Picking up Saint's Row 2 during one of Steam's mega sales a few months ago, I finally got around to playing it. Critically acclaimed on the consoles, yet maligned on PC as the victim of yet another bad port job, the game actually is playable thanks to the patches that were released quickly after the game's release and it doesn't deserve the overwhelming negative stigma the pc version has. Granted I know where people are coming from because just for kicks I played version 1.0 prior to patching, and did indeed find the game to be nearly completely unplayable.

I'm quite late to the party on playing this title so anything I say is retreading the million other comments available on the title, but after spending a few days powering through the storyline I was left with an enjoyable experience. I love game designers who have a very clear idea of what they're aiming for in a title and hit it perfectly, which is something Saint's Row 2 does. It doesn't try to be serious, and as a result benefits because you never have to worry about reality setting in. The only point of the game is to have fun, and indeed fun can be had living out the ultimate gangster fantasy in the comfort of your living room.

Unfortunately once I finished the main storyline, I found it impossible to boot up Saint's Row 2 to do any of the additional side missions past those that I was required to do to get to the ending, and I had to ask myself why I had no desire to continue playing past the sub-60% completion rate I had so far achieved.

I came to the conclusion that I simply had no motivation to continue playing the game. The big baddie was toast; I had destroyed the rival gangs, and anything else I did simply felt like licking the plate after a delicious meal. Sure, it might have been somewhat enjoyable but it also disrupted my memory of the delicious meal I had just consumed.

This is my issue with sandbox games, and why I've never seemed to take a great liking to them despite their popularity since GTA3 burst onto the scene what now seems like ages ago. In these titles you have two options: do the main story quest, or get diverted into countless side quests which lead to rewards like more cash and items that can help you with the main quest, but in the end are rarely necessary. Saint's Row 2 required you to do some of these side quests due to the respect system, but it was lax enough that all I had to do was power through the two sets of easy Fight Club missions in an hour or so to build up enough respect to get me through nearly the entire campaign without any further diversions.

The remaining diversions like racing, poop spraying, and carjacking simply didn't interest me in the same way the story missions did. If I wanted to race, I'd much rather load up a game in which the sole focus is racing, and as a result get a much better experience. Why settle for squirrely physics and limited car options when I can get much better street racing from Burnout or Need for Speed? Why should I play Zombie Uprising when I can play one of the countless better action titles in this world? Why choose to compromise your gaming experience with a less impressive experience simply because the game designer threw it in there? Is the racing in Saint's Row 2 really more fun or at the very least comparable to that of Burnout: Paradise?

I understand the completionist argument, those who don't just beat their games but instead pound them mercilessly, who explore every dark corner, and who get every single achievement point, but in my long experience of playing games those people are in the minority. I've fallen victim to this times before but it was in a situation where I think the sandbox argument is valid: MMO's. In a MMO you're playing in a continuously evolving world, where what you do today can help you be better in the future. As a result, doing side quests and the same dungeons over and over has a purpose to them, even though they may be boring and monotonous.

The name of the game is freedom, and it looks to me like game designers have this crazy idea that everybody craves it above all other aspects of a game. On another gaming website that shall-not-be-named, I wrote a long time ago during the dark age of the silent protagonist, when Half-Life, FEAR, and it's countless knockoffs spawned an unending stream of boring player characters, either because game designers were too lazy to actually give these individuals a personality, or the far more defendable argument that they didn't want to restrict how two different players experienced a game. I was infinitely relieved to see Saint's Row 2 have full voice over for the protagonist, and even though it was a pretty stale protagonist there was at least some semblance of life in the person you made, which is a lot more than some games can say.

Maybe I'm just getting old and my imagination doesn't work as well as it used to, but when I play a game I want to be entertained, not forced to always fill in the missing pieces to complete my experience. Give me an exciting protagonist (or even better, an exciting cast), wonderful story, and ten hours of gameplay that can't be beat any day over forty hours of aimless wandering through another sandbox city.