The Street Fighter IV Thread

Zebra Airforce · Post by **Zebra Airforce** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:17 am

hyper fighting anniversary's original LE release, they forgot to put in the region coding (ntsc/j copy boots up fine on a standard pal ps2 - never seen a glaring oversight like that before).

Why would you ever complain about this? Region encoding is dumb as hell anyways.

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:18 am

i'm not complaining - but sony would've been pissed as hell

Zebra Airforce · Post by **Zebra Airforce** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:22 am

Strider77 wrote:they said in that article that it's 2 percent done, that build that is being shown anyway. has anyone bothered to read it?

Yeah, I read it. There was mention that the game was played on an arcade machine, which got my hopes up a little.

Strider77 · Post by **Strider77** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:26 am

capcom did that on alot a xbox 1 2D fighters, they were region free.... on purpose.

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:45 am

i'm not sure on that one, because the other versions of hyper fighting (including the normal ntsc/j version) had region protection put in though. anyways... not really important.

arika fucked up the EX games, but wasn't it one of the original SFII people behid the EX series...? i've never played them, but aren't they 3d with 2d gameplay, or whatever?

Strider77 · Post by **Strider77** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:57 am

yes and quite crappy to look at....

PS... cleaner shots and more of them here

http://www.neo-arcadia.com/News/voir_ne ... n=voirtout

Post by **Shatterhand** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:03 pm

I don't think the EX series is that bad. I played a lot of EX2 ....

Skyknight · Post by **Skyknight** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:48 pm

I'm not sure why just having 3D visuals would alter how the game would be played. Just because it's 3D doesn't mean you necessarily have things like flanking et al. (I'm pretty sure the first Tekken didn't). We probably still have the usual hitboxes.

Next question is, what number of player-characters will properly sate everyone? I say this because I mentioned on GameFAQs that we'd probably see around 22 player-characters (about 10-11 from previous games)...it didn't sit that well with at least one person, as he thought it would be too constraining. A later message from him might help explain the mindset...

"In any case, it's definitely a bad idea to have too few characters any way you look at it. Considering how much content is in games these days, it shouldn't be hard for a fighting game to include a nice percentage of extra fighters.. or even double/triple the number of playables. Balance is a lousy excuse. Now that I mention it, sheer content is much better to have than balance.

Besides content, if the game is pulled together in a good way, the SF4 cabinet can literally feel like a world tour in which you get to meet awesome characters. It would also be great if it had an updated version of the "plane trip" graphic from SF2 select screen."

{sigh} The "sheer content" is usually in the home releases, yes? (If he's thinking of Tekken, that wasn't a lot of new content at once, but the series slowly accruing material like a caddisfly nymph assembles its shell) And I'm afraid to ask why he thinks balance is unimportant. Without balance, you're likely to only see about 10-30% of the player-characters being used—thwarting the purpose of the "sheer content".

(Triple the number of PC's...From his minimum of 24, that would be 72. It would take a player quite some time to figure out which one or two he/she is most comfortable with--and I'm aware with how much time there would be, considering what it took me to finally settle on Asuka and Ganryu for T5. How well did that work with MvC2, out of curiosity?)
[/i]

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 8:17 pm

your first mistake was signing up to gamefaqs...

and this is sorta what i mean... it took capcom three attempts with SFIII, and most tournaments are won with 3 of the possible characters (ken, chun li, and yun). which makes me appreciate just how good a job sega did with vf5. it's on it's third version now, and it seems there is no "tiers" per se. just a *very* well balanced roster. and now SF moving to 3D... i'm not so confident in capcom's ability to make a well-balanced beat-'em-up. and if it's true that there wont be an arcade release, that could really kill the game's popularity (soul calibur 3 suffered in a similar way because it was released on console first). if it's out in the arcade *first*, you have time to notice any characters dominating over the rest of the cast from high-level arcade play; and then make revisions from there.

Tempest · Post by **Tempest** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 8:33 pm

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=215633

SF IV Info:

-Producer is Yoshinori Ono, who worked on SF Alpha, SF III, and oversaw Capcom Fighting Revolution

-Ono wants it to be the "second coming" of SF II. Wants it to feel like "homecoming" for SF II fans.*

-Online play is planned with potential for microtransactions such as new characters and stages

-The look is not really similiar to the teaser trailer. A "cartoon-shaded style that manages to evoke SF II reimagined in 3d"*

- runs in 60FPS

- Gameplay sticking with 2D- Ono wants to "preserve the strategic nature of SF II"*

-camera doesn't budge

- Trying to get "as many SFII characters in as possible"*

- Takes place after SFII Turbo and before SF III

-Controls are traditional- "in its current early state, the game feels remarkably close to Super SFII Turbo"*

- Game is more aggressive- more about attacking than defending. Many of the SF III and Alpha gameplay systems have been scrapped.*

- Producer says they haven't decided what platforms or even if there will be an arcade version. Version Shane played was running on a P.C

- Ono suggests Capcom could make a PS2 or DS version if "they deem the market suitable"

-Ono not enthusiastic about making it an exclusive- wants to get it out on as many platforms as possible

*- Makes me want to throw up.

As stated by a previous post, Capcom has forced my hand and now I must murder someone.

Capcom: If it aint broke, then don't fix it.... and then release it 8 more times.

Nuke · Post by **Nuke** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:23 pm

Why this is doomed to alienate it's fan base:

-Producer is Yoshinori Ono, who worked on SF Alpha, SF III, and oversaw Capcom Fighting Revolution
So far, not good...

-Online play is planned with potential for microtransactions
such as new characters and stages
Look EA, we can be greedy too! Wana play as T-hawk, well not from the box you don't!

-The look is not really similar to the teaser trailer. A "cartoon-shaded style that manages to evoke SF II reimagined in 3d"
Because that is what we old school 2D fighting fans are really excited about, another 3D fighter in the already crowded market, almost devoid of our favorite game style.
Shit, if it really has to be 3D, why not go with the much kewler teeser trailer style, at least it's stylish and reminds us of Okami

- Gameplay sticking with 2D- Ono wants to "preserve the strategic nature of SF II"
So, basically they are downgrading the fighting system back to 1992, instead of trying to refine it. Shit capcom, why don't you just call it Street Fighter II: 3D edition?

- Trying to get "as many SFII characters in as possible"
Further fucking up the story and screwing up balance. +No Duddley=

-Takes place after SFII Turbo and before SF III
Here's an idiea: How about re-telling the first one? Or just moving on, for that matter, enough of this alpha shit.

-Controls are traditional- "in its current early state, the game feels remarkably close to Super SFII Turbo"
Because really, why try and perfect the already excellent system you had in III when you can go back to a much simpler system?

- Game is more aggressive- more about attacking than defending. Many of the SF III and Alpha gameplay systems have been scrapped.
Depth sacrificed for retardation

- Ono suggests Capcom could make a PS2 or DS version if "they deem the market suitable"
Read; we can decrease it's omph factor to fit it on a PS2, becasue our graphics are shit. Also, there's this crappy company that can make a quick cash in for us really cheep, they last made that ShrekIII DS game!

-Ono not enthusiastic about making it an exclusive- wants to get it out on as many platforms as possible
Guess that neither Sony or Microsoft are insaine enough to battle for it.

[/i]

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:31 pm

does anyone remember Capcom Fighting All-Stars....?
maybe they'll scrap it

CIT · Post by **CIT** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:39 pm

jpj wrote:arika fucked up the EX games

jpj wrote:i've never played them

Always good to hear somebody with an informed opinion.

Shatterhand wrote:I don't think the EX series is that bad. I played a lot of EX2 ....

Dito. Super cancels were a nice expansion of the SF Alpha system. Graphics are dated now, but the game definitely had something to offer besides just "3D".

EDIT: Also, the EX series has the best soundtracks of any SF game. A must for Shinji Hosoe (Ibara, Under Defeat, etc) fans!

jpj · Post by **jpj** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 10:20 pm

tell a lie, i played the psone versions. not very exciting.

Strider77 · Post by **Strider77** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 2:34 am

I liked Super Turbo quite a bit, it is still one of my favorites. So taking a step in that direction is fine with me. I read the article and there are new mechanics to the system being added and some removed like the parry.

I heard folks bitch and cry over SF3 when it was coming out. They claimed it was a step backwards towards SF2.... b/c it has no air blocking and now you had to deal with just one super unlike the alpha/zero series. Now it's funny b/c folks are saying it's (SF3) way more evolved than the others. Now keep in mind I'm not hating on 3S, I love it and never saw it as backwards, just different in it's own right.

History repeats itself, guess it's true. I remember so much SF3 hate when that game came out.....

On a side note i'm trying to give the 411 on SF to a female friend. I'm curious to see a female who can play. She plays and nows the motions ect but I'm trying to teach her the actual engine ect.

Skyknight · Post by **Skyknight** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:40 pm

I might as well post the thread that the "sheer content" advocate was in; I'm just having trouble deciphering his latest points. (You're looking for Final_lap)

http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/genmes ... c=40055602

moozooh · Post by **moozooh** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 4:16 pm

Look at Ryu's face, please. It's paralyzed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Compare:

…to:

Strider77 · Post by **Strider77** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:51 pm

-Producer is Yoshinori Ono, who worked on SF Alpha, SF III, and oversaw Capcom Fighting Revolution
So far, not good...

yeah and that's one miss out of 2 hits.... he even dissed that game in the interview.

BTW, the guy who was responsible for the EX games just happens to be one of the guys resposible for SF2, the game that started it all. Guess that proves alot don't it.

lgb · Post by **lgb** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:40 pm

Strider77 wrote:
-Producer is Yoshinori Ono, who worked on SF Alpha, SF III, and oversaw Capcom Fighting Revolution
So far, not good...
yeah and that's one miss out of 2 hits.... he even dissed that game in the interview.

BTW, the guy who was responsible for the EX games just happens to be one of the guys resposible for SF2, the game that started it all. Guess that proves alot don't it.

No. All that'll do is cause another war over why EX sucks. Oh wait, it doesn't. (Though I've only played 3, it's still fun.)
---
-Producer is Yoshinori Ono, who worked on SF Alpha, SF III, and oversaw Capcom Fighting Revolution
Never played CFR... meh.
-Online play is planned with potential for microtransactions such as new characters and stages
To be expected. They're getting into the neo groove.
-The look is not really similar to the teaser trailer. A "cartoon-shaded style that manages to evoke SF II reimagined in 3d"
Wow, that'll be cool. Just hope they don't screw it up.
- Gameplay sticking with 2D- Ono wants to "preserve the strategic nature of SF II"
So wait, does this mean we can fireball the hell out of everyone for the win again? Sweet.
- Trying to get "as many SFII characters in as possible"
Nostalgia ftw? No one?
-Takes place after SFII Turbo and before SF III
Would be nice to continue after III. Just like III continued after II. Does this mean Ryu dies after III? Way to kill a character.
-Controls are traditional- "in its current early state, the game feels remarkably close to Super SFII Turbo"
1 meter? No way. Unless ISMs return.
- Game is more aggressive- more about attacking than defending. Many of the SF III and Alpha gameplay systems have been scrapped.
This looks... odd. Autoguard abuse is a must, apparently. And every move will have an autoguard.
- Ono suggests Capcom could make a PS2 or DS version if "they deem the market suitable"
If it's DS please let it be original or handled by Capcom. Other than that, no complaints.
-Ono not enthusiastic about making it an exclusive- wants to get it out on as many platforms as possible
WII. PLEASE WII FOR ****'S SAKE. NINTENDO NEEDS A STREET FIGHTER. ****ING BADLY.

TKGB_Mental_Gear · Post by **TKGB_Mental_Gear** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:15 pm

HO HO!

I just read the article on EGM. It's awesome how Ono is gonna go back to SF2's roots. SF3 was good but that was a circus of freaks.

Strider77 · Post by **Strider77** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:48 pm

- Ono suggests Capcom could make a PS2 or DS version if "they deem the market suitable"

this is the only thing that bothers me, it'd better be next gen or bust. the only thing that keeps me optimistic is the fact next gen power makes things not look like polygons anymore, they look like the CG scenes we use to drool over.

i mean if it's made on next gen arcade hardware and is ported to the newer systems.... then also gets a lower end port then i'm totally ok with that.

Lordstar · Post by **Lordstar** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:51 pm

Buzz lightyear to the rescue!

Tempest · Post by **Tempest** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:02 am

TKGB_Mental_Gear wrote:HO HO!

I just read the article on EGM. It's awesome how Ono is gonna go back to SF2's roots. SF3 was good but that was a circus of freaks.

You have no dignity!

gameoverDude · Post by **gameoverDude** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:09 am

The SFIV shots at Neo Arcadia are looking even better, with some decent facial expressions on the characters. For 3D graphics, it's looking worthy of the PS3 and 360, definitely- like a good polygon approximation of the SFII style. Hopefully there will be one freak character in there (either Blanka, or an all new one). I don't want to see all the SF3 characters tossed- two of them should be brought in.

If there's a console release, they can patch it if need be. Paying another 800 MS Points to grab a SFIV CE upgrade on 360 doesn't sound too bad.

SFEX 3 is merely OK, with really meh 3D model design on the characters. Having all tag battles in 1P kind of throws it off focus. The soundtrack is hot, however (thanks to Shinji Hosoe, Ayako Saso, J99, & Yack).

CMoon · Post by **CMoon** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:18 am

Nuke wrote: +No Duddley=

QFT

MathU · Post by **MathU** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 6:10 am

Strider77 wrote:the only thing that keeps me optimistic is the fact next gen power makes things not look like polygons anymore, they look like the CG scenes we use to drool over.

I'm still extremely unimpressed by "next-gen graphics".

Strider77 · Post by **Strider77** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 5:57 pm

I'm still extremely unimpressed by "next-gen graphics".

what the fuck ever.... trying playing one in it's actual resolution on a HDTV. Games like Mass Effect and Call of Duty 4 look fantastic, they certainly look leaps and bounds beyond anything the past gen could do.

you can bitch and moan about having to have a HD display all you want but resolution is a BIG part of what makes games look better. Other wise we'd still be playing atari. and the 2 games I mentioned still look great in SD, even though you are crippling the resolution.

Post by **Shatterhand** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 6:35 pm

Yeah, the HD is the big name here. When I first saw an X-Box360 game running, it was on HD and I was like "HOLY SHIT, the graphics are AWESOME, screenshots never made justice to that"

When I saw it on a normal TV, it was more like "Hey, where are those great graphics? This doesn't look all that much better than a PS2... goddamn"

Squirrel · Post by **Squirrel** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:28 pm

TKGB_Mental_Gear wrote:HO HO!

I just read the article on EGM. It's awesome how Ono is gonna go back to SF2's roots. SF3 was good but that was a circus of freaks.

I agree 100%.

Ex-Cyber · Post by **Ex-Cyber** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:35 pm

MathU wrote:I'm still extremely unimpressed by "next-gen graphics".

That's not really a "next-gen" thing, it's a combination of a particular art style that values a Hollywood-inspired idea of "realism" and publishers wanting to port games designed for PS2 and/or mainstream PCs (which they did, unrelentingly, for the first 6-8 months of 360's life). Things have been getting better on the latter point, at least.