| Original message (4995 Views )
|
Replies: |
| Sano 1878th Post
 
Gold Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
   
    
    
    
    
|  "Re(8):SF4 in the works? (!)" , posted Mon 18 Jul 09:52:
Pimp Willy of Shroyuken.com who was also at the panel had more details.
Audience: "When will we see Street Fighter 4?"
Erik Ko (Senior Editor of Studio Udon who put out the North American SF Comic) "I've been bugging them about it for some time."
Capcom Representitive: "All we can say is something is definitely in the works. Don't worry, Capcom has not turned its back on the Street Fighter series."
From Pimp Willy: "They also mentioned that one of the problems with the series is that they have to come up with an innovative way to push it forward. They don't want to re-hash the game and put out an updated version, they want to make sure the game is leaps and bounds above EVERYBODIES expectations, and are still exploring ways to do this. Hence, SF4 (when it comes around) is designed to be the FUTURE of fighting games."
Man, I don't want no damn inovation, just give me a good fighter no matter if it's 2D, 3D, Cel Shaded, Virtual Reality, whatever like SF2 Turbo or SF3TS. Then again, neither of those where first tries, oh well. SF4 part 3 will own...
Ah well, inovation can be good. No matter what they do I'd like to see SF4 within my lifetime.
Ryu and Chun-Li forever!
[this message was edited by Sano on Mon 18 Jul 09:54] |
| Spoon 1149th Post
Red Carpet Premium Member+
| "Re(1):Capcom's master plan..." , posted Mon 18 Jul 13:41
See, the guy who said about "the first game in a series will suck" has it mostly right, at least from a gameplay perspective. Fighting games are by design competitive experiences. As such, people will be on a mission to find the best BS. And when you're trying some totally new stuff out... well, expect it to get broken.
Brokenness of the initial game aside, I think it is kinda sad how we expect the first game to not merely be a broken mess, but to flatout SUCK. Fighters are an old genre, not some experimental new territory. Do we expect FPS games to straight up suck in version one? No. While we may have the luxury of bug fixes in the PC world, if a FPS game sucks, it sucks and there is no forgiveness. Why should we settle for an FPS with garbage production values? We know they can do better, and we've already SEEN better, many times before.
What we've been waiting for for a long time is either a GOOD game, or a DIFFERENT game. Rumble Fish is a DIFFERENT game, Rumble Fish 2 might actually be a GOOD game; I don't know, we don't have it around here. CFJ is neither a different game nor a good game.
CvS 1 actually has a lot to love about it, even though there's an awful lot about it that's flaky as heck (e.g. Kyo's emaciated move list).
I did like how back when Capcom made some different and good games, they experimented in some small places... like music. Between the concurrent releases of SF3 series and SFA2/3 and then MvC2, none of the games had a soundtrack that resembled the other. But that was a long time ago.
|
| Bata kun 2671th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Bata-kun's rant on 'SF IV'" , posted Mon 18 Jul 14:41
From what I remember, I heard that in some meeting, the majority of the gathers said that "SF IV" should be in 3D. Whether or not that'll happen, I don't know. If that does happen, I'd like to know how much brandy, whisky, or possibly both was mixed into the sake that the Japanese Capcom staff members had when they gave "SF" to its American branch.
About "SF IV" being in the works for about 5 years, I saw an interview a while ago with a Capcom Japan staff member. I'd show the interview, but one, it's been years since I last saw it and two, I doubt that it's up anymore. Anyway, I remember the staff member said that Dee Jay was an unusual chararacter or something like that. Other than that, I don't remember much. In terms of the term "possibility", that showed up in the interview as well. Probably Dash Taisen, if it's still up, would be the only site I can think to have the interview, but I highly doubt it has interview. As for the game being in works for five years, that is reasonable, give or take a year.
Now, can "SF IV" be better than "III"? My heart says "I hope so", but my mind, says "I'm afraid that it'll be worse". If you know me, you should know by now that "III" is okay at best. I think that "III", especially "Third Strike", showed me a preview of what "IV" will be like: a game many people will get into, but only because of the final product and it won't even be that great in my own eyes, which is not a good trait. I predict that in "IV", I won't hear classics and fitting music, I won't stages get better with each version, I won't like half of the characters (if not, more) in the end and I will say that the fundamentals will be more hideous than the thought of seeing Kusaregedou eating Rimururu. No, I take that back. The thought is more hideous, but the fundamentals will still be hideous.
Remember "II"? The last version wasn't that great because of Gouki and I had to deal with Big Bird as the announcer again. (If the announcer said, "'Street Fighter' was brought to you today by the letters 'F' and 'S' and the number '2'," I'm so going to scream.) I could have sworn that something was removed in the Thailand statue stage in the later versions too. (A tree, I think.) The only reason you wanted to play the last version was because it introduced Super Combos for the first time in the series.
"Zero III" was the most competitive game of the "Zero" series, but like Iggy said, many people, including myself, prefer " Z II" over "Z III" because it was and still is more fun. Plus, it has elements "Z III" should have kept (like the terrific stages).
The point is that just because it's the final product, it doesn't mean that it'll be that great. If this turns out to be the finale, which I hope to Kami-sama that it doesn't so that it can be passed down to the other Asia branch, "Sutofai" to me will only be remembered as the series with the forever-changing "II", not as one of the greatest series ever.
|
| Spoon 1151th Post
Red Carpet Premium Member+
| "Re(1):Bata-kun's rant on 'SF IV'" , posted Mon 18 Jul 16:26:
Guess what?
I've got hella time on my hands!
Bwahahaha.
quote:
From what I remember, I heard that in some meeting, the majority of the gathers said that "SF IV" should be in 3D. Whether or not that'll happen, I don't know. If that does happen, I'd like to know how much brandy, whisky, or possibly both was mixed into the sake that the Japanese Capcom staff members had when they gave "SF" to its American branch.
Dunno bout that.
I think I would mind less if the games didn't suck.
If SF became SFEX period, then yeah, I'd be pretty angry.
quote:
About "SF IV" being in the works for about 5 years, I saw an interview a while ago with a Capcom Japan staff member. I'd show the interview, but one, it's been years since I last saw it and two, I doubt that it's up anymore. Anyway, I remember the staff member said that Dee Jay was an unusual chararacter or something like that. Other than that, I don't remember much. In terms of the term "possibility", that showed up in the interview as well. Probably Dash Taisen, if it's still up, would be the only site I can think to have the interview, but I highly doubt it has interview. As for the game being in works for five years, that is reasonable, give or take a year.
I remember that, actually!
It was YEARS ago.
quote:
Now, can "SF IV" be better than "III"?
SF3 is far from perfect, so of course.
quote:
My heart says "I hope so", but my mind, says "I'm afraid that it'll be worse".
We just had CFJ, so that's totally evidenced.
quote:
If you know me, you should know by now that "III" is okay at best. I think that "III", especially "Third Strike", showed me a preview of what "IV" will be like: a game many people will get into, but only because of the final product
...yep, pretty much.
In fact, I believe that 3S wouldn't have the attention that it does in NA the past few years if it weren't for the mass videos and the big displays at evo that were conducted. Today... well, we have a good console port on the single most popular console, so that certainly helps.
quote:
and it won't even be that great in my own eyes, which is not a good trait.
See Abster and blood in SS.
quote:
I predict that in "IV", I won't hear classics and fitting music,
The music was kinda mellow in the first two SF3s, but come on! Q's theme! It's so slick!
quote:
I won't stages get better with each version,
Capcom already outdid themselves in this department with CvS1 and CvS2, remember?
quote:
I won't like half of the characters (if not, more) in the end
I actually thought meh of the SF3 cast for YEARS. And then I actually went and got into the game, and found that if not for some stupidity (e.g. Twelve's craptastic damage, and the utter stupidity of Chun), 3S has one of the best SF casts ever. In both conception and execution, it's just... wow. It's like Necro: people first see him and go, "wtf is that, he fails", but if you see skilled Necro, it's sooooooo slick. Aegis-powered Urien plays like NOTHING in any other SF game, even without unblockables. Fireball trapping as known in previous SF-style games doesn't exist.
quote:
and I will say that the fundamentals will be more hideous than the thought of seeing Kusaregedou eating Rimururu. No, I take that back. The thought is more hideous, but the fundamentals will still be hideous.
Me no understand this part.
But what part of Rimururu dying messily is not wonderful?
quote:
Remember "II"? The last version wasn't that great because of Gouki
FFS, people love turbo-powered hidden SNK bosses... Akuma IS cheap. Akuma is today overexposed somewhat. But back then he was interesting. He brought us the raging demon, come on.
quote:
and I had to deal with Big Bird as the announcer again. (If the announcer said, "'Street Fighter' was brought to you today by the letters 'F' and 'S' and the number '2'," I'm so going to scream.)
This I agree with you 100%. WTH was with that?! Not to mention Guile's voice, which sounded like it was done by the same guy. SF2WW Guile has the best voice of all Guiles, because it is appropriately deep and yet still has good pronounciation.
quote:
I could have sworn that something was removed in the Thailand statue stage in the later versions too. (A tree, I think.)
Who gives a...
quote:
The only reason you wanted to play the last version was because it introduced Super Combos for the first time in the series.
Don't forget the speed fix. SSF on most consoles was slow as heck. I'd agree that only the hardcore players would've cared about the new normals.
quote:
"Zero III" was the most competitive game of the "Zero" series, but like Iggy said, many people, including myself, prefer " Z II" over "Z III"
That's fine...
quote:
because it was and still is more fun.
...but it isn't fact.
quote:
Plus, it has elements "Z III" should have kept (like the terrific stages).
Guy's SFA2 stage was so great.
But Cody's SFA3 stage was great, too!
Yeah, there really wasn't anything in SFA3 that could match the Ryu vs. Sagat stage.
But the stages in SFA3 didn't suck, come on... well, Guy's stage sucked. Unlike CvS2, which has.... the flaming stage? SFA3 has a couple good stages.
And besides, there so many great little things in SFA3, like EVERYTHING Cody (his punch super, his knife, his intro with Guy... it just goes on).
quote:
The point is that just because it's the final product, it doesn't mean that it'll be that great. If this turns out to be the finale, which I hope to Kami-sama that it doesn't so that it can be passed down to the other Asia branch, "Sutofai" to me will only be remembered as the series with the forever-changing "II", not as one of the greatest series ever.
It deserves more than that.
I don't think that 2D fighters would've gotten as big as they did, as fast as they did (and crashed as hard as they did...), were it not for SF. SF2 is surely one of the all-time greats; don't even think of some particular SF2 game to attribute that to. SF2 is great, period.
[this message was edited by Spoon on Mon 18 Jul 16:29] |
| Bata kun 2674th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(2):Bata-kun's rant on 'SF IV'" , posted Mon 18 Jul 18:15:
Keep in mind that I'm so sleepy right now. So don't be surprised if nothing makes sense.
quote:
Dunno bout that.
I think I would mind less if the games didn't suck.
If SF became SFEX period, then yeah, I'd be pretty angry.
Yup.
quote:
The music was kinda mellow in the first two SF3s, but come on! Q's theme! It's so slick!
Eh. I guess that's what happens when you don't care about the characters. You don't care about the music either.
quote:
Capcom already outdid themselves in this department with CvS1 and CvS2, remember?
I'm sorry, but I've seen way better in a game like "Kabuki Klash".
quote:
Me no understand this part.
But what part of Rimururu dying messily is not wonderful?
I think I was trying to say that I never liked the fundamentals in "III", as I thought that they're hideous to learn. Hope that helps. Oh and for that other part, uh, I am not going to further comment on this.
quote:
FFS, people love turbo-powered hidden SNK bosses... Akuma IS cheap. Akuma is today overexposed somewhat. But back then he was interesting. He brought us the raging demon, come on.
Meh. I guess you do have points there.
quote:
Who gives a...
That's irrelevant, but just in case someone wanted an example, it was the only one I could have thought of. Besides, I never liked Sagat anyway. So, why would I throw an object out of the window over something like this? =P
quote:
...but it isn't fact.
True.
quote:
Guy's SFA2 stage was so great.
But Cody's SFA3 stage was great, too!
Yeah, there really wasn't anything in SFA3 that could match the Ryu vs. Sagat stage.
But the stages in SFA3 didn't suck, come on... well, Guy's stage sucked. Unlike CvS2, which has.... the flaming stage? SFA3 has a couple good stages.
I'm not saying that the stages in "Zero III" were bad. I wished they had more of the touch the second game had.
quote:
And besides, there so many great little things in SFA3, like EVERYTHING Cody (his punch super, his knife, his intro with Guy... it just goes on).
Well, true. It does have more special introductions after all.
quote:
It deserves more than that.
I don't think that 2D fighters would've gotten as big as they did, as fast as they did (and crashed as hard as they did...), were it not for SF. SF2 is surely one of the all-time greats; don't even think of some particular SF2 game to attribute that to. SF2 is great, period.
Good? Certainly. Influencial? No doubt. However, Capcom in the second half of the last decade made too many mistakes in that series for me to call it one of the best ever. I feel the same way for series like "KoF" and "Samurai Spirits".
[this message was edited by Bata kun on Mon 18 Jul 18:22] |
| Iggy 6888th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(4):Bata-kun's rant on 'SF IV'" , posted Mon 18 Jul 20:02
Also, as for "the first game always suck", it's mostly a Capcom rule (at least to my taste). It's not always the case, but Vampire, SF Zero 1, SF3 New challengers, even the first Power Stone are really not good games.
Namco's or late SNK's first games can be good (MOTW is the first and only game of its series, and it surely isn't a failure). Even if TRF1 isn't the best game ever, it's still a lot of shallow fun.
This is totally subjective, of course.
ねんがんの ネ申ゲーをてにいれたぞ！
|
| KTallguy 695th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member
| "Re(2):Re(10):SF4 in the works? (!)" , posted Mon 18 Jul 22:05
quote:
I don't want the FUTURE of fighting games, especially when so many issues regarding the support structure FOR fighting games are in doubt or unsettled.
What I want is a great game like Third Strike or Super Turbo. Don't try to reinvent the wheel, that's what got them into trouble LAST time (the CPS 3 boards).
On the other hand I don't want a rehash either so let's be clear about that.
If you want a great fighter, you're going to have to suffer through some innovation. It's for the good of the genre.
Why would I want to play SF3 Third Strike again? I mean, I fricking LOVE 3rd Strike. It's EVERYWHERE in Japan, I barely see arcades without at least one cabinet, and people are always playing, and usually pretty good. I've met some players that just blow my mind, because they are unconventional players that are quite strong. Such as Yun players that don't use the 'Shadow Super', extremly machi Ryu, etc.
I want Capcom to shock and amaze me again with a new system. Parry was fricking great right? I mean, risk/reward wise, it's a really good system. You don't always want to parry, but parrying skillfully gives you a good advantage, and incentive to learn the system. If Capcom can make another nice system, I'll be really happy.
I would prefer 2D sprites in high res, though. I know it's expensive, but this is Street Fighter! It's funny that 3D models can be churned out like widgets but 2D sprites are so difficult. I know it's true but...
The Rumble Fish 2 is not a bad game, it's MUCH better than 1, like exponentially better, but it's still not very attractive to me...the style. Some of the characters are strange looking, in the way that their art style is weird. It's an interesting, deep system that I hope you guys will get your hands on to test and stuff.
Guilty Gear was also a huge success in Japan (people play a LOT), and in the US too, right? The only reason Sol always wins in the US is because I've realized that players in the US always pick the characters that are easiest to win with. Once someone gets really good (and I mean REALLY good) with a underused character, they can steamroll people. That's why a Shun player keeps winning the Virtua Fighter tournaments in Japan.
[/ramble]
Proud Supporter of Next Generation GAMEPLAY
"テメエがヤクブソクなんだよ!"
|
| Sano 1885th Post
Gold Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
| "Re(3):Re(10):SF4 in the works? (!)" , posted Mon 18 Jul 22:55:
"If you want a great fighter, you're going to have to suffer..."
And there you go, who the heck wants to suffer?  Shoot, I'll be suffering enough playing the new "innovative" Marvel Nemesis... Innovation is a double edged sword. Sure, you get your innovative Okami that's great (or maybe it will be great) but for everyone of those you get a bunch of lame-o Crimson Tears, Onimusha Blade Warriors, point and click Killer 7 and so on.
But as I said before if you check my first post on the subject, innovation's not necesarily a bad thing. And I'll just be happy to see SF4 in my lifetime. It's not even a game anymore, it's more like a dream you want to see happen... for all I know Capcom is blowing smoke yet again. "We haven't abandoned SF, so buy the toys/comics/joysticks/new Anime/etc."
Ryu and Chun-Li forever!
[this message was edited by Sano on Mon 18 Jul 23:05] |
| Spoon 1155th Post
Red Carpet Premium Member+
| "Re(3):Bata-kun's rant on 'SF IV'" , posted Tue 19 Jul 04:42:
Tons of junk that I will randomly paraphrase and respond to:
quote:
Capcom already outdid themselves in this department with CvS1 and CvS2, remember?
I'm sorry, but I've seen way better in a game like "Kabuki Klash".
By this I meant that the stages in CvS1 were terrific, and the stages in CvS2 were crap.
quote:
MOTW
This is definitely true. MOTW was the first of its type by SNK, and it's not a failure at all.
quote:
SFZ3 vs. SFZ2
An interesting thing I heard is that SFA2 was really popular in the US during its time, while it never really caught on in Japan. SFZ3 was popular in the US and Japan, but today it only continues to be played in Japan. Gameplay-wise, I've never totally understood the arguments behind SFA2 being better than SFA3... about the best one I've heard is that SFA2 has a better footsies game than SFA3, in large part from CC activation.
quote:
Capcom should just put everything together
Not the Capcom right now. CFJ, remember.
quote:
Pollyanna
I am overjoyed by the resurgence of non-gay-male opinion.
quote:
Rumbling Fishes
Personally, I liked how TRF tried to look different (with mixed success), tried to bring in a bunch of stuff (with mixed success), and had an air game reminiscent of SFA3 (which is always good). TRF2 really looks like a much better game than TRF, and I'd love to play it... whenever that is...
quote:
Guilty Gear
Interesting thing is that I believe GG1 was a console-only (PSX) game. While it did have its own share of stupidity (YAY! FREE INSTANT-KILL MOVES!), it was alright. It introduced the GG cast, and stuff like Faultless Defence. Sure, it needed refinement. But hey, we got GGX afterwards, so how much can we complain?
Here's a more interesting thing:
Super Smash Bros.
The first game was excellent, no doubt. Not only that, it was POPULAR. Nintendo got it all right the first time. And as evidence of just how successful it is, look at how much it's been copied since. On top of it all, were people whining about things like, "booooooooooo I want 2D high-res sprite Samusssss"? No, in fact, people thought the SSB and SSBM 3D renditions of 2D characters were fantastic... Ness, for chrissakes.
For all the loony-ness that Nintedo does, somehow from time to time they know how to get things done right.
[this message was edited by Spoon on Tue 19 Jul 11:59] |
| JJWE 509th Post
New Red Carpet Member
| "Re(5):Bata-kun's rant on 'SF IV'" , posted Tue 19 Jul 06:08:
quote:
Oh. Yeah. Still, "KK" had better stages than those two combined. =P
Eh. The stages in Kabuki Klash are pretty "meh". Sure the settings are pretty interesting (underwater, on top of a blimp, etc.), but somehow they feel pretty static. CVS1's backgrounds were definitely pretty to look at, being high-res and all, but they were pretty generic (arcade, alley, etc.).
SFA2 owns them all for free anyway. Rolento's SFA2 background is just... Well, there aren't words. 
--- http://ngmc.retrogames.com
[this message was edited by JJWE on Tue 19 Jul 06:09] |
| Pollyanna 1244th Post
Red Carpet Executive Member
| "Re(5):Re(10):SF4 in the works? (!)" , posted Tue 19 Jul 06:40
Lots of things.
Iggy: I thought I would be gone longer. Last time it was 2 months, this time, 2 weeks...though last time, I didn't post too often here and nobody knew who I was.
Spoon: Ness doesn't count. His original character design was clay. He's already 3D. Still, I get your point.
Everyone:
I still think that all 3 of Capcom's firsts had charm when they came out, even if they don't stand the test of time. Vampire blew my mind. None of my friends cared, but they had to listen to me scream in their ears "It's STREET FIGHTER...ONLY WITH MONSTERS! MONSTERS!" and it was fun enough for the time. Zero was a new Street Fighter, and that was enough. And SF3 was SF3. Don't you remember what a big deal that was? Don't you remember how spectacular the game looked by the standards of the time (even by today's standards!)? I felt pretty "ehhh" about it in the end, but I still played it a lot, as I played Zero and Vampire. My point is that while all 3 games were a little weak, I didn't think that at the time, I just enjoyed what I had, and without knowing what I was missing, that was more than good enough.
CFJ on the other hand is the opposite, because I know what I'm missing: Lots of characters and backgrounds. I still stand by the belief that a sequel to CFJ with twice as many characters/backgrounds/everything would be a great game. However, my line of thinking that "the sequel will be better" fits into the typical "Capcom's first game sucks" theory in a different sort of way.
I find SFZ2 horribly boring. I fully understand complaints that SFZ3 is too loose and has zany systems, but that's better than SFZ2's totally bland offering. Also, (although this isn't fair) SFZ3 has Karin, who is the only SFZ character I can get excited about. The other characters, for the most part, are entirely too boring. A long time ago, Iggy made a brilliant comment about how the characters in KOF 98 (despite being in a good game) are boring to play by today's standards. (very true) With the exception of Karin, that's how I feel about SFZ2. It's also why I can only use about half of the characters in 3rd Strike. The others are too boring. (though a game where I can happily use half of the characters is a true accomplishment)
|
| Baines
115th Post
Regular Customer
| "Re(4):Bata-kun's rant on 'SF IV'" , posted Tue 19 Jul 09:56
quote:
This is definitely true. MOTW was the first of its type by SNK, and it's not a failure at all.
I'd bet if SNK had a few years later released an improved enough MOTW2 (like doubling the characters, adding relatively balanced mode selection, etc), then at least some people would retroactively pick apart MOTW, downgrading its quality and saying how SNK had to make a sucky version first before making the "real" MOTW.
quote:
Interesting thing is that I believe GG1 was a console-only (PSX) game. While it did have its own share of stupidity (YAY! FREE INSTANT-KILL MOVES!), it was alright. It introduced the GG cast, and stuff like Faultless Defence. Sure, it needed refinement. But hey, we got GGX afterwards, so how much can we complain?
I really liked GG1 (imported on day of release), but it is somewhat hard to go back to it now. It is weird seeing the magazine scans of the prototype that used generic PS1-quality polygon characters rather than sprites. And I cannot help but wonder what would have happened to the industry fanbase if Guilty Gear had gone with SFEX 3D rather than sprites. For one thing, we probably wouldn't have 2D sequels, which means the posterboy for hi-res sprites in a fighter wouldn't have been made.
quote:
Super Smash Bros.
The first game was excellent, no doubt. Not only that, it was POPULAR. Nintendo got it all right the first time. And as evidence of just how successful it is, look at how much it's been copied since. On top of it all, were people whining about things like, "booooooooooo I want 2D high-res sprite Samusssss"? No, in fact, people thought the SSB and SSBM 3D renditions of 2D characters were fantastic... Ness, for chrissakes.
One interesting thing with Smash Bros is how different the two games actually played.
I'd really dislike a 2D Smash Bros. The 3D models have so much more life, and depth. I think 2D conventions are actaully one of the main limits on the GBA/DS Smash Bros clones.
|
| Bata kun 2676th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(6):Bata-kun's rant on 'SF IV'" , posted Tue 19 Jul 10:06
quote:
Eh. The stages in Kabuki Klash are pretty "meh". Sure the settings are pretty interesting (underwater, on top of a blimp, etc.), but somehow they feel pretty static. CVS1's backgrounds were definitely pretty to look at, being high-res and all, but they were pretty generic (arcade, alley, etc.).
SFA2 owns them all for free anyway. Rolento's SFA2 background is just... Well, there aren't words.
Of course "Zero II" has the best stages. If not, close to it. Even better than "Real Bout II's" and that had good stages as well. I guess I never did like the "CvS" games' stages because they were, like you said, bland. I'd figure Capcom would do a way better job here, but oh well.
|
| Baines
116th Post
Regular Customer
| "Re(6):Re(10):SF4 in the works? (!)" , posted Tue 19 Jul 10:21
quote:
Vampire blew my mind. None of my friends cared, but they had to listen to me scream in their ears "It's STREET FIGHTER...ONLY WITH MONSTERS! MONSTERS!" and it was fun enough for the time.
I think Vampire is unduly maligned, and that if Capcom had never made any sequels then it would be thought of in a better light.
"Street Fighter...Only with MONSTERS!" is exactly the opinion I had of it when I first saw it in an arcade. My second opinion was "Not a crappy Street Fighter knock-off either!" For everything improved, added, and fixed in the later games, the first wasn't in itself a bad game.
I see Vampire in a different light than I see CvS1 or All Stars.
Vampire was fun for its time, fairly well produced, decently thought out, and better than a lot of the competition.
CvS1 was a game where you could just read the description and could tell there were going to be problems. Things like the handling of the SNK characters in general don't feel like they were thought out at all, but rather just thrown out with the idea that it would be fixed in the sequel. That pretty much defined the game for me, something that Capcom didn't even try to do well, but rather just released with the idea of fixing/finishing it in the sequel.
And All Stars, without ever playing it, just flat out looked like low quality design. Evolution/Jam I guess showed that they really didn't have the budget or manpower or desire in the long run.
|
| Ultima 409th Post
Gold Customer
| "Re(4) SFA2 vs. SFA3" , posted Tue 19 Jul 22:01
Sano:
I have family in New York, y'know. ;)
Sp00n:
> By this I meant that the stages in CvS1 were terrific, and the stages in CvS2 were crap.
You won't hear this from me too often, but 3D (stages) != crap. I thought most of the stages in CvS1 were rubbish actually. I barely paid attention to them. I thought the sand rally stage, Shin Gouki/God Rugal's Osaka stage and London were far more interesting than anything in CvS1 (okay, Barentzburg was beyond bland).
> MOTW
> This is definitely true. MOTW was the first of its type by SNK, and it's not a failure at all.
Except balance-wise.
> SFZ3 vs. SFZ2
> An interesting thing I heard is that SFA2 was really popular in the US during its time, while it never really caught on in Japan. SFZ3 was popular in the US and Japan, but today it only continues to be played in Japan. Gameplay-wise, I've never totally understood the arguments behind SFA2 being better than SFA3... about the best one I've heard is that SFA2 has a better footsies game than SFA3, in large part from CC activation.
In a nutshell, SFA2 was pretty popular in the US until about 6 months to a year before SFA3 came out. The reason for that was because SFA2 had devolved in a massive turtle CC/AC fest, with the most mind-numbingly dull top tier (Ryu, Ken, Chun-li, Rose) of any game *ever*. MAss stupidity abound, like Chun-li removing 60% of your life with 1 level of meter, Rose staying in one spot with c.MP, Ken removing 15% of your life every time you tried to attack him, etc. And of course, the whole nature of VAlle CCs, which meant that no one dared to walk forward because standing up in sweep range = death.
People were *longing* for SFA3, and were overjoyed at first to hear about the numerous changes. ACs totally nerfed, the addition of a guard bar, and revamped CCs so no more mashing one button for 60% life.
Unfortunately, right out the gate SFA3 had some issues, most of which most people got used to, but some swore off it right from the start. The main issue is the awful (or at least, REALLY different and seemingly random) hit detection. Many moves would whiff like crazy unless they were at a very specific range, many moves would hit in situations you wouldn't expect them to, and there seemed to be a small but definite random factor, in which a move would suddenly not work in a given situation, when it worked 9 times before. Later on people would figure out stuff like V-ISM CC abuse (Daigo showed us the way with V-Akuma), and then finally CC (crouch cancel) infinites, by which time the game was pretty old and had been played to death, so a lot of people in the US stopped, though Japan kept playing it and took the game much further than anyone thought.
In general, the arguments for SFA2 over SFA3 are a more "solid" feel to it: It has better and more reliable hit detection, and has a more traditional SF feel since it doesn't have free juggling and air recoveries.
These days, it's really a matter of which you hate less: The general dullness of SFA2's high level CC/AC play and top tier characters, or the unreliable hit detection, V-ISM abuse and general "looseness" of SFA3.
--
Ultima - The Right arm of Scrub Voltron
http://uramble.com/index.html - U's Rambling Page
|
| Ultima 411th Post
Gold Customer
| "Re(6):Re(4) SFA2 vs. SFA3" , posted Wed 20 Jul 04:11
> > Except balance-wise.
> Well, there's that, but aside from that, the game was that good, even if you only had one plane to work with.
More like "especially because you only had one plane to work with". The whole multiple plane thing was the whole reason why I never took on Fatal Fury before MOTW. Getting rid of multiple planes and the old control scheme was the best thing they could have done.
BTW, I see a few people talking badly about CvS1 in regard to the handling of SNK characters. WHile this is true, I would also like to point out that the Capcom characters were also handled pretty badly, just based on the button setup.
re: Vampire Series
I never really got into the Vampire series. I liked Vampire Saviour, the first one I got into (Saturn version), but I never got around to taking it too seriously even though I realise there's a lots of good stuff in there - I'm just not a big fan of the feel of the series nor the whacky characters. I wish I had gotten a chance to get into Vampire Hunter since I think that that is superior to Vampire Saviour, but the original Vampire is pretty archaic.
--
Ultima - The Right arm of Scrub Voltron
http://uramble.com/index.html - U's Rambling Page
|
| Spoon 1157th Post
Red Carpet Premium Member+
| "Re(5):Re(4) SFA2 vs. SFA3" , posted Wed 20 Jul 04:43:
Once more, I have TIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIME on my hands. Ahahahaha.
quote:
Sp00n:
> By this I meant that the stages in CvS1 were terrific, and the stages in CvS2 were crap.
You won't hear this from me too often, but 3D (stages) != crap. I thought most of the stages in CvS1 were rubbish actually. I barely paid attention to them. I thought the sand rally stage, Shin Gouki/God Rugal's Osaka stage and London were far more interesting than anything in CvS1 (okay, Barentzburg was beyond bland).
It's not really a 2D vs. 3D thing for me. I just thought that CvS1 did a lot of different things, and did them well. The back alley's been done a million time, but the CvS1 still managed to impress me. The traffic accident stage, with the character highlighting and the awesome intro impressed me. The boss stage with the screens showing screens from CvS1, and a central screen that changed according to your character looked cool. Etc. Yeah, it's a bit overboard to say CvS2 stages were crap, since the burning stage was cool...
quote:
> MOTW
> This is definitely true. MOTW was the first of its type by SNK, and it's not a failure at all.
Except balance-wise.
I think that there's so much BS in the game that even though Kevin is #1 and Gato is hella cheese, it's not as though the other characters can't do anything back to them. Considering that there really isn't a living tournament scene for the game, and most of us (myself included) aren't exactly top Garou players, we aren't in a position to give a truly accurate read on the game. We do know that the game looks great, sounds great, has very lenient controls, and is lots of fun to play. Seems pretty terrific to me.
Observe.
quote:
> SFZ3 vs. SFZ2
> An interesting thing I heard is that SFA2 was really popular in the US during its time, while it never really caught on in Japan. SFZ3 was popular in the US and Japan, but today it only continues to be played in Japan. Gameplay-wise, I've never totally understood the arguments behind SFA2 being better than SFA3... about the best one I've heard is that SFA2 has a better footsies game than SFA3, in large part from CC activation.
In a nutshell, SFA2 was pretty popular in the US until about 6 months to a year before SFA3 came out. The reason for that was because SFA2 had devolved in a massive turtle CC/AC fest, with the most mind-numbingly dull top tier (Ryu, Ken, Chun-li, Rose) of any game *ever*. MAss stupidity abound, like Chun-li removing 60% of your life with 1 level of meter, Rose staying in one spot with c.MP, Ken removing 15% of your life every time you tried to attack him, etc. And of course, the whole nature of VAlle CCs, which meant that no one dared to walk forward because standing up in sweep range = death.
Yeah, Chun's lightning kick CC was pretty damn stupid. I remember back in the day a player won the championship match by the Rose d.MP wall.
I dunno about it being a turtle fest, though, since there actually were at least two counters to CC activation: CC activation, and proximity cancel DP. Of course, d.HK distance judging did rule the day.
quote:
Unfortunately, right out the gate SFA3 had some issues, most of which most people got used to, but some swore off it right from the start. The main issue is the awful (or at least, REALLY different and seemingly random) hit detection. Many moves would whiff like crazy unless they were at a very specific range, many moves would hit in situations you wouldn't expect them to, and there seemed to be a small but definite random factor, in which a move would suddenly not work in a given situation, when it worked 9 times before.
Personally, I've always thought that this was blown a little out of proportion. There's some pretty darned weird stuff I've seen in ST, and nobody complains about that.
quote:
Later on people would figure out stuff like V-ISM CC abuse (Daigo showed us the way with V-Akuma),
It was bas! bas, not daigo, who invented the demon flip CCs!
quote:
and then finally CC (crouch cancel) infinites, by which time the game was pretty old and had been played to death, so a lot of people in the US stopped, though Japan kept playing it and took the game much further than anyone thought.
I think the US stopped well before CC infinites were being used extensively in play... they probably started dropping it when MvC2 came out.
quote:
In general, the arguments for SFA2 over SFA3 are a more "solid" feel to it: It has better and more reliable hit detection, and has a more traditional SF feel since it doesn't have free juggling and air recoveries.
But I wonder... is that the fanboy opinion, or the tournament-level player opinion? There's so much BS that floats around since most players that did play both back then don't talk about the games much anymore.
quote:
These days, it's really a matter of which you hate less: The general dullness of SFA2's high level CC/AC play and top tier characters, or the unreliable hit detection, V-ISM abuse and general "looseness" of SFA3.
Well, that's one way to put it.
Given that crouch cancel infinites are pretty BS, players can agree not to use them (cuz you can't ACCIDENTALLY do it), or play more rounds to a game Tekken-style.
But I've always thought that there was simply too much to like in the gameplay of SFA3 to decide which is better by negative terms. What's more, a good number of characters are quite good in A-ism. A-Guy is deadly, but hard to use... and V-Guy has yet to be demonstrated to be good anyway. A-Gen is the best Gen, but also hard to use. A-Mika and A-Rose are both solid. A-Rolento and A-Dhalsim are both excellent. It is true that the best characters in the game are there in large part because of what they can do in V-ism.
Well, what's new in the land of Capcom custom combos, I guess...
Also, the dynamic air game of SFA3 makes me wonder why air recovery wasn't put into SF3... maybe it'd make things really random, maybe it'd make some of the best characters even better... I don't know. They didn't try implementing it, so all talk will forever be just talk.
quote:
Vampire
I never got to play it much in arcades at all. The console versions I did try looked ugly as heck on my (very decent) TV, even with the S-video cable... but then, I heard that the DC port was a port of not the arcade game, but the PSX game! That might explain a thing or two...
The arcade version looks beautiful on a VGA monitor, though. But the gameplay doesn't feel right with me.
In conclusion, Jojo's Bizarre Adventure is king.
[this message was edited by Spoon on Wed 20 Jul 07:08] |
| Time Mage 2205th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(1):Planes, buttons and monsters. Oh my." , posted Wed 20 Jul 07:16
quote:
The multiple planes gig was wonderful and still is! Oh and by the way, "MotW" isn't the first "Garou Densetsu" game to have the two punches and two kick format. "III" has this for example
Do you know what I think?
I think that what you like more about fighting games is not what people generally like: You talk about backgrounds, character designs, music, seiyuus, and other things, like the multiple planes that, albeit being original and curious, are not the core of a fighting game. I'm not saying that you're right or wrong, but when talking about a fighting game with people, and measuring how good it is, people take into account more things that what you do, like gameplay, balance, etc. That's because, as well as looking at the backgrounds, listening to the music and recognizing that favourite seiyuu of yours, people want to have a good time playing the game, and that doesn't need "curious" or "original" features like multiple planes that, instead of making the game more playable, work against that.
So, you like multiple planes because it's a "wonderful gig", while others (the majority) thinks that, while original, that made the games more confusing, les fun, and overall, worse.
Please take this as what it is: A critic, but with the best possible intentions.
|
| Phoenix 813th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(2):Planes, buttons and monsters. Oh my." , posted Wed 20 Jul 10:46
quote:
The multiple planes gig was wonderful and still is! Oh and by the way, "MotW" isn't the first "Garou Densetsu" game to have the two punches and two kick format. "III" has this for example
Do you know what I think?
I think that what you like more about fighting games is not what people generally like: You talk about backgrounds, character designs, music, seiyuus, and other things, like the multiple planes that, albeit being original and curious, are not the core of a fighting game. I'm not saying that you're right or wrong, but when talking about a fighting game with people, and measuring how good it is, people take into account more things that what you do, like gameplay, balance, etc. That's because, as well as looking at the backgrounds, listening to the music and recognizing that favourite seiyuu of yours, people want to have a good time playing the game, and that doesn't need "curious" or "original" features like multiple planes that, instead of making the game more playable, work against that.
So, you like multiple planes because it's a "wonderful gig", while others (the majority) thinks that, while original, that made the games more confusing, les fun, and overall, worse.
Please take this as what it is: A critic, but with the best possible intentions.
Well it's not like the multiple plane thing made unbalanced games. Just take a look at Real Bout 2. That game had the great backgrounds, seiyuus etc. and the great gameplay balance.
|
| Pollyanna 1246th Post
Red Carpet Executive Member
| "Re(7):Re(10):SF4 in the works? (!)" , posted Wed 20 Jul 12:11
quote:
I'd be interested in you developing on that statement (please (Madam)). Which characters do you find "contemporary" enough to be enjoyable by today's standards, and why ?
Well, this is just my opinion, but like, in terms of 3rd Strike, I find Remy horribly boring in reference to the other characters. Fewer tricks, fewer combos, few interesting moves. Ryu also falls into this, only because he's been around so long and there are so many "copycat" characters like him.
In terms of SFZ, I find Karin twice as interesting as any of the other characters, because she has more moves, more tricks and more counters. In GGXX, it's Bridget, who I can always find new tricks with. In KOF, I like characters like Angel and May Lee (that I'm still learning) instead of characters like Ash that you can learn in a few games.
If you make a game like Rage of the Dragons with lots of easy to master, generic characters, it becomes stale very fast. I need "progressive" characters, or characters that have styles that haven't been touched on before to keep itnerest in a fighting game.
|
| Just a Person 729th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(4):SF4" , posted Wed 20 Jul 23:20
quote:
honestly i love sf3.3 too much to be ready for an SF4
Well, I am.
By the way, it seems that my comment about wishing that SF4 was at least as good as SFIII:3rd. generated all this comparison among an original fighting game and its sequels. Interesting.
But I guess that SF4 probably wouldn't be considered better or as good as 3rd.Strike, even because it seems that Capcom of America is making the game now. Not that I doubt they can make a great game, but since it's their first time producing, maybe CoA will need some experience.
However, I still think (and hope!!) that SF4 can be a good game. Actually, it could be a really great game. It doesn't matter whether it is better than SFII or SFIII:3rd.S, as long as it brings a new and interesting fighting system (and if they make it a 3D game, that it could be at least half as good as Tekken 5 or Virtua Fighter 4 - okay, that may be asking for too much...). Plus, if they keep more than just two favorite characters (like CoJ did in SFIII), that would attract people (they could keep Ryu, Ken, Nash (who maybe wasn't actually dead), Chun-Li, Necro, Cammy, Elena and Q, among other people; I would really love that!).
Let's wait for 2007 (or maybe some previews in 2006) and see what happens...
I can be any person in the world ... maybe I'm this person right in front of you ... or maybe I'm not !!
|
| shin ramberk
153th Post
Regular Customer
| "Re(5):SF4" , posted Thu 21 Jul 00:40
quote:
It doesn't matter whether it is better than SFII or SFIII:3rd.S, as long as it brings a new and interesting fighting system (and if they make it a 3D game, that it could be at least half as good as Tekken 5 or Virtua Fighter 4 - okay, that may be asking for too much.
Well, thats the problem right there. Fighting game developers have two options when developing a game. Either they add more features/options/gimmicks to the game engine or they refine existing features to make them work very well. The problem with adding new features is that you can clearly break the game (custom combos broke SFA2 and you could argue SFA3). But if you don't add new features, your game might get stale and boring, but if you refine existing features, you can make a great game (Super Turbo, Third Strike, although its debateable with 3S).
So its a trade off between new features and feature refinement. In the past, when Capcom wanted to put radically new features into a fighting game, they would just simply make a new franchise. I'd much rather have Capcom build off the 3S engine (and even used 3S sprites) but called the game SF4-- but thats the least possibility.
On the flipside, SNK/Playmore has had the long running KOF series, which has changed a lot, but I don't too much 'feature evolution' in that game. Its more like a different gimmick gets put in the game and then taken out but nothing gets super refined and then left inside. Does anyone else feel this way about KOF? I mean, a few features do remain consistent in each KOF but its more fluid in its feature set.
What I'm curious about is also the evolution of 3D fighting games. I know that the Virtua Fighter series has evolved a lot in every sequel, but I don't know to what degree. What are the big changes between every VF sequel? Same with Tekken? I can easily name all the big chanes in SF games but of course I'm a 2D fanatic.
Go buy the new Warlock series by Marvel. It is good support this title!
|
| Baines
121th Post
Regular Customer
| "Re(6):SF4" , posted Thu 21 Jul 13:38
quote:
On the flipside, SNK/Playmore has had the long running KOF series, which has changed a lot, but I don't too much 'feature evolution' in that game. Its more like a different gimmick gets put in the game and then taken out but nothing gets super refined and then left inside. Does anyone else feel this way about KOF? I mean, a few features do remain consistent in each KOF but its more fluid in its feature set.
Fluid is a good description. Some things were kept and refined, some were dropped only to return for another chance, and some just vanished. In a way, the engine itself is like the roster with a general consistancy that says "KOF" but various changes and occasional improvements.
quote:
What I'm curious about is also the evolution of 3D fighting games. I know that the Virtua Fighter series has evolveda lot in every sequel, but I don't know to what degree. What are the big changes between every VF sequel? Same with Tekken? I can easily name all the big chanes in SF games but of course I'm a 2D fanatic.
3D fighters have certainly had their own share of ideas that have been dropped rather than refined, and sometimes that return later.
Such as VF3 going heavily into uneven terrain as well as non-square rings, while VF4 goes back to flat square rings though a few have walls (some breakable.) Or Soul Calibur dropping Soul Edge's breakable weapons as well as the polygonal and sometimes interactive endings, though the endings may be returning with SC3? One could argue Soul Edge and Soul Calibur are somewhere between direct number sequels and SF2/SFA/SF3 "different" series though.
|
| Ishmael 2111th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(7):" , posted Fri 22 Jul 05:02
quote:
What I'm curious about is also the evolution of 3D fighting games. I know that the Virtua Fighter series has evolveda lot in every sequel, but I don't know to what degree. What are the big changes between every VF sequel? Same with Tekken? I can easily name all the big chanes in SF games but of course I'm a 2D fanatic.
3D fighters have certainly had their own share of ideas that have been dropped rather than refined, and sometimes that return later.
Such as VF3 going heavily into uneven terrain as well as non-square rings, while VF4 goes back to flat square rings though a few have walls (some breakable.) Or Soul Calibur dropping Soul Edge's breakable weapons as well as the polygonal and sometimes interactive endings, though the endings may be returning with SC3? One could argue Soul Edge and Soul Calibur are somewhere between direct number sequels and SF2/SFA/SF3 "different" series though.
There's also the loss of "moon gravity" -where you could do those long, slow jumps twelve feet into the air- from both VF and Tekken. The fighting enviornments have also changed, whether it's enclosed rings, neverending scrolling, or odd shaped fighting arenas. One of the biggest changes in 3D games is how the game handles having the characters in 3D enviornments. Early games didn't give much if any option for handling the third plane but that's certainly changed over the years. There are all sorts of little changes as well like the addition of universal low parries to Tekken but I'm hardly an expert on the chronology of cataloging these types of changes. That, and I have to go so I have to cut this post short.
|
| Ultima 413th Post
Gold Customer
| "Re(6):Re(4) SFA2 vs. SFA3" , posted Fri 22 Jul 06:10
Sp00n:
> It's not really a 2D vs. 3D thing for me. I just thought that CvS1 did a lot of different things, and did them well.
I thought CvS1's stages intros were interesting, at least the first few times. Then they got old. And the stagesd themselves I thought were mostly bleh.
re: MOTW
> Considering that there really isn't a living tournament scene for the game, and most of us (myself included) aren't exactly top Garou players, we aren't in a position to give a truly accurate read on the game.
This is something that bothers me about the game, actually: See below.
> We do know that the game looks great, sounds great, has very lenient controls, and is lots of fun to play. Seems pretty terrific to me.
Yes, that's all true. However, being the pessimistic cynic that I am, I can't help wondering if MOTW underwent intense scrunity like most of Capcom's games, if it would stand up? Most of the people who play Garou only play it casually. Arcadia rankings show the game to have a seriously broken character (Kevin) and definite tiers, but nobody seems to mind. I just wonder if it's because the wrong people (or maybe the right people?) are playing the game, or the right (wrong?) people just aren't playing it enough. :p
> > SFZ3 vs. SFZ2
> I remember back in the day a player won the championship match by the Rose d.MP wall.
That would be Dave Sirlin, at the East Coast Championships 4. It was ECC3 that made me swear off of SFA2 forever.
> I dunno about it being a turtle fest, though, since there actually were at least two counters to CC activation: CC activation, and proximity cancel DP. Of course, d.HK distance judging did rule the day.
First of all: If the counter to a tactic is itself, then there is no counter for that tactic. You wouldn't say the counter to ST Akuma is ST Akuma, would you? And secondly, "proximatey cancel DP" only works if you're playing with, what, 4 characters in the game?
re: SFA3 issues
> Personally, I've always thought that this was blown a little out of proportion. There's some pretty darned weird stuff I've seen in ST, and nobody complains about that.
True,. but SFA3 had a far greater number of randomness, and it was noticed *very* early on. on the very first day I played SFA3 beta, I counted no fewer than 3 instances of my X-Vega's j.MK completely whiffing my opponent.
> (Daigo showed us the way with V-Akuma),
> It was bas! bas, not daigo, who invented the demon flip CCs!
Yeah, Bas invented them, but I don't think we saw them in the US until Daigo came over here and beasted on everyone. No one played V-Akuma before Daigo.
> > and then finally CC (crouch cancel) infinites
> I think the US stopped well before CC infinites were being used extensively in play... they probably started dropping it when MvC2 came out.
That's the thing: When CC infinites were first discovered, they were banned in the US, mainly because it was believed that only a few characters could do them, and only on one side of the screen. This would later turn out to be false, but the game sort of petered out by then. Japan didn't ban CC infinites, and started using them in their play, and took the game much further than the US (note: This is why the US doesn't ban *anything* any more - they don't want to risk falling behind Japan automatically because they didn't learn something).
re: SFA2 vs. SFA3
> But I wonder... is that the fanboy opinion, or the tournament-level player opinion?
Mostly tournament-level player opinion (fanboy-wise, I think SFA3 has a much bigger fanbase, since it has a much larger cast, had awesome-if-not-quite-arcade-accurate hope ports, etc), but as I said, it varies.
Me, I'm squarely in SFA3's camp.
> But I've always thought that there was simply too much to like in the gameplay of SFA3 to decide which is better by negative terms.
I agree 100%. SFA3 has numerous faults, but I find it strengths far FAR outweigh its weaknesses. PLus, I CAN'T STAND SFA2 at anything past lower-level intermediate. If I'm playing someone in SFA2 who knows how to play the game, it's not fun. SFA3 I can have fun whether I'm fighting people who know how to play the game or not, or even by myself (which is *very* rare).
> Also, the dynamic air game of SFA3 makes me wonder why air recovery wasn't put into SF3... maybe it'd make things really random,
maybe it'd make some of the best characters even better... I don't know. They didn't try implementing it, so all talk will forever be just talk.
Well, SF3 was mostly going for an "old school" feel, at least on the surface. PLus the main engine (NG/2I) is a lot older and way different. NG and 2I had infinites even without SFA3's loose juggle rules, so there was no way they would hgave done something like that in 3S (on the contrary, they added a hard juggle limit). Besides, thanks to parries, the games are random enough as is.
--
Ultima - The Right arm of Scrub Voltron
http://uramble.com/index.html - U's Rambling Page
|
| Spoon 1164th Post
Red Carpet Premium Member+
| "Re(7):Re(4) SFA2 vs. SFA3" , posted Fri 22 Jul 07:32:
quote:
Sp00n:
Yes, that's all true. However, being the pessimistic cynic that I am, I can't help wondering if MOTW underwent intense scrunity like most of Capcom's games, if it would stand up? Most of the people who play Garou only play it casually. Arcadia rankings show the game to have a seriously broken character (Kevin) and definite tiers, but nobody seems to mind. I just wonder if it's because the wrong people (or maybe the right people?) are playing the game, or the right (wrong?) people just aren't playing it enough. :p
If it were as popular as MvC2, then it'd probably be a Kevin/Gato/someone else fest in a tournament environment. Even so, many of the other characters are so individually charismatic (and also capable of BS) that they'd probably draw players anyway. Even though every SBO championship team has contained at least 50% top tier (last winner was Chun/Ken team >_< ), there's still been a surprising number of mid tier representation. And I think the fantabulous showing of the Kuroda/Hayao team will just inspire more people to pick up non-top characters.
quote:
First of all: If the counter to a tactic is itself, then there is no counter for that tactic. You wouldn't say the counter to ST Akuma is ST Akuma, would you? And secondly, "proximatey cancel DP" only works if you're playing with, what, 4 characters in the game?
It's not quite right to use the ST Akuma analogy, since everyone in SFA2 is capable of CC, where only ST Akuma is ST Akuma. Yeah, prox cancel DP only makes the top shotos more top.
quote:
I played SFA3 beta, I counted no fewer than 3 instances of my X-Vega's j.MK completely whiffing my opponent.
Devil's advocate time:
that was the beta.
I won't deny that really, REALLY weird stuff has happened to me though, mainly with low strongs and low forwards up close. Some pretty weirdass hitboxing stuff has personally happened to me around Sodom, stuff which could well mean win/loss, so I won't deny it.
quote:
Well, SF3 was mostly going for an "old school" feel, at least on the surface. PLus the main engine (NG/2I) is a lot older and way different. NG and 2I had infinites even without SFA3's loose juggle rules, so there was no way they would hgave done something like that in 3S (on the contrary, they added a hard juggle limit). Besides, thanks to parries, the games are random enough as is.
See, that's the question: implementation. I don't have access to the dev tools for the SF3 engine, so I can't say what is and isn't possible. Even then, simply saying, "the game has juggles" or "you can air recover" is a really imprecise statement that often sweeps over many vital elements of what's being referred to. We know that ST and 3S both allow juggles, but they are very different in the two games. Some characters can't even juggle in ST! Say you had 3S as it is now, and then I say, "add air recovery". What are the rules for air recovery? Do you maintain the juggle count while air recovered? (Hopefully it'd get set to allow at least ONE hit, else you'd get an uncounterable attack...) Counter-hit as we know it in SFA3 doesn't exist in 3S; after all, counterhits grant NO bonus in 3S!
I don't know if the game would be better or worse with air recovery, since I don't know the implementation for that which was never implemented, or even publicly proposed. Considering that parry alone introduces a strong random element into the game, is it possible for air recovery to make the game MORE random?
But the thought of getting hit, air recovering, parrying opponent's juggle attempt and then counter hitting sounds really cool to me. It might also become really stupid in practise, but I don't know.
Even with the general absence of infinites in 3S (the only true infinite that exists in non-system direction 3S is an Ibuki vs. Gill combo I believe), 100% combos or setups were still found. To be honest, I'm surprised that stuff like the Urien/Oro unblockables made it into the game, because with spam walls like theirs the first thing I'd try is launching that and then crossing someone up... maybe it was just dismissed as, "you guessed wrong on block"?
Oh well. Talk is fun.
quote:
Sirlin
Oh, one thing.
I have a tendency not to name names unless the names are already smeared all over the place (e.g. Daigo) or factually important (e.g. BAS combo)... because I'm afraid that it makes me look like an ENORMOUS geek.
(I'll admit that I actually knew that it was Sirlin, as much as I wish that I didn't).
[this message was edited by Spoon on Fri 22 Jul 08:14] |
| Sano 1902th Post
Gold Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
| "Re(10):Re(4) SFA2 vs. SFA3" , posted Sat 23 Jul 05:17:
quote:
You're afraid to look like an enormous geek... IN A FIGHTING GAME FORUM??? O_O :p
There's a difference between looking like whomever and looking like... say, Sano.
I told ya on the "I give up" thread I had no cool points.
And seriously, just the fact that you post at MMCAFE I'm sorry to say, makes you a Nerd/Geek/Dork. There's nothing wrong with that. The way I see it, every guy fills their head up with knowledge of every sports event that ever happened in the existence of mankind, we just fill the void with comics, cartoons, games, etc. So long as you master the art of not bringing any of this stuff up in actual conversation and having outside interests your personal relationships with the opposite sex should turn out fine(and please shower, watch your weight and stuff). Rejoice in Nerd-dum I say. Adjust your glasses and raise your pocket protectors up in the air!
And I suppose I'm the only one who preferred SFZ1 to SFZ2. Granted I never played either of them competitivly or in the Arcades, was pretty poor back then, could just afford to buy the games and that's it, play with friends and relatives. I played SFZ3 in the Arcades a lot though, my financial situation changed by then. Here's why I liked SFZ1 more than SFZ2 at least.
1. I hated Custom Combos. Now anyone can do a Combo just by hitting 2 bottons and button mashing instead of all the work that goes into learning a combo? Get the *f* out of here. Speaking of wich, I didn't care for my Chain Combos being lessened and/or gone entirely. No longer could I combine Chun-Li's kick Super with a Fireball Super for 15 hits without godly super precise timing if even at all.
2. SFZ1 offered no endings on Level 1. Increase the difficulty bitch to get a real ending! No Fighter should offer endings on Level 1 I feel. When the heck did this trend start? There's no stopping it nowadays though.
3. When you beat SFZ on Level 8 with any character you were treated to a special song for each character, more incentive to beat the game with every character on Level 8. Chun-Li's Piano song was amazing.
3. Ryu and Ken vs. Vega(Cape). OMG IT'S TEH MOVIE!
4. When you beat Gouki, the screen blew up with a big white flash from a regular hit, you were called a great player and the background looked 'sort of' like 'space' in the last episode of SF2V only light blue with stuff flying around (Okay it looked more like a Megaman Boss Intro screen) and you were told you were a great player and you believed it - that was just classic.
5. DAN WAS USEFUL!
6. SFZ had new characters with Rose, Nash and Dan. SFZ2, what new characters??? Gen from SF1, Rolento from FF, Dhalsim and Zangief who I used to hate back in the day from SF2 and look at the brand spanking new character. Sailor Moon with Ryu's head! Yes, by this point I've gotten to like Dhalsim, Zangief and even Sakura, it's kind of hard not to as many times Capcom has rammed them down my throat, especially Sakura.
The next few are storyline stuff, I guess you can ignore if you don't particularly care for these type of things.
7. NASH IS STILL ALIVE IN SFZ2, OKAY WTF WHERE'S GUILE??? Lots of luck figuring out SFZ2's storyline retconned SFZ1's story without internet help or being able to read Japanese.
8. How dare they retcon Adon calling Vega(Cape) a Drug Dealer? That was priceless and made me an Adon fan on the spot! Adon/Gouki rivalry is beyond retarted. It can only end in the death of one of my favorite characters. They should of kept the Adon/Vega rivalry.
9. Ryu defeated Sagat again in SFZ1. Rivalry over since they didn't fight in SF2, now you have them fight prior, the rivalry is out of the way. But SFZ2 retcons it, rivalry stands. Now they have this rivalry that will never ever ever be settled and just sit there in the air for eternity. Honestly by SF4 I hope they resolve the Ryu/Sagat rivalry, his outstanding eternal rival should be Gouki and a friendly rivalry with Ken, that's it. But this is just storyline stuff, doesn't matter much in the grand scheme of things I guess. It's not like Kyo/Iori will ever get settled either, nor will Sol/Ky or a bunch of other ones.
But in general SFZ1 worked much better with the SF2 storyline, the retcons were not as drastic, SFZ2-SFZ3 really screwed things up, so much so most believe the series is an alternate reality. I wished they would of just upgraded SFZ1's storyline with more characters instead of changing everything with more retcons. I do however still love SFZ3's storyline though and what became of Ryu/Sagat, Cammy/Balrog(ninja) and Rose/Vega but I still wish they didn't make things as convuluted as they did. I pray that SF4 has no more storyline retcons and just builds on what's there. Please don't feel the need to say Vega never died or stupid ish like that.
SFZ2 did own in the backgrounds though.
SFZ3 is my favorite in the series. With all the Isms and SF2 characters it's really hard to hate on it, I can even forgive their cheesey endings. The Soundtrack really owned, the announcer told me I had fists of God, Feilong and Guile returned in the home ports, Vega(Cape) upped the anty as boss and Juni and Juli were really great sub bosses. And I just loved Xism Ryu and Chun-Li besides. Just the fact that if you didn't defeat Vega on the first try you reserved the lame-o ending in the arcades made me drop a fortune in the machine until I got Ryu and Chun-Li's Arcade 'true' endings while having to fight off all the human competition just to even accomplish this. Brings back fond memories.
Ryu and Chun-Li forever!
[this message was edited by Sano on Sat 23 Jul 09:53] |
|
|
Best site EVER:
