[FTS]

Yep, that's right. Street Fighter IV has been announced, and there is a trailer!

If the game turns out to look anything like the trailer, it's going to be pretty awesome.

http://www.streetfighterworld.com/

[anathema]

Looks pretty cool...


I stopped playing SF once it became a 'combo' fighting game, I just dont want to learn 10 button combos in order to win...

[Lightknight]

I liked it on the Snes. But come on. All they put out after it was just the same game. It has never really improved along with technology. We'll see.

[exo]

That is one of the most awesome trailers I've seen for a video game. Really, really cool. We'll see what they come up with for the actual game itself.

[FTS]

Originally Posted by Lightknight

I liked it on the Snes. But come on. All they put out after it was just the same game. It has never really improved along with technology. We'll see.

Exactly. But now it has a chance to change. It might be a crapfest of sameness, but it might just be amazing. It'll be a long time before we have any way to tell, though.

[bowstaff981]

I've always hated any Street Fighter that wasn't Super Street Fighter II, mostly because I hate memorizing the 50 button combos, and I hate the kids that can do every characters combos.

[Dice]

Originally Posted by Lightknight

I liked it on the Snes. But come on. All they put out after it was just the same game. It has never really improved along with technology. We'll see.

You mean the same game visiually? That is the only way that statement could come close to making any sort of sense. You have awakened the very passionate Capcom fan in me, so now I will speak in their defense.

Gameplay-wise the Alpha series introduced tons of new elements. Air play was given a priority system and blocking, real combos were introduced, super meters were introduced, reversals, overheads, dashes, juggling, rolls, tech recovery, cancels, stuns, counters and modes were all introduced. The animation was also improved twice over making for twice as precise play, and speed and recovery times were worked to make gameplay flow much better and more balanced.

Then Street Fighter 3 happened. Even 8 years later it is still the most technical and brilliant 2D fighter ever created. The parry system revolutionized the entire fighting game genre (including 3D fighters), the movesets were about tripled in amount of moves and tactical complexity, the animation was improved to 60fps with a new hit detection system for gameplay as precise as 3D fighters, other techniques like negative edge press, piano-key press, advanced super canceling, kara throwing, links, super jumps, rise attacks, etc. were all introduced. Gameplay-wise, new Virtua Fighter games are its only rival in technical dynamics and complexity, and they learned everything they do from it.

You ought not speak about things of which you are so ignorant. The fact is that Capcom has created everything the fighting genre knows. They did everything first. Everything. Even evasion in 3D fighters is just a translation of the roll move. Capcom has stated several times in these 8 years that they didn't want to make Street Fighter 4 unless it could revolutionize things again, so I am extremely excited to see what they will do next.

[Lightknight]

HAHAHA, that's hilarious. I can only assume your entire post is satire.

You should play Bushido Blade sometime. It was the best fighting game I've ever experienced (and the most realistic to boot). The 3-D environment translates to a whole lot more than just rolling. That's just them being stupid and ignorant in the same sentence. Or perhaps just unimaginitive.

The fact is, every time I see that game (back on Street Fighter), it looks the same. The environments look the same, the moves look the same, and it may have some more people from time to time, but the game looks the same and feels the same. The controls may get a little harder but "Oh noes" it doesn't matter. It's the same game over and over again. Dynasty Warriors pulls the same crap on us too. The same game forever more with slighty differing controls and more characters. Nothing you list or say does anything for me. I cannot play the same game for 8 years, watching it get a little better with each year, without being completely bored and wishing I could have played the current version that is made now back when it looked new and even original. This is one of the most agreed upon stances.

Now, they may have made their own little version better and better from a technical perspective over the years. But not enough to make the game feel different.

[MJ_Avalanche]

Regardless of whether SFIV is a shift in how fighting games are made or not... I'm going to play it if that art style translates into the final version. Looks uber cool.

[Lightknight]

Yeah, I think the greatest draw it has for me is its nostalgic value.

[Dice]

Originally Posted by Lightknight

The sun does NOT shine! This is a fact.

[Lightknight]

Originally Posted by Dice

Misquoting like that is directly against CGR rules.

[Dice]

Oops. Sorry, I just get a little carried away when someone makes such a noble attempt to simply blow off so many plain facts that were clearly laid out for them.

[Lightknight]

Should I then make a snide remark about how obviously impassioned you are in regards to this topic and therefore no where near a reasonable position for objectivity? Or can we perhaps progress through this discussion with some level of civility?

Street Fighter has always appeared the same. For all the "technical advances" you mention that they created, I fail to see any real advantage or difference any or all of them would make between a previous game that didn't have it and a new one that does. I mean, come on, how many variations of SF II have we seen?

Updated versions of SF II:
Street Fighter II′: Champion Edition
Street Fighter II′ Turbo: Hyper Fighting
Super Street Fighter II: The New Challengers
Super Street Fighter II Turbo
Hyper Street Fighter II: The Anniversary Edition

Ports:
Street Fighter II: The World Warrior
Street Fighter II′: Champion Edition and Street Fighter II′ Turbo: Hyper Fighting
Super Street Fighter II and Super Street Fighter II Turbo
Hyper Street Fighter II: The Anniversary Edition
Retro collections

I mean, it's crazy. There's just as many variations of SF Alpha and SF III. They're all called different games but they keep pushing the same thing on us each time. I'm sorry if you love the game so much that you can't see this, but I think most people agree with me. The series really hasn't changed all that much.

And recall what I said in regards to utilizing three dimensional environments. I think they're just being lazy and saving money. Milking away at its good name.

[Dice]

Should I then make a snide remark about how obviously impassioned you are in regards to this topic and therefore no where near a reasonable position for objectivity?

I'm not the one ignoring the facts.

For all the "technical advances" you mention that they created, I fail to see any real advantage or difference any or all of them would make between a previous game that didn't have it and a new one that does.

Then you are completely ignorant as to how fighting games really work. Perhaps you should visit shoryuken.com and learn a bit about the genre in general. People there are world-class professionals who compete internationally in tournaments of various different fighters from several different companies. They actually often work directly with developers in balancing out new games.

I mean, come on, how many variations of SF II have we seen?

Street Fighter 2 was the first of it's kind. There were many versions similar to each other because as the game exploded in popularity the large market and arcade competition exposed bugs and gameplay faults. Those editions are how they worked out the foundations of the fighting genre. It isn't milking a title to listen to your market and fix problems they want fixed. Also, back in those days arcades were the focus of the genre and they demanded the best you could offer. It wasn't like Madden games or something where they try to sucker consumers with nothing important.

There's just as many variations of SF Alpha and SF III. They're all called different games but they keep pushing the same thing on us each time.

I clearly explained how this is not true. If you are unfamiliar with elements of gameplay found in fighters, that does not make my points any less valid.

The series really hasn't changed all that much.

Again, I clearly explained how this is not true. They didn't just add a few new moves like Mortal Kombat games. They created every single idea that has moved the fighting genre forward. You can try to deny this all you want, try to assert that "most people" agree with you, but it doesn't change the facts. If there are elements in other major fighting games you like, you can always trace back their origins to Capcom.

And recall what I said in regards to utilizing three dimensional environments.

What, using them to break the gameplay? There is a reason Bushido Blade wasn't popular and never had a place in tournaments. Poorly implementing a badly conceived idea isn't a mark of value to the genre. There have been many "original" failures throughout the years. The genre is fighting, so if ideas hinder or damage the fighting they don't belong in the genre.

I think they're just being lazy and saving money.

Again, you don't seem to understand the nature of the fighting genre. I bet you think there was only one Tekken 3, right?

You see, every major series has several revisions of the same title made in response to criticisms and discoveries of the players. Every one of these revisions must be bought new, it is the same across the board. The only difference between Capcom and the rest is that when they do revisions they actually add new ideas, characters, levels, etc so the purchase is more justified. You claim they are milking things but they actually offer more than other companies in this regard.

If you can admit that you are ignorant and undiscerning of the genre, that's fine, many people are and it doesn't bother me. However, you speak as though you know what you are talking about when you clearly don't. So I am simply trying to explain how you are making unjust assertions (they really aren't valid as arguments) against one of, if not the most influential, innovative, advanced and respected companies in the genre concerning their flagship series. I mean seriously, what you are doing is more ridiculous than saying Mario has offered nothing of merit to the platforming genre.