PS3 News: THQ: A "Wilder' Saints Row Is Already In The Pipeline - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

THQ: A "Wilder' Saints Row Is Already In The Pipeline

You can't possibly do anything wilder. There's just no chance. No way, no how.

But we're sure Volition will try. In a G4 interview with THQ boss Danny Bilson confirmed that Saints Row 4 will definitely become a reality, and fans can expect the next level in over-the-top insanity.

Said Bilson:

"I already know what Saint's Row 4 is about, and it is wilder than this one, It's a good example of how you take what you have and you say, 'What can happen in the next?'"

I've got Saints Row: The Third here and it's difficult to imagine something that shocks and titillates at a higher level...wait, "higher level" sort of implies some sort of intense shine, polish, and progressive production styles. That's not what Saints Row is about, but you get my meaning.

At any rate, THQ could really use a massive franchise like Saints Row; if it can really take off and become a huge, guaranteed multi-million seller, the publisher should be in a much better position. Other titles and franchises haven't done well, as most of you know.

Tags: saints row 4, saints row the third, thq, volition

11/8/2011 8:56:57 PM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

New Comment System

Legacy Comment System (19 posts)

Tuesday, November 08, 2011 @ 11:31:24 PM

Well, so much for getting Saints Row the Third. Am gonna just occupy myself with all the other great games from the last 2 months and the beginning of next year until Saints Row 4 comes out.

Guess what Volition! You just lost a sale with that little statement. Will try out Saints Row the Third when it's in the $30 bargain bin halfway through next year.

What a shame. Was looking forward to it, but I'm trying to be smarter with how I spend my money, so why buy The Third when Saints Row 4 will likely be out by 2013? AND if Saints Row 4 will be bigger and better and "wilder" than SR3!!

Last edited by Dancemachine55 on 11/8/2011 11:31:49 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Tuesday, November 08, 2011 @ 11:54:48 PM

I don't understand your logic. We all knew there would be an Uncharted3 upon the release of Uncharted2. Knowledge of a future addition to a series should not stop you from enjoying the present game in the series.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 1:02:41 AM

Not really, Alienange. I mean, we may all have supposed it, but ND and Sony did not state outright that we WILL be doing Uncharted 3 until a year after the release of 2. Not only is it different there, but Uncharted has a focus purely on creating a unique story, while Saint's Row is more about how over the top it can be. Saying what Bilson has said here only makes it seem as though Volition did not expend their greatest effort in this attempt and thus will be trying again.

A wildly different scenario from UC and AC. More akin to the same thing happening for CoD, Fallout, GT... games that are more about the gameplay experience than the narrative one. Just sayin'

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 4:15:40 AM

You hit the nail on the head there Lawless.

Basically, my excitement towards Saints Row the Third was killed when they announced a sequel in the works well before the new game was even out!!

Since story hasn't been central to Saints Row games, I feel like waiting for Saints Row 4 will be more rewarding in the future than buying Saints Row the Third, barely playing it while I'm busy finishing other games or picking up other ones over the holidays, trading it unfinished towards Saints 4 and losing out on about 50 or 60 bucks.

I'd rather be patient, save my money and wait for Saints Row 4. Don't get me wrong, Saints Row The Third looks like stupid amounts of fun, but this comment kinda killed a D1P mentality for me.

Now it's just worthy of a pickup if I have the time and money for it, rather than MAKING time to play it. Sequel announcements tend to do that.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 4:27:28 AM

I understand how you think, I think it is weird to shift focus like this, right before release day. Strange PR move.

But isn't this exactly what Ubisoft did too now, by announcing the release of the next Assassins Creed for 2012 already? I can guarantee you that this game too will be more polished and in several ways "better" than the upcoming release... In every successful franchise the work on the next tile begins before the current release is finished.

Also, if sr4 is due to release in 2013, that's like two YEARS ahead!

Last edited by Beamboom on 11/9/2011 4:29:24 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 5:10:19 AM

I do like that argument Beam, but it isn't exactly the same. Why? Because Assassin's Creed does have a strong story focus and Revelations promises to be the link between the conclusion of Brotherhood and the beginning of ACIII, *POTENTIAL SPOILERS* which is almost certain to finally have Desmond as the primary protagonist, which would be impossible at the current point without a plot hole or some deus ex machina.

Yes, ACIII should indeed be a better game in its entirety, but we don't know what it may change, whereas we now know that SR4 will aim to better complete the vision of Volition... I'd say it's more akin to Activision today confirming that there is a CoD set for calendar year 2012 than Ubisoft and AC because CoD really is focussed on the MP being the biggest and best...

Admittedly, it's a small difference, perhaps no more than nitpicking, but it's still there.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 8:48:01 AM

I'll let you in on a secret: I've never completed an AC game so far. So to me every title is like starting a new story... lol

Last edited by Beamboom on 11/9/2011 8:48:13 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 10:40:06 AM

That's kinda dumb, I mean yeah you can spend your money however you want but we all knew there would be a Saint's Row 4 that tried to top 3 before he even said this.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 1:04:16 PM

Not really World. We assumed it sure, but we didn't *know* it.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 6:49:47 PM

Why did you refer to me as Alienange? I'm not that Canadian a-hole.

You keep bringing up that we assume we don't know which evidently is the breaking point as far as getting a current game over waiting for a future product. Come on, it only takes a little common sense to KNOW that the next game in a series should "1up" the previous game.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Thursday, November 10, 2011 @ 12:54:42 AM

Woops. Not sure how I made that mistake... Dreadfully sorry. I blame the veggie-alien avatar. Saw that mixed the names up... I dunno.

First off, yes, a new entry should top an older one, no doubt. And I'm not saying that knowing that a new game is in the works means that there is no point in buying the just released or soon-to-be released entry, as I tried to make clear in referring to ACIII. It depends as much on the focus of the game and how desperately you feel that you want/need it. With SR3 being all about the gameplay and the OTT nature, with it being announced that they intend to go beyond it with the apparently confirmed next iteration, it makes me feel as though SR3 is somewhat superfluous. The series has no strong narrative thread to tie all of the entries together and most of what it offers will be refined and expanded upon for the next entry. The only thing that may truly change is the setting.

Whereas, using AC as an example, Ubisoft have wrapped up the stories of Altair and Ezio. This means that they have to move on to either a new ancestor and timeframe, or Desmond in the modern day. That creates changes to the setting and should have an effect on the gameplay and possibly the game design as a whole. Not only that, but Revelations seems to be a vital stepping stone in an ongoing narrative thread that plays a huge role in the identity of the series.

Uncharted 3 is different again. The story isn't ongoing, aside from a few cues here and there, but each is self-contained and very strong, making it worthwhile to pick up all of them, despite the similarities to the gameplay. Beyond that, the gameplay has been refined and altered with each entry, though I cannot honestly say whether I would have picked up UC3 had I known that 4 was on the way... More likely I would have waited for it to hit bargain pricing levels and picked it up shortly before the release of 4 so that I know what transpired in 3.

It depends on the style of the game, I suppose is all I'm saying though others are free to disagree completely.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 2:42:03 AM

really looking forward to this.
its hard to imagine what they could add to this, i mean saints row 3 has it all!
eh, whatever, if its crazier then some of the stuff i saw at the expo all i can say is bring it on!
i just hope we get a R18 rating by then.........

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 2:48:50 AM

Hear the latest on it? Apparently they're claiming that the R18+ is simply going to replace MA15+ with the same high level content remaining banned because video games are potentially a more harmful form of media than film due to the interactivity...

Geez it annoys me.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 4:28:04 AM

What is a bigger shame is that the one or two cases where psychopaths have claimed video games as the reason for their violence have to ruin it for the millions of others worldwide who enjoy playing them.

Apparently, the psychopaths who go on violent killing sprees aren't to blame for what they do. Video games are to blame!!! OH NO!!! We have to get rid of GTA and COD and MK and L4D, and Saints Row, or else the 0.0001% of the people who play them might kill someone or commit public indecency or start swearing at old ladies!!!
Forget the news, forget TV shows, comic books or novels that explain how to do these criminal acts, IT'S THE VIDEO GAMES!!!

I am so sick of hearing politicians argue about this. Video games are no longer a children's pastime!! They are now an entertaining alternative to film!!

Their aim is to prevent children from accessing or purchasing adult material!! Instead of blaming the video game for being violent, blame the parent for buying the game not knowing what it contains!!!

It's not the video game's fault that Little Timmy is traumetised by swearing and gushing blood. The rating on the cover is there for a reason!! Why the hell don't parents adhere to it?!?!? Most video game stores do!!! You HAVE to be over 15 to get an MA15+ game, and the staff actually check ID!! It's illegal not to!!!

Sorry, but this whole argument about interactivity and adult content affecting young minds is complete and utter rubbish when the content material isn't aimed at young minds in the first place!!

Australia rocks, but it really sucks to be a gamer in this country. Thankfully, people like Brendon O'Connor are turning things around and actually LISTEN to the gaming public.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 5:26:15 AM

That's pretty much my thoughts exactly Dance. Unfortunately, real parenting is becoming a thing of the past as 'parents' consider television and video games to be a virtual babysitter. What I find supremely annoying is when a child, four years old is out imitating Ben Ten. For one, it does show the impressionableness of the young mind, which obviously may lead to them adopting more violent tendencies if exposed to more violent media, but that's not it. No, what I really dislike is when a parent tries to defend that imitation by saying that it is imagination, or creativity. It isn't, at all. I suppose that's off-topic.

But yeah, if parents would take a little responsibility and allow their children access to media more suitable to their age bracket, rather than passing them on to whatever is on telly, I think we'd need a lot less of this nanny state bollocks that seems to be taking over. Seriously, they should just stop thinking about the potential ramifications on those people that are already delusional because it is a tiny, tiny portion of the population and instead just allow grown-ups to make grown up decisions. Ah well...

EDIT: Just remembered something I read in the paper over the weekend about The Human Centipede 2. It's the same thing really. I haven't seen the film, don't intend to, but it is reported to push every boundary of decency. It is shock for shock's sake, yet it was allowed into this country, to be shown in a limited release, completely uncensored, while 32 cuts were required for it to be allowed to screen in the UK.

Now... why is something as utterly disturbing as that is reported to be allowed into the country, yet MK is not? It's a double standard based on neophobia and the buffoons in government just need to get the hell over it. It annoys me almost as much as the Coalition/media smear campaign against the carbon tax. Ugh... Don't let me start.

Last edited by Lawless SXE on 11/9/2011 5:34:04 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 8:34:59 AM

no,no they are replacing the MA rating but the way it is now is that anything considered above high impact is banned.
but with a R18 rating higher then that will be allowed, basically only games with extreme realistic violence, prostitution, and things like that will be banned.
the way there setting it up we should get pretty much everything no problems.
i had to laugh though when they proposed that only games thought to be rated R should be submitted for ratings, everything else should be rated by the publisher.
no, sorry that is the worst idea i have ever heard!

all they need to do is treat this like they do R18 for movies.
which im sure they will, pretty much everything will get in but will be restricted to 18 and up like it should of been in the beginning!
AUs finally catching up in the ratings department, now lets hope they can hurry up and catch up in the internet availability department!
drives me freaking insane my ex boss is getting unlimited ADSL2+ at triple the speed im getting and he pays HALF what i do!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 1:11:27 PM

The idea of having the publisher rate the games is quite laughable. It is a government regulated industry, and should remain that way for ALL classification levels, just as it does for film.

As for the R18 rating, by the looks of things, I must have misread, but you aren't strictly right.

“Due to the interactive nature of computer games and the active repetitive involvement of the participant, as a general rule, computer games may have a higher impact than similarly themed depictions of the classifiable elements in film, and therefore greater potential for harm or detriment, particularly to minors,” the Guidelines state.

It goes on to say that interactivity may increase the impact of some content. “For example, impact may be higher where interactivity enables action such as inflicting realistically depicted injuries, death or post-mortem damage, attacking civilians or engaging in sexual activity.”

The Guidelines define R18 games as legally restricted to adults with classifiable elements including violence, implied sexual violence, realistically simulated sexual activity, bad language, permitted drug use, as long as the use of drugs does not lead to rewards in the game and nudity.

Eh, it's still loose.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 10:42:36 AM

I know SR isn't about graphics or realism but it would be great to see the insanity approach the graphical fidelity of GTA. It would only make it more insane. Can't wait for this game, not sure when I'll actually get it though, that might be up to THQ. Skyrim will own my ass for a while.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Wednesday, November 09, 2011 @ 2:26:49 PM

I'm with you on that. Saints Row reaching the graphical intensity of GTA while maintaining it's surreal scenarios would be amazing.

Also, prepping for Skyrim, I've been on an Oblivion rampage. Hopefully, Skyrim has a hint of Shivering Isles on it's own.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

How often do you visit the site?
Once a day
Several times a day
Every few days
Once a week
This is my first visit
I've never been here, even now I am not here

Previous Poll Results