simple unnecessary, most upgrades (character and weapons) are useless. It's like they were not even making Saint Row game, but a parody or an expansion at best.

Game doenst offer many interesting concepts to play with, or interesting characters, or amazing story. It's just silly, mindless, pew-pew fun. There's nothing bad with that, but that alone cannot make a game good.

Again... according to you.

Also, I bolded all the parts of your objective overview that are not objective at all.

So you want to tell me that the gimmick of superpowers retains its value throughout the game? That building challenges around gimmicks is clever design? Or that it was a fully fleshed out game? I'm sorry, but I dont understand your standards at all. What is there in SR4 for you that makes it a good game?

Well, the fact that it's fun. That's always a plus. Saying "It's not a good game because it's fun and nothing else" is a bizarre, alien standpoint to me.

Gimmicks don't necessarily get boring. Things like Just Cause 2's grapple fist, for instance, never got boring during my 100+ hours of playing. It depends if you really like what the gimmick does. Ergo, "Gimmicks get boring" is not objective.

"Minigames never feel challenging or fun"... I shouldn't have to point out why this doesn't belong in an "objective" overview.

Also, you claim it doesn't feel like a Saints Row game, because you connect games through gameplay and features. I connect games through familiar settings and characters. Saints Row IV could have been a turn based strategy game, and I would still think it felt like Saints Row as long as it stayed in Steelport or Stilwater with the same characters. So again... not objective.

So what makes me think it's a good game?

Well, if we assume it's functional and stable, then two words: Dubstep gun.

If you can't follow my train of logic into why that makes it a good game, then stop trying to "get it". You'll only make your head hurt.

 

[-Dragmire-]

I've never played a Saints Row game, but I might be willing to give this one a try once it comes down in price.

Be warned, the game is a love letter to fans and the franchise as a whole. There is a lot of content referencing the first 3 games. I'd watch all the cutscenes of the first game on Youtube (or a LP if you have the time), play the second game, and watch a LP of the third on Youtube. Or jut watch LPs/the cutscenes of all the games. You do lose a bit from just the cutscenes, though.

So I should play through at least one of the other games first then?

I'd highly recommend it.

Ok then, I'll have to see if I can find them.

If I could make a recommendation, it'd be to play SR2 - not because many consider it the best in the series, but because that's the game that SRIV calls back to the most. There are definitely some big call backs to SR1 and SRTT, but there are even more for SR2, that'll really allow you to appreciate the game/story more.

I'd recommend mentioning the platform to get it on when suggesting SR2. For PC, SR2 does not function properly on newer systems. The biggest issue is the accelerated speed it plays at, they make the control(particularly driving) nearly impossible maneuver. I just played and beat it a couple weeks ago, while it was a very compelling game(my fav even though I played it after 3+4), I had to cheat to win once the missions required precision diving. Some people may not be able to look past the technical faults when playing that game.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

I had a very good time with Saints Row 4, the most fun I've had since finishing Deadpool.

It was a very good sendoff to the "crazy" that was SR3&4

 

[AJey]

I'm glad Saints Row 4 exists as a game. It proved that fun does not make a game good and that people want more than stupid, mindless killy-stompy-bang-bang game.

Proved that to who?

You?

I could counter that Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs proved that people want more than a good story in their games, and that would prove exactly as much (possibly more, because people are actually QUITE upset about the new Amnesia, while less than half are upset about the new Saints Row).

For starters to me, yes. But there are people who share that opinion. Here's the thing, I finished that game and i enjoyed it (to the point). But I would never call it good. Lets look at it objectively.

Story - simple, serviceable story without much complexity or meaning as a whole. It just acted as glue for other elements.
Characters - one-dimensional. They have their little quirk or feature that they play at, that's it. No development or arcs. Just chess pieces for main character to play with and get upgrades from.
Mechanics - it is a game built around gimmicks. Superpowers, odd weapons, strange vehicles - all are fun for 10-20 minutes, as a joke, for a laugh. But then it gets old very quickly and you start looking for a best hings to deal with any particular situation. You use superpowers to move around, or kill enemies efficiently, or use the best weapons. They even built all the challenges around those gimmicks to force players to use them more often. That's not very smart design. Gimmicks wear off very quickly.
Minigames - minigames that for some reason were made to progress the game, never feel fun, or challenging, or in any way plot related. "Complete this or that and you will destabilize the simulation" - sounds like a silly excuse than an actual plot point. Besides, you can do all the jumping, shooting and exploding outside those minigames. They seem out of place.
Series - SR4 made the established world obsolete. Sprinting is faster than driving, powers and moves are better than any weapon, gang members are simple unnecessary, most upgrades (character and weapons) are useless. It's like they were not even making Saint Row game, but a parody or an expansion at best.

Game doenst offer many interesting concepts to play with, or interesting characters, or amazing story. It's just silly, mindless, pew-pew fun. There's nothing bad with that, but that alone cannot make a game good.

Again... according to you.

Also, I bolded all the parts of your objective overview that are not objective at all.

So you want to tell me that the gimmick of superpowers retains its value throughout the game? That building challenges around gimmicks is clever design? Or that it was a fully fleshed out game? I'm sorry, but I dont understand your standards at all. What is there in SR4 for you that makes it a good game?

Well, the fact that it's fun. That's always a plus. Saying "It's not a good game because it's fun and nothing else" is a bizarre, alien standpoint to me.

Gimmicks don't necessarily get boring. Things like Just Cause 2's grapple fist, for instance, never got boring during my 100+ hours of playing. It depends if you really like what the gimmick does. Ergo, "Gimmicks get boring" is not objective.

"Minigames never feel challenging or fun"... I shouldn't have to point out why this doesn't belong in an "objective" overview.

Also, you claim it doesn't feel like a Saints Row game, because you connect games through gameplay and features. I connect games through familiar settings and characters. Saints Row IV could have been a turn based strategy game, and I would still think it felt like Saints Row as long as it stayed in Steelport or Stilwater with the same characters. So again... not objective.

So what makes me think it's a good game?

Well, if we assume it's functional and stable, then two words: Dubstep gun.

If you can't follow my train of logic into why that makes it a good game, then stop trying to "get it". You'll only make your head hurt.

I didn't say it was a bad game because it was fun. I said it was fun, but that alone was not enough to make it good.

You're right. Lets replace word "objective" with "analytical". I agree, gimmicks dont necessarily get boring. If there is the rest of the game to compensate or compliment that gimmick. SR4, however, is a gimmick in its entirety. Powers, weapons, minigames. There is no overarching mechanic or unifying element that makes it whole. It's just a collection of many little things that dont always go well together. You might like it, or enjoy it, but it does not make it good. If there are people who can get satisfied with hours of gliding and sprinting up buildings, then its great, for them. I just dont see how mechanical simplicity is a benefit.

Oh, no. It's not that i connect games through gameplay and features. My take has nothing to do with it. SR established itself as a crime game centered around gangs. It did that in the first, in the second, and even in the third, although with many goofy elements. But then fourth comes along and abandons that concept completely. Gangs and crime world becomes irrelevant they just abandon it, the world that they have established with three games collapses because devs had to write in the aliens, physical world stops making sense within the context of invasion, characters were turned into basic NPCs that give you quests for upgrades (with an exception of Kinzie). You say you connect through setting and characters? Well setting in SR4 is similar in name, nothing else. It's not the Steelport that Saints conquered in SR3. It's just a virtual copy, lifeless and mangled by writing. And the best thing they came up with characters was put some of them through their past experiences. No development, do depth, no conflict or drama. Just bodies with the names you know and voices that you recognize. I have no idea how you can connect with that.

Again, you cant claim it to be good on it being simply fun. That's not how it works. Say you liked it, maybe loved it, but calling it good based on single element is fallacious.

 

[Reise]

I actually really enjoyed SR4.

However, one thing I didn't care for in the Yahtzee review.

You know that boss fight he was gushing all over? He failed to mention that the song playing leading up to it was Stan Bush's The Touch (from 1986 Transformers fame). And it is completely and utterly glorious.

(He also failed to mention that you can actually listen to music without a car, but whatever)

 

[FPLOON]

So I'm wondering, is Yahtzee going to review Rayman Legends? I can think of several criticisms that he'd make for the game, even though I loved it.

I REALLY hope so... His review of Rayman Origins is still one of my favorites... *thinks* Wait a second... When he reviewed Rayman Origins, it was alongside 3D Mario Land Super... So, does that mean he'll have to have a recent Mario game to compare Legends to? I can only see him compare it to New Super Luigi U (or New Luigi U Super), if he's going that particular route...

Boy, talk about a toss-up there... It would be Luigi vs Rayman and Yahtzee has a thing for Luigi more than Mario this round... Either way, I give it two to four weeks before he does Rayman Legends, either alone or alongside a[nother] Mario comparison...

 

[Aquarion]

The Saints Row IV review was neat, but I wish he'd close his quote marks at the end.

 

[Psychobabble]

I actually really enjoyed SR4.

However, one thing I didn't care for in the Yahtzee review.

You know that boss fight he was gushing all over? He failed to mention that the song playing leading up to it was Stan Bush's The Touch (from 1986 Transformers fame). And it is completely and utterly glorious.

(He also failed to mention that you can actually listen to music without a car, but whatever)

He also barely touched on how the game panders to all genders. Which from previous reviews here seems to be its biggest selling point. In fact its reason d'etre. That's what the whole episode should have been about. Not boss fights, music, or how wacky and fun the game is. Shame on you Yahtzee.

Oh and my Gran was incensed by your angst against totalitarian government censorship. How on earth are you ever going to be educated on how dangerous things are for you without some member of government employed gestapo around to tell you what you should be thinking?