surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
The same people who bitch about being expected to buy a new sequel every year or two tend to go out and buy it anyway.
If it wasn't profitable for companies to make a Madden 2049 Or Super Street Fighter II HD Turbo Special Champion Edition Remix V7, they wouldn't make them.
Excellent points, Topher. Nobody has to buy it if they don't like it.
If it wasn't profitable for companies to make a Madden 2049 Or Super Street Fighter II HD Turbo Special Champion Edition Remix V7, they wouldn't make them.
Excellent points, Topher. Nobody has to buy it if they don't like it.
@FistfullofAwesome
Way to ignore everything I said in my post in favour of a spurious interpretation of Street Fighter’s sales history. I didn’t say you didn’t know your history. I said you that didn’t know what you were talking about, and I still don’t think you do. Oh, and out of interest, where are you getting these sales numbers from? I’d have to have a look at them.
But is this an argument about how many units the various games have sold, or an argument about how good each iteration of the game is on its own merit? On the one hand, you seem to be using SF’s ‘dwindling’ sales as a barometer for measuring its failures. The public stopped buying, therefore future versions must not be as good? I can’ t even begin to attack how wrong this thinking is – I astonish myself by being lost for words. On the other hand, the wildly popular financial success of Street Fighter IV, an all-star retread by your own admittance, is a cash-in? So is financial success a measure for the game being good or bad? Make your mind up!
The problem we have here is that your criteria for what makes a good fighting game are completely at odds with mine. It’s at odds with the ethos behind every fighting game franchise ever and, being presumptuous enough to speak for an entire freakin’ community, it’s an affront to every single person who’s ever invested serious time in them. That you trivialise the entire concept of fighting games’ core mechanics, to me, means you’re ignorant of the subject matter. Your interest in them is completely shallow. You see new iterations only in terms of the cosmetic. For you, a dragon punch is something you’ve seen and done before so now all you want to see are NEW characters. Well, newsflash for you, not only do you not understand fighting games, you plain don’t understand franchises.
If all you want is to play new characters, play a different fighting game! But only one version of it, mind you, because EVERY FIGHTING GAME EVER will re-use some of its characters in a future version. I raise this point again because you ignored it last time – what’s your analysis of the progression of the Tekken series if core fighting mechanics are not of interest to you? Are they cash-ins or different games because they have a different number tacked on to the end? How about the Virtua Fighter series? Guilty Gear? Christ, forget all that - what’s your take on the Virtua Tennis series? Madden? Pro Evo? Fifa? Super Mario? Gears of freakin’ War? These are all guilty of the crime of what a future version of a game, in your blinkered estimation, SHOULD NOT be doing. You only seem to want to see something different – strides towards a series’ betterment are lost on you - but since you all but accept that the tactical element of the game is irrelevant in favour of AWESOME NEW CHARACTERS fighting each other, you utterly fail to understand what makes a good fighting game what it is. At an attempt at a “cheap shot”, you claim that Super Street Fighter II Turbo wouldn’t exist if Capcom weren’t “greedy whores”, but whereas you might think this claim gives your argument merit, it’s actually the complete embodiment of why your reasoning is utter twaddle. SSF2T is universally considered the BEST iteration of the Street Fighter II saga and is still avidly being played today. That it sold less than Street Fighter II (and what game fucking hasn’t?) is a red herring that needs to have its head smashed in.
Truth be told, I actually don’t think you believe any of this. I suspect, from snippets here and there, that you just don’t like Street Fighter IV, for whatever reason, and that’s something I can at least respect. But the argument you’ve put forward is still bollocks because you’re criticising the game for doing what its most experienced players and, indeed, it’s most fervent criticisers, want to see. You don’t understand fighting games because you engage them on the most casual, cheapest, most frivolous of levels. As subjective opinion goes, this part of your argument would be sound. I just think it’s vacuous.
Way to ignore everything I said in my post in favour of a spurious interpretation of Street Fighter’s sales history. I didn’t say you didn’t know your history. I said you that didn’t know what you were talking about, and I still don’t think you do. Oh, and out of interest, where are you getting these sales numbers from? I’d have to have a look at them.
But is this an argument about how many units the various games have sold, or an argument about how good each iteration of the game is on its own merit? On the one hand, you seem to be using SF’s ‘dwindling’ sales as a barometer for measuring its failures. The public stopped buying, therefore future versions must not be as good? I can’ t even begin to attack how wrong this thinking is – I astonish myself by being lost for words. On the other hand, the wildly popular financial success of Street Fighter IV, an all-star retread by your own admittance, is a cash-in? So is financial success a measure for the game being good or bad? Make your mind up!
The problem we have here is that your criteria for what makes a good fighting game are completely at odds with mine. It’s at odds with the ethos behind every fighting game franchise ever and, being presumptuous enough to speak for an entire freakin’ community, it’s an affront to every single person who’s ever invested serious time in them. That you trivialise the entire concept of fighting games’ core mechanics, to me, means you’re ignorant of the subject matter. Your interest in them is completely shallow. You see new iterations only in terms of the cosmetic. For you, a dragon punch is something you’ve seen and done before so now all you want to see are NEW characters. Well, newsflash for you, not only do you not understand fighting games, you plain don’t understand franchises.
If all you want is to play new characters, play a different fighting game! But only one version of it, mind you, because EVERY FIGHTING GAME EVER will re-use some of its characters in a future version. I raise this point again because you ignored it last time – what’s your analysis of the progression of the Tekken series if core fighting mechanics are not of interest to you? Are they cash-ins or different games because they have a different number tacked on to the end? How about the Virtua Fighter series? Guilty Gear? Christ, forget all that - what’s your take on the Virtua Tennis series? Madden? Pro Evo? Fifa? Super Mario? Gears of freakin’ War? These are all guilty of the crime of what a future version of a game, in your blinkered estimation, SHOULD NOT be doing. You only seem to want to see something different – strides towards a series’ betterment are lost on you - but since you all but accept that the tactical element of the game is irrelevant in favour of AWESOME NEW CHARACTERS fighting each other, you utterly fail to understand what makes a good fighting game what it is. At an attempt at a “cheap shot”, you claim that Super Street Fighter II Turbo wouldn’t exist if Capcom weren’t “greedy whores”, but whereas you might think this claim gives your argument merit, it’s actually the complete embodiment of why your reasoning is utter twaddle. SSF2T is universally considered the BEST iteration of the Street Fighter II saga and is still avidly being played today. That it sold less than Street Fighter II (and what game fucking hasn’t?) is a red herring that needs to have its head smashed in.
Truth be told, I actually don’t think you believe any of this. I suspect, from snippets here and there, that you just don’t like Street Fighter IV, for whatever reason, and that’s something I can at least respect. But the argument you’ve put forward is still bollocks because you’re criticising the game for doing what its most experienced players and, indeed, it’s most fervent criticisers, want to see. You don’t understand fighting games because you engage them on the most casual, cheapest, most frivolous of levels. As subjective opinion goes, this part of your argument would be sound. I just think it’s vacuous.
I have just registered to answer to some of your arguments. I may use some ugly vocabulary, too, I guess you don't mind since you have called motherfuckers so many people. To be modest I will say I haven't play the game, I hope you can stay "ad hominem" free if you answer.
For a guy who knows that much about the industry you seem to give too much credit to a big company as if they never put the benefit before the customers. You said well, we are talking about a company that charge for content that was already on the game. Of course they have learned, next time they wont make it that obvious.
I will explain you how SSFIV has been most probably developed. Capcom did already know that they will milk this game as they did with the rest of the series. No, there are not nine SF this decade, they have <a href="http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/street-fighter-series">released</a> only 8 this decade if you don't count the 4 Street Fighter-s of 2000. So they pretty much know how to program a fighting game and, especially one that is going to be expanded. I can even give you an idea. Put characters and scenarios in modular form (for example, all that concerns fighter B goes in a folder called "fighter B") and you configure their movements in an easy to tweak way. For example, movement A has "duration = 0.8" and "hit_points = 20", so, if you want to make it faster, but less powerfull, you can change to "duration = 0.4" and "hit_points = 10". This way, adding new characters is just about adding the files and writing a few lines in "characters.txt" and tweaking the characters is about changing numbers in "movement_X.txt" in a given character folder. I have read that the online mode was quite crappy so, as for the online "enhancement", it is more like a fix than a plus, don't you think? By the way, don't do SFIV owners that don't want to switch deserve a good online mode and the tweaks that supposedly fit better with what the SFIV player want?
In any case, the bulk of the announced update is the 8 new characters. 8 new character of a total of 25, that makes just a third of the game, if you don't take into consideration the actual core of the game (the part that decide what to do with the content of folder "fighter_Y"). By common sense, this is NOT a new game, it's an expansion. Of course, you can always charge more money on something called a "new game" than on something called an expansion. It is not wrong per se. When it is released, the SSFIV will be worth like a whole dated game (as much as an average game a year after release), but owners of the original game shouldn't pay more than 10-15€ for something that is just a patch and a third of new characters.
As for your insults on people working hard, just tell me, do we have to respect all the bullshit catalog of the Wii or shit like that too just because people have worked hard on them? Maybe I shouldn't explain you how the industry works, as you are so into this thing, but let me explain to the others here. The companies have something called "department of marketing" whose work is to look for ways to make the highest benefit out of each product. The costumers are just money-bags for them, they don't want to please the gamer, unless it reports more benefits. Never ever forget this. When somebody says "Capcom is milking us", he/she is not saying that the poor coder or designer that has to work 10 hours a day and 12-14 hours a day the last months before release should work harder or for less money. What we say is that, this time, the department of marketing is being too obvious in its pretensions and that we don't want to pay for the new Lamborgini of the CEO of the company. Is it clear now, you motherfucker or are you going to keep blaming the hard workers for the problems caused by the rich ones?
You still don't believe things are this way? Why do you think that Korean Juri girl you like that much is in the game? Because the department of marketing realized that the Korean market is very <a href="http://kotaku.com/5370682/why-there-is-a-korean-fighter-in-super-street-fighter-iv">profitable</a>. You may instead had a retarded dog in a wheelchair if retarded dogs in wheelchair were more profitable than Koreans. This is not such a revealing fact, but please tell you can remember more examples, because I can remember dozens upon dozens of them and I'm not a game journalist.
And please, stop that "nobody is holding a gun to your head" argument already. Human being are NOT as rational as people tend to think, we humans are extremely manipulable. Tell me why do publishers spend important percentages of their budgets in advertisements, why do they release screenshots, teaser trailers, countdown, proper trailers, tv ads, street ads, interviews, rumors, confirmations, etc., months before the games are released. If we are so free and rational to choose the game we want, we would only need a couple of reviews to decide to buy a game or not. This is especially important for you, since most of your readers seem to be disoriented teenagers that follow the angriest hate-speecher they can find on the internet.
For a guy who knows that much about the industry you seem to give too much credit to a big company as if they never put the benefit before the customers. You said well, we are talking about a company that charge for content that was already on the game. Of course they have learned, next time they wont make it that obvious.
I will explain you how SSFIV has been most probably developed. Capcom did already know that they will milk this game as they did with the rest of the series. No, there are not nine SF this decade, they have <a href="http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/street-fighter-series">released</a> only 8 this decade if you don't count the 4 Street Fighter-s of 2000. So they pretty much know how to program a fighting game and, especially one that is going to be expanded. I can even give you an idea. Put characters and scenarios in modular form (for example, all that concerns fighter B goes in a folder called "fighter B") and you configure their movements in an easy to tweak way. For example, movement A has "duration = 0.8" and "hit_points = 20", so, if you want to make it faster, but less powerfull, you can change to "duration = 0.4" and "hit_points = 10". This way, adding new characters is just about adding the files and writing a few lines in "characters.txt" and tweaking the characters is about changing numbers in "movement_X.txt" in a given character folder. I have read that the online mode was quite crappy so, as for the online "enhancement", it is more like a fix than a plus, don't you think? By the way, don't do SFIV owners that don't want to switch deserve a good online mode and the tweaks that supposedly fit better with what the SFIV player want?
In any case, the bulk of the announced update is the 8 new characters. 8 new character of a total of 25, that makes just a third of the game, if you don't take into consideration the actual core of the game (the part that decide what to do with the content of folder "fighter_Y"). By common sense, this is NOT a new game, it's an expansion. Of course, you can always charge more money on something called a "new game" than on something called an expansion. It is not wrong per se. When it is released, the SSFIV will be worth like a whole dated game (as much as an average game a year after release), but owners of the original game shouldn't pay more than 10-15€ for something that is just a patch and a third of new characters.
As for your insults on people working hard, just tell me, do we have to respect all the bullshit catalog of the Wii or shit like that too just because people have worked hard on them? Maybe I shouldn't explain you how the industry works, as you are so into this thing, but let me explain to the others here. The companies have something called "department of marketing" whose work is to look for ways to make the highest benefit out of each product. The costumers are just money-bags for them, they don't want to please the gamer, unless it reports more benefits. Never ever forget this. When somebody says "Capcom is milking us", he/she is not saying that the poor coder or designer that has to work 10 hours a day and 12-14 hours a day the last months before release should work harder or for less money. What we say is that, this time, the department of marketing is being too obvious in its pretensions and that we don't want to pay for the new Lamborgini of the CEO of the company. Is it clear now, you motherfucker or are you going to keep blaming the hard workers for the problems caused by the rich ones?
You still don't believe things are this way? Why do you think that Korean Juri girl you like that much is in the game? Because the department of marketing realized that the Korean market is very <a href="http://kotaku.com/5370682/why-there-is-a-korean-fighter-in-super-street-fighter-iv">profitable</a>. You may instead had a retarded dog in a wheelchair if retarded dogs in wheelchair were more profitable than Koreans. This is not such a revealing fact, but please tell you can remember more examples, because I can remember dozens upon dozens of them and I'm not a game journalist.
And please, stop that "nobody is holding a gun to your head" argument already. Human being are NOT as rational as people tend to think, we humans are extremely manipulable. Tell me why do publishers spend important percentages of their budgets in advertisements, why do they release screenshots, teaser trailers, countdown, proper trailers, tv ads, street ads, interviews, rumors, confirmations, etc., months before the games are released. If we are so free and rational to choose the game we want, we would only need a couple of reviews to decide to buy a game or not. This is especially important for you, since most of your readers seem to be disoriented teenagers that follow the angriest hate-speecher they can find on the internet.
So I'm buying it, whose with me.
And topher, mind if add your psn I'd to my friends list on the off chance you do wind up with the ps3 version?
And topher, mind if add your psn I'd to my friends list on the off chance you do wind up with the ps3 version?
Gosh, many fighting games have seen the light of these updated packages:
Street Fighter II (C.E., Turbo, Super and Super Turbo/X)
Guilty Gear (X, X 1.5, XX, XX #RELOAD,XX Slash, XX A Core and XX A Core+)
Melty Blood (Re-Act, Act Cadenza, Act Cadenza Version B and Actress Again)
Mortal Kombat (Ultimate, Trilogy and 4 Gold)
BlazBlue (Continuum Shift)
Ergh... ok, so every fighting game has this.
Street Fighter II (C.E., Turbo, Super and Super Turbo/X)
Guilty Gear (X, X 1.5, XX, XX #RELOAD,XX Slash, XX A Core and XX A Core+)
Melty Blood (Re-Act, Act Cadenza, Act Cadenza Version B and Actress Again)
Mortal Kombat (Ultimate, Trilogy and 4 Gold)
BlazBlue (Continuum Shift)
Ergh... ok, so every fighting game has this.
first comment defending this game I've heard so far.
nice to see someone agrees with me. good shit, Topher.
nice to see someone agrees with me. good shit, Topher.
Everyone excited about this almost always follows by saying how they did not buy SF4. Go figure. Gameplay tweaks plus 8 characters hasn't been considered a new game since the 90's I don't know a reason to go back to the old trend. When they announce a real price for the game (below MSRP could be 50 dollars for all I know) and the real bonus for owning both I will reserve judgment. But so far color me unimpressed.
@MichaelPalin
Why is Capcom putting in a korean character to appeal to the korean demographic a bad thing?
If you feel you are manipulated and forced into buying things I feel sorry for you. Advertisements are there so people know about the product, and to make it look appealing. It's not fucking mind control.
Also I don't think you understand the concept of business. Capcom is giving people WHAT THEY WANT. Thats how business works, they provide a product or service and you pay for it if you're interested. If you fail to provide a good product, people don't buy it. Look at King of Fighters XII it has a great core fighting system, but the online sucks, and there are no single player modes or unlockables, it's a shitty product. As a result KoFXII isn't doing well.
Also it's dumb to complain about SSFIV so early, since we don't know whats going into it, and IF the rumors about the game are true, this si going to be an ENTIRELY different game and I'd probably pay $60 for it. Once we actaully know what they are putting the game you can bitch about it all you want.
Why is Capcom putting in a korean character to appeal to the korean demographic a bad thing?
If you feel you are manipulated and forced into buying things I feel sorry for you. Advertisements are there so people know about the product, and to make it look appealing. It's not fucking mind control.
Also I don't think you understand the concept of business. Capcom is giving people WHAT THEY WANT. Thats how business works, they provide a product or service and you pay for it if you're interested. If you fail to provide a good product, people don't buy it. Look at King of Fighters XII it has a great core fighting system, but the online sucks, and there are no single player modes or unlockables, it's a shitty product. As a result KoFXII isn't doing well.
Also it's dumb to complain about SSFIV so early, since we don't know whats going into it, and IF the rumors about the game are true, this si going to be an ENTIRELY different game and I'd probably pay $60 for it. Once we actaully know what they are putting the game you can bitch about it all you want.
@MichaelPallin
Where the hell do you guys keep coming from?
Nobody is arguing that there isn’t a marketing strategy here. There’s marketing strategy for every commercial game you can you conceive of – shocking as it may be, companies need to sell games to make money. This isn’t news to any of us. But what might be news to you is some of us are very happy to pay for a new version of the game if we think the product is up to scratch. What you’re trying to do is tell us that SSF4 isn’t worth the price of a brand new game (which apparently it’s not going to be anyway) because... and I admit I’m sketchy on your logic here myself... the cost of making it isn’t as high as the previous game? What sort of retarded thinking is this?
For starters, when you pay to see a film at the cinema, is the ticket price based on the cost to make the film? No, it’s the same across the board. When you then buy it on DVD, do you pay what it cost to make the disk? No, there’s a rough RRP on new DVD’s and you pay that price if you want it at release. Applying your logic to videogames and using Arkham Assylum as the benchmark, since I paid £40 for a solid, Bat-tastic 10 hours of fun (that’s £4 an hour, eager readers!), is it then reasonable that I pay £920 for the 230 hours I’ve so far managed to get out of SF4? What the game is worth is subjective based on quality of the personal experience, but prices are sensibly fixed within certain generally accepted limits. Telling players that a new version game is not worth the money because it cost less to make is just stupid. Especially before the overall quality of that game can be judged. You’re attempt at analysis focuses on the re-use of code and the mere inclusion of new material as a means to analyse its value. You haven’t the foggiest idea how to judge a game based on the experience it offers.
And yes, of course Capcom wants to make a profit on SF. And if they wanted to add three new costumes to the game and charge it £3000 a copy, only the most fervent and wealthy of fanboys would apply. Its worth to the average consumer wouldn’t justify the cost, the game would fail and even the fanatics would have adequate reason to complain. But perceived worth is actually what the argument here is really about, not some sketchy understanding of programming code or some misguided belief that a new game must mean a new engine to make it value for money. Your knowledge of what it takes to program new fighters in SF4 is rendered idiotic by your failure to look at the entire process of design holistically. The entire struggle of fighting game balance, one of the most difficult things to achieve in fighting game design - not to mention how new characters must interact with every other character, how they behave, how they move, look, sound and, most importantly, feel - is only as simple a matter as changing digits in pre-existing code if you think that painting the Mona Lisa was a half-assed effort because da Vinci used a stand-in.
As someone who admits he hasn’t played Street Fighter IV, that you presume to lecture us about value of the product is an arrogant ignorance of devout Christian proportions. Capcom’s mistake may well yet prove to be that the uneducated consumer won’t be convinced to buy a game they consider themselves to already own. But that’s a marketing issue. It has nothing to do with the quality of the game and its true worth, something none of us can know yet.
Where the hell do you guys keep coming from?
Nobody is arguing that there isn’t a marketing strategy here. There’s marketing strategy for every commercial game you can you conceive of – shocking as it may be, companies need to sell games to make money. This isn’t news to any of us. But what might be news to you is some of us are very happy to pay for a new version of the game if we think the product is up to scratch. What you’re trying to do is tell us that SSF4 isn’t worth the price of a brand new game (which apparently it’s not going to be anyway) because... and I admit I’m sketchy on your logic here myself... the cost of making it isn’t as high as the previous game? What sort of retarded thinking is this?
For starters, when you pay to see a film at the cinema, is the ticket price based on the cost to make the film? No, it’s the same across the board. When you then buy it on DVD, do you pay what it cost to make the disk? No, there’s a rough RRP on new DVD’s and you pay that price if you want it at release. Applying your logic to videogames and using Arkham Assylum as the benchmark, since I paid £40 for a solid, Bat-tastic 10 hours of fun (that’s £4 an hour, eager readers!), is it then reasonable that I pay £920 for the 230 hours I’ve so far managed to get out of SF4? What the game is worth is subjective based on quality of the personal experience, but prices are sensibly fixed within certain generally accepted limits. Telling players that a new version game is not worth the money because it cost less to make is just stupid. Especially before the overall quality of that game can be judged. You’re attempt at analysis focuses on the re-use of code and the mere inclusion of new material as a means to analyse its value. You haven’t the foggiest idea how to judge a game based on the experience it offers.
And yes, of course Capcom wants to make a profit on SF. And if they wanted to add three new costumes to the game and charge it £3000 a copy, only the most fervent and wealthy of fanboys would apply. Its worth to the average consumer wouldn’t justify the cost, the game would fail and even the fanatics would have adequate reason to complain. But perceived worth is actually what the argument here is really about, not some sketchy understanding of programming code or some misguided belief that a new game must mean a new engine to make it value for money. Your knowledge of what it takes to program new fighters in SF4 is rendered idiotic by your failure to look at the entire process of design holistically. The entire struggle of fighting game balance, one of the most difficult things to achieve in fighting game design - not to mention how new characters must interact with every other character, how they behave, how they move, look, sound and, most importantly, feel - is only as simple a matter as changing digits in pre-existing code if you think that painting the Mona Lisa was a half-assed effort because da Vinci used a stand-in.
As someone who admits he hasn’t played Street Fighter IV, that you presume to lecture us about value of the product is an arrogant ignorance of devout Christian proportions. Capcom’s mistake may well yet prove to be that the uneducated consumer won’t be convinced to buy a game they consider themselves to already own. But that’s a marketing issue. It has nothing to do with the quality of the game and its true worth, something none of us can know yet.
@Karkarov
I'd consider 8 new characters and balance tweaks for a fighting game a new game, but thats about it. The blance tweaks and new characters will change the way the game plays compeletely for me. I bought SFIV the day it came out and I'm EXTREMELY excited about this game. I think most of the people really exited about this game are hardcore fighting game fans. If the game doesn't do well we probably won't see a return to this trend, but I'm hoping the changes are signifcant enough to warrant it, especially if it gets released for aproximately $40.
I'd consider 8 new characters and balance tweaks for a fighting game a new game, but thats about it. The blance tweaks and new characters will change the way the game plays compeletely for me. I bought SFIV the day it came out and I'm EXTREMELY excited about this game. I think most of the people really exited about this game are hardcore fighting game fans. If the game doesn't do well we probably won't see a return to this trend, but I'm hoping the changes are signifcant enough to warrant it, especially if it gets released for aproximately $40.
"As for your insults on people working hard, just tell me, do we have to respect all the bullshit catalog of the Wii or shit like that too just because people have worked hard on them?"
Of course not, you should point at them and laugh at how crappy they are. But does that mean they should be given to you FOR FREE because you don't like them?
...really?
Of course not, you should point at them and laugh at how crappy they are. But does that mean they should be given to you FOR FREE because you don't like them?
...really?
@Goutetsu
*Figuratively cracks knuckles*
I'll start with the sales figures. I could go to any video game selling website and post an adress to it, but it might be considered unreliable. So how about I let Capcom itself do the work for me. Earlier this year Capcom released a list detailing it's best-selling individual games and series. I couldn't find the original post on their site (it's there, but I wasn't willing to click through pages and pages of old posts), but here's a copy of the list on Wiki:http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Best_selling_Capcom_games
As you can see, Capcom's best selling game ever is SFII:WW on the SNES. 6.3 Million copies of that game sold. The next best selling game is the SNES version of HF, with 4.1 million copies. So only about 2/3 of the original buyers where willing to snag the update. The next update, SSFII for the SNES and Genesis, sold only 2 million copies. That's 1/3 WW's sales, and that one was on two systems. Both those updates (talking SNES here) had 4 additional playable characters, and yet each update had 2 million less players caring enough to purchase.
Of course, that list was released back in May, so Capcom hadn't yet added IV to the list (after all, it had only been out for three months). As of June (VGChartz hasn't updated past June), SFIV has sold a total of 2.5 million copies (it might be up to 3 by now, though based on it's drop past week 8 (check the individual pages of the PS3 and XBOX 360 on the site) I'm not sure), with about 1.38 on the PS3 and 1.24 on the XBOX 360. Together, they barely beat Super II (which was also on two systems), but don't come close to beating HF (which was on one system). The series sold less, and that's Capcom's own facts. So what's this massive financial success of SFIV everybody's mentioning ? I don't forget to mention that SFIV probably cost a lot more to produce and distribute than SFII did, and Capcom doesn't get the massive arcade sales in addition to console sales with IV that II did.
Do I think sales signify how good a game is? No. But I do think they signify how much people want the content of the game. It's important for Capcom to figure out why people were less interested in later SF games if they ever want it to sell as well as II did. It can't have been the characters, because Alpha 3 and SFIV also had the majority of the II cast, and yet they didn't sell as well. So what is it?
I can't really tell you about those other games cause I either haven't played them, or barely invested any time in them. When it comes to fighting games, I really only care about SF and Super Smash Bros. Those are the most fun for me, since the general systems and characters are better to me than in other games. I'm not interested in KOF since most of the charaters look "cool" rather than like fighters. I don't care about 3D fighting games since they've always felt sluggish to me compared to 2D fighting games. I don't care about GOW since it feels a little generic to me (although, I don't care about FPS's past Duke Nukem, and TPS's past RE4, to be honest). I don't care about GG since it's super complicated and the general design is off-putting. Fifa and Madden are sports games, so no (I generally like the exxagerated sports games, like NBA Street or Mario Tennis). Anyway, point of this paragraph is that I can't detail those other games you mentioned since I haven't played them/haven't played them enough. Moving on.
Wait, Wait! Super Mario!? Are you kidding on that one? SMB2 was different as hell to SMB (mostly because it literally was a different game, but still). And SMB3 was such a massive difference to SMB it blew anyones mind who played it. It's one of the defining videogames of all time! Kinda a little off on that example weren't ya?
Anyway, SSFIIT is the best game in the SFII series (well, HD Remix is, we're talking long time ago), but it didn't have to be. Remember how HF was supposed to be the last game in the II series, and how The New Challengers were tentative SFIII characters? Well, guess what else would have gone into III? Akuma, Air Juggles, Super Combos, and more were all planned to be in III, but were forced into II. SSFIIT is the best game in the II series, but not because it was supposed to be. It was best because all the ideas for III were reconfigured for it by the demands of the higher-ups.
Hell, Alpha 3 and 3S aren't even really the best versions of their individual games. Alpha 3 needlessly separates Supers and the Variable meter into selectable styles (no more being able to choose in a match one or the other), and it's music and stages are freaking terrible compared to Alpha 2. 3S, while adding Makoto and Chun-Li (not many cheered for Q and Twelve), along with it's awesome ST, wasn't the massive step-up 2nd Impact was to NG (though it is still the best version of III, it's more because of refinement than any actual change).
I don't claim to speak for anyone than myself. I just don't care to write IMO after every "radical" thought I have, since we can all tell it's my opinion by virtue of the fact that I said it: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=boiling_blood
I never even said that I wanted every SF game to only feature new characters. I just don't need every SF game to shove every character into itself. If the game is at least 50/50, I can dig it. SFIV has far more old characters compared to new ones. If the rumors are true of a 35-character cast, than only about 21% of the cast is new (and Seth doesn't even count for me, so it would be more like 18%). That's what you call a new game?
I do care about core mechanics. The mechanics of IV feel to me like some gimped love child of all the other SF games. It both doesn't feel significantly different and a little stale. The only thing I do like is the FA (I'm not a Parry fanboy), but it's far too weak to be of any use (FA and Focus Cancel are different moves, okay?).
Whew! That's a bit much. I love doing these internet arguments. I get to test my writing abilities (they probably suck, but I'm an honors student compared to the internet), get to get my thoughts out in the open, and maybe start a couple rivalries. I don't think I'll ever get tired of this.
*Figuratively cracks knuckles*
I'll start with the sales figures. I could go to any video game selling website and post an adress to it, but it might be considered unreliable. So how about I let Capcom itself do the work for me. Earlier this year Capcom released a list detailing it's best-selling individual games and series. I couldn't find the original post on their site (it's there, but I wasn't willing to click through pages and pages of old posts), but here's a copy of the list on Wiki:http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Best_selling_Capcom_games
As you can see, Capcom's best selling game ever is SFII:WW on the SNES. 6.3 Million copies of that game sold. The next best selling game is the SNES version of HF, with 4.1 million copies. So only about 2/3 of the original buyers where willing to snag the update. The next update, SSFII for the SNES and Genesis, sold only 2 million copies. That's 1/3 WW's sales, and that one was on two systems. Both those updates (talking SNES here) had 4 additional playable characters, and yet each update had 2 million less players caring enough to purchase.
Of course, that list was released back in May, so Capcom hadn't yet added IV to the list (after all, it had only been out for three months). As of June (VGChartz hasn't updated past June), SFIV has sold a total of 2.5 million copies (it might be up to 3 by now, though based on it's drop past week 8 (check the individual pages of the PS3 and XBOX 360 on the site) I'm not sure), with about 1.38 on the PS3 and 1.24 on the XBOX 360. Together, they barely beat Super II (which was also on two systems), but don't come close to beating HF (which was on one system). The series sold less, and that's Capcom's own facts. So what's this massive financial success of SFIV everybody's mentioning ? I don't forget to mention that SFIV probably cost a lot more to produce and distribute than SFII did, and Capcom doesn't get the massive arcade sales in addition to console sales with IV that II did.
Do I think sales signify how good a game is? No. But I do think they signify how much people want the content of the game. It's important for Capcom to figure out why people were less interested in later SF games if they ever want it to sell as well as II did. It can't have been the characters, because Alpha 3 and SFIV also had the majority of the II cast, and yet they didn't sell as well. So what is it?
I can't really tell you about those other games cause I either haven't played them, or barely invested any time in them. When it comes to fighting games, I really only care about SF and Super Smash Bros. Those are the most fun for me, since the general systems and characters are better to me than in other games. I'm not interested in KOF since most of the charaters look "cool" rather than like fighters. I don't care about 3D fighting games since they've always felt sluggish to me compared to 2D fighting games. I don't care about GOW since it feels a little generic to me (although, I don't care about FPS's past Duke Nukem, and TPS's past RE4, to be honest). I don't care about GG since it's super complicated and the general design is off-putting. Fifa and Madden are sports games, so no (I generally like the exxagerated sports games, like NBA Street or Mario Tennis). Anyway, point of this paragraph is that I can't detail those other games you mentioned since I haven't played them/haven't played them enough. Moving on.
Wait, Wait! Super Mario!? Are you kidding on that one? SMB2 was different as hell to SMB (mostly because it literally was a different game, but still). And SMB3 was such a massive difference to SMB it blew anyones mind who played it. It's one of the defining videogames of all time! Kinda a little off on that example weren't ya?
Anyway, SSFIIT is the best game in the SFII series (well, HD Remix is, we're talking long time ago), but it didn't have to be. Remember how HF was supposed to be the last game in the II series, and how The New Challengers were tentative SFIII characters? Well, guess what else would have gone into III? Akuma, Air Juggles, Super Combos, and more were all planned to be in III, but were forced into II. SSFIIT is the best game in the II series, but not because it was supposed to be. It was best because all the ideas for III were reconfigured for it by the demands of the higher-ups.
Hell, Alpha 3 and 3S aren't even really the best versions of their individual games. Alpha 3 needlessly separates Supers and the Variable meter into selectable styles (no more being able to choose in a match one or the other), and it's music and stages are freaking terrible compared to Alpha 2. 3S, while adding Makoto and Chun-Li (not many cheered for Q and Twelve), along with it's awesome ST, wasn't the massive step-up 2nd Impact was to NG (though it is still the best version of III, it's more because of refinement than any actual change).
I don't claim to speak for anyone than myself. I just don't care to write IMO after every "radical" thought I have, since we can all tell it's my opinion by virtue of the fact that I said it: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=boiling_blood
I never even said that I wanted every SF game to only feature new characters. I just don't need every SF game to shove every character into itself. If the game is at least 50/50, I can dig it. SFIV has far more old characters compared to new ones. If the rumors are true of a 35-character cast, than only about 21% of the cast is new (and Seth doesn't even count for me, so it would be more like 18%). That's what you call a new game?
I do care about core mechanics. The mechanics of IV feel to me like some gimped love child of all the other SF games. It both doesn't feel significantly different and a little stale. The only thing I do like is the FA (I'm not a Parry fanboy), but it's far too weak to be of any use (FA and Focus Cancel are different moves, okay?).
Whew! That's a bit much. I love doing these internet arguments. I get to test my writing abilities (they probably suck, but I'm an honors student compared to the internet), get to get my thoughts out in the open, and maybe start a couple rivalries. I don't think I'll ever get tired of this.
That Genesis power tower pic annoys me: not only do they repeat the S&K cart, but it just wouldn't work with that SMS Convertor in the middle!
@Karkarov: About 4 new characters and gameplay tweaks is all Tekken 6 is getting over 5 Dark Resurrection, and nobody is complaining about that game despite them charging $60 for it. Guilty Gear had 4 games in a row that added only 1 character each time and each one was considered a full sequal and each was more beloved than the last.
So, yeah, less than what SSF4 provides is enough for a sequel even today.
So, yeah, less than what SSF4 provides is enough for a sequel even today.
You guys are really bad at following How to STFU guides. >_>
Capcom is doing it right. Those of us who love SFIV will be playing it up until SUPER's release date, and those of you who were in some way unhappy with IV might be able to find what you were looking for in SSFIV at a (hopefully) lower price.
Capcom is doing it right. Those of us who love SFIV will be playing it up until SUPER's release date, and those of you who were in some way unhappy with IV might be able to find what you were looking for in SSFIV at a (hopefully) lower price.
@FistfulOAwesome
Either I'm going to kill you or I'm beginning to like you. I'll try to post a response to this in the morning if I get the chance.
Brief preview: You're still wrong but no hard feelings!
Either I'm going to kill you or I'm beginning to like you. I'll try to post a response to this in the morning if I get the chance.
Brief preview: You're still wrong but no hard feelings!
I was reading through the article nodding as I go along until I saw Ibuki and just completely stopped hitting the jump.
Jesus. I was hoping to keep this briefer than previous posts because this whole debate has veered so wildly off course it’s bust a tyre and crashed into a lamppost in Hemel Hempstead. I failed admirably. Being concise is not one of my virtues.
In spite of everything you’ve written, your argument remains, at best, hugely confused, and, at worst, completely irrelevant. You are still trying to use Street Fighter’s supposed dwindling sales figures as measurement of, in your own words, “how much people want the content of the game” as means to condemn its existence. Let me repeat that in a different way: you’re using the game’s popularity as a yardstick for its future merit. The question is, why in God’s name are you trying to do that?
Firstly, we can argue all day about numbers. I could tell you that Street Fighter IV has sold better on one console than any Alpha game. I could tell you that Street Fighter IV has - and I have no way of proving this but I bet my right eyelid I’m 100% right - sold better than any Street Fighter III game at the point of release. Without knowing the costs Capcom incurred to produce, market and distribute any version of these games, these figures are irrelevant. But even if we knew these figures inside and out, even if we knew that Street Fighter IV profited Capcom less than any previous iteration of Street Fighter, that information would STILL be completely meaningless to this debate about whether or not Capcom is creatively justified to release a newer version of SF4. If this is ONLY an argument about whether or not SSF4 will cause the death of the franchise, then I hold my hands up right now that I can’t know the answer, though your reasoning for thinking it remains suspect. If this is a debate about whether or not new additions in a single iteration of a series are inherently a bad thing, then I’ll carry on as I am.
But even in terms of finances, the very existence of Super Street Fighter IV all but verifies that Capcom considers SF4 to have been sufficiently profitable to justify a follow-up. They have even predicted that another iteration, selling even less (such is inevitable with fighting games today), will also be profitable. But even if they’re completely wrong, even if SSF4 bombs commercially and the Heaven’s drop pink underpants into your Alphabetti Spaghetti, provided the game is GOOD the consumer has still lost nothing. Even under the sheer tonnage of figures you’ve supplied, I still don’t believe for a second that your concern is for the company’s welfare. You just want to see another Street Fighter that isn’t Street Fighter IV. That’s the point you’re really trying to make. The rest is spreadsheet window-dressing.
Secondly, I have to break some bad news to you. Brace yourself for (2nd) impact, because this is really going to hurt. Street Fighter will NEVER, EVER be as commercially popular as it was. If you’re asking yourself right now how I could possibly know that, you’re absolutely right to, because I can’t. But trust me, it’s still the fucking truth. The video gaming world today is a very different place than it was in 1992 and even then there were a million different reasons as to why Street Fighter II was the success it was. But your tunnel-vision reasoning that it must be because Capcom made multiple versions within a single series is just an example of misinformed, post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking. That’s Latin for ‘I speak Latin and you do not’. No, kidding, but the point stands.
Nobody is arguing that the various iterations of Street Fighter didn’t vary in quality, but suggesting SSF4 is inherently a bad thing before it’s even out is wilfully ignorant. Especially in the wake of Third Strike’s long-loved critical popularity. That you think Third Strike’s improvements over 2nd Impact are less extreme than those between 2nd Impact and SF3 is fair comment. But we wouldn’t even have 2nd Impact if we didn’t allow for future iterations in a single version of SF. This just backs up my point about SSF4. And yes, I personally consider a 21% (or 18%) increase in characters enough to justify a new fighting game (by fighting game standards, that’s arguably huge), but not in and of itself. To me it’s about the totality of the experience, not about the percentage of content added. This is where you and I fundamentally disagree about fighting games and here’s why: you see new games in the series in terms of how much new content is added. -, the number of new backgrounds and new characters. How you don’t see it is as refinements made, ultras added, combos changed, characters improved, game mechanics altered. You pay for newer, I pay for better. There’s a point where the line between those two ideas meet but ours are miles apart.
As long as the SF series remains profitable and new games of quality continue to be made, you’d think fans of the series would be happy. The original Super Mario Bros sold in excess of 40 million copies. Mario 64 sold 11 million, and Galaxy 8 million. And these are just some of the highlights. Diminishing returns on videogames over a prolonged period of time is as inevitable as the fucking tide. The quality of future releases, plays to nostalgia, solid marketing campaigns, inclusions of future technologies, etc can all cause fluctuations in sales, sure, but reigniting public interest in a relatively esoteric product on such a massive scale in a world where video games are everywhere and fighting games are in abundant supply is, although not impossible, seriously unlikely. But again I’m forced to ask why this even matters? Why do you care if Street Fighter sells 6 million or 2 million so long as it makes money? On a personal note, I would much prefer for Street Fighter to sell profitably to an exclusive audience of loyal supporters who are able to appreciate the game for what it is rather than have it dumbed down and sold ad-infinitum to the masses just so we see new pointless new iterations with escalated numbers on the end just for the sake of new graphics and new characters. This is, of course, unrealistic presents its own series of problems that I won’t go into. But what we personally want from SF is really what this argument is all about, but it’s not why we started the debate.
That Street Fighter IV has sold, at a minimum, 2.5 million units worldwide, should be, on the basis of your argument for it to return to its glory days, cause for you to rejoice. That Capcom ostensibly had to go back to basics to make SF4 sell as well as it did, (through creative repugnancy or inspired marketing – take your pick) should at least tell you something about the public’s feelings towards the series. The public don’t like change. Street Fighter III’s commercial disappointment is arguably evidence of this. But you don’t like SF4 so you’re trying to justify new iterations in the saga as damaging. That you never addressed the point I made in two separate posts about how SSF4, with revised mechanics and new characters, is potentially no different from numerical increased in the Virtua Fighter/Tekken series is telling. To you, a bigger number at the end of a game signifies massive change, even if that change is one you can only see graphically or in terms of percentage of content added. This is what I meant by my point about franchises, which I admit got a little confused with mention of Mario (which supposed to feature in a different part of the debate – my bad). New versions in a series, particularly those that focus on two-player gaming, aren’t often about making massive overhauls to game design. They’re about improving upon it, and in that mindset SSF4 could, and I think will, justify its own existence as a sequel within the same numerical iteration without arbitrarily changing the number at the end of its title.
But here’s what I really think, and to continue a trend, this is on the basis of virtually no evidence whatsoever.
In spite of everything, I think you’re a SF fanboy. There’s no shame in that (on the Internet) - I am too. But whereas I like to think my fanboyism doesn’t get in the way of analysing a situation objectively, yours has made you invent an argument about why Capcom is wrong to make new versions of SSF4. You don’t want new versions of SF4 because you don’t like SF4. It has nothing to do with worries about Capcom’s finances, or a hope to see the series return to the commercial popularity of its former glories - you’re just eager to see SF5 because it might right all that you personally consider to be wrong with SF4. For you, the existence of SSF4 slows down how soon you can get SF5, even jeopardises the chance of it ever coming. From what I’ve been able to surmise, you don’t like SF4 because you love the cosmetic experience more than you care about the core experience. I’m even going to guess that you don’t like the art style, and I know you hate the new characters. If pressed about your preference SF style, you’re probably a fan of the original roster and the ones that feature in Alpha. Truth be told, I am too. But my feelings towards the game’s style do not heavily influence my feelings towards the game itself. To you, the cosmetics are central to the experience. That I think this stupid, wrong, idiotic, retarded, abhorrent and a bunch of other mean words is completely irrelevant to argument we’ve been having. It has nothing to do with whether or not there should be a SSF4.
In spite of everything you’ve written, your argument remains, at best, hugely confused, and, at worst, completely irrelevant. You are still trying to use Street Fighter’s supposed dwindling sales figures as measurement of, in your own words, “how much people want the content of the game” as means to condemn its existence. Let me repeat that in a different way: you’re using the game’s popularity as a yardstick for its future merit. The question is, why in God’s name are you trying to do that?
Firstly, we can argue all day about numbers. I could tell you that Street Fighter IV has sold better on one console than any Alpha game. I could tell you that Street Fighter IV has - and I have no way of proving this but I bet my right eyelid I’m 100% right - sold better than any Street Fighter III game at the point of release. Without knowing the costs Capcom incurred to produce, market and distribute any version of these games, these figures are irrelevant. But even if we knew these figures inside and out, even if we knew that Street Fighter IV profited Capcom less than any previous iteration of Street Fighter, that information would STILL be completely meaningless to this debate about whether or not Capcom is creatively justified to release a newer version of SF4. If this is ONLY an argument about whether or not SSF4 will cause the death of the franchise, then I hold my hands up right now that I can’t know the answer, though your reasoning for thinking it remains suspect. If this is a debate about whether or not new additions in a single iteration of a series are inherently a bad thing, then I’ll carry on as I am.
But even in terms of finances, the very existence of Super Street Fighter IV all but verifies that Capcom considers SF4 to have been sufficiently profitable to justify a follow-up. They have even predicted that another iteration, selling even less (such is inevitable with fighting games today), will also be profitable. But even if they’re completely wrong, even if SSF4 bombs commercially and the Heaven’s drop pink underpants into your Alphabetti Spaghetti, provided the game is GOOD the consumer has still lost nothing. Even under the sheer tonnage of figures you’ve supplied, I still don’t believe for a second that your concern is for the company’s welfare. You just want to see another Street Fighter that isn’t Street Fighter IV. That’s the point you’re really trying to make. The rest is spreadsheet window-dressing.
Secondly, I have to break some bad news to you. Brace yourself for (2nd) impact, because this is really going to hurt. Street Fighter will NEVER, EVER be as commercially popular as it was. If you’re asking yourself right now how I could possibly know that, you’re absolutely right to, because I can’t. But trust me, it’s still the fucking truth. The video gaming world today is a very different place than it was in 1992 and even then there were a million different reasons as to why Street Fighter II was the success it was. But your tunnel-vision reasoning that it must be because Capcom made multiple versions within a single series is just an example of misinformed, post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking. That’s Latin for ‘I speak Latin and you do not’. No, kidding, but the point stands.
Nobody is arguing that the various iterations of Street Fighter didn’t vary in quality, but suggesting SSF4 is inherently a bad thing before it’s even out is wilfully ignorant. Especially in the wake of Third Strike’s long-loved critical popularity. That you think Third Strike’s improvements over 2nd Impact are less extreme than those between 2nd Impact and SF3 is fair comment. But we wouldn’t even have 2nd Impact if we didn’t allow for future iterations in a single version of SF. This just backs up my point about SSF4. And yes, I personally consider a 21% (or 18%) increase in characters enough to justify a new fighting game (by fighting game standards, that’s arguably huge), but not in and of itself. To me it’s about the totality of the experience, not about the percentage of content added. This is where you and I fundamentally disagree about fighting games and here’s why: you see new games in the series in terms of how much new content is added. -, the number of new backgrounds and new characters. How you don’t see it is as refinements made, ultras added, combos changed, characters improved, game mechanics altered. You pay for newer, I pay for better. There’s a point where the line between those two ideas meet but ours are miles apart.
As long as the SF series remains profitable and new games of quality continue to be made, you’d think fans of the series would be happy. The original Super Mario Bros sold in excess of 40 million copies. Mario 64 sold 11 million, and Galaxy 8 million. And these are just some of the highlights. Diminishing returns on videogames over a prolonged period of time is as inevitable as the fucking tide. The quality of future releases, plays to nostalgia, solid marketing campaigns, inclusions of future technologies, etc can all cause fluctuations in sales, sure, but reigniting public interest in a relatively esoteric product on such a massive scale in a world where video games are everywhere and fighting games are in abundant supply is, although not impossible, seriously unlikely. But again I’m forced to ask why this even matters? Why do you care if Street Fighter sells 6 million or 2 million so long as it makes money? On a personal note, I would much prefer for Street Fighter to sell profitably to an exclusive audience of loyal supporters who are able to appreciate the game for what it is rather than have it dumbed down and sold ad-infinitum to the masses just so we see new pointless new iterations with escalated numbers on the end just for the sake of new graphics and new characters. This is, of course, unrealistic presents its own series of problems that I won’t go into. But what we personally want from SF is really what this argument is all about, but it’s not why we started the debate.
That Street Fighter IV has sold, at a minimum, 2.5 million units worldwide, should be, on the basis of your argument for it to return to its glory days, cause for you to rejoice. That Capcom ostensibly had to go back to basics to make SF4 sell as well as it did, (through creative repugnancy or inspired marketing – take your pick) should at least tell you something about the public’s feelings towards the series. The public don’t like change. Street Fighter III’s commercial disappointment is arguably evidence of this. But you don’t like SF4 so you’re trying to justify new iterations in the saga as damaging. That you never addressed the point I made in two separate posts about how SSF4, with revised mechanics and new characters, is potentially no different from numerical increased in the Virtua Fighter/Tekken series is telling. To you, a bigger number at the end of a game signifies massive change, even if that change is one you can only see graphically or in terms of percentage of content added. This is what I meant by my point about franchises, which I admit got a little confused with mention of Mario (which supposed to feature in a different part of the debate – my bad). New versions in a series, particularly those that focus on two-player gaming, aren’t often about making massive overhauls to game design. They’re about improving upon it, and in that mindset SSF4 could, and I think will, justify its own existence as a sequel within the same numerical iteration without arbitrarily changing the number at the end of its title.
But here’s what I really think, and to continue a trend, this is on the basis of virtually no evidence whatsoever.
In spite of everything, I think you’re a SF fanboy. There’s no shame in that (on the Internet) - I am too. But whereas I like to think my fanboyism doesn’t get in the way of analysing a situation objectively, yours has made you invent an argument about why Capcom is wrong to make new versions of SSF4. You don’t want new versions of SF4 because you don’t like SF4. It has nothing to do with worries about Capcom’s finances, or a hope to see the series return to the commercial popularity of its former glories - you’re just eager to see SF5 because it might right all that you personally consider to be wrong with SF4. For you, the existence of SSF4 slows down how soon you can get SF5, even jeopardises the chance of it ever coming. From what I’ve been able to surmise, you don’t like SF4 because you love the cosmetic experience more than you care about the core experience. I’m even going to guess that you don’t like the art style, and I know you hate the new characters. If pressed about your preference SF style, you’re probably a fan of the original roster and the ones that feature in Alpha. Truth be told, I am too. But my feelings towards the game’s style do not heavily influence my feelings towards the game itself. To you, the cosmetics are central to the experience. That I think this stupid, wrong, idiotic, retarded, abhorrent and a bunch of other mean words is completely irrelevant to argument we’ve been having. It has nothing to do with whether or not there should be a SSF4.
EDIT:Second paragraph should read:
In spite of everything you’ve written, your argument remains, at best, hugely confused, and, at worst, completely irrelevant. You are still trying to use Street Fighter’s supposed dwindling sales figures as measurement of, in your own words, “how much people want the content of the game” as means to condemn Super Street Fighter IV's existence. Let me repeat that in a different way: you’re using the game’s dwindling popularity as a yardstick to assess its future merit. The question is, why in God’s name are you trying to do that?
In spite of everything you’ve written, your argument remains, at best, hugely confused, and, at worst, completely irrelevant. You are still trying to use Street Fighter’s supposed dwindling sales figures as measurement of, in your own words, “how much people want the content of the game” as means to condemn Super Street Fighter IV's existence. Let me repeat that in a different way: you’re using the game’s dwindling popularity as a yardstick to assess its future merit. The question is, why in God’s name are you trying to do that?
Great blog post, I've put well over 200 hours into SF IV and that's far more than I'd put into 90% of full priced games on the 360 and PS3...
@Goutetsu
*Has a panic attack*. Breath in, Breath out!
Holy crap! Why the hell do we do this!? Are neither of us capable of being succinct? I seriously considered not responding and letting you "win" by Filibuster alone. But we know how us nerds operate. Here we go again.
I'll try to keep the numbers bit short. You're right. SFIV has beaten any console version of SFA or SFIII. But those games were released during a time where patience with SF was wearing thin. All those updates were too much to keep in your head, and with like 30 different releases of various games in the series, it was hard to care. Plus, with SFIII, it wasn't even given proper releases. Capcom wasn't willing to make the game work for the consoles at the time of it's release (basically the PS), and it's only proper release at it's time was on the Dreamcast, a system that died fairly quickly.
SFIV had a lot going for it. It was released several years after the glut of SF games in the 90's, so it wouldn't be seen as stale (ugh, another SF game!) or have to compete against other SF games (other SF releases were as big a competitor to later SF games (Alpha 3 and 3rd Strike) as other fighting games). It has the return factor (nostalgia) going for it, which wasn't possible for Alpha or III since the other SF games were still in use at arcades and had frequent releases (not fresh). It was released as perfect ports on the current systems pretty close to its arcade release. And there's no denying the heavy marketing/hype the game released under. SFIV was given every break that earlier SF games didn't have. And it still didn't do that well.
I don't really think that SSFIV will cause the death of the franchise, in the sense that SSFIV will be released and hellfire will rain on the offices of Dimps and Ono's division. I think SSFIV is a harbinger of SF repeating the same mistakes that killed SF in the first place. I still expect a V, but maybe not a VI.
As I've told you, I've never seriously played VF or Tekken. But I'll try to say something. It doesn't matter what either of those two games do. SF should concern itself with selling to its customers, not selling against competitors, with improving itself, not trying to be directly better to its rivals. After all, it's SF that was the phenomenon, not VF or Tekken. It shouldn't be as good or better than VF or Tekken, it should be out of their leagues.
I don't deny that updates can improve games. But I'm not sure they ever truly needed them. SFII already had all the characters that would be playable in HF. The code simply hadn't been finished. SF Alpha is an unfinished Alpha 2. New Generation is an unfinished 2nd Impact (There's even mostly finished Hugo sprites in the code). SFIV is a mostly finished game (even if it did drop T. Hawk and DeeJay partway through development). Maybe SSFIV will improve SFIV. But it won't sell better than it. More doesn't sell (WW to HF shows that). Different does. Interesting does.
I love everything about SF. I don't like the games just for the gameplay, just for the characters, just for the environment, just for the music, or everything else that makes the games. All those things have to come together to make the game, the experience, work. When one or more of those things is/are off, it weakens my experience, my fun. SFIV is off (its offness is why it used so many old things).
SF can come back to prominence. The problem is that SFIV isn't even trying to do so. To stay in the public eye, to be prominent, would require SF to continuously keep making new fans, to keep being interesting and giving people a reason to play.
You used Mario as an example of a series losing sales as it went on. But you're example is faulty. I'm going to skip SMB's 40 million for a sec (I've got a good reason that I'll address later) and have SMB3 be the first game sales. We all know SMB3 is one of the best selling games of all time, selling a total of over 18 million on NES (and more over other releases). When SMW came out, it sold a bit more than SMB3 (20 million). But then, when SM64 was released, it sold less (about 11 million). That's not because the N64 sold less than the PS (contrary to popular belief, they were about equal), but because not as many people were interested in 3D Mario as they were in 2D Mario (they are not the same type of game). SMS and SMG continued to sell less well than SM64 and the 2D Mario games (even the Super Mario Land games sold better (18 mil and 11 mil respectively). It wasn't until Nintendo released NSMB that Mario returned to prominence (19 mil and counting). Point is that there's an example of returning to prominence (and just you wait for NSMBW to shock everyone). It can be done.
Better example: When Nintendo released the NES packed in with SMB (told ya I'd come back) the package managed to sell immensely. But as Nintendo went on they forgot their audiences and style (games the whole family could enjoy) and went more and more inward. The SNES-N64-Gamecube's were entirely competing for a select dollar of kids who could be manipulated to hate other systems (Gasp! They created fanboys!) and buy theirs exclusively. They competely forgot about Mom, Dad, Aunt Uncle, ect. and had focused on the manipulatable kids. The marketing at the time and since then was even at making systems look cool rather than fun. As a result Nintendo saw diminished sales as more and more people left gaming, and they were forced to squeeze more out of whatever customers remained. But then, someone came up with an idea! "Forfeit" the race, and sell back to the customers who left, and those that had never really started. The Wii packed with Wii Sports sold like bonkers, with Wii Sports overtaking Super Mario Bros. as the best selling game of all time. It is always possible, no matter what anyone says, to return to prominence, even from last place.
Umm... I'm supposed to be talking about SF, aren't I? Ok.
The point of that major aside is that it is always possible to return to prominence, provided you understand the audience. SFIV/SSFIV aren't even trying. As SF went on, it became more exclusive, more fan baiting, more complex, but never really more accessible and by association, fun. SFIV is by far the most complex game in the series, the most fan baiting, the most exclusive. SFIV isn't bringing in any new fans. It sells near exclusively to old fans.
For SF to go back to II levels and higher, it can't simply try to match or beat SFII. It has to kill it! It has to make it look ancient and useless. People who start with this fictional killing SF game should not even want to play the older titles. It has to be a phenomenon all it's own.
The reason I want Capcom to make a SFV that does this is because I love SF so much, and I don't want it do die out. SFIV and SSFIV are bigger dinosaurs, not seeing the meteor that will destroy them. One day, maybe in some kids head right now, there is a small mammal that will survive, and become the new dominant species. On that day, the dinosaurs will gone.
This game, the killer, will likely be hated by the classic Fighting game gamers. I wouldn't be surprised if this game took cues from Super Smash Brothers (it's not the killer, but it's definitely the first step in the evolution of the killer). But the "casuals" will love it.
Man, I can't believe I spend so much time and energy on something I don't even get paid for. Can you?
*Has a panic attack*. Breath in, Breath out!
Holy crap! Why the hell do we do this!? Are neither of us capable of being succinct? I seriously considered not responding and letting you "win" by Filibuster alone. But we know how us nerds operate. Here we go again.
I'll try to keep the numbers bit short. You're right. SFIV has beaten any console version of SFA or SFIII. But those games were released during a time where patience with SF was wearing thin. All those updates were too much to keep in your head, and with like 30 different releases of various games in the series, it was hard to care. Plus, with SFIII, it wasn't even given proper releases. Capcom wasn't willing to make the game work for the consoles at the time of it's release (basically the PS), and it's only proper release at it's time was on the Dreamcast, a system that died fairly quickly.
SFIV had a lot going for it. It was released several years after the glut of SF games in the 90's, so it wouldn't be seen as stale (ugh, another SF game!) or have to compete against other SF games (other SF releases were as big a competitor to later SF games (Alpha 3 and 3rd Strike) as other fighting games). It has the return factor (nostalgia) going for it, which wasn't possible for Alpha or III since the other SF games were still in use at arcades and had frequent releases (not fresh). It was released as perfect ports on the current systems pretty close to its arcade release. And there's no denying the heavy marketing/hype the game released under. SFIV was given every break that earlier SF games didn't have. And it still didn't do that well.
I don't really think that SSFIV will cause the death of the franchise, in the sense that SSFIV will be released and hellfire will rain on the offices of Dimps and Ono's division. I think SSFIV is a harbinger of SF repeating the same mistakes that killed SF in the first place. I still expect a V, but maybe not a VI.
As I've told you, I've never seriously played VF or Tekken. But I'll try to say something. It doesn't matter what either of those two games do. SF should concern itself with selling to its customers, not selling against competitors, with improving itself, not trying to be directly better to its rivals. After all, it's SF that was the phenomenon, not VF or Tekken. It shouldn't be as good or better than VF or Tekken, it should be out of their leagues.
I don't deny that updates can improve games. But I'm not sure they ever truly needed them. SFII already had all the characters that would be playable in HF. The code simply hadn't been finished. SF Alpha is an unfinished Alpha 2. New Generation is an unfinished 2nd Impact (There's even mostly finished Hugo sprites in the code). SFIV is a mostly finished game (even if it did drop T. Hawk and DeeJay partway through development). Maybe SSFIV will improve SFIV. But it won't sell better than it. More doesn't sell (WW to HF shows that). Different does. Interesting does.
I love everything about SF. I don't like the games just for the gameplay, just for the characters, just for the environment, just for the music, or everything else that makes the games. All those things have to come together to make the game, the experience, work. When one or more of those things is/are off, it weakens my experience, my fun. SFIV is off (its offness is why it used so many old things).
SF can come back to prominence. The problem is that SFIV isn't even trying to do so. To stay in the public eye, to be prominent, would require SF to continuously keep making new fans, to keep being interesting and giving people a reason to play.
You used Mario as an example of a series losing sales as it went on. But you're example is faulty. I'm going to skip SMB's 40 million for a sec (I've got a good reason that I'll address later) and have SMB3 be the first game sales. We all know SMB3 is one of the best selling games of all time, selling a total of over 18 million on NES (and more over other releases). When SMW came out, it sold a bit more than SMB3 (20 million). But then, when SM64 was released, it sold less (about 11 million). That's not because the N64 sold less than the PS (contrary to popular belief, they were about equal), but because not as many people were interested in 3D Mario as they were in 2D Mario (they are not the same type of game). SMS and SMG continued to sell less well than SM64 and the 2D Mario games (even the Super Mario Land games sold better (18 mil and 11 mil respectively). It wasn't until Nintendo released NSMB that Mario returned to prominence (19 mil and counting). Point is that there's an example of returning to prominence (and just you wait for NSMBW to shock everyone). It can be done.
Better example: When Nintendo released the NES packed in with SMB (told ya I'd come back) the package managed to sell immensely. But as Nintendo went on they forgot their audiences and style (games the whole family could enjoy) and went more and more inward. The SNES-N64-Gamecube's were entirely competing for a select dollar of kids who could be manipulated to hate other systems (Gasp! They created fanboys!) and buy theirs exclusively. They competely forgot about Mom, Dad, Aunt Uncle, ect. and had focused on the manipulatable kids. The marketing at the time and since then was even at making systems look cool rather than fun. As a result Nintendo saw diminished sales as more and more people left gaming, and they were forced to squeeze more out of whatever customers remained. But then, someone came up with an idea! "Forfeit" the race, and sell back to the customers who left, and those that had never really started. The Wii packed with Wii Sports sold like bonkers, with Wii Sports overtaking Super Mario Bros. as the best selling game of all time. It is always possible, no matter what anyone says, to return to prominence, even from last place.
Umm... I'm supposed to be talking about SF, aren't I? Ok.
The point of that major aside is that it is always possible to return to prominence, provided you understand the audience. SFIV/SSFIV aren't even trying. As SF went on, it became more exclusive, more fan baiting, more complex, but never really more accessible and by association, fun. SFIV is by far the most complex game in the series, the most fan baiting, the most exclusive. SFIV isn't bringing in any new fans. It sells near exclusively to old fans.
For SF to go back to II levels and higher, it can't simply try to match or beat SFII. It has to kill it! It has to make it look ancient and useless. People who start with this fictional killing SF game should not even want to play the older titles. It has to be a phenomenon all it's own.
The reason I want Capcom to make a SFV that does this is because I love SF so much, and I don't want it do die out. SFIV and SSFIV are bigger dinosaurs, not seeing the meteor that will destroy them. One day, maybe in some kids head right now, there is a small mammal that will survive, and become the new dominant species. On that day, the dinosaurs will gone.
This game, the killer, will likely be hated by the classic Fighting game gamers. I wouldn't be surprised if this game took cues from Super Smash Brothers (it's not the killer, but it's definitely the first step in the evolution of the killer). But the "casuals" will love it.
Man, I can't believe I spend so much time and energy on something I don't even get paid for. Can you?
@ FistfulOAwesome
You just completely contradicted yourself.
"The point of that major aside is that it is always possible to return to prominence, provided you understand the audience. SFIV/SSFIV aren't even trying. As SF went on, it became more exclusive, more fan baiting, more complex, but never really more accessible and by association, fun."
SFIV returned to prominence by including the entire cast of SFII. Capcom tried an almost entirely new cast with SF3 New Generation and most people didn't even recognize it as Street Fighter. SF4 is catered to the more casual player with the inclusion of relaxed command inputs and enormous leniency on input timing. If anything SF4 is THE MOST DUMBED DOWN version of Street Fighter ever.
You just completely contradicted yourself.
"The point of that major aside is that it is always possible to return to prominence, provided you understand the audience. SFIV/SSFIV aren't even trying. As SF went on, it became more exclusive, more fan baiting, more complex, but never really more accessible and by association, fun."
SFIV returned to prominence by including the entire cast of SFII. Capcom tried an almost entirely new cast with SF3 New Generation and most people didn't even recognize it as Street Fighter. SF4 is catered to the more casual player with the inclusion of relaxed command inputs and enormous leniency on input timing. If anything SF4 is THE MOST DUMBED DOWN version of Street Fighter ever.
@sleipnr
No, I haven't. The cast of SFII alone will not guarantee sales. SFA3 had most of the II cast in the arcade (and all of it in home releases) and it didn't bring back SF. The cast alone wasn't why II succeeded. It was the entire experience. SFIII couldn't bring it back, even though it's a well designed game with memorable characters, because it's nothing more than a sequel to II. The cast doesn't matter alone, the entire experience does (although, Necro and Gill did poison the water by being too weird, making people remember the entire III series as "full of freaks", despite their being only 4 (Q and Twelve as well). SFIII didn't feel significantly different to the average player (as didn't SFA) to SFII.
Why would the cast of II matter? Would the cast of II bring in new players, or would it simply entice old ones? The sales of IV suggest the latter.
As for IV being a dumbed-down SF, that's far from the truth. SFIV has all the old difficulties of past SF games, with new difficulties like Ultras, Focus Attacks, Focus Cancels, and more. There is so much shit to think about that it's quite frankly maddening. I'm not surprised that many people would see the game played and think to themselves "Wow! I'll never be able to be good at that game". What they really mean is that it would take to long for them to get to the fun (the actual fighting) from the training (learning special move inputs), and so they don't want to try.
For SF to return to prominence, it must kill II. The entire system must be scratched for one that is simpler, for the gamers who simply can't get the grasp of SRK motion's, 360's, and Charges. Extra stuff, like 2 supers at once (Super's and Ultra's), Dash's, Focus Cancels, and other things might have to go to. It would have to be a game that asks why people don't play SF now (controls are difficult, too complicated) and fixes those issues. Believe me, if a fighting game manages to take the world by storm again (whether it's SF or not), it will be one that understands why people want to play (play as a badass fighter (no silly anime designs like C. Viper or Juri) and compete against friends) and that limits the amount of things in the way to play (no confusing motions or overtly complicated system). "Hardcore" fighting gamers will likely hate it, but that won't matter, because the "Casuals" will love it.
As an example, you know who was on the path to getting it right? David Sirlin, the designer of SSFIITHDR. He originally had a plan for bringing back SF back around '06, but it was denied.
The pitch:http://www.lion-gv.com/v09/Portfolio/game-design/street_fighter_iv/sf4-concept-doc.pdf
Check out page 6 detailing the control scheme. Sirlin mentions that to many players have problems with the standard SF controls, so like Turbo Revival, he would offer a control option to make them incredibly simple.
His game wouldn't have made more money than IV. I'm just using his pitch to show that some people are at least partway to understanding how to gain more customers.
This control scheme does work well to gain more customers, as does appealing to a customers wants (and this means customers who don't have an interest in the game as well. Everyone is a potential customer). The best selling fighting game of the past 10 years is Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Like its predecessors, SSBB delivers what customers want (play with all their favorite Nintendo characters fighting each other) while keeping the barrier to entry very low (there is a button that is specifically used to perform special moves). While SMB isn't the killer, its very likely the killer's ancestor. Look at how much the tourney players (the most "Hardcore" of fighting game players) scoff at the SSBB players. They hate that game, and its customers. I suspect the killer of II (hopefully a future SF game) will likely take inspiration from SSB.
Word to ya muther!!!
No, I haven't. The cast of SFII alone will not guarantee sales. SFA3 had most of the II cast in the arcade (and all of it in home releases) and it didn't bring back SF. The cast alone wasn't why II succeeded. It was the entire experience. SFIII couldn't bring it back, even though it's a well designed game with memorable characters, because it's nothing more than a sequel to II. The cast doesn't matter alone, the entire experience does (although, Necro and Gill did poison the water by being too weird, making people remember the entire III series as "full of freaks", despite their being only 4 (Q and Twelve as well). SFIII didn't feel significantly different to the average player (as didn't SFA) to SFII.
Why would the cast of II matter? Would the cast of II bring in new players, or would it simply entice old ones? The sales of IV suggest the latter.
As for IV being a dumbed-down SF, that's far from the truth. SFIV has all the old difficulties of past SF games, with new difficulties like Ultras, Focus Attacks, Focus Cancels, and more. There is so much shit to think about that it's quite frankly maddening. I'm not surprised that many people would see the game played and think to themselves "Wow! I'll never be able to be good at that game". What they really mean is that it would take to long for them to get to the fun (the actual fighting) from the training (learning special move inputs), and so they don't want to try.
For SF to return to prominence, it must kill II. The entire system must be scratched for one that is simpler, for the gamers who simply can't get the grasp of SRK motion's, 360's, and Charges. Extra stuff, like 2 supers at once (Super's and Ultra's), Dash's, Focus Cancels, and other things might have to go to. It would have to be a game that asks why people don't play SF now (controls are difficult, too complicated) and fixes those issues. Believe me, if a fighting game manages to take the world by storm again (whether it's SF or not), it will be one that understands why people want to play (play as a badass fighter (no silly anime designs like C. Viper or Juri) and compete against friends) and that limits the amount of things in the way to play (no confusing motions or overtly complicated system). "Hardcore" fighting gamers will likely hate it, but that won't matter, because the "Casuals" will love it.
As an example, you know who was on the path to getting it right? David Sirlin, the designer of SSFIITHDR. He originally had a plan for bringing back SF back around '06, but it was denied.
The pitch:http://www.lion-gv.com/v09/Portfolio/game-design/street_fighter_iv/sf4-concept-doc.pdf
Check out page 6 detailing the control scheme. Sirlin mentions that to many players have problems with the standard SF controls, so like Turbo Revival, he would offer a control option to make them incredibly simple.
His game wouldn't have made more money than IV. I'm just using his pitch to show that some people are at least partway to understanding how to gain more customers.
This control scheme does work well to gain more customers, as does appealing to a customers wants (and this means customers who don't have an interest in the game as well. Everyone is a potential customer). The best selling fighting game of the past 10 years is Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Like its predecessors, SSBB delivers what customers want (play with all their favorite Nintendo characters fighting each other) while keeping the barrier to entry very low (there is a button that is specifically used to perform special moves). While SMB isn't the killer, its very likely the killer's ancestor. Look at how much the tourney players (the most "Hardcore" of fighting game players) scoff at the SSBB players. They hate that game, and its customers. I suspect the killer of II (hopefully a future SF game) will likely take inspiration from SSB.
Word to ya muther!!!
this is why you don't buy fighting games at full price... Considering games get dirt cheap in a short period of time, and the fact that fighting games get a new revision every year, what should people complain? How many guilty gear revisions have there been? Virtua Fighter? Tekken? c'mon man! now super sf4 sounds like a brand new game if they are adding more than 5 characters!
@ wutang4ever
I buy fighting games at full price because I am a fan of any game that primarily involves punching people in the fucking face. I buy the revisions because I am a fan of punching people in the fucking face in a brand new costume or with a brand new character roster. Also, punching people in the fucking face in a set of new stages ain't half bad either.
@ FistfulOAwesome
I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Street Fighter hardcore, and I don't hate SSBB players, I just don't like the game that much. There's too much to focus on at once, it's like I need two Adderall pills just to fucking play. Madcap fighting had its perfect balance with Power Stone 2, in my opinion. Just enough to be crazy, but little enough to still keep track of what the hell was going on and where you stood in the midst of the chaos.
I'm glad this game is getting a revision, as all SF games eventually do. It's always about the marked improvement over the previous iteration, whether through purely aesthetic means such as graphics and sound, or more important aspects like technical tweaks and gameplay refinements. That's one thing that the Smash Bros. series doesn't have going for it - when you have a version of that game, you're stuck with her and all of her issues, for better or worse. Street Fighter games get pilates classes, boob jobs and facelifts every year and a half or so. Eventually, the age begins to show regardless, and that's when you start dating her newer, younger sister - who will show you things that your previous flame wasn't able to physically handle, much less perform.
Sounds a bit misogynistic, but it's an adequate comparison.
I buy fighting games at full price because I am a fan of any game that primarily involves punching people in the fucking face. I buy the revisions because I am a fan of punching people in the fucking face in a brand new costume or with a brand new character roster. Also, punching people in the fucking face in a set of new stages ain't half bad either.
@ FistfulOAwesome
I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Street Fighter hardcore, and I don't hate SSBB players, I just don't like the game that much. There's too much to focus on at once, it's like I need two Adderall pills just to fucking play. Madcap fighting had its perfect balance with Power Stone 2, in my opinion. Just enough to be crazy, but little enough to still keep track of what the hell was going on and where you stood in the midst of the chaos.
I'm glad this game is getting a revision, as all SF games eventually do. It's always about the marked improvement over the previous iteration, whether through purely aesthetic means such as graphics and sound, or more important aspects like technical tweaks and gameplay refinements. That's one thing that the Smash Bros. series doesn't have going for it - when you have a version of that game, you're stuck with her and all of her issues, for better or worse. Street Fighter games get pilates classes, boob jobs and facelifts every year and a half or so. Eventually, the age begins to show regardless, and that's when you start dating her newer, younger sister - who will show you things that your previous flame wasn't able to physically handle, much less perform.
Sounds a bit misogynistic, but it's an adequate comparison.
@Everyone who seems to love this article regardless of whats said I'm still a little pissed about this, but all the updates and additions i'm hearing hear make it worth buying. All they need to do is re-balance Akuma so he takes less damage and give him fireball super/ultra I'll be all smiles.
@Everyone who is all glad they didn't buy the first version STFU!! I don't give a damn you didn't
@Everyone who is all glad they didn't buy the first version STFU!! I don't give a damn you didn't
Wow this post is mad stupid. First of all it should be free because in this time & age money doesn't come free. Second the online play for SFIV is horrible and Capcom hasn't done anything about it. Third wow new characters big deal it should of have been a DLC and to those people saying "there's no room or what digital age are you living" please save all that shit for some one who is stupid cause Microsoft and Capcom can work it for SSFIV to become a DLC so it isn't impossible.
I'm a big SF player and probably been playing longer than 90% of the people in this forum but lucky for me I'm going to burn it on a disc 1 week before people become stupid and buy it at local game stores.
I'm a big SF player and probably been playing longer than 90% of the people in this forum but lucky for me I'm going to burn it on a disc 1 week before people become stupid and buy it at local game stores.
SSFIV should be a DLC and to who ever said it can't be done is just simply stupid and should be shot. Capcom and microsoft can make it a DLC but they choose not to due to capcom is trying to make more profit and that's it. This game either should be free or a DLC worth about $15 to $20 max. Also this article is thrash and made no sense what so ever. People will complain no matter what and the sad thing is is that if you look closely at the complaints the people complaining are right 100%.
Am I excited about SSFIV...yes I am as a fellow gamer and SFIV Pro I do believe this should of have been a DLC or free and the worst thing is A LOT of PRO'S are saying the same thing about SSFIV.
Am I excited about SSFIV...yes I am as a fellow gamer and SFIV Pro I do believe this should of have been a DLC or free and the worst thing is A LOT of PRO'S are saying the same thing about SSFIV.
omfg.. this is sad.. i spend 300 for the street fighter 4 series (collector edition, costume packs, TE fightstick).. now they're going to leech me even MORE blahhh!! >.< capcom is smart... this game is the only reason why i buy ps3 :D
ima stab myself if they come out with "super street fighter fightstick tournament edition v2.0 w/ auto hadoken button"..
ima stab myself if they come out with "super street fighter fightstick tournament edition v2.0 w/ auto hadoken button"..
This article should be used as a ref sheet for anyone that ever bitches about any other game. EVER.
PERIOD.
YOU sir, are a gaming Confucius.
*applause*
'Confucius saaaayyy.... SHUT THE FUCK UP!'
PERIOD.
YOU sir, are a gaming Confucius.
*applause*
'Confucius saaaayyy.... SHUT THE FUCK UP!'
Just how much did Capcom bribe you to post this utter garbage? Come on, you can tell us.
How about an article about telling those who defend everything and anything corporations do to try to rape us to STFU?
A LOT of publishers have been taking advantage of milking people dry this gen, re-releasing games with a few tweaks ridiculously fast, and not making it DLC, Left 4 Dead 2 anyone?
Too massive to be DLC? Massive my ass, you want massive? Look at the Burnout Paradise DLC, a 1 gig addon that adds 30 or so cars and AN ENTIRE FUCKING ISLAND, I assure you this is far more massive than the SF4 additions.
There is NO reason this shouldn't be DLC, other than of course, Capcom raping consumers dry and people like the idiot who posted this utter garbage backing them up.
You know what Topher is? You know what you all are?
WIMPS
Yes, spineless, beaten-down, utter wimps with no minds of their own. A total wuss.
Anything a publisher does, everything a publisher does, not matter how much they rape you, you just suck it down and then try to attack others that actually have more than two braincells to go "hey, wait a minute".
And then you hide behind the viel of internet anonymity, knowing that whatever retarded-ass comment you make, there will be others even more retarded to back you up, I guess having an army of anonymous wimps makes you feel unstoppable on the internet, oh, and don't forget insulting their mother and swearing at them to shut up, that works too, you sure told them.
I have meet people like this before, and they cower and fold like paper when they try to argue face to face, and I suppose NOW that I said that suddenly everybody here has won every real life argument they have ever been in, with their opponent being an idiot, and for those that actually got into a fight happen to know martial arts and won right?
How about an article about telling those who defend everything and anything corporations do to try to rape us to STFU?
A LOT of publishers have been taking advantage of milking people dry this gen, re-releasing games with a few tweaks ridiculously fast, and not making it DLC, Left 4 Dead 2 anyone?
Too massive to be DLC? Massive my ass, you want massive? Look at the Burnout Paradise DLC, a 1 gig addon that adds 30 or so cars and AN ENTIRE FUCKING ISLAND, I assure you this is far more massive than the SF4 additions.
There is NO reason this shouldn't be DLC, other than of course, Capcom raping consumers dry and people like the idiot who posted this utter garbage backing them up.
You know what Topher is? You know what you all are?
WIMPS
Yes, spineless, beaten-down, utter wimps with no minds of their own. A total wuss.
Anything a publisher does, everything a publisher does, not matter how much they rape you, you just suck it down and then try to attack others that actually have more than two braincells to go "hey, wait a minute".
And then you hide behind the viel of internet anonymity, knowing that whatever retarded-ass comment you make, there will be others even more retarded to back you up, I guess having an army of anonymous wimps makes you feel unstoppable on the internet, oh, and don't forget insulting their mother and swearing at them to shut up, that works too, you sure told them.
I have meet people like this before, and they cower and fold like paper when they try to argue face to face, and I suppose NOW that I said that suddenly everybody here has won every real life argument they have ever been in, with their opponent being an idiot, and for those that actually got into a fight happen to know martial arts and won right?
I've never been a big fan of T. Hawk, but Deejay I wasn't a big fan of either. UNTIL I saw people playing Super Street Fighter at some of the EVO championship tournaments. DeeJay has many setups, very good countering against that fat@$$ Rufus.Unfortunately I sold my SFIV for Batman:AA, but I planned on getting it back, but now everyone's telling me about this one and seeing news on it. I wonder if I should just buy SSFIV or get them both?
follow
