SRV Ideas thread.

[Kojenk]

Personally, I think Saints Row V should not be about aliens, simulations and time travel. Let's move on to something else.

what a lot of us are trying to say is,

create an excuse to bring earth back and have the saints go back to their roots on it.

 

[Haganu]

I don't know for certain, but hasn't it been stated long ago that if they were going to make a 5th Saints Row game, that they would take a step out of the current universe as it is? (**As in resetting everything, new characters, new story, new approach of the Saints. AKA a clear start of our lovely gang)

 

[rastaman289]

I don't know for certain, but hasn't it been stated long ago that if they were going to make a 5th Saints Row game, that they would take a step out of the current universe as it is? (**As in resetting everything, new characters, new story, new approach of the Saints. AKA a clear start of our lovely gang)

Like one of the SRGOOH ending ?

 

[srnewbie]

60. I don't know if i've already said this before but a more challenging normal & up difficulty settings.
I hate today's games where normal feels like easy/casual difficulty.
I've seen gamers day 1 open the box of SaintsRowThe3rd & SaintsRowIV & before anything turn the difficulty setting to hardcore.

And things like this: "I'm guessing you want the easier gameplay to where 4 hours in you're pretty much invincible. SR is garbage now."

The was actually said by a moderator on another forum commenting about how easy SaintsRowThe3rd & SaintsRowIV is.

So yea increased difficulty would be nice.

SR4 with all the superpowers is easy even on Hardcore.

SR3 on Hardcore? I guess they just got the challenge right there.

I mean, seriously, if these people assigned the invincibility upgrades (no damage from bullets, fire, etc.) early in the game then call the rest of the game as easy, then that's BS.

 

[srnewbie]

@srnewbie

But yet there's those that say both SaintsRowThe3rd & SaintsRowIV is easy on hardcore before fully upgrading.

I honestly don't know what they expect in 'hard', tbh.

To me, it's very well balanced, especially SR3. SR3 survival can do a serious damage in Hardcore when you do it alone.

Some people, like in Borderlands community, for example, prefer to have cheap difficulty such as fighting buffed enemies that kill you within a few hits and yet the enemies are bullet sponge - and pretty much you have to use the same element over and over again to kill them or otherwise you have no chance.

They seem like it when they get killed over and over again in one shot. They enjoy cheap difficulty that's becoming a chore. While I play game for the enjoyment of various approach in overcoming challenges.

 

[rastaman289]

I honestly don't know what they expect in 'hard', tbh.

To me, it's very well balanced, especially SR3. SR3 survival can do a serious damage in Hardcore when you do it alone.

Some people, like in Borderlands community, for example, prefer to have cheap difficulty such as fighting buffed enemies that kill you within a few hits and yet the enemies are bullet sponge - and pretty much you have to use the same element over and over again to kill them or otherwise you have no chance.

They seem like it when they get killed over and over again in one shot. They enjoy cheap difficulty that's becoming a chore. While I play game for the enjoyment of various approach in overcoming challenges.

Yeah but in Borderlands, the game become harder as the number of player grows . And why not do that in SRV Multiplayer ?

 

[rastaman289]

I hope they never add multiplayer again.
The single player campaign should be what maintains the replay value, not the dependency on other players.
Co-op or 4players is enough i think.

Yeah but after doing all you can do in the game in single player, the multiplayer is here to give a second life to the game . If there's just single player, what you do after you finished the game entirely ?

 

[srnewbie]

True. Believe it or not, online co-op, even just 2 players actually can extend game's life. That's pretty much one reason why Borderlands can live long.

Replayable mission is good idea, but not in Borderlands way only. There should be an option to replay a mission from list and a New Game+.

Anyway, the reason i stick with SR3 more compared to SR4 is because of the random survival call. And I think that's what make SR3 stands out to me and has replay value.

IMO, SR4 is like old Gta with replayable side missions. However, if the gameonly have replayable missions, it will become GTAIV and GTAV in the end. And yet, if the game is too much rotating around story co-op and new game+, it'll be boring as fuck like Borderlands, because you have to witness the same story every-goddamn-time just to level up and get better gears.

So yeah, why not smash all the feature together, but don't make it a 'must' to do it. Just like the difficulty setting so far. The game don't care with what difficulty you want to do stuff and unlock crap, all it has to do is to scale the difficulty according to your wish.

 

[rastaman289]

@rastaman289
Free roaming.
That's why there's still an enemy threat.
As in SaintsRowIV you still have alien threats
As in SaintsRowThe3rd you have the random emergency calls.
In both you have player invasion
Co-op replayable activities
Co-op allowing friendly fire

Multiplayer is nice but unfortunately that's become a selling point for many strong single player games such as this & to me multiplayer makes single player pointless.
Why put in the effort on single player when so many rather play multiplayer.

Ask around, what gets more replay in GTAV
Single or multi

DeadSpace2 added multiplayer & it nearly killed single player to me.
DeadSpace2 multiplayer took away the element of surprise
Allowed weapon training
Strategy building
Familiarity with character movement.
DeadSpace2's multiplayer took away alot of single player campaign's challenge.

Volition puts alot of effort into characters, stories, etc.
Single player should get all the replay value not multiplayer where gamers could spend time.

It's because players like to play multiplayer, they like to play with someone and not themselves . Sure, some players prefer the singleplayer but almost all player prefer to play multiplayer just because it's better to have some fun with someone when playing with him than trying to have fun alone after the game is totally finished and getting bored 30 minutes after you started playing .

 

[3bertrand1993]

It's because players like to play multiplayer, they like to play with someone and not themselves . Sure, some players prefer the singleplayer but almost all player prefer to play multiplayer just because it's better to have some fun with someone when playing with him than trying to have fun alone after the game is totally finished and getting bored 30 minutes after you started playing .

While multiplayer can work for some games it doesn't always work for others. For example while GTAO or COD's online mode are at least decent some games such as Diablo 3 and Simcity 2013 were buggy, unstable catastrophes. Another thing to take note is that servers aren't always secure and they don't last forever. For example the "Lizard Squad" Fiasco that happened a few months ago. As for the topic of how long the servers will last, well in Armored Core 5 there were several missions that can only be done through the games online mode. However the servers have long since been put down and the missions themselves are now locked out.