Saving the Street Fighter Franchise

Gamasutra did an in-depth interview with Yoshi Ono, producer of Street Fighter IV, about trying to bring the series back to the quality and popularity of the '90s. Ono also talks about broadening the market to include casual players, who were slowly driven away from the game by the increased focus on competitive play. Quoting: "If you think about chess for instance, a kid and a grandfather can play the same game, with the same ruleset, and understand what's going on. I think through our competitive spirit back then; we were always out to out-complicate each other, and make our systems deeper and deeper. It was ok then because there was a wide player base who understood how to play these games, but that's not true anymore. What we're trying to do with Street Fighter IV is bring them back in. There's not a whole lot of other fighting games out there to compare it to, but hopefully, if we play our cards right and get people back in to the genre, we can blossom the genre itself again and spread things out and get it back to the way it was."

I played it at Comic Con

[PhrostyMcByte]

I'm a major fan of the series, so I had a lot of hopes for it. The graphics are noticeably improved, but the gameplay hasn't changed much. These kinds of games don't have a lot of room for depth though, so one can't really expect gameplay to change drastically.

I think the main problem Street Fighter has is that it's best played in an arcade, with a loud energetic environment surrounded by 5-10 people. Most people (in the USA, at least) don't go to arcades anymore.

So I played SF4 at Comic Con, it was fun. I still think Street Fighter Alpha 3 was the best of the series, but I'll definitely be buying this for the PC when it comes out later this year

Re:I played it at Comic Con

[Datamonstar]

How can you say fighting games don't have a lot of depth? They are the one video game that I immediately think of when I think of depth. One move can have over a dozen different possible responses, each with their own consequences and benefits. Virtua Fighter is a game that is FULL of 50/50 situations where either player really can't win, only not loose so much and the player who successfully baits or guesses his opponent out will probably win. These are games, situations where you have to think not only about what beats what, but exactly why it beats and how to maximize the use of it. Sorry, but FPS games may have their share of tactics, but it's nothing like a fighting game where the situation is always constantly changing and you are being challenged mentally every move you make.

Re:I played it at Comic Con

[PhrostyMcByte]

I agree there are tactics in these games, sometimes much more than any FPS. Combos have certainly stopped being innovative long ago. I would hardly consider combos to be depth. Give me something new!

I could accuse you of trolling

[Anonymous Coward]

I won't, but someone else might.

I'll give you that, outside of SF3, the games are not very smoothly animated. SF3 is very pretty and very smooth. Street Fighter has always been about timing and zen, although prior to turbo, the game didn't have fast enough action to really be much fun.

The various versions of all the games are actually quite warranted. Few developers revise their games like this, or even have games that people would buy revisions of. Each revision in SF is generally seen as an improvement, and most have strong enough content updates to be considered separate from the unrevised game.

I'd thought the 3D nonsense was put behind us by the players, despite developers maintaining the delusion. Apparently not. If you look past the graphics for a moment SFIV is still essentially a 2D game, and if you don't, it's not quite as pretty as SF3 3rd Strike.

"get off my lawn"

[plasmacutter]

seriously, you act as if most people, all the way from the late 80's, were not "button mashers".

The quality of the audience for these games has not changed since then, it was not "better" back then.

Re:I played it at Comic Con

[Datamonstar]

Combos are not and never will be equal to tactics. Zoning, baiting and trapping are much more important than combos. Combos are just ways to get quick damage. Those aren't the way to win. You win by creating the situation to land those combos. You know, tactics. I'd very much rather eat a 6-hit Akuma combo in Third Strike than get tricked into a 3-hit reset combo. This is because the damage-scaling makes the 3-hit combo much more damaging. Combos actually limit your damage output. Nasty players know how to trick you into thinking you can block the wrong way. Trick into thinking you're safe when you're not. In I play Urien in Third Strike and all I want to do is build my meter and get a single knockdown or air reel that I can capitalize on to start an unblockable chain. Combos are great if I am simply HANDED the opportunity to land one, but otherwise, I want a launcher or a close-standing knockdown situation. Those are tactics. Anyone can do combos, but landing them on a thinking opponent is very difficult.

Re:I played it at Comic Con

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, tactics. I'd very much rather eat a 6-hit Akuma combo in Third Strike than get tricked into a 3-hit reset combo. This is because the damage-scaling makes the 3-hit combo much more damaging.

Wow.. just the fact that you know this makes me feel sorry for you. Ever thought about losing your virginity?

Yes, he needs to learn to become equally (or more) obsessive about football or Nascar to be considered normal in the USA.