|
|
Post by warmunger on Nov 15, 2008 17:07:11 GMT -5
SF4 is fun, but it's obviously a lazy design ethic since all they are doing is putting many old fighters in. The Game play is looking good, but I'm not excited about it. TVC looks cool, but I'm burned out of versus games that follow MVC formula. SF2HD doesn't matter too much to me, it's a good game, though. Capcom still makes good games, but they threw away the talent to make great games IMO. These modern games will never leave the same kind of impression that their predecessors left on me back when they were in full force during the 90's. Alpha 3 has alot of nostalgia value, but if I really really get deep with the game play. It comes up short in comparison to Alpha 2. They have 6 new characters in SF4, that's more charcters than just about any up and comming fighter now except SC4. 6 new is enuff 4 me, I was happy with 4. And the old characters they R putting in R totally awesome. I'm a member of Capcom Unity and SF Devo and Capcom is actaully listening 2 the fans. About 3/4 of the roster is what the fans told them they wanted, really and I love the MVC formula and I'm glad they bought it back, I'm going to buy TVC the day it comes out. Capcom didn't throw away the talent, the talent left. It's like win a band grows big and everybody in the band leaves and starts solo careers. I have faith in Capcom's new talent. I played SF4 and I loved it. Nothing will ever match the 90s. Video games R slowly dying, every year sales R still huge but they R still shrinking. Huh? Alpha 2 and 3 play the same way, I just played it last night on the SFAA disc. Well, the secret charcters in SFA2 R really over powered but that's about the only difference I C. What puts Alpha 2 over 3, 2 U? |
|
|
|
Post by JACK-2 on Nov 15, 2008 22:47:49 GMT -5
They have 6 new characters in SF4, that's more charcters than just about any up and tomming fighter now except SC4. 6 new is enuff 4 me, I was happy with 4. And the old characters they R putting in R totally awesome. I'm a member of Capcom Unity and SF Devo and Capcom is actaully listening 2 the fans. About 3/4 of the roster is what the fans told them they wanted, really I think the new characters are lame minus Gouken, I'm not even gonna touch them at all. My beef is we've been playing with these characters forever, for me re-discovering the same mutha-phucka's over again ain't interesting. I understand why Capcom is doing it, though. They cannot afford to be innovative because innovation=Risk. They cannot afford to try something new because they have no way of guaranteeing it's success as opposed to using an old successful formula which is tried and tested. Gaming is much more expensive these days and that intells greater risk. So, the unnecessary risk or common risk which leads to innovation is not common place. Fans are more lenient now ad days as well, which would explain the rise in Fanboyism [No offense to anyone]. They'll take whatever the company hands them and make excuses for them no matter it. Sorta like how MM9 fanboys claim that MM9 is innovative when the game has absolutely no new implements at all. Infact, they actually took shit out just to make things seem old for the sake of nostalgia. and I love the MVC formula and I'm glad they bought it back, I'm going to buy TVC the day it comes out. Capcom didn't throw away the talent, the talent left. It's like win a band grows big and everybody in the band leaves and starts solo careers. I have faith in Capcom's new talent. Nah, they let shit slip. The people who left were even talking about how they weren't able to do their thing just because Capcom kept wouldn't let them. Hideki Kamiya wasn't allowed to work on any other DMC accept the first one, Clover Studio's didn't meet the sales expectations Capcom wanted and were shut down, and so on. Also, what new Talent, they ain't have nothing new mane. I played SF4 and I loved it. Nothing will ever match the 90s. Video games R slowly dying, every year sales R still huge but they R still shrinking. Which is why gaming interest me less. Huh? Alpha 2 and 3 play the same way, I just played it last night on the SFAA disc. Well, the secret charcters in SFA2 R really over powered but that's about the only difference I C. What puts Alpha 2 over 3, 2 U? No, they don't. . .Alpha 3 has a big focus on aerial combat. The sprites are smaller and the gameplay is much more erratic. |
|
The Big Daddy C-Master
Big Daddy 
Living life to the fullest, and it feels great.
I'm still here... for now...
Posts: 26,387
|
Post by The Big Daddy C-Master on Nov 17, 2008 21:57:51 GMT -5
The thing is at that time, Capcom started to venture into "cheap" endings. If you compare Alpha 3's ending to it's predecessor Alpha 2's endings. You'll realize how much they decreased in quality, But then again Alpha 3 was a rush job made due to the popularity of Alpha 2. As for Capcom, they've lost all the talent that has made them what the are today and they are definitely lazy. Fanboys tend to disagree, but they are fanboys after all. . .lol. Maybe I just haven't delved into number two that much. I've played it a good a mount but I'm forced to play against the computer often and I find their tactics on that game dissatisfying. What I like about Alpha 3 is how it is one of the few fighters designed to keep you playing for a long time, by yourself or otherwise. There is always something to do. There are many modes and things to unlock, it was just a really large and diverse game. It is a shame that they didn't really get V-Ism right though, that thing stayed broken. |
|
|
|
Post by JACK-2 on Nov 18, 2008 13:25:49 GMT -5
Back when I first played Alpha 3 [ I played the Japanese version first] around 10 years ago, The various modes and content it featured offered alot of replay value. The most of any Street Fighter if you ask me, I think that's why it was at the time my favorite Street fighter of all time. But, the game engine had alot of problems: Unbalanced Ism's and Crouch Cancels. In terms of a better combat system Alpha 2 which was more akin to Street fighter II type of game-play was better IMO. The fights felt less fixed and the game-play was more solid. I agree that Alpha 3 has great single player mode and more ways to play versus modes which makes it a better game to play with friends or alone. But, Alpha 2 just plays better nonetheless. But, at the end of the day both are good games and I still like Alpha 3 alot, though.  BTW, can you link me to your Fanboy test. . .I cannot seem to find it. |
|
The Big Daddy C-Master
Big Daddy
Living life to the fullest, and it feels great.
I'm still here... for now...
Posts: 26,387
|
Post by The Big Daddy C-Master on Nov 18, 2008 21:46:28 GMT -5
I played Zero 3 first as well. Like I said it was really fun, but yes there are some balance issues, as are with any game. Cap vs SNK 2 on playstation had Roll Canceling for example. Usually the more you put in a game the harder it is to balance. I'll find it, I believe it is in the comics section. I'll needle it. |
|
|
|
Post by JACK-2 on Nov 19, 2008 9:57:34 GMT -5
The thing is Alpha 3's balance issues really stuck out for me. It's not the most broken game, but many features are just way too good. Crouch Cancels and Variable combo's have to be the most overpowered abilities in Street fighter History.
|
|
|
|
Post by warmunger on Nov 29, 2008 17:46:13 GMT -5
I think the new characters are lame minus Gouken, I'm not even gonna touch them at all. My beef is we've been playing with these characters forever, for me re-discovering the same mutha-phucka's over again ain't interesting. I understand why Capcom is doing it, though. They cannot afford to be innovative because innovation=Risk. They cannot afford to try something new because they have no way of guaranteeing it's success as opposed to using an old successful formula which is tried and tested. Gaming is much more expensive these days and that intells greater risk. So, the unnecessary risk or common risk which leads to innovation is not common place. Fans are more lenient now ad days as well, which would explain the rise in Fanboyism [No offense to anyone]. They'll take whatever the company hands them and make excuses for them no matter it. Sorta like how MM9 fanboys claim that MM9 is innovative when the game has absolutely no new implements at all. Infact, they actually took shit out just to make things seem old for the sake of nostalgia. I don't think the new characters R lame. They R pretty good except El Fuerte, he's got some nice moves but there seems to B a lack of real strategy. Y say it sux to have the same characters return for most games. I mean EVERY other fighter on the planet has the same people com back EVERY GAME, y is it bad win SF does it? Plus people wanted these fighters back, they wint crazy win SF3 got rid of the hole cast, people just had 2 get use 2 it. I mean if U got EVERY game jouralist, some who R far from SF fanboys saying the game is good, then it's good, right? Nah, they let shit slip. The people who left were even talking about how they weren't able to do their thing just because Capcom kept wouldn't let them. Hideki Kamiya wasn't allowed to work on any other DMC accept the first one, Clover Studio's didn't meet the sales expectations Capcom wanted and were shut down, and so on. Also, what new Talent, they ain't have nothing new mane. Man, I didn't no that, that does suck and bad. Which is why gaming interest me less.. Yea, the desire to buy and play every game that I think I might like has gone down. If u c my past VG generation library, it's huge but N this Generation I own less than 10 games and I have a XB 360 and a PS3. No, they don't. . .Alpha 3 has a big focus on aerial combat. The sprites are smaller and the gameplay is much more erratic. Really? i always thought 3 was better, more balanced, ism's to pick from which gave nearly limitless posibilities, lots of extra game modes, lots of characters and stages. I thought alpha 3 was a vast improvment over 2 |
|
|
|
Post by JACK-2 on Nov 29, 2008 22:31:40 GMT -5
*I don't think the new characters R lame. They R pretty good except El Fuerte, he's got some nice moves but there seems to B a lack of real strategy. *Y say it sux to have the same characters return for most games. I mean EVERY other fighter on the planet has the same people com back EVERY GAME, y is it bad win SF does it? *I disagree, they are horrid IMO. What a complete lack of effort on Capcoms part. * Because SF is not like other games, every numbered sequel to Street Fighter has had a complete overhaul in cast. Alpha was the exception, but that isn't even a sequel. I doesn't matter if every game does it, what matters is what SF does. Plus people wanted these fighters back, they wint crazy win SF3 got rid of the hole cast, people just had 2 get use 2 it. I mean if U got EVERY game jouralist, some who R far from SF fanboys saying the game is good, then it's good, right? The game has so much Fanboy support, I remember they would delete threads that criticize SF4 back in Shoryuken. It's like Megaman 9 all over again, the game is okay. I just cannot enjoy re-discovering the same cast of characters I've been playing since 1991. Yea, the desire to buy and play every game that I think I might like has gone down. If u c my past VG generation library, it's huge but N this Generation I own less than 10 games and I have a XB 360 and a PS3. Same here, Gaming is dull as hell. Really? i always thought 3 was better, more balanced, ism's to pick from which gave nearly limitless posibilities, lots of extra game modes, lots of characters and stages. I thought alpha 3 was a vast improvment over 2 I agree that it had better modes, but the isms did not balance jack. V-ism is way too overpowered. |
|
|
|
Post by warmunger on Dec 1, 2008 19:47:19 GMT -5
* Because SF is not like other games, every numbered sequel to Street Fighter has had a complete overhaul in cast. Alpha was the exception, but that isn't even a sequel. I doesn't matter if every game does it, what matters is what SF does. I don't think that's fair at all and I'm not just saying that B-cuz I am an avid Capcom enthusiast. How can U praise 1 game 4 making moderate changes (KOF 12) but condem another (SF 4) 4 the same thing, just B-cuz that's not what SF usually does? N these times 6 is alot. It wood B incredibly foolish 2 come off of a hiatus with dozens of comics and appearal, adorning the old cast, then 10 yrs later, come back with a new game but without the cast that made your entrie company what it is 2 day. * Because SF is not like other games, every numbered sequel to Street Fighter has had a complete overhaul in cast. Alpha was the exception, but that isn't even a sequel. I doesn't matter if every game does it, what matters is what SF does. Even tho that's the way it should B, that's asking 2 much during these times. As much as Capcom made this game 4 the fans, they made it 2 get rich 2...all over again. I no I want 2 play a SF5 sum where N the future. The game has so much Fanboy support, I remember they would delete threads that criticize SF4 back in Shoryuken. It's like Megaman 9 all over again, the game is okay. I just cannot enjoy re-discovering the same cast of characters I've been playing since 1991. That does sound pretty darn fanboyish but U have 2 admit, most of that criticizm came from a couple of screen shots in the very begining. And U keep talking so badly about the SF2 cast and I must go back again and say that's very unfair. U complain about the the 16 OGs like they R such horrible characters. But its okay 2 play with the same over 20 characters that appear in almost every KOF every year. I can list 2 U all the characters that appear over and over in KOF and that list will B far longer than 16. Y don't you complain about the same KOF characters who appear over and over? Also, those 16 have been absent from more SFs games than the entire reaccuing roster in KOF. N fact, those 16 have also been absent more than all the OG's N Tekken have. I think it's very harsh go this hard on the game. It's like SF is held 2 a different standard. SF has never really blown any of it's comp out of the water like that to B held on such a higher standard. Tekken, KOF, and SC R a healthy amount time better than SF was. Same here, Gaming is dull as hell. That's Y I'm looking 4 a Dreamcast, takes me back 2 the days win I seen a game and said "This is the future" yet the game was still enjoyable and worth the cash B-cuz it was good and not B-cuz it took millions of dollars 2 make. but the isms did not balance jack. V-ism is way too overpowered. I hated V-ism, I thought it was overrated. There R 2 many characters that have attacks that R 2 hard 2 get around win your N V-ism, U can't block and in the SFA games and U need to B able 2 bloc cuz it's not like U can parry. Or may-B I just feel that way cuz I played 3rd Strike 2 death and SFA3 sat there and collected dust. |
|
|
|
Post by JACK-2 on Dec 3, 2008 0:11:15 GMT -5
I don't think that's fair at all and I'm not just saying that B-cuz I am an avid Capcom enthusiast. How can U praise 1 game 4 making moderate changes (KOF 12) but condem another (SF 4) 4 the same thing, just B-cuz that's not what SF usually does? But its okay 2 play with the same over 20 characters that appear in almost every KOF every year. I can list 2 U all the characters that appear over and over in KOF and that list will B far longer than 16. Y don't you complain about the same KOF characters who appear over and over? Also, those 16 have been absent from more SFs games than the entire reaccuing roster in KOF. N fact, those 16 have also been absent more than all the OG's N Tekken have. Remember that SF sequels are treated like a new series where they re-imagine things and the sequels for said entry add too them like conventional fighters sequels. SF 2 for instance is completely different from SF 1 and SF 3. . .But it has different versions like HF and ST where they add things like a normal sequel. KOF does not do that, it simply makes different versions and adds to them. I have no problem with add ons and if SF just did Add ons like KOF did. I would have no problem with SF4. They do not, instead they make completely new reiterations and add on. So, a sequel of SF has a completely different meaning for me than a sequel to KOF. Also, it ain't about how many times the characters return. Do not get it wrong, I want returning characters as well. My discrepancy is with the intentions of the creators. It's obvious they brought back the OG SF cast for marketing purpose. I cannot say the same for any fighter right now. N these times 6 is alot. It wood B incredibly foolish 2 come off of a hiatus with dozens of comics and appearal, adorning the old cast, then 10 yrs later, come back with a new game but without the cast that made your entrie company what it is 2 day. Why would that matter, there was also tons of media with the original cast as well back when SF 3 was coming out. The bottom line is I prefer the way Capcom did things and nothing is gonna change my mind. Even tho that's the way it should B, that's asking 2 much during these times. I agree'd, which is why I elaborated on it. That doesn't mean I'm gonna like it. As much as Capcom made this game 4 the fans, they made it 2 get rich 2...all over again. I no I want 2 play a SF5 sum where N the future. They aren't gonna get rich, though. . .They just aren't going to lose as much as if they would had they actually took a risk. Which is one of the reasons they are doing this. That does sound pretty darn fanboyish but U have 2 admit, most of that criticizm came from a couple of screen shots in the very begining. Yeah, but that doesn't justify what they did. And U keep talking so badly about the SF2 cast and I must go back again and say that's very unfair. U complain about the the 16 OGs like they R such horrible characters. They aren't horrible, just over exposed. Think about how many SF 2 versions we've had and how much exposure they get and for a game to come out and not even have SF3 characters just to pander to SF2 fanboys. It's ticks me off to wait for 10 years just to get a sequel that fails to meet standards set up by Capcom. It's equivalent to breaking a promise IMO. SF2 is the greatest Street fighter ever no doubt and you will not hear any complaints from me in that respect. But, that does not excuse Capcoms milking of them. I think it's very harsh go this hard on the game. It's like SF is held 2 a different standard. SF has never really blown any of it's comp out of the water like that to B held on such a higher standard. Tekken, KOF, and SC R a healthy amount time better than SF was. This isn't about which is a better game, but how they cast. It's there that SF sets itself apart from other fighters to such a degree in that respect. Personally, I don't care for Tekken post Tekken Tag w/ the exception of Dark Resurrection and I explained my view on KOF on KMC. That's Y I'm looking 4 a Dreamcast, takes me back 2 the days win I seen a game and said "This is the future" yet the game was still enjoyable and worth the cash B-cuz it was good and not B-cuz it took millions of dollars 2 make. Agree'd |
|
|
|
Post by warmunger on Dec 5, 2008 16:35:15 GMT -5
Remember that SF sequels are treated like a new series where they re-imagine things and the sequels for said entry add too them like conventional fighters sequels. SF 2 for instance is completely different from SF 1 and SF 3. . .But it has different versions like HF and ST where they add things like a normal sequel. KOF does not do that, it simply makes different versions and adds to them. I have no problem with add ons and if SF just did Add ons like KOF did. I would have no problem with SF4. They do not, instead they make completely new reiterations and add on. So, a sequel of SF has a completely different meaning for me than a sequel to KOF. Also, it ain't about how many times the characters return. Do not get it wrong, I want returning characters as well. My discrepancy is with the intentions of the creators. It's obvious they brought back the OG SF cast for marketing purpose. I cannot say the same for any fighter right now. O.K I get it. U R use 2 Capcom redoing the entire cast win a new NO.# sequel is announced. If they do not do that then it's not a real SF sequel 2 U? Also, I think that Capcom brought back the old cast cuz they were afraid that SFIV not sell well with out them (that's really what U just said). What' rong with that? U can't come off a 10 yr hiatus and fail, that would suck. Also, it ain't about how many times the characters return. Do not get it wrong, I want returning characters as well. My discrepancy is with the intentions of the creators. It's obvious they brought back the OG SF cast for marketing purpose. I cannot say the same for any fighter right now. I geuss Capcom feels that U can't a have a real SF with out them. 2 B honest, I don't mind, I like the SFII guys. As long as they add a few new characters every new game. They aren't gonna get rich, though. . .They just aren't going to lose as much as if they would had they actually took a risk. Which is one of the reasons they are doing this. Given the hype and press they might find gold again. I woodn't B suprised if this game manages 500,000 copies. PlEEZ don't wish bad fortune on this game, if this game is a sucsess there is no doubt N my mind that we will C a RS3, MVC3, and a DS4. I hope Capcom does well cuz I want sum of the old fighters 2 B brought back. At least a PSP port of RE and PJ. Yeah, but that doesn't justify what they did. Yea, I agree. I was just pointing out that a lot of the rage was premature. A lot of people have changed their minds. for a game to come out and not even have SF3 characters just to pander to SF2 fanboys. That is kind of like a slap N the face. 2 this day it iratates me. I no its' a prequel but there should B at least a character or 2 from SF3. I will really take it as an insult if there isn't a single SF3 character cameo appearance in that game. It's like "dudes, I played SF3, you can't hide the fact that it exist". It's like they want to erase SF3 replace it with 4. From the way the story seems 2 B shaping up...SF3 has never existed, but I'll wait until the game comes out 2 say they have retconed SF3. [/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by JACK-2 on Dec 5, 2008 18:00:04 GMT -5
O.K I get it. U R use 2 Capcom redoing the entire cast win a new NO.# sequel is announced. If they do not do that then it's not a real SF sequel 2 U? Also, I think that Capcom brought back the old cast cuz they were afraid that SFIV not sell well with out them (that's really what U just said). What' rong with that? U can't come off a 10 yr hiatus and fail, that would suck. I don't wanna go that far and say it's not a real sequel because of that. My problem is that Capcom isn't thinking in terms of what's best for the franchise in the long run, rather they are thinking of what's best for their pocket. Let's face it SF4 is mostly targeted at SF2 fans. The fact that the hack producer ONO aka ohnoes [directed Fighting Jam] pretty much has an anti-SF3 policy based on his casting and keeps harping about his goal to revive the SF2 glory days shows this. This may look fine on paper because let's face it, SF3 was a flop in the mainstream audience vs SF2 which is what pioneered the Golden age of fighters. This make look like a valid argument especially with fanboys who keep pushing the "SF has to go back to it's roots argument" or "SF3 sucks!!" nias arguments. What they forget to tell you is that when SF2 was being developed. The target audience was completely different than that of SF4 which is ironic since SF4 is trying to tap into SF2 popularity. The target audience back then was everyone. The game was made with everyone in mind, not just a select few. Furthermore the game was built from scratch, pretty much everything from SF1 was scrapped. They remade everything a new and you can guess what happened next. . .The game was a hit. Infact, it was more than a hit, it was a revolution which forever changed the face of gaming. Now ask yourself, if Capcom didn't take a risk and tried something new. . .had they stuck to the dame old formula which enjoyed moderate success. . .Would SF2 be as big as opposed to trying something new? Fanboys constantly cite SF3 as an example of why Capcom should keep to the same old tired formula. Without ever knowing what made SF successful. This whole thing about the casting is B.S., SF3 flopped because of timing. The game came out in the late 90's, a time where the fighting game market was filled with competition from rival companies that have gained popularity such as 3D fighter which were gaining immense popularity: Tekken and Virtua Fighter. Not too mention games from SF3 own camp I.E. Versus series and Alpha. . .compare that to when SF2 came out? The difference is obvious to everyone but fanboys who keep bringing up the cast, nevermind all the other games that were full of SF2 OG's and could not rival SF2 success. Alpha 3 had everyone from SF2 with brand new moves and gameplay. . .Yet, it still couldn't rival SF2 success. Nevermind that SF3 did better than most of those Capcom games in the competitive scene and was neck n neck with MVC 2 which was the biggest competitive 2-D fighter. Hell, SF 3 was more popular than SF2 in the competitive scene. My point is that for better or for worst, progress is made with risk. Staying with the familiar may keep you from a completely flop, but it also keeps you from a complete hit. What we need is a new SF for a new era. Not SF2 reborn dream match 08. I geuss Capcom feels that U can't a have a real SF with out them. 2 B honest, I don't mind, I like the SFII guys. As long as they add a few new characters every new game. Given the hype and press they might find gold again. I woodn't B suprised if this game manages 500,000 copies. PlEEZ don't wish bad fortune on this game, if this game is a sucsess there is no doubt N my mind that we will C a RS3, MVC3, and a DS4. I hope Capcom does well cuz I want sum of the old fighters 2 B brought back. At least a PSP port of RE and PJ. IMO, this game will never reach the success it could have reached had it actually tried something new. I'm not gonna wish it bad, but I really do not think that the average GTA and Halo kat is gonna go crazy because Ken and "Rye-yuu" is back with the SF gang. It's hopeless fanboy dream. Yea, I agree. I was just pointing out that a lot of the rage was premature. A lot of people have changed their minds. I won't, because I don't take whatever is given to me by the game company. No offense to anyone, but it is what it is. I'm gonna play the game and I'm looking forward to palying with Gouken and Evil Ryu. But, it sure won't change my opinion of gaming and it's retarded status quo. The nostalgia fanboys really urk me with their B.S. and pretty much ruin everything IMO. That is kind of like a slap N the face. 2 this day it iratates me. I no its' a prequel but there should B at least a character or 2 from SF3. I will really take it as an insult if there isn't a single SF3 character cameo appearance in that game. It's like "dudes, I played SF3, you can't hide the fact that it exist". It's like they want to erase SF3 replace it with 4. From the way the story seems 2 B shaping up...SF3 has never existed, but I'll wait until the game comes out 2 say they have retconed SF3. What do you expect, this game is made by an Anti-SF3 producer who is nothing but a SF2 fanboy. That's why I normally hate talking about this game with other people then those I'm cool wit. Way too much fanboys pushin' B.S. |
|
