I like Saints Row 2 better for a couple of reasons:

1. More colorful villains and not just the boring military stereotype that the third had.

2. Better soundtrack.

3. Longer and more varied gameplay. I beat Saints Row 3 in 11 hours, but I beat Saints Row 2 in closer to 40 hours.

4. More memorable story telling moments with better humor and dialogue.

5. Better minigames (I still have no idea why they took out septic avenger from SR2)

There you go, my top 5 reasons why I like Saints Row 2 better than Saints Row 3. I could go on I suppose, but you get the idea.

Saints Row The Third is better than Saints Row 2 in every conceivable way. 

Saints Row the third was a fun game but I was SOOOOOOOO overhyped by the bombcast. I couldn't wait to get my hands on it and when I was done I was a bit disappointed. Sure it is pretty damn funny (and crazy) but that is the most it had goin for it. Anyway I never played the 2nd one so I'm not sure what I'm doing… bye guys.

Saints Row: The Third has a mission where Power plays, so that automatically wins.

Saints 2 had better activities and felt more alive, Saints 3 had better story and more holyshitwhatdidIjustdo moments.
 
Can't pick, but I'd like to see the two combined for a fourth.

I'm trying to play Saints Row 2 for the first time now but god damn it the controls for the game are ass backwards! Also the lack of trophies on the PS3 version was a surprising blow to my desire to carry on.

Well, I had some fun with Saint's Row the Third and it worked, so that gets my vote.

I think they're about equal. I thought the side missions were better in 2 and I liked the villains more, but The Third was completely over the top and hilarious that I honestly felt that helped alleviate some of the disappointment in those two departments.

From an aesthetic and gameplay front, Volition got their shit together for The Third. Everything from the art style, to the voice acting, to the fact that you don't need to go do nonsense filler activities just to get to the next story mission.

I don't know how, but SR2 managed to make spraying shit all over someone's house the opposite of fun.

i liked SR3 a lot more than SR2. SR2 at the time was wonderful, with a fun cast of characters, interesting activities and pretty good villains. however, have any of you gone back to play SR2 after being done with SR3? maybe it's just me, but that game is practically unplayable for me now. everything that SR3 refined, whether it was the driving, feel of the shooting or other game mechanics made the trip back to SR2 a lot harder than i thought it would be.

so, on that alone, i think SR3 is better because it simply plays a lot better than the game before it. also, there's a point where Killbane mentions the Montreal Screwjob. the wrestling fan in me thinks that a mere mention is unbeatable.

@Milkman said:

Saints Row The Third is better than Saints Row 2 in every conceivable way.

Both. 3 is a better and much more fun game, but 2 felt more sprawling and expansive.

3 is a better game, and initially when I got it, quite awesome. But the novelty wears out after a period of time, and with the DLCs, I just felt bored, and worse, cheated. What makes 3 a better game, is that it doesn't force you to continuously play the minigames to progress the story. I know you have to play through each of them once, but doing it over and over just to continue the game is tedious and boring, not fun. But if they brought more of those minigames into SR3, I wouldn't mind. Technically, the controls in SR3 Are leaps and bounds over SR2.

@Tylea002 said:

@Milkman said:

Saints Row The Third is better than Saints Row 2 in every conceivable way.

I liked Saints Row 2 better, personally. I loved both games but I prefer Saints Row 2 because of gameplay, theme, and general style. I like both stories equally (though I preferred most of the second game villains, minus Killbane because I love that guy) but for my personal tastes, the second one will always be my favorite.

I liked Saints Row the Third, but the Beginning was the best part. the first few missions where you

is the craziest thing in the game.

I like both for their own reasons, but I think Saints Row 2 had better characters and I really enjoyed how much of an absolute psychopath the main character felt like.

The Third is just "LOLSORANDUMXD" with surprisingly little content and no depth or character development to speak of.

@shivermetimbers said:

I like Saints Row 2 better for a couple of reasons:

1. More colorful villains and not just the boring military stereotype that the third had.

Am I missing something, or wasn't the main villain in Saints 3 a fucking luchador? How is that a boring military stereotype? I guess you're referring to Cyrus, but he was hardly the only villain.

I got the second one for free with the online pass thing, and haven't really given a chance yet. Sell me on it.

They're... Okay, Saints 2 is better. Third has elements that were improved, certainly, but overall Saints Row 2 is just more enjoyable (too lazy to go into what was improved and why 2<Third~).

@notdavid said:

@shivermetimbers said:

I like Saints Row 2 better for a couple of reasons:

1. More colorful villains and not just the boring military stereotype that the third had.

Am I missing something, or wasn't the main villain in Saints 3 a fucking luchador? How is that a boring military stereotype? I guess you're referring to Cyrus, but he was hardly the only villain.

I got the second one for free with the online pass thing, and haven't really given a chance yet. Sell me on it.

I was mostly referring to the STAGs as they seemed to take over the spotlight in the story. Needless to say, my point about SR2 having more colorful villains stays true. SR2 has Yakuzas, Voodoo lords, the Brotherhood, and an evil corporation just to name a few.

It's a little better.

The core gameplay (shooting and driving) feels a lot better, but there's less variety in the weapons and cars.

The story is really funny and written very well, but it's kinda unfocused and lacks any of the emotional punch of Saints Row 2 and abandons some of the major threads left hanging from that game.

The DLC is shitty in both games.

The character customization, aside from faces, is undeniably worse. There's really no reason for them to take out custom walkcycles and different "wear options" for clothes and accessories (tucked in shirts, etc.)

So yeah, Saints Row The Third is a bit better on the whole.

I really enjoy both games but I think I like SR2 a bit better.

Hey alright! Now that I've actually finished Saints Row 2 I can actually have a say in this matter. And that say is to say that Saints Row the Third was way better than Saints Row 2.

edit: my "wordplay" has sent me spiraling down a deep, dark hole.

As someone with zero investment in the characters or story of Saints Row, but who as played them all, I can say with full confidence that The Third is the absolute most fun I've had with this style of open world game since Mercenaries. And that's really all I ask for with these types of games.

SR3 is much more mechanically sound. SR2 had some pretty terrible driving and shooting, whereas The Third feels much more refined and fun to play.

I never played 2, but SR3 is good but dont believe the hype that its something special. Its one of those games that came out at the right time when a lot of other titles were being serious.

I've actually been trying to decide this myself while playing Saints Row 2 for the first time over the last few days. There are definitely things about 2 that I like more than 3, but the same goes the other way around too. Some things in 3, the driving especially, ended up a lot better than 2. I'd put them about even. Definitely both outstanding games, though, and it makes me wonder why people still like the GTA series if Saints Row has been this good for so long.

I like some of the things in Saints Row the Third, and I think the craziness is pretty fun, but ultimately I think that Saints Row 2 is the better game. I just found that Saints Row The Third has less entertainment and it hits a point where it isn't that much fun anymore. I remember getting to the endgame and thinking that even Bonnie Tyler's humorous playing of "I NEED A HERO"! wasn't funny at all. I just wasn't having fun and wasn't looking forward to, well, anything during the last hour.

Saints Row 2, on the other hand, comes across less enthusiastically at first but is ultimately a better game. There's just more of it, for one - I spent fifteen hours in SR3 and I feel like I could drag nothing more out of it. No fancy new clothes, no cool new stores, no nice new weapons, no good side missions, nothing. All that's left to do are some snatch missions, a few shitty heli-assault missions, and finish upgrading all the way. SR2 feels like I've barely scratched the surface of things to do at fifteen hours in. I feel like at any moment I could be doing one thing and something else the next.

SR2 has its problems but as far as I'm concerned it's better than SR3 in pretty much every way, from quality of humor and writing to gameplay and things to do. Now, if SR4 can have the variety and interesting things of SR2 with some of the more interesting aspects of SR3, like hoverbikes and stuff, then it will be the best. Also, SR4 should be more technically proficient, what with the need for a much better framerate and all. Seriously, the slowdown in both games is nuts sometimes.

EDIT: Seems like other people have summed up what I've said much better by saying that each game has its good and bad. The perfect open world game will occur when we marry the insanity and controls of SR3 with the variety of SR2.

The Third was way better. It moved the series from being a solid and slightly wacky game that lived in the shadow of GTA to being a great game in its own right and being wonderfully balls-out crazy.

Wait, did someone just say there wasn't enough character development in one of these games?

Talk about missing the point.

I think I like the story, writing, mission design and sheer insanity of the Third a lot more than SR2. But I was upset about the reduced options for customization.

Other than that, the gameplay is essentially identical. I just like the Third's wacky situations they thrust you in for missions.

Going purely off how I felt when the credits rolled, I'll have to give this one to SR2. I simply did not have that euphoric moment at the end of 3, that I did with 2.

Played all of the three games, the third is the best.

The only thing I miss from SR2 is character customization, in terms of playing dress up and male female proportions and facial customization. Other then that SR3 all the way.

(man from an outside perspective it sounds like I am a grown man who likes to play with dolls)

I prefer Saints Row 2 for a) having gameplay that is less repetitive and b) more customization over everything (more vehicle customization options, non-civilian vehicle customization, your character walk, voice options (no black female voice? what?)). The stores weren't so repetitive and there were more open interiors to explore.

The Third had a better sense of what kind of game it wanted to be. at the cost of less game. It's better on a strictly technical level, but I couldn't get over how annoyingly over the top it was. SR2 lets you create the insane moments, and The Third shoved them down your throat. Everything in The Third felt cheezy and forced to me.

I'll concede that from a strictly technical standpoint, The Third wins, but I can't really care about how great shooting mechanics are if the weapons feel crazy weak.

WHY NO SAINTS ROW !?

Saints Row 2 has much better sidekicks and a much better story when you compare the first half of each game. Also, NPH as a Bob Swarley Mon is a win in my book. I love both games though.

Not sure about SR2, but SR3 gets very boring very quickly. Once you've done all the missions and the little activities, you've done everything. There is nothing else to really do. It'd be cool if this took like 40-60 hours, but it only takes 20 to effectively 100% the game, after that everything you do is meaningless and boring. It's fun while it lasts, but it doesn't last long.

They both had their strengths, but enjoyed playing Saint's Row The Third a lot more than Saint's Row 2.

The story and customisation were way better in Saints Row 2, but from a gameplay and spectacle standpoint, Saints Row The Third wins.

I have not played Saints 2, but I loved Saints the third... is it worth going back to 2 after playing the recent one (as far as control, graphic improvements, etc)?

Might have to go scrape up a copy of it...

Was compelled to play through Saint's Row 2, can't say the same of The Third. Just didn't find what it was doing especially funny or novel, and the way it was structured felt way more linear somehow.

How is this even a debatable question? Saints Row 2 was the true successor to GTA San Andreas.

Saints 2. So much felt taken away in 3 and the missions were terrible

I enjoyed SR2 way more. I liked the leaders of the rival gangs more as villians, and there was more stuff to do.

I think SR3 is better. I think a lot of people who perfer SR2 forget how bad its plays. The shooting, driving, etc.in SR3 is just better than it is in SR2. On the other hand, there's just a lot more content in SR2. There's a ridiculous amount of customization you can do. There's also a lot more missions in SR2 than in SR3. I beat SR3 in like 11 hours. That's honestly pretty pathetic for an open world game. SR2 took me about 40 or so. So I think SR3 is slightly better mainly because I don't have to fight the controls to play it like in SR2 but I think SR2 has a lot more content.

I have not played Saints Row 2 yet, but I'm sure @yummylee has a thing or two to say about this.