User Avatar Image

Saints Row: The Third. What Sam & Max should be?

posted by Merlynn on - last edited - Viewed by 948 users

If you've played Saints Row 3,and I know *I* have,you might have noticed some things. Like how cartoonish the violence can be,how nonsensical the story is sometimes,and how,with a little imagination,the whole thing can be turned into something altogether funnier.

Imagine,if you will,Sam & Max in a sandbox style city. They have the DeSoto to drive around in. They can go anywhere in the city they want to. Now imagine instead of a "weapon wheel",you have a "box o' stuff". Imagine going to a crime scene,going into "investigation mode" and looking over stuff in a point and click style hunt for clues. Imagine Max doing a take down on a suspect,cuffing him,and reading him his rights as best as Sam & Max can.

Sam: You have the right to remain silent.
Max: After we break your toes,we'll see if you have the *ability* to remain silent.

Oh,several things about game play would have to be reworked,yes,but the over the top game play style and the potential for wackiness is there. What do you guys think?

44 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • ^You know responding to someone elses criticism doesn't involve calling them an idiot . Instead of saying the same thing in all your responces by rehapping your suggestion that was established in your first post you could adress some other posters arguments instead of just poncing on one detail and making out that the opinion is pointless by only deconstructing one part of their argument.

    Edit: Sorry GuruGuru214 I didin't mean you.

  • Heh, no worries. Guess we were thinking along the same lines.

  • Ok,let me sum it up for you.

    Me: We should take an open world game like Saints Row 3 and make an open world Sam and Max game. We'd change it so it's all cartoon violence and wacky,zany police style fun,but I think SR3 might be a good place to start learning basic game play mechanics for it.

    Some idiot: But Saints Row 3 is all violence and people dying and icky and mean! (hence why I mentioned making changes to the game,like going to cartoon violence instead of realistic violence) And Sam and Max wouldn't do criminal things like run drugs and murder hookers! How could you even suggest this!?! (Which is where the "wacky,zany POLICE style fun" thing comes in as we'd obviously change these things so it fits Sam and Max's style)

    Me: RAGE!!!!

    Now,if you'd paid attention,you'd realize all the "points" the other person brought up HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED IN MY PREVIOUS STATEMENT!!! Ergo,I have to repeat myself because someone didn't get it the first time. And I can only do that so many times before it just seems like they're just being trolls. It's like that old saying. You can lead a fool to knowledge but you can't make him think.

    And when I'm shown such basic disrespect,you know,not reading my posts,not bothering to understand what I'm saying,and basically bringing up problems that have already been resolved,it bothers me. It says "I don't care what you say,I'm against it cause I'm just going to assume I understand based on a very general idea of what you said". And you want me to treat such people with respect? When they don't even have the common courtesy of actually reading my posts before spouting off their nonsense? When they insult my intelligence so blatantly when they themselves lack even the most basic understanding of what I'm talking about? I flat out refuse. And up yours for telling me to do so.

    If this were a spoken discussion,I wouldn't mind repeating myself so much. As it's all written there,where everyone can see the whole thing,the only excuse is they simply couldn't be bothered. And if you can't be bothered to properly join a discussion,then keep your uninformed opinion to yourself.

    So,yeah,learn2read,noob.

  • You're being awfully rude, and that's just going to make people less inclined to agree with you. The reason some people may not pick up on your "responses" to their statements is because you go off on rants like this that can easily lose the point you're trying to make in your frustration.

    Trust me, I know all about getting frustrated and totally missing the point I was trying to address.

  • If you can't figure out a paragraph,then you shouldn't be responding to this thread. Frankly,at this point,you'd have to prove to me you're not a troll. You want respect,yet you give none. You want polite conversation,yet you're going over the same ground that's already been covered. I've explained this topic exhaustively and you still don't get the simple concept of "take Saints Row 3 and making the changes needed to make it a Sam and Max game".

    Polite has run out. Learn to read and we'll talk.

  • You know, the whole notion of "you're going over the same ground" that you're accusing us of is the same thing you've been doing yourself.

    You take a game that is absolutely nothing like Sam & Max and suggest that there should be a S&M game like that - regardless of any other circumstances - is enough to cause debate. I think at this point you just don't like that people disagree with you, and hey, I know that feeling too.

    But hey, if you want someone to attempt to defend your opinion let's go with Metroid Prime. It's a first person Metroid game that feels a lot like a shooter and is totally unlike anything Metroid had done before. So many people were against it or on the fence, but when it came out many were pleasantly surprised how well it worked.

    I don't think it actually captured the feel of the series, but that's cause I'm not a fan of the genre it went towards. But that doesn't mean a Sam & Max game in an open world where you can get into a lot of mischief wouldn't work or be a bad idea. I simply think that using Saints Row 3 as the premise for the concept you're trying to push was not the best example to use.

    You could've simply said "Sam & Max should have a sandbox game where you go around solving cases or causing general mayhem and chaos" might've been better. I mean, I think most of us know what a sandbox game is, it's just that unfortunately most sandbox games are either terribly violent or western RPGs.

    EDIT: Also you're only proving their points by using terms like "idiot", "rage", accusing people of trolling cause they don't agree with you, and using all caps. I think a fair number of people wouldn't have been blamed for thinking YOU were the troll. And considering I've been a member here 2 years more than you, accusing me of being a troll is a pretty shallow argument. It's only digging you in deeper.

  • Here is a critisisim you haven't adressed:
    [quote=lombre]This is the part of this idea I really have a problem with. See, if you notice in most open-world "solve this problem how ever you want" games, you've got a character that's basically designed to be molded into whatever you want him to be. That way, no matter how you want to play the game, it doesn't seem out of character, since your play style is the main thing defining the character. Want to shoot that guy? Go for it! Decided to spare him? No problem.[/quote]

    No one has called you and idiot, you are getting way caught up with souch a trivial matter about something that is unlikely to happen.

  • I remember that, I thought the comment was quite appropriate considering that in an adventure game, particularly Sam & Max, your actions can and will be limited by things the characters will and won't do.

    "I can't shoot Max, he's my little buddy! ..I think."
    "I just can't shoot someone.. unless they really want me to."

  • It's called an imagination. You have to have one in order to understand this. SR3 is simply the best example of the kind of wackiness one can accomplish with a sandbox game. I'm saying you just need to take it a little further to get it to where it's Sam and Max levels of wackiness. But when you consider the stories they tell and the horrible things they do to people and how often they will use violence and firearms to achieve their goals,one begins to realize the only reason they don't "just shoot people" is because then you wouldn't need to solve the puzzle.

    If they could have,they'd have shot Jurgen. They shot at the Soda Poppers without being aware they *could* dodge the bullet. And they have gone on killing sprees before. I remember one comic where they were basically wading through dead storm troopers in a Star Wars crossover. And I've already gone over how you can substitute cartoon violence for real violence. Hence,non-issue. You can keep beating that horse,but it's not gonna get any more dead.

    But let me tell you a story. I was playing SR3 when I found out there was a car surfing mini-game. You just jump on top of one of the cars rolling around and you start the game. And while I was doing this,it occurred to me that Sam and Max car surf all the time. And the more I thought about it,the more it clicked. Most sandbox games star a main character who's in a morel/legal grey area,much like Sam and Max. Most sandbox games have the player doing wild stunts and getting into odd situations,just like Sam and Max. And the one thing most sandbox games don't do is let you play the good guys. So it seems to me with so much in common,yet certain key differences,if done right,Sam and Max would make a great sandbox game with enough fresh material to make it stand out.

    But I don't expect you to even read that,let alone understand it.

  • User Avatar Image
    divisionten Moderator

    Merylnn- personal attacks are NOT tolerated. Discussion is fine, but please refrain from insulting your fellow forum members. Not everyone will agree with you, and that's what makes a discussion. Continuing to be rude to other members (anybody in this thread) will result in an infraction, followed by a two-week ban.

    Thank you.

Add Comment