Saints Row - "2" is better than "The Third"

I love sandbox-games. I LOVE the Grand Theft Auto-series. I remember back in the day when I played GTA II, then III when it came out and had that amazing TPS-view instead. Vice City was the first game I ever truly loved, San Andreas the second and IV no less than the others. Then we also have the Saints Row-series. A GTA-ripoff to some, a different kind of a "GTA clone" to some, and so on. Personally, I'm just happy that there are more games "like" GTA, since that's my favorite kind of games.



I bought Saints Row 2 back in 2009 when I found it in a store. I think I read the back and thought it seemed to be like GTA and therefore bought it. I do not regret it! I've had SO much fun with that game, it's unbelievable. It was like a weird, crazy, comedy cousin to GTA: San Andreas with some better graphics and mechanics. I totally loved the free options of choosing your clothes and even making your very own character. Then I played the first Saints Row, which was good but quite bad in some way(s) compared to the second game.

In time I started waiting for the third installment in the series, with great anticipation. When it finally came out in late 2011 I bought it. Well, what can I say about it? While it's a great, funny and pretty good looking game, it misses kinda a lotta things. I've played it over and over and always find things here and there that makes me compare it to the second. Here are some of the things I like and dislike, comparing the second game with the third:

Saints Row 2

Good:

• Lots of different clothes and haircuts
• Quite many, different from each other, safe-houses
• Quite many enterable buildings
• Activities like fight club, demolition derby and fuzz
• Many different-looking areas in the map
• The urban street gangs fight each other

Bad:

• Quite stellar and bad driving mechanics
• The same with the shooting mechanics

Saints Row The Third

Good:

• Nicer-looking city in many ways
• Sexier girls (both pedestrians and player character)
• Upgradeable weapons
• Better driving and shooting mechanics
• Funnier vehicles
• Buildable Saints headquarters (though only three)
• More Saints-characters (like Oleg, Angel, Viola, Kenzie and Zimos)
• Funnier missions

Bad:

• The whole middle-section of the story is made up of side-missions (boring!)
• They took away my fave activities fight club, fuzz and demolition derby
• But they KEPT the boring and annoying snatch, escort and trafficking
• Less enterable buildings 
• All the buildable safe-houses look the same inside (boring...)
• Shaundi is fucking annoying
• Many parts of the city look the same
• Less secrets (secret rooms etc. that were in 2)

I'm sure there are other things as well, both possitiva and negative, for both games that I just didn't come up with now. Overall, I think Saints Row 2 had more, was more solid and fun in the long run than The Third. While Saints Row The Third has many improvements, it certainly feels kinda thin and rushed in many ways. WHY not KEEP all the good and fun from 2 and ADD the new stuff? In Saints Row 4 I'd like to see 2 combined with 3, with new stuff. Don't rush it, make it awesome! 

In the end, I am not satisfied with SR3 since I bought it full-price when it came out. I bought SR2 for 200 Swedish kronor (about 25-30 bucks maybe, SR3 was like 65-75 dollars) and I've had more fun with it.

                Concept art for SR the third. It did / does NOT look like this .....