According to the Paul Gale Network, Capcom considered releasing another version of Street Fighter 3 series after Third Strike before they ended up pushing through with Street Fighter 4.Before Capcom 100% committed themselves to doing Street Fighter 4, they were actually toying around with the idea of making a fourth title in the Street Fighter 3 series and it would have come out in February, 2009 (instead of SF4). The reason being that Capcom already had an overall story to work with, a balance of characters, and gameplay respected by the hardcore fans.
The decision was leaning towards going with 3D graphics from the start, but there was talk of it sticking to 2D drawn artwork like past titles in the series, but also the possibility of going complete 3D… movement and all. Capcom ultimately decided to relaunch and just give the fans what they really wanted: Street Fighter 4 and go with 3D visuals to attract today’s modern gamer, but maintain that classic gameplay from the SF2 series, which was loads more popular amongst the mainstream crowd than SF3.
Source: PaulGaleNetwork.com via Hadoken.net.
Maybe we are getting this 4th incarnation instead of 3s on xbox/psn..
"Capcom ultimately decided to relaunch and just give the fans what they really wanted: Street Fighter 4 and go with 3D visuals to attract today’s modern gamer, but maintain that classic gameplay from the SF2 series, which was loads more popular amongst the mainstream crowd than SF3."
lol. I love it when Capcom tries to tell us what we want.
We didn't want 3D models and steps backwards in gameplay depth just so you could appeal to the casual SF fans that gave up after SF2.
I'm not going to say that everyone would have preferred a new SF3 game, but I think it's more than safe to say that the majority would have preferred HD sprites over 3D models for SF4.
@Struggs
Not even. The problem with SF3 were the omission of the SF2 cast. All they had to do was bring back Dictator or Bison with the Parry system and it would've been a huge success.
The only reason why SF4 is so successful is because of the return of the SF2 cast.
There is a reason a lot of people prefer the gameplay of SF3 over SF4.
I just think SFIV is their way of working back up to a highly technical Street Fighter title. I think they are just testing the waters to see if another attempt is worth it, thus that is why they are releasing the 3S on XBL and PSN. If that does well also.. Street Fighter V may just be as technical as 3S... If not even more technical than that. Just be happy that regardless what has happened now... Although it cannot be undone... You are still getting what you want. You have a new street fighter game and also a remake to what many believe is the best in the series to date, now with online play. As long as we as a whole are willing to be understanding and give things a try... The good games will continue to flow. I think by time it is said and done, they will have a fighting game for every class of gamer...
"it's more than safe to say that the majority would have preferred HD sprites over 3D models for SF4."
really? because 3rd strike really sold so well? let me guess you were the guy who thought HD remix was so cool...
To the rest of the SF4 haters:
SF4 was successful because it is a great game. Why are you on this site? Getting SF3 info? SF3 had way more balance issues than SF4 and wasnt more fun to play by any means...
I seriously wish some of you would shut the hell up about HD sprites.
You want some that bad, go play Blazblue.
I think they should of gone with HD sprites aswell...
I do play BB instead of SF4...
Summary: Instead of creating a game nobody wanted to play, Capcom instead decided to create a game that would sell and make them money.
Co-sign what Jerry said. I own every SF game up until 4 and after playing it I don't think I'll ever buy another Street Fighter game again unless it returns to it's roots.
"SF4 was successful because it is a great game."
I'm not saying it's not a great game cos' that comes down to personal taste but SF4 was successful because it was updated for mainstream appeal so casual gamers and people who stopped playing after SF2 would buy it.
@11
There are so many things wrong with your post that I honestly have no idea where to start.
1. Sales have nothing to do with the majority of fans preferring sprites to 3D models. Are you implying that SF3 didn't sell well because it used sprites? Are you ignoring the fact that every prior SF game had sprites and that these were the best looking ones to date?
2. I didn't think HD Remix was cool because I absolutely hate Udon. The idea of redoing a past SF game with updated sprites sounds good to me though. They just need to get an artist with talent
3. I'm not a SF4 hater
4. SF4 was successful for a number of reasons. It came out after a long fighting game drought, it achieved decent balance on its release, it released alongside a strong console port, etc. These are all luxuries that SF3 didn't have, which is why the sales for that game were poor.
Lol at sf4 haters,,u guys surely dont know the meaning of technical..!
Parrying would have fixed everything had it been in sf4. Balancing wouldn't be that much of an issue then. They wanted to appeal to the mainstream crowd over the hardcore games who preferred sf3. Meaning they looked where the most $$$ was and went with it.
Thanks to the big majority of scrubs that play SF that can't time a damn parry!
I dont know about you guys, but I'd love to see some more HD SF sprites!
@Gorehound
Third strike was highly unbalanced unjustly "rebalanced" version of Second Impact with a character that no one wouldn't say isn't somehow broken (Chun-Li) and a few other new characters, while the input leniency is a deal breaker playing SCRUBS ONLINE in a real match it's not even a factor. Another version of 3 that wasn't properly balanced wouldn't have flown, though they could have made it be 4 with most of the SF4 cast
To all the naysayers:
SF4 was the first SF title since SF Alpha series which actually made a profit.
The SF3 series tanked. Hard. Which means all of you SF3 lovers are actually a minority and pleasing to you almost killed the series, so nobody will miss you if you quit.
Nobody.
@#20
You don't think 3S involves footsies? Or SF4 is more scrub-friendly than SF3? I'm not saying SF4 is not technical, but you probably never even played SF3 and can't even parry a fireball coming at you. You probably can't even parry an EX fireball or a Super. The most technical thing SF4 has to offer is FADC, and that's nothing compared to predicting your opponent's attack, parrying it at the right moment, and then countering it with your own attack right afterwards.
gotta say I think making Sf4 was right. SF3 was the game that put me off SF for years . I was playing allot of the Alpha games then SF3 came out and I didnt like it at all.
Sf4 feels like the older games which is what brought me back
That said I'm looking forward to SF3 being released so I can give it another shot . think I'll be more into it now
Annon actually it wasn't them it was capcom for not doing Street Fighter 3 sooner, so it got everyone hooked that the original street fighter 2 cast to the point of doing street fighter 3 is like if the guys at Arc systems called BlazBlu, the next Gulity Gear everyone of there fans would have flipped after having their characters they loved for so long being dropped for a smaller selection of characters, some with similar move sets(sound familiar?)
I'm glad that they made SF4 in stead of another SF3... The 3s cast was only average and unbalanced. They want to appeal to the fans, but they wouldn't be able to do so if they made thousand versions of the same game that sold bad and just got broke. If you say that SF4 requires less skill, then you are wrong and probably just an average Ryu player. Some of you may say "SF3 is harder because of parry system!!"... No comments on that statement since cursing is not allowed on this website
i agree with #27
3S was a great game but if that same sprite fighting B.S. was all that was to be of SF, then the franchise was doomed. SF4 changed up the scene for alot of reasons but i think the main one is that it looks and plays new while keeping the old school aura.
So you 3S crybabies need to move on. Majority rules and obviously you guys are dated.
and i bet all the douchebags that are nut riding 3S dont even use a 3S character in SSF4
God, I hate when people think they speak for an entire fanbase. Thrid Strike is great, and so is IV in my opinion. MY opinion.
It must be so awful being Capcom right now -- it seems every decision they make has a total 50/50 community split in its support, meaning they have to go with whatever direction makes them most profit. But of course 50% of fans will condemn them for this basis, saying that all they care about is money.
Whichever side you're on, you gotta commend Capcom for not just giving up. I certainly would if I had a swarm of so-called fans calling me "stupid" or "retarded" every time I changed the frame data for a friggin jab.
(yeah, I just personified a company. What are gonna do about it?)
Whoa! A full, FULL 3D SF game off the SF3 series? Thank GOD they didn't make that as a follow up to Third Strike!
I play Third Strike casually, and I would say I'm a mid-level SF player overall, but I think that was a great decision given my base knowledge of the franchise.
@7
EmeraldFont, you do realize that it was SFIII that was the step back in terms of depth, right? Most players now-a-days agree that parries were a mistake.
In a nut shell.. If capcom went ahead and made SF3 again, I would NOT have visited eventhub, or played street fighter again. capcom made an excellent choice and went with sf4 which resembles sf2. SF3 only appealed to Hardcore and those who kept thinking sf3 is the best.
SF3 lost my interest when it came out and SF4 bought my interests back.
In my opinion the amount of fans SF3 has to SF2/or SF4 is like comparing and ant to an elephant.
@Brosephski
No, not really... SF3 and 4 is actually divided in two...
And you can't tell me that being able to parry whole Supers like what Daigo did to Justin or being able to predict your opponent, parry at the right time (Even doing the right parry! It's either you tap forward or down), and then countering that with your own attack right afterwards is not more technical and depth than being able to FADC.
I personally hate SFIII. They took away the heart of what made SFII so fun. It was accessible to anyone.
So thank SFIV for bringing that accessibility back. Just like how it was in 1992.
To all the SFIII fanboys, thank SFIV for getting the fighting scene back. If it wasn't for IV, you wouldn't have the new Third Strike Online.
Try to parry that.
supastar out.
And that's what 3s lacks..retarded learning curve for parry only makes "hardcore players" happy and i am a non scrubby casual player though..!
#28 and #34
Coming from someone who thinks precise timing requirements = depth, your assessment on what's scrub friendly and what's technical is meaningless. Not to say SFIV isn't scrub-friendly, but I would expect no less from a 3S fanboy.
BTW, Ono doesn't play these games, he just makes him. He's a scrub too. And so are you for taking his word over Evo players who think the game sucks.
You know why SFIV is TRULY better than 3S?
BECAUSE THE PARRY SYSTEM KILLS CHARGE CHARACTERS!
ONE OF THE MAIN MECHANICS OF THE GAME DISABLES THE TRUE COMPETITIVE POSSIBILITIES OF HALF IT"S ROSTER.
I know you like 3S A LOT but we're you there six years ago when 200 people for EVO was a big deal? Saying 3S is the best for the reasons people give is like saying candlestick bowling is the only real type of bowling because it's so much deeper. SFIV changed everything just like SFII did before it and if your tastes are different than 90 percent of the population of fighting game fans, great! But I promise you, being an boisterous jerk to people ain't winning your argument.
(Oh boy, give the 3S people more ammo? They already have this:
Some of you really need to let SF3 go haha. It was decent but a flop at the time, too much of a gamble to bring it back :( (what #4 said really).
Long live SF4 :)
@53 Funny because tic throws that has been around since SF2 days especially with Balrog being the most notorious go look up Killian vs. DSP in which he made heavy use of it.
Yeah good capcom did not make that mistake. They would not have made nearly as much money or racked in as many new people into the fighting game community. However, releasing SFIII ThirdSTrike Online edition in the next year or so is def a good idea 8-)
Everyone is so mad, just like the Strider hiryu article
@Murderous
You don't think I play SF4? I have Super in my PS3 right now. I like it in its own way, but I just prefer 3S better.
Oh, okay. EVO players think 3rd Strike sucks, huh? If that were the case, there wouldn't have been a 3rd Strike tourney at EVO every year (except 2010) with a good amount of players. That would go for every other tournament as well like SBO, Seasons Beatings, etc.
Did I say SF4 is scrub friendly? No, I just said it's more scrub-friendly than SF3. And "precise timing requirements" are sure as hell more depth than FADCing. You are in denial if you don't think so. But there's more than "precise timing requirements" to Parrying. There's also being able to predict your opponents' moves.
Who should play all the fighting games and updates they throw at people at the moment? They just take away from the uniqueness of their games and start to milk the cow as they did in the nineties were Street-Fighter-Ultra-Turbo-Super Wearing-A-Hat-CE-Special-Editions came out in rapis succession. Don't like it.
Take your time, do something special! Be rewarded!
im sort of split on this due to the fact dat i love both games. but an advantage of sf4 is the fact dat 3D has the pro of the alternate costumes. those costumes wudn't of been as flashy in 2D sprite form.
Why do people say SF4 is a step backwards gameplay wise from SF3? The game plays alot like SF3, but without parrying. SF4 even added a Roman Cancel type mechanic that alot of other fighters in the last several years have added.
My only gripe is I think SF4 should of used 2D sprites instead of 3D models.
I have to say Third Strike is the only Street Fighter game I actually like. Not only is it a whole lot faster than the rest of the series, but it's also not a projectile spamfest, and it has the most complex system in the series.
But even so, I prefer games like BlazBlue and Tatsunoko vs Capcom a lot better. They have the perfect combination of accessibility and depth.
i like SF3, but i hate with a passion its stupid elitist fans who waste their time bashing sf4 every chance they get. why are you even on this site if you dislike sf4?? why are you keeping up to date with ssf4? i like 3S but imo it is in no way more fun or better than ssf4, go ahead and bash me for having an opinion different to yours. SF3 elitists have to be the most bitter and resentful in the history of fighting games
SF3 royally f***ed any and all charge character contained therein, because it's hard to to parry an opponent's Super and counter with a special or such when parrying requires you to tap forward and charging, say, a Blanka ball requires you to hold back.
You COULDN'T make SF3 with SF2 characters. Blanka, Honda, Guile who get screwed. The only reason Chun-Li did well was because they changed her inputs to quarter circles, except for Spinning Bird Kick which according to the strategy guide on this very site, "you'll rarely use" unless it's the EX.
Charge characters in SF3:
Remy
Oro
Q
Urien
Alex
From all accounts, the only character of those who was halfway competitive was Urien. Now, I'm not saying it's not POSSIBLE to win with Q, and I'm sure there's a trick I've never heard of to parry an entire Super and keep you charge, but it's still putting all of the onus on the charge player.
nerfguile: you do know this website was started because of third strike? catalyst was making guides and faqs and posting them here so people could find information easy and in an orderly fashion.
Top 3 games are Super Turbo, 3s, and alpha 2/3.........10 years from now this game wont even be discussed much about, much like cvs2....it was only 2 years ago that it was played at most majors.
Third strike was just too technical for the average player. So they did the opposite with Sf4, made baby inputs, slowed down the speed, macro buttons where pushing 1 button counts as a grab/taunt/3ppp 3kkk.
So the game was made suitable for the masses.
"The reason being that Capcom already had an overall story to work with, a balance of characters, and gameplay respected by the hardcore fans." Balance? Bahahahahahahaha!!!! I admit, the concept of another SF3 title would be awesome. I wonder if that's what's coming out in the near future? I love how people deficate on the SFIV artwork, have people been completely stripped of their sense of creativity? I love both games, but SSFIV is quite a bit more balanced than third strike. Just because a game is more difficult doesn't make it better. Hell, it wasn't my first SF but I learned to play and become familiar with SF and 2d fighters in general through Third Strike. But.... the balance is a problem, so some of you need to stop bashing the other SF games and exalting Third Strike.
"But even so, I prefer games like BlazBlue and Tatsunoko vs Capcom a lot better. They have the perfect combination of accessibility and depth." Pffffff hahahaha your right dude, I forgot, The vs. series is extremely accessible, like instead of playing SSB why don't people just jump into high level vs play instead? Yeah, don't make me laugh.
And KenOh, your absolutely right my friend. It's a terrific idea to re release it, lets just hope they don't F the balance up a fourth time lmao
In the end, people can make their complaints about artwork and music, etc, but to deny SSFIV it's viability as a competitive fighter is extremely foolish.
im just so excited for Evil Ryu i told you guys my brother works for capcom i begged him to plead with ono to put in ER. It worked i told you so nah nah na boo boo lol Shotos FTFMFFFMFFMFWinnnnn lol
They made the right choice. There isn't a possible way they could have made the game better than they did.
Well they should have had a story line that continued after 3rd strike but I'm glad they went with 4. A 2D sfiv with all the characters hand drawn including the backgrounds would have taken a long time. I agree that it would have looked amazing but ssftiv looks cool no complains. Besides 3rd strike had a bunch of lame characters take out Ken,ryu,akuma and chun li and it would have been it's own fighting game and not sf. Not that it was a bad game cause I own it on dreamcast and ps2 and plan on getting the downloadble one on psn it was just missing that sf spark lol
I like both games but I think 4 would have been perfect had parrying been back. Perhaps make it so u can't parry every attack much like focus attack. Or atleast allow focus attack mid air and no air block. Right now its just mostly a poking match, I should know I main Sim. Loved Sf3's parrying system but I can't say I was crazy about the cast - mostly seemed like freaks. SF2 cast with atleast air focus attacks or parrying and not being able to parry everything - perfect sf4 formula! The community wouldn't be as split on it either then.
My only gripe with SF4 is that it brought a new breed of scrub into fighting games. One thing I hate is when new players don't respect the older games that make games like SF4 what it is today.
If it wasn't for the success of SF2 and the hardcore fans of 3rd Strike, there would be no SF4. SF4 is the game inthe series that rides off the success of its older games.
@cloudstrife360
1) Your comment made absolutely no sense.
2) You must have missed the words "I prefer" in my original post.
3) I never said I liked the "VS Series." Only "Tatsunoko vs Capcom."
Learn to read. Please.
@81
1. Easy baby inputs.
2. Very little effort to do reversals so meaty attacks are useless now.
3. Lazy comebacks thanks to the Ultra system.
4. The spacing is WAY too big so you can turtle for as much as you can throughout the game.
5. Easy ass chain combos.
Wow, you're right. It's like they're the same game.
@83 Dude, your right, like, your opinion means more than the opinions that other people form for themselves. Great Job!!!
@Froggyman77
What is there not to comprehend? Last I checked, Tatsunoko vs Capcom is a bonafide Vs. title, and thus still suited to advanced play. I'll admit defeat that I attacked your opinion, however.
@cloudstrife360
So your comment still doesn't make sense. You seem to be disagreeing with me about something, but both of us agree that TvC is a good game with both accessibility and death. If you actually read my first post, I said that I LIKED TvC, and that I preferred it over the SF series.
Once again: Learn to read.
Well I think 3s was a good game but I wasn't good at it, it's deeper than SF4 and I think that's why people liked it because it, was a bit more hardcore (like no input leniency or shortcuts or anything that really got built around to bring in casual gamers).
SF4 on the other hand really got built around bringing in a new demographic, that being casual gamers (while trying not to alienate the 3s fans) and was easy to pick up and lent itself to helping newer players with the above mentioned mechanics, unlike 3s.
Different communities: I think 3s has a smaller but more loyal and competitive group of fans over sf4's larger more casual community. Different strokes for different folks, I think if they make SFIII: 4th (iteration) it would've done well but SF4 was the right choice since in this day and age there's a large segment of the game buying population that are casual gamers.
I think Capcom needs to go back to the Alpha days, mainly with the GUARD GAUGE which SF4 oh so desperately needs.
Capcom should get some version of SFA3 on PSN+XBL, Alpha 3 was one of the best selling SF games, it was pretty easy to pick up as well.
Yeah, that's #88's opinion, and it's pretttyy damn biased.
@Froggyman77
No, I never said that I liked TvC (I do, but thats besides the point) I said that it's a Vs title in that playing on a high level bears a steep learning curve. I don't why you think that I agreed that it was accessible, because I didn't. I admitted fault because I attacked you for your opinion, When i'm wrong i'll admit it but the fact is I asserted that TvC is NOT very Accessible and you seem to think otherwise. So I say to YOU: practice what you preach.
@87 It almost died out because the fighting game genre is the hardest to get into of all video game genres. If every fighter was designed like Super Gem Fighter or Marvel vs Capcom, the mainstream audience would've kept interest in it believing under the assumption they could be the next Daigo. Just include an Auto Mode and they'll be happy.
@88 Please don't make comments like that, it just makes everyone else in the SF community look like dicks/fanboys to other fighting game fans (why else is SF, the biggest fighting game franchise, is also the most hated?).
@cloudstrife360
Incorrect. Accessibility means that the basics of the game can be picked up very quickly. And that's what TvC does. Anyone can jump in and do a magic series and an air combo. Because the timing is very lenient and the controls are simple. What you are referring to is depth; how long it takes to be able to play at a high level, and how many things one can do at a high level. Someone just picking up TvC can do a quick combo with ease, but will they know how to use meter management? When to MegaCrash? What's the best method of tagging in certain situations? How teammates work with each other? The best applications of Baroque? These latter questions involve TvC's depth, not its accessibility.
So yeah. I can read. I also know what the definition of accessibility is. TL;DR: accessibility is not "picking up the game and being able to know everything you can do in a couple of hours." Accessibility is "picking up the game and being able to pull off some basic combos pretty easily."
@11
"SF3 had way more balance issues than SF4 and wasnt more fun to play by any means..."
I don't think you understand what an opinion is.
MOving on, it's strange that people still complain about the balance in 3rd strike. The meta game has long since evolved 08 and on. Kuroda, the best 3rd strike player on the planet, mains Q and seconds Akuma. RX puts people to shame with Urien. J's Makoto is magical. Hop on GGPO some day and you'll definitely see the variety. Necros have since developed into unbelievable beasts since everyone moved on and Hugo is ridiculously amazing.
Seriously, hop on GGPO some time. The character I fight against the most tends to be Urien. I rarely see Chun-lis but I do see my fair share of Yun (he isn't easy contrary to popular belief). The balance metagame has since fixed itself. The only characters I truly feel that are lacking are Elena, Sean, and maybe Alex. All other characters are some variation of top tier.
Street Fighter 4 has revived the fighting game community basically on its own, even spawned another hit game the year after SSFIV and now we have AE DLC coming soon XD while third strike nearly caused it to be there final game. I think we know SF4 was the far better choice to make.
(Just because top players use a character doesn't mean it's balanced. We have famous Makoto, Dudley, and last but not least, Ryu players that place very high regularly.
Meta game? There's a huge meta game behind MVC2, but are all the characters balanced?)
I wasn't implying GGPO was the source of balance. I don't even know where you got that assumption from. I was making a claim about the diversity of characters and the development of metagame. Even if you don't want to play, spectate some people and you'll see a wide and large variety of characters. My statement still stands strong because there are pro Hugos, there are pro Qs, pro Yangs, pro Uriens, pro Oros, so on and so forth. I was proposing a real time example of where you can see such in practice. Don't read between lines.
"gameplay respected by the hardcore fans"
THis is what they forgot to do with ssf4. "but sf4 bought the fighting games back" yea it introduced it to casuals but at what cost? People are still playing sf2 after almost 20 years, do u really think people are gonna play mash fighter, i mean sf4 even 5 years from now?
I think the real reason why SFIV took off was because it was a re-release of a well known franchise in midst of a rather empty fighting game scene. We're now slowly seeing a comeback of the genre with many developers announcing new IP's and remakes.
The reason why SFIII didn't do so well overall was because it was introduced at a time when the scene was saturated with many other games of the same genre (as well as the lack of an old school cast). At least in Asia everyone was playing the KOF and Tekken series.
I think it just comes down to personal preference as to which game is more fun, and what is considered technical.
I know the parry system turned off a lot of people, but the 1 frame link system/heavy turtling tactics in SFIV can be quite discouraging as well.
In terms of spectating, 3rd strike all the way (minus stupid Chun Li vs Chun Li -_-).
@Froggyman77
Alright, I'll buy that. Perhaps I was wrong to call it non-accessible, but the fact of the matter is I still didn't agree with you and you said I did, case and point we both kind of....f'ed up.
@ "Jerry"
You, sir, are a retard. When I mentioned Evo players, I meant all the ones that MATTER. You know, people who know WTF they're talking about, like John Choi, Alex Valle, Seth Killian, David Sirlin, James Chen, Mike Watson, and so on. Not those stupid Daigo/Wong bandwagon jumpers that gather around like sheep every year to give the SRK hosts more money. Fck, even Daigo himself doesn't like 3S.
Precise timing and depth are not the same. All timing means is good execution on your part is required (albeit not as much as SFIV's link combos, which you 3S fanboys can't do worth a ****).
Depth comes from the number of options you have in relation to each specific character. CHARACTER VARIETY = DEPTH. Many OG's are still playing SFII because nothing hinders that, whereas parrying takes a steaming dump on the roster and makes the game shallow.
Not only that, but it favors defense in critical matches.
http://insomnia.ac/commentary/dominat...
If you seriously think SFIII is more technical because you get punished for attacking, you need to get your head checked.
I first played street fighter in a Brookshire Brothers (grocery store franchise where I live) lobby and it was Street Fighter 2. I was terrible and wasted about 3 quarters and never played it again. Then when I was about twelve I saw an add for SF Alpha3 on the back of my Tips & Tricks magazine and was REALLY looking forward to playing it, I was also happy to see the 3S guide in another of my Tips and Tricks because the closest arcade to me had a 3S machine and every time I was in the mall I would spend as many quarters there as I could. I know play SF4 and enjoy it, even though it doesn't have the parry system I still manage to enjoy it just as I have every other SF game I've played. I'm a Street Fighter fan and I will play every version of the game (not that EX stuff some people try to "claim" as a Street Fighter game...filthy liars)and most likely I will enjoy it. IMO if you take the 3S and SF4 roster and did what they are doing with Street Fighter X Tekken, making two versions of the game, I think then everybody will be happy and we can end this stupid argument of 3S vs SF4.
For me... SF4 is a step backwards technically, but visually and as a fighting game for the new generation consoles, is a step forward.
They made the game more attractive, appealin, accesible, with this changes they restored the interest in fighting game and created new fans. Not just the old school players are into this, also new people are enjoying the game at home and sharing with friends I dont know. We have to be happy for that, I mean, I forgot about fighting games a while ago, just because I thought there wouldnt be something else!
As all aspects of life, this is the beginning of a cycle, same cycle we saw with SF2... so in the end my prediction is... we will be getting a perfectly balanced game (attractive and technically challenging) eventually, maybe in the next 5 years.
All these hype for the fighting games will be diminishing UNTIL something new comes again, maybe new graphics or control style...
Another hipotesis is that... WE ARE the generation of the fighting games (as we know them) so, meanwhile the generation is active, fighting wont change dramatically... Because its like changing the rules of a sport, soccer or basketball have been played the same way for years of course with minor changes.
All other arguments are senseless LOL
First off, i like 3s. But i consider it the worst overall game in the series.
Just because a game is complicated doesnt make it good. The best games in any genre are always the ones that are scrub friendly.
That way a noob can play and has the possibility of beating an above avg player.
BUT, the great players still own. I remember seeing a youtube video of daigo in australia and he had something like 70+ consecutive wins against their tournament players.
How many scrubs can justin wong take down?
The problem with 3s was that it didnt encourage new players to get into it. The graphics and concepts were great for the time (and still today), but the community dwindled to nothing because the game was just too complicated for the avg gamer.
The fact that SSF4 is so scrub friendly means that the truly great players are really that good. If you are crying that you are losing to so many scrubs - NEWS FLASH - you are the scrub!
@112
u could get new players without makeing the game a scrub fest, especially today when u can search and find a million tutorial videos and sites like this one that breaks down the gameplay into a street fighter for dummies format. A good sign that sf4 is too scrub friendly is the fact that most average to good sf4 players have problems playing older games like alpha,turbo/hdr,3s etc. I know im having a hard time adjusting back to hdr after a year of sf4 because the game mechanics made me soft, the first match i had i got thrown like crazy because i forgot that i actually have to stand and tech properly.
I like how IDIOTS come on here and say CRAP and then are OBLIVIOUS to the thing they are defending.
in Sf3 Parries NEVER EVER effecd charge characters, why? Because UNLIKE SF4...Every single one of them, had QC motion moves.
In SF4 Unless you have timing of the Gods, you could only dream of Focus, Dash, Climax Beat.
In SF3...There were NO Zig-Zag Ultras/Supers! Therefore you can ALWAYS do the motion you want at ALL times!
In SF3 Parry negates damage to you and allows fast recovery. Nice and Simple!
In SF4...explain ALL of the properties of Focus to a casual person, tell us which is easier!
BTW the HOME version of SF3...you can ADJUST the timing of the parry to about HALF your body away! So you babies can get used to it!
so glad that they didnt release more SF3 games. For me SF3 started killing the SF series i knew and love. Parry was so pro like style that you couldnt just have fun with the casual player. Also the 2D graphics was too old even those days. SF4 brought SF back from the dead.
C'mon guys, We all have our gripes with sf4. But let's be honest. 3rd strike is a hard title to follow up on. Just accept ssf4 for what it is and don't let the online taunters get to you. Once you get the ball rolling in sf4 its pretty satisfying to beat the players who spammed you into submission
@112
That makes absolutely no sense. By having less noob-friendly tactics, you successfully widen the skill gap. These noob friendly tactics make it hard to distinguish good players from great players. You cut the handicap, and it becomes apparent who is good and who is GREAT. Giving a game a safety net doesn't make it more competitive.
@118
Before I begin, I must say that I generally do not like what Clack has to say. Now then, what he said this time is actually true. People have been complaining that charge characters don't fair well in 3rd strike with its parry system. This doesn't hold true by even a strand. The time it takes to charge is practically nothing, ever charge character has QC motions, and in the event of a parry, every singly charge character can start off by punishing with a normal move then into the charge move.
examples:
Q- st. mk-> rush punch
Remy- c. lk or c. hp -> flash kick
Urien- elbow -> practically anything and everything.
Oro- that launch move into the stomp into the infinite had it not had a 6 juggle rule.
I don't know anything about alex, but his punishes are ridiculous as well like the 360 grab and such. Charge characters are by no means inefficient in stacking up damage after a parry.
Also anything at low level game play is practically luck based. In SSF4, people can do shoryukens and walk up grabs all day long. If they are fighting people their same skill, the opponent will struggle. They don't know if it's time to block or to watch out for the grab. Comparing the lack of strategies at low levels does not determine a game's complexity.
On a final note, the parry system isn't that difficult. All moves have frame data. If you can see the move coming out, click forward. Some parries are much harder then others, but that doesn't deter from the fact that if you are good at reading your opponent, parrying shouldn't be any problem.
SF4 is successful because it has online options and was easier to get. SF3 was released in the nearly dying dreamcast and arcades, not many ppl had access to those in america so the game just passed by the most of the people. SF3 was not a flop, it was just bad managed in the media, SF4 is everywhere, so ppl ALWAYS play the popular game.
@125
People are quick to forget that. 3s came out when the arcades were dieing and when online play was barely in its begining stages. ANd then u also have to remember that the fighting game market was over flowing with games(seriously, go back and look at the releases, i mean alpha 3 was still somewhat current).
Sf4 came at out at a time where there was barely any fighting games out and when xboxlive/psn is strong enough that online fighting games work well. Capcom could have dressed a pos in a ryu gi and it still would have been fighting game of the year.
This is why capcom isnt trying to shoot themselves in the foot and shovel out fighting games left and right like they used too. Thats why we dont have darkstalkers,power stone, star gladiator, rival schools,gem fighter,etc being rebooted(i would like to see some of those though). Its smart when u think about it. They have there flagship fighter sf4 with traditional 1v1 gameplay and they have there main cross over mvc3 with the crazy gameplay. After there done with this update they will most likely start the hype machine for sf x tekken update that for a year or then annouce sf5.
Fighting game depth is about how the mechanics of the game affect the meta game/mind games. Deep fighting games have mechanics that allow multi-level strategies and mind games. By "multi-level", I mean it can't just be "paper/rock/scissors" or as Viscant puts it, "I thought you would do this, but you did that and I was surprised". Regardless of how many different choices you have to guess from (paper/rock/scissors/throw/parry/whatever), that's still only a very basic, single level mind game. That's not depth, as many people believe it to be.
A fighting game's characters may have thousands of moves each, but if the gameplay is never more complex than "I thought you would do this, but you did that and I was surprised", then it's not a deep game, because it basically consists of playing this basic guessing game over and over again. High level Third Strike is a good example of a game like this. Parry destroys so many other viable strategies that the only thing left that is safe is getting in close and playing this very basic mind game/mix-up game. Your object is to make your opponent guess wrong, punish them as much as you can for the wrong guess, then reset the sequence. You don't have to think ahead. You only need to think about whatever mix-up you're trying or trying to defend at the moment.
However, a game that has options that branch into many other options and counter options, that requires you to think many moves ahead, is a completely different story. You can visualize it like a tree, where one action establishes the trunk. Your opponents options are the first branches. Then your options, based on what your opponent does, are branches that diverge from the first branches, and so-on and so-forth. THAT is fighting game depth.
Paine:
What you are saying couldnt be further from the truth. Making a game simple enough that all types of players can get involved is what increases its popularity and makes it great. Games that are relatively easy to learn, but very hard to master are timeless. Again, the biggest problem with SF4 is that there are balance issues with the matchups. Unfortunately is seems like some of the key people at capcom want characters to have bad matchups. This sucks for all competitive players.
What if you took chess and added 50 pieces with different moves? No one would play it except for, maybe, the hardcore existing chess players. Sure if you had been playing this for years you would have a clear advantage over and noob, but this game would still suck.
Simplicity closes the skill gap? Not true. Simplicity helps you get average fast at SF4. This is a good thing. But to be great you still have to practice like crazy and put in tons of time.
Daigo, Tokido, Justin Wong, etc... were all really good at 3s. And look, they're also really good at SF4.
It's always the avg/above avg (not great) 3s players that are ripping on SF4 because they can't believe they are getting beat by mashers. Like i wrote before, if you are getting beat that much by mashers, it means you suck at this game - not that the game sucks. The great players are not getting beat by scrub mashers.
SF4 may not be the best in the series (this is opinion), but capcom is getting closer to making a really great and competitive game. The balance issues still keep this from ever gaining popularity like games such as starcraft.
I bet ALOT of $$$ that SF3 would have worked if they called it something else not Street Fighter. In the mind of the fans, SF, SF2, Champion, Turbo, Super Turbo, Alpha, Ex, Etc always had a theme, Ryu, Ken and Chun Li.
People would NEVER accept a game with SF in the title without them.
It was really arrogant for Capcom to think that SF would work without at least Ryu and Ken.
MY QUESTION: Who was going to replace Ryu and Ken if they went forward as planned?
Wasn't Alex the next poster boy to replace Ryu?
Also I took a break when 3s came out so I'm not saying if another title was good or not but honestly it didn't appeal to me maybe because it didn't feel familiar to the SF feel. Which is funny because I dislike Ryu, Chun and Ken to begin with.
So I'm glad SF4 came out it did bring something back from the dead no matter how 3s elite fan club like it or not.
i think SF3 series is much better its challenge me everytime i freaking kill gill in aracade its the first match when i instert a coin in WTf oh well but its more fun because tech awsome its less for spamming players which i agree that to many people spam in ssfiv.When will they increase Makoto defense meh if people knows how to use her then She goona become back a strong character just like in SF3S
...
I mean If Ryu, Ken and Chun Li were not going to be in SF3 who was going to replace them in the game?
Alex Oro Dudley Sean Necro Yun Yang were already planned so who were going to fill the other spots that Ryu and Ken took over in SF3 NG, where there only going to be 6 characters?
Nah it was probably gonna go to the Hugo and Urien who debuted in SF3 SI
Blocking and mashing DP through block strings is not like an engine that forces you to be on the offensive and parry what's thrown at you (timing). I believe the cast of 3S has a lot to do with its success, because people don't play for the engine, they play for the CHARACTERS. Still, 3S would be a far more technical game. Players who would be too lazy to go into the training room would get raped (the vast majority).
They get some moderate success in SF4. That's why the game has an online mode....bad players can beat other bad players and feel like hot stuff. This converts into moola.
Capcom needed an energizer bunny...something to get them pumped up for more projects. SF4 is not the end all, be all.
Also, look at the Call of Duty series. You think they didn't look at the most popular games and ask "why our games won't sell?"
Call of Duty is popular because anyone can pick it up, but you'll still get raped by good players. SF4 has the same type of theme going on...
We could of had a better SF game instead of that mash friendly piece of crap game called SF4!
LAME!!!