Wikipedia

Talk:Saints Row 2/Archive 1

< Talk:Saints Row 2
Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Archive 1

boobs

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

someone put in some stuff about boobs that had nothing to do with the game so i deleted this content. if someone wants to put it back go ahead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.207.187 (talk) 16:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Writing

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article looks like it was written by mildly mentally challenged child. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.129.170.155 (talk) 00:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Images for this page

Latest comment: 16 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Hey, does anybody have any valid images for this Wiki? I had uploaded some onto it but some people, who won't be mentioned *cough* cough* *Masem* *cough* decided to delete them all. Apparently they hadn't passed some silly policy on Wikipedia about uploading images or whatever... This Wiki is way too boring, it needs to be spruced up... If you've got an image and know how to come under the Free content policy or whatever it is, don't you think it's about time you uploaded them? The page desperately needs them! Tentimesone (talk) 10:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone

You can upload them, but you need to follow proper procedure for uploading images to WP; this is a mandate from the Wikimedia Foundation in order to provide a free-content encyclopedia. First, images are copyrighted and need an appropriate license tag. Secondly, because they are fair use of copyrighted images, you need a fair use rationale to describe why they are needed. And finally, we are to minimize the use of non-free fair use content, so only 2 or 3 images are really necessary.
Image uploading is very easy if you use the link on the left side of any WP page "Upload File" in the toolbox area; it will prompt you for a fair use rationale and the correct license to use from a drop-down menu. --MASEM 13:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I just uploaded an image to this page. Does it follow your fair-use policy? If not, perhaps you could edit the image instead of deleting it this time? Tentimesone (talk) 01:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone

The copyright license is correct, but the image still lacks a fair-use rationale, such as {{non-free rationale}}. Also, the image does nothing to help the reader understand the article - if anything, the image should be of gameplay, highlighting a new gameplay feature if at all possible. --MASEM 02:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, whatever, but don't be a pain! Just leave it there, and make sure it doesn't lack a fair-use rationale. I have no idea what it is, so if you're so smart, why don't you fix it? Tentimesone (talk) 05:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone

Hey man, as you know, there are now three images on this page, the box art, and the other two images. However, the box art image should be cropped so that you can't see the 'XBOX 360' template at the top. And also, how many more images could I add to this page before it'd be too much? Cuz i really wanna add that one with the SWAT roadblock and stuff, and Ive got some very big versions of all the images and some without IGN or Gamespot logos in the corners. So basically I've got plenty of high quality, decent images to spare and I reckon they should be on this page :). How many do you think I should add before it, as you say, becomes too heavily imaged? Tentimesone (talk) 11:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone

Adding another image may be approaching too many. Non-free images are meant to be added when they significant help increase the player's understanding of the article, and should only be used in minimal numbers. Obviously, the box art needs to stay (but it can be reduced to cut out the 360 header), but right now, the other two images are not terribly help to understanding - they're great decorations but that's all. I know you had a picture at one point of the customization screen; this would be a good picture to add as to explain this new approach. Another picture to show one of the new gameplay features (using bodies as shields, or the like). Just adding cool action shots that may look good doesn't help. As because we don't know how well the game will be received, we need to be careful about what images are added now, as maybe a certain gameplay feature will be really popular and we'll want to have a picture to show that, but exhausting all the pictures now will lead to problems then. --MASEM 13:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Sandbox or Open World

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The designers refer to games that have an open world like GTA as "open world" games while using "sandbox" more often for games that give the players virtual toys to play with and see what happens. The most famous example of a sandbox game is "The Sims" but other examples include Railroad Tycoon, Sim Theme Park, and Sim City. The article that the intro links to also has this information incorrect. However, I do not want to edit this myself because I'm a new user and I'm scared of messing things up. Maybe someone here can fix these pages?-bean23 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bean23tx (talk • contribs) 00:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Both terms describe GTA style games pretty well, in case anyone was wondering. JayKeaton (talk) 02:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Includable information

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I stumbled across the United People of Saints Row interviewing James Tsai in three parts. There is a library of unknown knowledge here, some of which I have been adding, but somebody else should check this out and add some content from it here.

Part 1: http://au.gamespot.com/pages/unions/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=25972806&union_id=2286

Part 2: http://www.gamespot.com/pages/unions/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26106400&union_id=2286

Part 3: http://au.gamespot.com/pages/unions/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26269859&union_id=2286&msg_id=299149943 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.224.178 (talk) 11:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Sons Of Samedi

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

They look more like a jamaican style gang than a carriban style gang SonsOfAnarchy1982 (talk

They are Caribbean. Also, when signing messages in talk pages, use four tidles (~) and then your name. Thanks, Tentimesone (talk) 05:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone

Ultor

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Ultor is a company in Saints row right? its also the main corporation from Volitions other franchise Red Faction. Not much to say but if there was a trivia section it'd fit nicely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snoopdye (talk • contribs) 03:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Throwing People

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey i just saw a trailer for this game and its shows the protagonist throwing sombody into a train so i think you should add that to the list of stuff that you can do, its apart of the Insurance Fraud activity --Big Eazy 22:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)SonsOfAnarchy1982

We can't add every single little thing to the article as it will turn out to be massive. Besides, how do you know it's not just part of the storyline? Unless you can verify you can actually do it yourself then there's little point. Vanguard (talk) 12:42, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Reception

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Ok, I completely removed the 'Reception' section as there's no real need for it at the moment. Since the game hasn't been released yet any 'Reception' is unfinished code. Plus, it said that the game received praise from various game reviewers. There's two problems with this; one is the lack of any cited sources and two is, well, how can you say this? The game hasn't been reviewed by anyone yet and any previews are based on short hands-on or showings by the games developers. When the game is released and there's been some reviews then the 'Reception' section can return. Until then there's just no real point in it being there. Vanguard (talk) 12:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

PC

Latest comment: 15 years ago8 comments6 people in discussion

This game is also coming to the PC. See this link - http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/ProductDetails.aspx?product_id=71022

and also this link for official news - http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=187121

I think the article should include this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.102.180.52 (talk) 17:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Yea but there is no official confirmation that it is coming for pc. Do you have any official sources to backup?.--SkyWalker (talk) 13:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there is official confirmation. I already linked it. "THQ has confirmed that Saint's Row 2 will be coming to British shores on August 29. The sequel, which will be available on PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and PC, has received positive praise." THQ has already confirmed it for PC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.215.185.234 (talk) 21:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Saints Row 2 does not, and I repeat NOT come out on PC. I don't know what you guys think, but it doesn't. So, on IGN it has information pages on SR2 for X360, PS3 and PC, that's just wrong, IGN have got it wrong. Official THQ and Volition interviews have confirmed that SR2 does not come out on PC and never will. OK? Tentimesone (talk) 06:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone

http://www.thq-games.com/uk/game/show/4317/Saints%20Row%202 That looks pretty real to me Free2game365 11:48 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Well looking from so many sources. It seems this is coming for pc. Even THQ page states it coming for pc. Should we add this in main page is the question?. Any answers?. --SkyWalker (talk) 07:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

THQ, when announcing the game, only listed 360 and PS3 versions [1] and no announcements since then have suggested a PC version. Even news today about a two month delay mentioned only 360 and PS3 [2]. I will also point out that the US version of the SR2 product page from THQ is 360/PS3 only. [3].
Basically, if there is a PC version, the proof that it is coming for it is very very weak, and we don't have enough reliability to state that. Myself, I would not be surprised to see such, or maybe down the road as a separate release, but we can't state that information until its more obvious that it is truly the case. --MASEM 13:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I will point out now we can talk a PC version, since THQ has actually stated to the effect there's a PC SKU when asked about it. --MASEM 20:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Where is the information that the PC release is two weeks behind the 360/PS3 releases coming from? Is there a citation for this? Everything I've seen has suggested the three platforms are going to have a simultaneous release 66.47.236.155 (talk) 21:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Special Edition

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It says in the main article there will be a special edition exclusive to New Zeland and Australia does this mean that there is special edition AND a collectors edition in New Zeland and Australia or does it mean New Zeland And Australia will be the only ones with a different edition other than the normal one, because i have reserved a special edition here in the US... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Somebody2D (talk • contribs) 22:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

First 25 Minutes video

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This video shows the character editor (you can wear panties and a bra under your clothes as a male?) and you can actually edit the way your character walks AND what accent he/she talks with, too. JAF1970 (talk) 18:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Local Co-Op

Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion

In the one section of the page it said onine co-op like crackdown, and local. Does that mean that You can play Saints Row 2 Coperatively on the same system. To mean it doesn't seem real, unless it was confirmed by Voilition or THQ I don't think it will happen, I think it will happen over XBL though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcwil477 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I sure hope you can do co op on 1 system.... if not thats BS >:O —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.144.112.197 (talk) 21:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean like in San Andreas, Two players on the one screen? I hope not, that was bloody awkward! But it's better than nothing I suppose. (Bobbo9000 (talk) 00:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC))

Ya i hope that saints row 2 is split screen so you can rome around Stilwater and take different paths or team up an alliance you know. And you change your color because in my opinion the color purple is dumb it sucks you should be able to change your color. But the thing that i am proving is the 2 player it should be split screen unlike San Andreas like that other person was talking about when it is one screen and you have to stay be each other you should be able to split up like take a position that would be awsome. Make it Split Screen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.105.79.65 (talk) 00:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


co-op is only online —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bob993 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

PC release date

Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

I think article needs some source'd information about Saints Row 2's actual PC releace date... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Levangvilava (talk • contribs) 12:30, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

There are no reliable sources which mentions PC release date. It might come on Winter according to Steam. --SkyWalker (talk) 06:22, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
There has been no official release date set yet for the PC version. THQ representatives have made public announcements saying this.[4] [5]MOOOOOPS (talk) 06:54, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes i have been following the news. Iam just wondering who added the false release date for PC?. --SkyWalker (talk) 07:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Do you think the release dates on the page should be removed, or should they be left alone?MOOOOOPS (talk) 07:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the release dates. Unless a reliable source is added no information regarding PC release dates must be added. --SkyWalker (talk) 07:10, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

5 years between Saints 1 and Saints2

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

So if 5 years have past between the two games, does that mean the new game will be set around the 2021 mark? If this is the case, does that mean they'll be running with a slightly futuristic look for the game (I don't mean futuristic like sci fi futuristic) ? What implications will arise from this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbo9000 (talk • contribs) 00:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I read in GameInformer that the player has awaken from a decade-long coma. If my math is correct, a decade is 10 years. Therefore, I believe we should change the plot section a little bit.

i thought that the city progressed 15 years but its not actually set 15 years later 202.76.158.8 (talk) 23:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

TWO years have passed since SR1 and 2.--Guru Larry (talk) 15:27, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Saints Row Church Observation in SR2

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Just an observation, but in Saints Row 2, Ultor had restored the 3rd Street's Saints church and is pride of place infront of their headquarters, but for some reason it's also rotated 90 degrees to the south. (the entrance originally faced West, but now it's South). So did Ultor decide to rotate the church for some reason, or is this a mistake/architectural change on the developers side?--Guru Larry (talk) 15:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I guess a mistake. Mallerd (talk) 19:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Glitches

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Any glitches noticed in the game should be put here. I think this is a useful section since there have been a lot of rumors going around. please delete My statement after the first glitch reference is posted.Spartanaj97 (talk) 21:49, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Unless glitches have notable value (eg a bug that makes the game unplayable if they occur, for example), they are rarely included. --MASEM 22:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. If you use cheats it is very easy to recreate neo from the matrix. Make your self look as much as neo then activate low gravity and milk bones then equip your self with the ronin melee and your set to go. Punch someone and milk bones will take its toll by making them fly away then while they're in the air low gravity will take affect and will stay in the air for a while. Warning; activating most cheats will disable achievements so deactivate them before saving. For a wide variety of cheats for basically every system go to www.cheatcc.com . Sorry for adding this in the glitches section. But that doesnt mean you can take advantage of this.Spartanaj97 (talk) 21:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Article Quality

Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

This article is terrible. 4 quick problems:

1) redundancy - mentioning several times that Johnny Gat is in the game, 2) unsubstantiation - many many claims with no referencing, 3) extravagant listing - even GTA IV doesn't have a list of all the different activities you can partake in. Does a game for which barely any information has been released need this?

Well, it's out now. I've updated the "Side-Play" section and renamed it "Activities & Diversions". As to the comparison to GTAIV, Saints Row 2 pretty handily exceeds the amount of side-play activities that GTAIV offered. Indeed, completing all of the story missions will net only about 50% completion. SteveG (talk) 08:47, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

4) Flattering praise - phrases like "Saint's Row 2 boasts over" sound like they've been cut from a press release.

I tried to cull out all of the crap in an earlier edit (under an anonymous IP), however it was reverted by Tentimesone. Therefore I'll ask whether anyone else thinks this article could do with a clean-up, because obviously there needs to be some sort of consensus before someone (like me!) makes the necessary changes. Electrosaurus (talk) 01:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, have a look now. Better? Tentimesone (talk) 10:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone

Yep, that's a lot better. :) Electrosaurus (talk) 22:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I will, of course, continue adding to the article, and keep in mind those problems you thought the article you had, and avoid resurfacing them. Obviously, people are going to plagiarise (correct spelling?} this article. Just now somebody wrote something about testicles and how they were blown off in the yacht explosion or whatever- I edited it out. Tentimesone (talk) 08:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)Tentimesone

Expand Setting?

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This is an excellent source and could assist in expanding the 'Stilwater' section. VG Editor (talk) 07:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Gameplay section is way too long

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

There's a lot of good information in this article, but there is way too much emphasis on the gameplay; it's about 1/3 to 1/2 of the total article length, and goes into detail that is approaching game-guide type information. Now, because there's a lot of common elements with the first game, the common aspects should be combined (and trimmed) into the Saints Row (series) article, with the gameplay here focusing mostly on the newer features (co-op play, customization, etc.) Remember that we are writing articles for the non-gamer, someone who may never play this game but needs to understand what it is, and thus most of the gameplay stuff will be lost on them. Also remember at the end of the day we need to source the gameplay, and thus if its not in the manual or described in reviews, it shouldn't be there. --MASEM 20:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

It only seems large because the Development and Reception sections are too short. Instead of focusing on trimming down the gameplay section, focus on expanding the aforementioned sections. Gameplay is a big aspect of the game, so you should expect this to be the biggest section. The gameplay section, I have to say, is 100% complete. No additional information needs to be added (maybe a few more sources) and so it won't be getting any bigger than it already is. The Development section, however, contains information about release dates and ratings and absolutely nothing else. That is why the Development section needs expanding. VG Editor (talk) 07:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Compare the gameplay section with most other featured and good VG articles. We are writing articles for the non-gamer, so to get into so much detail about the gameplay is going to be worthless. Some description is needed, and there are unique features of the game that aren't in other games of the genre (namely the Activities system), but the current version is obviously weighed to be appreciated by a player of this game rather than the non-gamer. A development section may not be able to be made really long - there wasn't a lot of information that I saw outside of the delay and various promotional information, so it may not be possible to expand this section more. Also remember we have the series article now, so most of the commonalities with both games should be placed there and only the unique features of the sequel identified here. --MASEM 12:53, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I think that the majority of the Gameplay section is the Respect system sub-section and this is because it happens to list every new activity and diversion in a list format;

  • lists
  • take
  • up
  • unnecessary
  • room

I am more than happy to have the Respect system shortened somehow. VG Editor (talk) 23:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

False Information

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

someone put a lot of stuff that is blatantly false. can someone edit this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.58.193.232 (talk) 20:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Hit the submit button by accident (instead of preview) when I was still writing the article. There should be enough information in it now with references etc. SeanMooney 00:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't sure where else to put this, and I don't know how to make a new section. Anyway, I found a bit of false information. The article says that the police never use spike strips, but I just came across one when I had a 5 star notoriety level. I don't have any proof, so can someone back this up? 24.105.230.36 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC)


I don't know if this was your edit "Pc verison released on 6, january 2009 was poorly done Port. It looks like a last gen game but also it performs horrible on all current PC configurations. highly variable framrates from 5 to 30. Missing sounds from left channel and random freezes plague this port." But I removed it because it was a biased opinionAnto103 (talk) 22:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Controversies - Jack Thompson

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Under the "Controversies", there's a reference to Jack Thompson being a Florida lawyer. He is in fact a disbarred lawyer (his disbarment took effect on September 25, 2008), so currently, no lawyer at all. So I've just edited this statement to reflect the Floridian ruling and to avoid any confusion with his professional status. (121.45.28.1 (talk) 07:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC))

I changed it to note that he was a lawyer at the time. Smurfy 22:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

How should "the protagonist" be referred to as?

Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

The protagonist. Because "the protagonist" has no other name but Boss, how should "the protagonist" be referred to as? He/ she? 60.242.127.62 (talk) 07:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Julius always referred to the "the protagonist" as "Player" ans continues to do so in Saints Row 2.--Guru Larry (talk) 15:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I mean in this article. Like he? She? The protagonist? Boss? 60.242.127.62 (talk) 08:18, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

The protagonist. Mallerd (talk) 19:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

That wouldn't work well. "The protagonist entered the protagonist's car and drove to the protagonist's hideout". Maybe "the protagonist" should be referred to as a male, seeing as "the protagonist" was male in SR1 and is referred to by players as male in SR2. 60.242.127.62 (talk) 21:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


How about Calling him MC?

Main Charecter or My Charecter

"The Main Charecter Entered His/Her Car and Drove off into the sunset" MiyagerMan (talk) 17:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Flashing and Streaking? (Question)

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Though its forum-related, I must ask a question; how do I flash and steak by performing indecent exposure? I can't take off my character's clothes completely. JMBZ-12 (talk) 22:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Semi-Protection

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Due to recent vanaalism, this article needs to be semi-protected.--Unionhawk (talk) 14:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This article badly needs sources. Like in the infobox, theres a claim about Ps3 using 640p, for all we know it could be 1080p. The article should be marked for cleanup and missing citing of sources. 83.108.232.65 (talk) 04:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

True, but instead of complaining about it, you could always help. 121.210.112.118 (talk) 12:40, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

IMPORTANT INFORMATION

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This discussion is NOT a forum. Please limit all discussion to relevant inclusions and sources that can potentially aid the development of the article. Thank you. Gyrferret (talk) 20:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Saints Row 2 is very short

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I rented saints row 2 in 4 days and i was able to complete it on the third day I played.I did not play for hours on end either.One problem I had with this game was the fact that you never get to see julius or you never get to see Troy(in person). I think there will be a saints row 3 and it will answer all these questions I have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ILuvTiffany55 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure you completed all the activities? There's plenty more to do. Troy is an unlockable homie, and Julius is unlocked in an epilouge mission. Clearly you haven't played the bonus mission, either. It can be found here. 60.242.127.62 (talk) 21:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)



chico-brazil i finish gta4 in 2 days —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.31.213.124 (talk) 13:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Assessment as of 2009-05-16

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This is still C-class, borderline B-class however. Here's what's holding you back:

  • Citation needed tags still pepped the text in four places.
  • Promotion section could use better organization: no need to bold each trailer, could be discussed in a paragraph or groups of them.
  • Downloadable content section paragraphs end up too short and too choppy.
  • The Windows version section needs to be fleshed out. Additionally the requirements box is horribly biting into the section below it.
  • Commercial success and Awards are both too small as sections, and could be combined.
  • Areas of the Controversies section is left uncited. For such a subsection of the article this is a necessity.
  • Other areas are also a bit lacking on references. If you make a statement, cite it. It saves headaches, even if the article feels heavy with them at the end. As long as the references are reliable you're home free and nobody will fault you for them.

Hope this helps. If you want more, I'd suggest peer review. Assessments are way too backlogged in their current form for heavily detailed reviews at this time.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 10:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Delete "Characters" sub-section?

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I feel that this is a bit of an unnecessary section too small to stand out on its own. Perhaps delete it? VG Editor (talk) 12:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

neutrality issues

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

The entire time I read that article I thought it was written by the people who made the game. I understand that some people like it more than me but that should have no place here as personal opinion don't belong on wiki. The reviews section does not mention the bad reviews but mentions a bunch of good ones including one by zero punctuation and anyone who watches it probably knows its a comedy show as he bashes GTA 4 in his review the whole time than admits he actually likes the game after giving it a horrible review so that should prove that he does no have the same credibility as a source like EGM or IGM. What about the negative reviews of the game? Are only the positive ones neutral? Or for that matter if your going to take quotes from those reviews why only the good ones? This whole article will likely never be fixed because its so constant throughout even in the combat section. Read it yourself and then read an article on another game becuase the tone of this article is just really biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.40.209.76 (talk) 13:42, 19 January 2009 (UTC) plus where has it been stated that a patch will be released because i don't see that happening. 209.40.209.76 (talk) 13:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

First off, the tone is not biased, not even slightly. Wikipedians like us work tirelessly to ensure that articles are neutral and do not contradict. Just looking at Grand Theft Auto IV's Reception section, it also only mentions those who praised the game in a good way. The fan basis generally disliked GTA IV for its lack of entertainment, however this is not mentioned in the Reception section simply because it doesn't need to. On average, SR2 scored about 85% based upon game aggregator's reviews, so it is fair to say that the general reaction of the game was positive. So, really, the neutrality of this article is fair and there are absolutely no problems in that manner. VG Editor (talk) 12:19, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Then what about the article itself not just the critical reception part, praising the game in some areas. And you have yet to explain the use of a comedic review like yatzee being used when he has also admitted to making a review negative to satisfy fans even if he likes a game making his credibility a little wobbly . BTW GTA 4 was not generally disliked by fans it did pretty well by fans judging by the sales numbers for the lost and damned (i use the DLC because if i said the GTA 4 sales you would just say its because people did not play it first or that people did not know how bad it was) If you work so tirelessly than why do i see stuff like "The open, non-linear environment allows players to explore and choose how they wish to play the game. After the player completes a tutorial mission the entire environment is fully explorable to every detail." Even though the game is not fully explorable to every detail. That is something thats not truthfully said about any game yet and if you think thats not biased what about this "In addition, the game has kept the world-acclaimed 360-degree free-aim weapon firing" world aclaimed? really? oh and how about this "These changes were well received with fans," if you can put in that then your not just using reliable sources since there is no way you can prove that the changes were well recieved or at least no way you can prove that is not some kind of OR since fan reaction cannot be determined with enough certainty for it to be "encyclopedic" "The city of Stilwater itself has become more "alive" and has added layers of depth in it." i thought saints row 2 was enjoyable but this article is just not very neutral and the critical reception of GTA 4 was almost universally good from the major reviewers but Saints row 2 was not so i dont see what you point was mentioning that.I remember when i posted that complaint there was also a part of this article praising the dialog comparing it to that of the dialog in quentin terrintino movies and if that was removed than good but i could not find it and it was a very clear opinion and it does not belong here.174.42.145.253 (talk) 07:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)




"The story blends black comedy and gritty realism to illustrate the vibrant narrative" This is bias, this shouldn't be in an encyclopedia. That is what Wiki is supposed to be.174.42.137.175 (talk) 05:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

PC (reception)

Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I have yet to find anything on reception of the PC version, which seems to mention only the moderately good rating (60-70% range) in the rating box, but delves into nothing more. The ratings conflicts with all the pre-release fluff by the developer on the port's features, and implies the PC platform is not given much weight in the article. I don't consider the reception section sufficiently covered if further information on the PC version's reviews is not provided. - 60.49.110.38 (talk) 17:38, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll get to work on this issue soon-ish. VG Editor (talk) 05:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

You know, if you have a wish to work on it, it's a bad idea to say that you'll do it if you won't for half a year. That's enough of that shit. - 60.50.250.126 (talk) 20:04, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

5 or 15

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Does anyone know why the English version of the site mentions the Saints Row 2 events as 5 year after SR 1 and the Dutch 15 years? Mallerd (talk) 12:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


It actually takes place three years after the first one according to gamepro.com

Someone really needs to clear this up since the first game magazines articles for the game stated 15 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.161.204 (talk) 15:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

It's said in game that it's 5 years. 94.171.91.148 (talk) 17:59, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Advertising

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Has anyone else noticed that when you go around on Saints Row 2, there's advertisements for real-life items? They change every so often. Could anyone explain how that works? 94.171.91.148 (talk) 17:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I remember. It happens every so often, maybe while the player isn't looking at them, or maybe at a certain time everyday. Don't think it's possible to change them with the in game files, however. --Another Type of Zombie talk 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

List of Saints Row 2 Characters

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

WHAT THE HELL?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHO DELETED THE "List of Saints Row 2 Characters" article? That was a stupid idea whoever came up with that idea, you should be smacked upside your head. The King Gemini (talk) 17:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

As with List of Saints Row characters, List of Saints Row 2 characters was deleted after a deletion discussion failed to find any independent reliable sources for the article. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Source discussion

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
  1. [1]
  2. The game was awarded "Game of the Year 2008" by JustPressPlay.com.[2]
  1. ^ "Saint's Row 2: Activities - Gamersyde". Gamersyde. June 5, 2008. Retrieved 2008-06-05.
  2. ^ Moorer, Julian (January 3, 2009). "2008 JustPressPlay Game Awards". JustPressPlay. Retrieved 2009-09-22.

Thoughts on Gamersyde's reliability? (About page) I think it should go. Any other sources to review? I'll add stuff to the list above as I remove it czar ♔ 01:43, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Ripten named SR2 its GOTY, but I don't think the site's reliable czar ♔ 02:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Honestly, my vote's for just dropping all of them. There's plenty more reliable sources available as alternatives. On Gamersyde, though they've been around for at least ten years I don't see enough credibility to the authors. Looks like an indie site to me. CR4ZE (t • c) 07:53, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Overhaul

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Czar and I are currently overhauling this page.

Czar, thanks for making some good headway already. Nice work with the mobile article too. In terms of absent content, the Critical reception section certainly needs some fleshing out. Good start already. For now I'll continue my way through Development and into Marketing and release. A lot of the sources are dead, but luckily it looks like they can be archived. Gameplay could do with some snipping/prose tightening, but I'm happy to look at that too. If you go through the diffs from 2009 I think I had the Plot down to a much better length, so you can use that as a reference point for snipping. Particularly in Gameplay/Marketing, there are too many references supporting claims, some of which being unreliable. We should get the sources down by picking only the reliable ones.

This was an article I contributed heavily to back in the day. I've certainly improved my writing since then, but I've never had the desire to go over and fix this one up until now. While I'm getting through Development you could start by getting Reception up to par. Then we can work at everything else. CR4ZE (t • c) 07:49, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

@URDNEXT: Saw your comments on the mobile GA and wanted to bring you here. If you're interested, I'm sporadically lazily working on copy-editing Gameplay/Development but there are some other things to do listed here. CR4ZE (t • c) 11:24, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Voice cast

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Extended content
The following actors appear in Saints Row 2:

Removed the voice cast list from the article per video game scope guideline #10: voice cast mentions should be in prose (not lists) and brief, if worth mentioning at all czar ⨹ 07:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Road to GA

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I'm prepping this article for GAN. Let me know if you would have any objections to such a nomination. Also am merging in the two downloadable content packs, which don't have enough secondary, reliable, independent coverage to warrant their own articles. czar ⨹ 03:04, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

  • The dev site appears to have converted to using the age gate or a different blog format around November 2008, so this is the last usable archive of the dev material from the Internet Archive. I'm going to remove everything posted after this time as they're dead and unrecoverable links. czar ⨹ 12:40, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 18 external links on Saints Row 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:47, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on Saints Row 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Saints Row 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Saints_Row_2/Archive_1&oldid=1137170357"